 |
Home | Contact Us | Press Room | Site Overview | Help | Login | Register |
 |
 |
| About NCSL | State & Federal Issues | Legislatures | Legislative Staff | Meetings | Bookstore | Legislators & Staff Only |
| NCSL Home > Bookstore > | Add to MyNCSL |
State Legislatures Magazine: October/November 1999Editor's Note: This article appeared in the October/November 1999 issue of NCSL's magazine, State Legislatures. To order copies or to subscribe, contact the marketing department at (303) 364-7700. .08 BAC State Programs Reduce Youth Drunk Driving States have more work to do in reducing drunk driving deaths, but there are plenty of good programs to copy. By Jeanne Mejeur It's a scene repeated all too often, and it happens in every state. The torn wreckage of cars, the too-early deaths of the victims, the grieving families and a drunk driver. It happened last December in tiny Brock, Texas. Four teenage girls, inseparable friends and cheerleaders at the local high school, went out to rent Christmas videos on a Saturday night. A pickup truck crossed the center line and hit their car head-on. The girls were killed. The truck driver, who survived, had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .16 and is awaiting trial. Drunk drivers killed more than 16,000 people in 1997. Preliminary figures for 1998 are about the same. Although alcohol-related traffic fatalities decreased 32 percent from 1987 to 1997-a reduction due largely to stricter laws passed over the last decade-there is more work to be done. The area of biggest debate right now is whether states should adopt .08 BAC as the legal limit for intoxication. Studies have long shown that almost all drivers are impaired at .10 BAC in such critical driving skills as judgment, steering ability, vision and attention. Figures from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety also demonstrate that alcohol significantly increases the chances of a fatal accident. The federal government is offering a powerful incentive. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), passed last year, includes additional federal highway funds for states that adopt .08 BAC limits. But does it work? In Texas, the answer is yes. Texas was the only state to pass .08 legislation this year, and it was less in response to the "carrot" of $26 million in extra federal highway funding than it was to save lives. "We have heard heartbreaking testimony from those who have lost loved ones," said the bill's sponsor, Senator Mario Gallegos. "Today, the voices of Texans have been heard. We can't stop drinking and driving, but hopefully this will be a deterrent." More than 1,700 Texans died in 1997 in drunk driving accidents. "Because of this legislation, hundreds of Texans will probably live to see another day," said Senator Steve Odgen. But not all legislators are convinced that .08 is the solution to the drunk driving problem. A .08 bill stalled in the Rhode Island legislature this year because advocates couldn't make a convincing case for changing the current law. "There is absolutely no evidence that .08 is going to save lives," said Representative Peter Palumbo. "This is a tough thing to do right now, to vote against this, because the media has been all over it saying Ô.08 saves lives, and if you don't vote for it you want drunk drivers on the road,' which is absolutely wrong. But I don't think, just because of political pressure, we should go ahead and vote for .08 if we don't feel it is the right thing to do." Members of the House Judiciary Committee, which killed the bill, were swayed by figures presented by the American Beverage Institute that showed 73 percent of Rhode Island's drunk driving fatalities from 1987 to 1997 were caused by drivers with BAC levels of .13 or higher; only 6 percent had a BAC between .07 and .09. The issue recently became even more controversial. A number of studies from National Highway Transportation Safety Administration support the effectiveness of .08 BAC levels, but have been criticized both for flawed methodology and bias. And a U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) report issued in June 1999 supports those concerns, documenting that the conclusions of the .08 studies have been overstated and that problems in methodology do exist in the studies. The GAO report notes that reductions in drunk driving fatalities that were attributed to .08 BAC laws were actually the result of .08 being used in combination with other countermeasures, such as administrative license revocation, strict law enforcement efforts and sustained public education programs. Another recent study, Evaluation of the Effects of North Carolina's .08% BAC Law, conducted by the Highway Safety Research Center at the University of North Carolina, concluded that there was little clear impact from lowering North Carolina's BAC limit from .10 to .08 over the 18-month period during which it had been in effect. The debate will continue over the effectiveness of .08 in saving lives, and the lure of additional highway funds has not proved irresistible. Only Texas and Washington enacted their laws after the passage of TEA-21, joining Alabama, California, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Virginia as the 17 states that have now adopted .08 as their legal level of intoxication. All other states have maintained .10 BAC as the limit for drunk driving, with the exception of Massachusetts and South Carolina, which have no illegal per se laws. (Illegal per se laws make it a crime to drive with a BAC level above a statutorily established limit, and no impairment need be demonstrated.) DEALING WITH EXTREMELY DRUNK DRIVERS The flip side of the .08 debate is what to do about extremely drunk drivers. The pickup truck driver in the Texas crash had a BAC level of .16 when he killed the four teenagers last December. Of the almost 42,000 traffic deaths nationwide in 1997, only 8 percent of the drivers had what is defined as "low alcohol" involvement, with BAC levels from .01 to .09, while more than 30 percent had BAC levels above .10. What can states do about getting really drunk drivers off the roads? "Hard-core offenders represent a relatively small number of drivers, yet they account for a disproportionately large percentage of drunk driving accidents," said Ohio Senator Bruce Johnson, who sponsored a bill this year that doubles jail time for drunk drivers with a BAC of .17 or higher and makes repeat offenses a more serious felony. Figures from the Ohio Department of Public Safety show that over the past 15 years, nearly 40 percent of drunk driving fatalities in Ohio involved drivers with BAC levels of .20 or higher. "We need to get repeat drunk drivers off the road and behind bars," added Johnson. Rhode Island Representative Leona Kelley agrees. She introduced a bill that would require mandatory jail time for anyone with a BAC of .15 or higher and would increase maximum fines to $5,000, up from the current $300. "I believe that anyone who is more than mildly intoxicated, whose BAC is .15 or higher, deserves a much sterner punishment." She added that ".15 is more than enough to so severely impair that person's reason and driving ability as to risk the lives of all others on the road. And for that, the drunk driver should pay a heavier price." A number of states have recently enacted laws based on the driver's BAC level. Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Tennessee and Washington are among the states that have established a second tier limit for high BAC drivers, with significantly higher penalties and, in some cases, separate offenses, such as extreme or aggravated drunk driving. The high BAC limit varies from .15 to .20, and is in addition to the state's .08 or .10 illegal per se law. Since these high BAC drivers are often problem drinkers, not social drinkers, addressing the underlying substance abuse issue is also important in keeping them from repeat offenses. States including California, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Maine, New Mexico, Nevada, South Dakota and Washington are requiring that high BAC drivers be evaluated for alcohol abuse or participate in mandatory treatment for hard-core problem drinking. Then there are the kids who drink and drive. Teenage drivers comprise less than 7 percent of the total U.S. population but accounted for more than 13 percent of motor vehicle deaths in 1997. More than 21 percent of those accidents involved alcohol. In 14 percent of the fatalities, the young driver's BAC level was above .10. These are disturbing figures-particularly considering that kids under age 21 can't legally buy alcohol. All states have now adopted "zero tolerance" laws in compliance with the National Highway Systems Designation Act of 1995. The act required states to establish a BAC of .02 or less for drivers age 21 and under or risk losing federal highway funds. And all states have adopted minimum drinking age laws, which are credited with saving more than 17,000 lives since 1987. But kids are still drinking and driving and getting killed in disproportionate numbers. What can be done about that? A number of states have established innovative state laws to reduce underage drinking and driving. In Arkansas, courts collect an additional $5 fine for every moving traffic violation and use the money to fund programs about drunk driving for junior and senior high school students. The California Legislature adopted the Youthful Drunk Driver Visitation Program, which requires underage drunk drivers to participate in supervised visits to emergency rooms or county morgue facilities. The program has an excellent history of discouraging repeat offenders and has been copied in Florida, Illinois and Iowa. Both Connecticut and Vermont make it a crime for minors to misrepresent their age to try to buy alcohol. Violators are required to participate in alcohol treatment programs, as well as face fines and possible jail time. New Jersey not only sanctions the minors who attempt to buy alcohol, but also the adults who buy liquor on a minor's behalf. Both are subject to a fine of $500 and six months' license suspension. Kids who are convicted of drunk driving face additional penalties and must participate in alcohol treatment programs. Georgia provides for a lengthy license suspension and requires underage drunk drivers to complete a state-approved alcohol use reduction program. Tennessee has established a separate offense of Underage Driving While Impaired, punishable by a one-year license suspension and $250 fine. Texas punishes underage drunk drivers with fines up to $2,000, 180 days in jail or both. These are punishments being handed out to underage drunk drivers. What about the penalties for drunk drivers in general? All but six states have adopted mandatory minimum sentences for drunk driving offenses, but drunk drivers aren't spending much time in jail. Only 20 states require any time in jail for a first offense, and the average stay is only 60 hours. For third offenses, the minimum jail terms range from two days to six months. Only Michigan and Nevada require a year in jail. The longest sentence is in Utah, which sends third time offenders to jail for two years. Many proponents believe that states could also do a better job with mandatory minimum fines, which are required in only 20 states, and mandatory minimum license suspensions: Think higher and longer. New Jersey considered a number of drunk driving bills this year in response to a Senate task force recommendation that the state needed stiffer laws, particularly for repeat offenders. "I hope for stronger penalties for people who are convicted of drunk driving and even stronger penalties for people driving on the revoked list," said Senator Louis Kosco, chair of the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee. "Nothing seems to happen to these people. They have it revoked five, six or seven times, and nothing happens. They keep driving." Something more will happen now: New Jersey passed legislation this year that doubles almost every penalty for drunk driving. A new twist on punishment is taking the car away from convicted drunk drivers. Thirty-five states plus the District of Columbia, Guam and the Virgin Islands have enacted some sort of vehicle impoundment or forfeiture law for drunk drivers. Most of the laws provide for temporarily impounding the car, but in some cases, particularly for repeat offenders, the car is gone for good. A new Oklahoma law, sponsored this year by the mother-son team of Representative Mary Easley and Senator Kevin Easley requires that police seize the cars of those convicted of a second drunk driving offense in 10 years. The bill also changes procedures that will make it easier to track multiple offenses. "We've managed to take tough drunk driving legislation and make it even tougher," said Representative Easley. "Not only will we take the keys of repeat drunk drivers, we'll make sure they can't run away from their DUI history." The law has been named Greg's Law, in memory of Tulsa teenager Greg Gifford, who was killed by a repeat DUI offender in 1997. What the states have done over the last 10 years to reduce drunk driving deaths is impressive. State legislatures took the problem of drunk driving seriously, long before the federal government began offering incentives and imposing sanctions. But proponents of tougher standards believe there is more to be done because there are still too many lives being lost and too many families grieving. Not every state has adopted administrative license revocation, which many view as one of the most effective deterrents to drunk driving because it provides an immediate sanction for the crime. Not every state has an illegal per se law, the most basic of all drunk driving laws. Only slightly more than half of the states have enacted open container laws. Just a relative handful of states have addressed high BAC drivers through enhanced penalties. Not all states have adopted mandatory minimum sentences, license suspensions or fines, and in some states those minimums could be a lot higher. Although all states have adopted zero tolerance for underage drunk driving, just a few states have established innovative programs to help keep kids from getting access to alcohol and educate them about the consequences of drinking and driving. The good news is that states can look to each other for examples of strict and effective drunk driving countermeasures. Proven solutions already exist for keeping drunk drivers off our roads. The current array of statutes offers many options to legislators who want to toughen their state's drunk driving laws. Editor's note: NHTSA reports can be found at www.nhtsa.dot.gov/ people/injury/alcohol/limit.08/index.html. The GAO report is available at www.gao.gov. Look for the North Carolina report at www.hsrc.unc.edu/alcohol/nc08_web.pdf. ©1999, National Conference of State Legislatures. All rights reserved. State Programs Reduce Youth Drunk Driving Georgia's Driving Prevention Program Ohio's None for Under 21 Program Pennsylvania's Minor ID Checker Cops in Shops Undercover police officers are assigned to participating retail locations. One officer is placed inside the store while another remains outside. The officer inside enforces the minimum age requirements for purchase of alcohol. The prospective buyer can find him or herself talking to a real police officer about losing a driver's license, going to court or paying a fine. The officer posted outside the store apprehends adults who purchase alcohol for minors. States that adopt the program often use it in smaller geographical areas, usually as test sites to determine the best method for further implementation. The Century Council publishes a how-to manual that outlines the steps. Federal funding may be available from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) or from the U.S. Department of Justice. An evaluation of the program was conducted in eight states (Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, Iowa and Wisconsin) by the Century Council and the National Association of Governor's Highway Safety Representatives. The evaluation was based on surveys completed by retailers (Indiana) and law enforcement personnel (all eight states). Generally, retailers viewed the program as successful and felt it should continue. Law enforcement personnel rated the program a 10 out of 10 and believed that additional media coverage was an effective tool to raise community awareness about underage drinking. Cops in Shops has been organized in communities in 40 states. Nineteen states-Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin-have statewide programs. For more information on Cops in Shops, call Anisa Nammar of the Century Council at (949) 756-8477 or Jay Hibbard at (207) 774-2130. -Carolyn Mitchell, NCSL ©1999, National Conference of State Legislatures. All rights reserved. |
© 2008 National Conference of State Legislatures, All Rights Reserved
Denver Office: Tel: 303-364-7700 | Fax: 303-364-7800 | 7700 East First Place | Denver, CO 80230 | Map
Washington Office: Tel: 202-624-5400 | Fax: 202-737-1069 | 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515 | Washington, D.C. 20001
