Old Enough to Vote. Old Enough to Fight. But NOT Old Enough to Have a Beer – LEGALLY!
Old Enough to Vote. Old Enough to Fight. But NOT Old Enough to Have a Beer – LEGALLY!
SEVERAL MAJOR UNIVERSITIES SUGGEST RECONSIDERING 21 YEAR OLD DRINKING AGE WHILE OTHERS SAY "NO!"
The debate has gone on across the U.S. for many years. How old should the minimum age for drinking alcoholic beverages be? Eighteen? Twenty-one? Somewhere in between?
Presidents at several noted colleges and universities across the country including Ohio State University Duke Dartmouth and Lake Forest College in IL suggest re-opening debate and considering lowering the legal drinking age on a state-by-state basis. Prominent schools in Illinois including the Universtiy of Illinois and Southern Illinois University oppose any changes.
The Uniform Drinking Age Act of 1984 cuts federal highway funding if they lower their state drinking age below 21 so every U.S. state has complied with the federal 21-year-old minimum for two decades.
The movement to lower legal drinking to the age of 18 has been called The Amethyst Initiative. In ancient Greece many believed the purple gemstone can actually ward off drunkenness and they placed the stone in drinking vessels and jewelry of the time for that purpose. For the past year quietly the measure’s proponents have been recruiting college presidents for support.
"This is a law that is routinely evaded" said John McCardell former president of Middlebury College in Vermont who started the organization. "It is a law that the people at whom it is directed believe is unjust and unfair and discriminatory."
Highway Safety Data indicates that drunk driving accidents and fatalities have dropped considerably since the de facto 21-year-old drinking age became law. But are adult civil liberties being trampled by the dual-standard for adulthood – 18 for registering to vote for joining the armed services and to sign a legal contract but 21 to imbibe – legally?
MADD – Mothers Against Drunk Driving – cautions that lowering the drinking age would immediately increase the incidence of fatal car crashes by increasing the number of intoxicated drivers. MADD Chairman Chuck Hurley equates a lowered drinking age to "waving the white flag."
But as some say if the drinking age of 21 versus 18 or 19 would reduce alcohol-related traffic accidents wouldn’t increasing the legal age even higher – say to 23 or 25 – reduce accidents even more? Where should the line be drawn?
Others suggest reducing the drinking age but increasing the legal age for driving a car – not likely today one might assume!
People on either side of the debate agree that abuse of alcohol by those of college age is a huge concern. Research has found that greater than 40% of college students experienced at least one symptom of alcohol abuse or dependence during their school years. Another study indicates that more than 500000 full-time students at four-year colleges or universities suffer injuries each year related to drinking and roughly 1700 die annually in alcohol-related traffic accidents.
Back in the 1980’s and earlier each state had their own minimum age of majority for drinking – ranging from 18 to 21 with some setting lower ages for reduced-alcohol beer and wine. The impetus for the reduced drinking age at that time – the Vietnam War. Many argued that those old enough to fight for their country should be able to enjoy a legal beer or cocktail.
Illinois Law beginning in the early 1970’s lowered the legal drinking age for beer and wine only to 19 with the higher age of 21 for cocktails and mixed drinks. This age distinction seemed largely ignored in many Chicago bars clubs and taverns at the time – in essence everyone admitted with a few exceptions got to drink whatever they wanted.
When I attended college at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign beginning in 1974 police largely ignored the distinction and even the 19-year-old minimum – IF you were able to show a valid U of I ID! Often even those under 18 (as I was initially) got a free pass!
The college town of Urbana IL even temporarily lowered the overall drinking age to 18. Happy hours pitcher of beer specials and chugging contests were common in this liberal town at this liberal time.
At the time 18 year old drinking was the law in the nearby states of Wisconsin Michigan New York and others as well as in most provinces in Canada (today an 18 or 19 year old minimum is still the norm in most Canadian provinces and in most other nations around the world).
Does a higher drinking age actually add glamor to drinking among young people and even incite reckless "binge" drinking? Will lowering the drinking age combined with public education actually remove that allure and make younger drinkers more responsible?
And is a 21-year-old drinking age actually a form of discrimination against otherwise legal mature adults?
The debate continues!
See coverage from yesterday’s Chicago Tribune with contributions by AP Reporter Justin Pope for more info.
DEAN & DEAN’S TEAM CHICAGO
