Lowering the Drinking Age
Youth Need to Learn to Drink Responsibly
Theresa West
Issue date: 9/28/04 Section: OLExclusives
- Page 1 of 1
Last week, in a New York Times editorial, former President of Middlebury College John McCardell Jr. expressed his belief that the legal drinking age should be lowered. This comment sparked debate over the effectiveness of our current drinking laws. McCardell wrote, "Society expects us to graduate students who have been educated to drink responsibly. But society has severely circumscribed our ability to do that."
I couldn't agree more. Today's laws and culture prevent youth from learning to drink safely and responsibly. The laws don't stop underage drinking; they simply force it behind closed doors. Kids are learning to drink in the secrecy of basements and frat houses. Lowering the legal drinking age would allow parents and school administrators to address the issue of youth drinking head on by allowing kids to learn to drink in a safe and supervised environment. Recognized as legal adults, eighteen-year-olds have access to do a number of privileges: they can vote; serve in the military; they serve on a jury; they can buy a gun, they can sign a legal contract and get married. Why are they not allowed to drink alcohol?
Prohibition has never been effective at controlling the use of alcohol among Americans. Our country has tried prohibition twice in the past, once at the state level in the 1850's and later at the national level in 1920. Each time, prohibition of alcohol failed. People did not adhere to the law and organized crime thrived. Although consumption of alcohol fell at the start of each era of prohibition, it later increased. Additionally, people were more likely to drink stronger types of alcohol during times of prohibition because wine, whiskey and other hard liquors were easier to make and less expensive than beer. Many people simply refused to follow the law. According to one researcher, "Men were drinking defiantly, with a sense of high purpose, a kind of dedicated drinking that you don't see much of today."
I would argue, however, that a very similar phenomenon occurs among today's youth. Teenagers, who cannot drink legally, guzzle alcohol when they get their hands on it. Any high school student can obtain alcohol if they really want it. Nearly three quarters of 8th graders (71%) say that it is "fairly easy" or "very easy" to get alcohol according to one survey. Even more alarming is the fact that 51 percent of high school seniors and 26 percent of eighth graders admitted drinking within the past 30 days at the time of a 1996 government survey. Clearly, today's drinking laws are not keeping alcohol out of the hands of underage drinkers
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act is in and of itself unconstitutional. Establishing 21 as the minimum drinking age in 1984, this law violates states' rights by requiring all states to either uphold a minimum drinking age of 21 or risk losing their Federal-aid highway funds. Because no state can afford to lose this funding, every state has essentially been forced to maintain a minimum legal drinking age of 21 years old. The bill for the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 was originally rejected for its infringement upon state's rights. Even President Ronald Reagan condemned it for its violation of state's rights. However, the national climate later became so saturated with information about the dangers of youth drinking that Reagan approved the bill. Special interest groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) greatly pressured lawmakers to pass this bill even though doing so was unconstitutional.
It is important to understand that the statistics presented by associations such as MADD are often manipulated and misleading. In the early 1970s, for example, almost all states lowered their legal age of adulthood from 21 to 18, largely in a response to the draft which forced 18 years olds to serve in the Vietnam War. 29 states also lowered their legal drinking age during this time. The effects of the lowered legal drinking age are frequently cited as evidence that the minimum drinking age should be lowered or maintained; representatives for MADD repeatedly refer to confusing statistics gathered during this time to bolster their arguments against lowering the drinking age. They give statistics about the decrease in the number of 18-21 year olds involved in fatal car accidents after the passing of the Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 and claim that records from 1982 show that 43 percent (4,393) of drivers under the age of 21 who were involved in fatal car accidents were drinking before their crashes.
MADD proponents also claim that by 1998, this had significantly changed and that only 21 percent (1,714) of drivers younger than 21 involved in fatal car crashes had been drinking alcohol. What they fail to mention is that following the passing of the Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984, there was an increase in the number of drinking induced fatalities in the 21-24 age bracket by about as much as the decrease in the number of fatalities for those 18- 20 years old. The failure of MADD representatives to mention this conflicting data calls their credibility into question.
The bottom line is that today's drinking laws are not preventing underage kids from drinking. They are only forcing teens behind closed doors and away from the supervision of parents. Parents who provide alcohol for underage drinkers in a supervised, safe environment can be put in jail for serving alcohol to a minor, even if their "child" is 18 years old, leaving no safe way for the American youth to learn to drink responsibly. In most European countries, children learn to drink with their parents. Consequently, there is less binge drinking and also fewer alcohol related deaths. Kids in the United States are not taught how to drink responsibly and this lacking resource needs to change. Reducing the legal drinking limit would allow parents and colleges to address the issue of drinking more effectively.
In a powerful closing statement to his New York times editorial piece, McCardell spoke about the dangers of today's drinking laws, saying, "Given the facts, [MADD is] pushing for a law that will unquestionably mean more drunk kids behind the wheel, and in all likelihood mean more deaths." If you would like to help support the movement to lower the drinking age, you can do your part by signing a petition at this web address: Petition Online.. Click here to see McCardell's full article.
I couldn't agree more. Today's laws and culture prevent youth from learning to drink safely and responsibly. The laws don't stop underage drinking; they simply force it behind closed doors. Kids are learning to drink in the secrecy of basements and frat houses. Lowering the legal drinking age would allow parents and school administrators to address the issue of youth drinking head on by allowing kids to learn to drink in a safe and supervised environment. Recognized as legal adults, eighteen-year-olds have access to do a number of privileges: they can vote; serve in the military; they serve on a jury; they can buy a gun, they can sign a legal contract and get married. Why are they not allowed to drink alcohol?
Prohibition has never been effective at controlling the use of alcohol among Americans. Our country has tried prohibition twice in the past, once at the state level in the 1850's and later at the national level in 1920. Each time, prohibition of alcohol failed. People did not adhere to the law and organized crime thrived. Although consumption of alcohol fell at the start of each era of prohibition, it later increased. Additionally, people were more likely to drink stronger types of alcohol during times of prohibition because wine, whiskey and other hard liquors were easier to make and less expensive than beer. Many people simply refused to follow the law. According to one researcher, "Men were drinking defiantly, with a sense of high purpose, a kind of dedicated drinking that you don't see much of today."
I would argue, however, that a very similar phenomenon occurs among today's youth. Teenagers, who cannot drink legally, guzzle alcohol when they get their hands on it. Any high school student can obtain alcohol if they really want it. Nearly three quarters of 8th graders (71%) say that it is "fairly easy" or "very easy" to get alcohol according to one survey. Even more alarming is the fact that 51 percent of high school seniors and 26 percent of eighth graders admitted drinking within the past 30 days at the time of a 1996 government survey. Clearly, today's drinking laws are not keeping alcohol out of the hands of underage drinkers
The National Minimum Drinking Age Act is in and of itself unconstitutional. Establishing 21 as the minimum drinking age in 1984, this law violates states' rights by requiring all states to either uphold a minimum drinking age of 21 or risk losing their Federal-aid highway funds. Because no state can afford to lose this funding, every state has essentially been forced to maintain a minimum legal drinking age of 21 years old. The bill for the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 was originally rejected for its infringement upon state's rights. Even President Ronald Reagan condemned it for its violation of state's rights. However, the national climate later became so saturated with information about the dangers of youth drinking that Reagan approved the bill. Special interest groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) greatly pressured lawmakers to pass this bill even though doing so was unconstitutional.
It is important to understand that the statistics presented by associations such as MADD are often manipulated and misleading. In the early 1970s, for example, almost all states lowered their legal age of adulthood from 21 to 18, largely in a response to the draft which forced 18 years olds to serve in the Vietnam War. 29 states also lowered their legal drinking age during this time. The effects of the lowered legal drinking age are frequently cited as evidence that the minimum drinking age should be lowered or maintained; representatives for MADD repeatedly refer to confusing statistics gathered during this time to bolster their arguments against lowering the drinking age. They give statistics about the decrease in the number of 18-21 year olds involved in fatal car accidents after the passing of the Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 and claim that records from 1982 show that 43 percent (4,393) of drivers under the age of 21 who were involved in fatal car accidents were drinking before their crashes.
MADD proponents also claim that by 1998, this had significantly changed and that only 21 percent (1,714) of drivers younger than 21 involved in fatal car crashes had been drinking alcohol. What they fail to mention is that following the passing of the Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984, there was an increase in the number of drinking induced fatalities in the 21-24 age bracket by about as much as the decrease in the number of fatalities for those 18- 20 years old. The failure of MADD representatives to mention this conflicting data calls their credibility into question.
The bottom line is that today's drinking laws are not preventing underage kids from drinking. They are only forcing teens behind closed doors and away from the supervision of parents. Parents who provide alcohol for underage drinkers in a supervised, safe environment can be put in jail for serving alcohol to a minor, even if their "child" is 18 years old, leaving no safe way for the American youth to learn to drink responsibly. In most European countries, children learn to drink with their parents. Consequently, there is less binge drinking and also fewer alcohol related deaths. Kids in the United States are not taught how to drink responsibly and this lacking resource needs to change. Reducing the legal drinking limit would allow parents and colleges to address the issue of drinking more effectively.
In a powerful closing statement to his New York times editorial piece, McCardell spoke about the dangers of today's drinking laws, saying, "Given the facts, [MADD is] pushing for a law that will unquestionably mean more drunk kids behind the wheel, and in all likelihood mean more deaths." If you would like to help support the movement to lower the drinking age, you can do your part by signing a petition at this web address: Petition Online.. Click here to see McCardell's full article.
