Posted on 08/21/2008 5:18:12 AM PDT by Kaslin
Life is full of surprises, and some 100 college presidents think they have stumbled on one. They think there is too much problem drinking on campus -- no surprise there -- and suggest we might solve the problem by changing the drinking age. They don't propose to raise it to 25. They want to lower it to 18.
The group behind the petition they signed, Choose Responsibility, says the current drinking age is a failure. It has "not resulted in significant constructive behavioral change among our students," the statement says, and in fact has spawned "a culture of dangerous, clandestine 'binge-drinking' -- often conducted off-campus."
It's true that in the old days, there was no college culture of clandestine, off-campus binge drinking. It was out in the open, right on the quad. Another difference back then: There was more of it.
At the risk of stating the obvious, that's at least partly because in most states, the drinking age was under 21. Youngsters could buy booze legally, so they did what you would expect. They drank more and got drunk more.
It's bizarre to blame the higher age for today's staggering undergraduates. According to Monitoring the Future, an ongoing research project at the University of Michigan, binge drinking has not risen since 1988, when 21 became the minimum drinking age throughout the country. Among college students and other college-age Americans, the rate is lower today than it was then, and the decline has been even bigger among high-school students.
It's true the progress stalled around 1996. But how can that be blamed on the higher drinking age? By then, it had been the national norm for nearly a decade.
In spite of the law, plenty of 18-to-20-year-olds somehow manage to get wasted on a regular basis. But a law can be helpful without being airtight. This one has curbed not only the use of alcohol among young people, but its dangerous abuse.
Since 1988, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, drunk-driving deaths have dropped in all age groups. That's due in part to stricter enforcement and changing public attitudes about drinking and driving. But they dropped most among those younger than 21. In that group, the number of alcohol-related fatalities has been cut nearly in half -- even as the number of non-alcohol-related traffic deaths has been stable.
This is not a coincidence. When states lowered their drinking age in the 1970s, they got more drunk-driving deaths among teenagers than similar states that stayed at 21. A 1983 study in the Journal of Legal Studies concluded that any state that "raises its drinking age can expect the nighttime fatal crashes of drivers of the affected age groups to drop by about 28 percent."
There are other arguments for lowering the age. Maybe the most popular is that if you're old enough to join the Army and die for your country, you're old enough to buy a beer. But there is a good reason to avoid such blind consistency. Among the qualities that make 18-year-olds such good soldiers are their fearlessness and sense of immortality -- traits that do not mix well with alcohol.
Besides, we don't have a single age threshold for adulthood. We give driver's licenses to 16-year-olds, but a 20-year-old Marine returning from Iraq will find he may not buy a handgun or gamble in a casino.
Why permit 18-year-olds to vote but not drink? Because they have not shown a disproportionate tendency to abuse the franchise, to the peril of innocent bystanders.
Another reason is that extending the vote to 18-year-olds doesn't let even younger people gain illicit access to the polls. But if high-school seniors could legally patronize a liquor store, sophomores would find it much easier to get party fuel. Raising the drinking age to 21 reduced alcohol-related traffic fatalities not only among 18-year-olds, who lost the right to drink, but 16-year-olds, who never had it.
It's not hard to make a logical case for allowing 18-year-olds to buy alcohol, but only if you disregard the practical effects of letting them do something that many of them are not mature enough to handle. In this debate, the ultimate wisdom comes from Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, who reminded us that sometimes, a page of history is worth a volume of logic.
You can thank Liddy Dole for forcing it up to 21. Bad move. The feds have zero business even discussing the issue.
The Feds have a huge say in the issue, courtesy of Federal Highway Funds.
How much bribe money have these college presidents received from Big Alcohol? The logic of their position is total crap. They are clearly being bought off.
No, it's accurate.
I think the first college that solves the problem of underage drinking is going to have a mass of parents (who pay the bills, after all) beating a path to their door.
It sucks to shell out $50K a year for college and then have Junior spend it in an alcoholic haze...
I know dropping the drinking age would cause trouble overnight. However, I wish we could, in this case, emulate Europe more with a very low drinking age where it does not become some ‘right of passage’ when you turn 21.
We are still too obsessed with drinking even though prohibition is nearly 100 years in the past.
I liken our nation’s views on alcohol like those on firearms:
Rather than focusing on holding irresponsible users accountable, we instead treat everyone as being equally deficient.
I agree with that. However, the article does make a number of good points.
They have their noses in everything. And in most cases it needs to be slapped out, including on this issue.
Big Alcohol? Uh-oh, do we have a prohibitionist in our midst?!
I don’t recall such a thing ever happening.
I know when I turned 18 ,I took full advantage of the legal drinking age being the same.With some not so good results. Totally my fault. At the UofI they let 19 year olds into the bars on campus and wonder why there are underage drinkers in those same bars.Duh,just raise the entry age to the legal drinking age and be done with it.
If we just send them to a war overseas somewhere, that’ll keep ‘em out of the bars.
drunk driving dropped due to education.
The “drink responsibly” commercial is far more effective than any nanny state BS law.
MADD and other groups are just fund raising vehicles to keep their own execs in a job.
I could not say if these Pres’s have been bribed or not. However, having raised three children, all of which were allowed to drink at home and under my wife's and my supervising have turned out to be responsible and moderate drinkers. We believe that by taking our approach we demystified drinking and when they went off to college they did not participate in this activity.
Besides, the age of majority in virtually every state is 18; meaning ability to vote, join the military (fight and get perhaps killed), sign contracts, get married, get divorced, etc, etc. So, if 18 is old enough to legally do all these things, why shouldn't the right to drink be included?
When did Townhall become a socialist nanny-state cess pool?
“It’s bizarre to blame the higher age for today’s staggering undergraduates. According to Monitoring the Future, an ongoing research project at the University of Michigan, binge drinking has not risen since 1988, when 21 became the minimum drinking age throughout the country. Among college students and other college-age Americans, the rate is lower today than it was then, and the decline has been even bigger among high-school students.”
How can they even possible know this? How do you accurately measure these numbers? Is it like the poll taking that showed Kerry winning the 2004 election?
And the numbers of people arrested with a fake ID and drinking underage went up when the age was raised.
Duh-huh. Some numbers go up, some go down.
Either you are a full adult at 18, or you are not. No questions. No wishy-washy crap. I can enter a contract, get credit, buy a house, own a car, get married and have kids, but I’m too young, at 18, to have a drink. That’s some major duty crap, there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.