|
|
|
|
Those in favor of lowering the age, such as the group Amethyst Initiative currently leading that effort, insist that binge drinking in America, including college campuses, only increases when young adults are forbidden to drink until age 21. That forbidden flavor makes these students drink more when they get their hands on alcoholic beverages, and deaths have occurred, they say.
Twenty-one was the age set by Congress in the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984. But those who oppose it have strong arguments.
At age 18, they say, young Americans can vote, get married without parental approval, sign legally binding loans and other legal documents and — die in war wearing the uniform of their country’s armed forces.
It is therefore illogical to forbid them from having a drink, they say.
But the Federal Trade Commission argues to the contrary.
“The law is working,” says the FTC’s Web site. Since the passage of the 1984 act, their research shows, “Twenty-five percent fewer high school seniors drink today than did in 1983. Teen binge drinking is down. Fifteen percent fewer high school seniors engage in binge drinking today than did in 1983.
They quote as their source the Monitoring the Future Study of the University of Michigan, dated Dec. 12, 2007.
The FTC goes on to say that alcohol-related fatal crashes involving teen drivers have dropped by more than half — from 22 per 100,000 licensed drivers 15 to 20 years old in 1982, to fewer than 10 per 100,000 in 2003.
The minimum drinking age has prevented an estimated 22,000 alcohol-related driving deaths — about 900 lives a year, their research indicated.
Still, even the FTC admits that too many teens still drink — 16 percent of eighth-graders, 33 percent of high school sophomores, and 44 percent of high school seniors. And, more than 10 percent of eighth-graders, 22 percent of sophomores, and 26 percent of seniors report recent binge drinking.
Most teens report that alcohol is “fairly easy” or “very easy” to get — including 62 percent of eighth graders, 83 percent of sophomores, and 92 percent of seniors, according to the FTC.
In our opinion, teens are going to drink — law or no law in their way. Nevertheless, the law should stay in place, even if the FTC’s success figures are only close to true. Any young life saved is worth it, and a teen who abstains from early drinking may indeed have the hope of a longer, safer life.
But if the legal age is lowered, perhaps the idea of college administrator Roderic B. Park has merit. Park, who has had tenure at the University of Colorado and at the University of California Berkeley, says teens should have to pass tests to attain a drinker’s “learner’s permit” to purchase alcohol.
Also, we would make one exception in our opposition to drinking at 18.
Those who serve their country in uniform should be able to include an alcoholic beverage in their R&R.
And, one day soon, when the job is done, may they be able to have that drink in their own hometown bar if they so choose.
This editorial reflects the views of the Victoria Advocate’s editorial board.