Posted on 10/31/2002 4:57:12 AM PST by Wolfie
Dole Links License To Drug Test
Elizabeth Dole wants to require all teenagers to pass a drug test before getting a driver's license. Dole, the Republican U.S. Senate candidate and a former transportation secretary, has promised to push for a federal law pressuring states to enforce such a measure. "Wouldn't that help them understand how important it is to be drug free?" Dole asked at a recent campaign stop in Washington, N.C. "It's not cool (to abuse drugs). It kills."
Then-President Bill Clinton proposed a nearly identical measure in 1996 while campaigning against Dole's husband, former Sen. Bob Dole, and offered federal grants to states the following year. Campaign officials for Elizabeth Dole said they were unaware of the Clinton initiative.
Dole included the pre-license drug test as part of her "Dole Plan for North Carolina" this year, proposing that teens who test positive must complete a drug counseling course and pass a subsequent test before getting a license.
The test could be bypassed. Parents who don't want their children to take a drug test could just say no and waive the requirement, said Mary Brown Brewer, Dole's communications director.
"You can't solely address illegal drugs from the supply side. You have to address it from the demand side," Brewer said. "When you turn 16, you look so forward to getting that driver's license ... This is a pretty strong incentive not to do anything that would prevent you from getting that driver's license."
Dole has made "less government" a campaign mantra, as have many Republicans, which makes it striking that she would embrace an invasive expansion of government duties and authority. Last year, nearly 62,000 N.C. teens got their first driver's license.
A spokesman for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said he was unaware of any states enacting such a program after the Clinton push.
Dole's opponent, Democrat Erskine Bowles, said he would like to talk with law enforcement officials, parents and teenagers before proposing such a measure.
The testing presents practical obstacles and legal questions. State motor vehicles administrations would suddenly face the costs of processing drug tests through a laboratory, not to mention the idea of testing youngsters who haven't been accused of anything. U.S. courts, though, have repeatedly upheld the constitutionality of drug tests.
Several states have zero tolerance laws on alcohol use, requiring that teens lose their license if caught driving with any of alcohol in their blood. The alcohol tests, though, are administered after a youth has been stopped on suspicion of drinking.
Substance-abuse experts said drug testing works as an incentive to keep youths from abusing drugs but likely only until they pass that checkpoint.
"Drug testing has always been a false promise that it would help us somehow by threatening people and make them stop so they wouldn't get into trouble," said John P. Morgan, a physician and City University of New York medical professor who has studied drug testing for 15 years.
He said the vast majority of positive drug tests detect nothing stronger than marijuana, and occasional smokers need only stop for a couple of weeks to pass.
Carl Shantzis, executive director of Substance Abuse Prevention Services in Charlotte, said prevention policy requires follow-up.
"Once teenagers get a license," Shantzis said, "the question is what kind of other incentives are there to keep them from abusing alcohol or other drugs."
Might I add, that I'm active in North Carolina political organizing and have spared no effort to make sure this is known as widely as possible. I would never vote for Nanny Dole and may even go so far as to vote for Bowles when I split my ballot. Someone ever taking positions such as these should never call herself a Republican and sure as hell doesn't deserve to sit in Jesse Helms' seat!
Well, I agree. Dole is no Helms. That's too bad.
There's no intrinsic right to drive. Our governments can set the standards for the right to drive. If we don't like it, we can elect new representatives.
Nothing "wrong" because why? Because you say so?
It's the same for kids who are required to have good grades before joining a sports team or who are required to show they can read before getting a diploma.
Again, your refusal to see the difference is noted. A school system does not make law - it can't imprison you. I can attempt to find a school to send my kids to that shares my values, and the public school I am zoned for has no say simply because I live in that disctrict. A school can make rules, but I only have to obey them if I elect to send my child there. Its voluntary(to some degree). The right to travel is a fundamental natural right. No level of government has the legitimate power to make an indivudual prove anything to it before they are "allowed" to travel by a certain means.
Urinating on the street is not a right and that's obvious to anyone who is being honest. Making the comparison between laws against public urination and drug tests for driver's licenses is disingenuous at best.
Set a high bar, and most kids will rise to it.
There is nothing wrong with individuals setting "high bars" for their kids. No one here would argue otherwise. The "high bar" becomes immoral and repugnant when you solicit the "government" to use their guns to force people to live up to your standards.
The overall picture is the added seat in the senate. If you had been paying attention, politicians cater their views to the middle of the road in order to get elected because that's where the most votes come from. The democrats have played the game quite well for the past umteen years and succeeded quite nicely. It's about time Republicans and so-called Libertarians take their damn heads out of the sand and get in the game!
Requiring a teen to be drug free before getting his license is certaily in the interest of many, many citizens concerned about their families' safety on the road. It's also in the interest of teens who don't do drugs (since they will be safer on the road as well). It's in the interest of teens on drugs who give them up to get their drivers licenses. And it's in the interest of kids caught using drugs - if they are given help to get off of them. That sounds like a win-win-win-win situation to me.
Well, that's just totally wrong. You can't fly to LA with a rifle in your briefcase, and you can't take the train to Washington with a bomb in your suitcase, and you can't drive a car until you've proven that your eyesight is OK, and you can't ride a motorcycle in most states until you've shown you know how to drive it and...and...and...
I've told them many times that if I ever suspected them of drug use, I'd have them tested pronto. I've told them that that doesn't mean that I believe they're going to do drugs - only that I know the temptation will exist and that many will try to entice them to do so, and that many kids fall to that temptation and don't get help when they need it. I love my kids, and they know it. If I suspect them of drug abuse, I will test them and help them in every way I know how.
Why? Because you say so?
Have you told them they will be tested, by you, before they can get their license?
Not yet. But I have no objection to them having to be tested to get their license.
*Psst* Then YOU test YOUR kids. YOU steer YOUR kids. But that's not what you want. You just like control.
Again, it's not about driving skills, if your kid decides to go out and get stoned and drive then kills a family in a head-on with a minivan,
Very rare occurence. Alcohol is the main intoxicant that contributes to teen wrecks. Not pot, not cocaine, not acid and not ecstacy.
it is his fault and he should be tried as an adult and you should be riddled with guilt knowing that you spent too much time fighting for your child's supposed rights when you could have been teaching him responsibility.
You keep using "you"'s and "your"'s when speaking of children, then petition the government to make parenting decisions. You continually contradict yourself with this "it takes a village" crap.
FT said: What then? Oops, I don't think I have to ask. Tests for eveyone. Woo hoo!
Hatteras replies: That's quite a leap, though not unexpected in a forum such as this.
Quite a leap? You are kidding right? You just replied to:
FT said: And what about people who never get a license until they are a legal adult?
with.....
Hatteras Responds: I hadn't given that much thought, but heck, if the state demands that they, as adults, take a driver's test, why not put a cup in their hand and point them to the bathroom as well?
Quite a leap, or are you being quite dishonest as to your beiefs?
A kid who wants to get his/her license will find a way to give up drugs long enough to do so, and a kid who want to quit drugs for good will hopefully find a way to do so. You seem to have the idea that an addict will be "cured" if they can give up drugs long enough to pass a pee test.
Why thank you, Mr. Hatteras. I'm so glad us'ns got someones lahk you to educash us pour dum konservatives!!
Tell me something slick. If we elect a group of politicians that are willing to sell out their base just to gain votes how much can we trust them when they get in? Secondly, if we continue to elect these 'brave and cunning' Republicans that are willing to sell out their base to get elected, what type of candidates will the RNC continue to foist upon us and what type of legislation is going to get passed by a bunch of feelgood RINOs. What? Are they suddenly going to gain heart when they step into those hallowed halls, forget the lies they've been pushing for over a year, and 'do the right thing'? I've lived in this state my entire life and I have seen it go straight to hell. I love this state first and foremost, even over the government in Washington. Elizabeth Dole will win the seat, you've got that beyond a shadow of a doubt. But if you believe that she cares anything about NC values or even knows anything about them, you're fooling yourself
All of your arguments about "safety" fall short for that simple reason.
Hey, FreeTally. I don't want YOUR kids on the roads doing drugs, and neither do most parents. Sorry.
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.