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."
And there seem to be as many Republicans as Democrats who think so. Maybe more.
Please FRmail me if you want to be added to or removed from this North Carolina ping list.
Of course it was, because he's a rebellious stupid kid. His non-support for the misguided twit Dole was not illogical in the least.
I can understand his frustration. The "Republicans" in my chaing of command is in the process of destroying my community in a wholesale fashion, every sinlge one of them.
When I state "destroying my community in a wholesale fashion, every single one of them" I'm not exaggerating in the least. Every single republican in my chain of command really is in the process of destroying my commmunity in a wholesale fashion. Your country is next.
I feel Darth's pain.
Is that "right" enough for you Ham?
Sure, muggs. Pot and alcohol are debatable topics - in this scenario as well. But anyone who shows that they are doing hard drugs is showing a blatant disregard for the law (which cannot be condoned on the road), are likely addicted (which means that they will have problems NOT taking the drug in question while driving), are showing enormous irresponsibility with regard to their own well-being (yes, that's their business - but it shows that they are, on average, not so likely to be concerned with others' well-being), shouldn't be driving. In my town, we have several fatal car wrecks every year (often involving, maiming or killing passers-by) involving kids on drugs. I have a family. I do NOT want kids driving around who do drugs. You can disagree with that. But the vast, vast majority of parents will agree with me. Anything that makes my kids and my wife safer from the predations of others is something that I will strongly consider.
You know, Mr. Hyperbole is not always your friend.
Maybe you should consider locking them up in the house. That would keep them much safer from DUI drivers.
Franky, I hope she loses. I don't think she will, but I could do without her.
That's fine, at the state level. Why anyone would want the federal government mucking around with the issue of state-issued drivers' licenses is beyond me. Particularly at a time when we're one or two terrorist attacks away from a national drivers' license with an accompanying biometric database.
Socialism is an economic system in which the government owns many of the large businesses in the society. The government (whether you like it or not) passes laws every day which are believed (and yes, sometimes they are poorly designed) to help protect citizens from questionable behaviors or dangers emanating from others. That's why in many places: you can't shoot guns into the air over crowds (because falling bullets can seriously injure people), you can't raise tigers and let them loose, you can't drive with poor eyesight, you can't transport radioactive and biological hazard materials through many neighborhoods, etc. etc.
Sure there, NL. I would much prefer that this be at the state level - and that's where it belongs under our Constitution. But I AM in favor of forcing kids to be off drugs before they get a drivers license.
Appy, you should already know, everything to Liddy is a federal matter. Apparently and especially what we do in our cars. The separate state legislatures exist just to rubber stamp federal initiatives she and others like her push. To make it appear all 'legal'. I'm just suprised she hasn't suggested bolting us in and having a computer in Washington drive the car for us
She is no more from NC than I am from KS.
As far as I'm concerned, she should move "elsewhere".
And so should that pansy husband of hers.
They can take Trent Lott with them while they're at it.
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.