Should the National Minimum Drinkin Act be repealed? This would allow individual states to have a drinking age under 21 without losing federal highway money. “Blood borders” would present a problem, but is that reason enough restrict states’ rights? How big a problem was it when the age varied from state to state? What does it matter if young adults from North Takoma go to South Takoma for a drink? States bordering Canada or Mexico already have to deal with this (though it’s much easier to go to another state than country). Does Canada have a problem with provincial blood borders (18/19 by province)?
FWIW, I don’t think anyone in Canada is too upset by the difference in drinking ages across the provinces. Except for the occasional foray to Alberta’s border towns from Saskatchewan, I haven’t heard of it affecting anyone at all.
I’d strongly support the repeal of this law. Since I believe the drinking age should be 18 (and I’m well over 18), I can’t imagine a state raising the drinking age above 21.
At age 18, you can vote, join the military, smoke, and be able to drink. You’re also responsible for the consequences of your actions.
I strongly support this.
STATES RIGHTS trumps federal fiat. At least in theory.
Amendment X - Powers not delegated (to the Federa Gov’t), reserved to states and people respectively.
As someone who in 1976-77 frequently drove to southern Wisconsin when I was 18, drank a whole lot of beer, and then drove home to Elgin, IL. (about 90 miles) legally drunk , I see the logic of having a uniform drinking age in this country. And I was far from alone in doing this. (Once I turned 19, i never went back to Wisconsin bars.)
Yeah, I don’t know about that argument, though. I remember more than a few trips for second last call when I was younger. Perhaps the feds should mandate closing times too? Also, public nudity laws vary among jurisdictions, so perhaps we can standardize those as well. After all, we don’t want a rowdy bachelor party hitting the highway to see more than they can at home.
So, the 18 year old adult has a decision to make. If she/he would be guilty of DWI, then they should realize that decision as well. They’re 18 now. If they choose to drive while intoxicated, let them face the penalites of whichever state they’re convicted in. I still wouldn’t restrict them from drinking.
I was under the impression that states were already free to set their own minimum drinking age. I thought the Feds simply told states to set their age at 21 or risk losing highway funds. Is that not the case?
Marc
The problem with the drinking age being 18 is that there are too many high school seniors who are 18 and can by for their other high school age buddies. My solution? Keep the drinking age at 21, or 18 if you have a high school diploma. It provides an incentive to stay in school and means that no one still in school can buy alcohol. It also eliminates the whole “old enough to join the army” thing, since you have to have a diploma to join the army, too (though you can enlist early, you have to finish the diploma).
I suppose it’s unfair that an 18 year old can theoretically be drafted but cant drink. I dont care though and neither will they after they turn 21. I suppose I could support an 18 year old drinking age if they had to forfeit their drivers license until age 21 and travel home from the bar on a skateboard.
Call me a cynic but I’m pretty sure the only reason the US allowes kids to join the armed forces at age 18 is because they are in their physical prime. NOT because of their decision making capabilities.
Which I’m pretty sure anyone over the age of 18 can tell you, is NOT your prime time in life for making decisions or judgement calls.
That being said; I do think it should be left up to the state. And not under the BS pemise: “It’s still up to the states, but if you don’t, you don’t get highway funding.”
Ha! I could drink at 19 as well, and I grew up 30 miles from Wisconsin with its 18-year-old drinking age. I didn’t make the trip too often because I looked older than my age and could usually buy alcohol in stores or get it from my parents, but I had a lot of friends who made that trip. 
That’s what I thought too. It’s also how they got states to enforce a stronger open bottle law.
I think that the 21 year old age saves lives but I also think it’s unfair that 18 year olds can’t drink. I was just thinking this weekend that I couldn’t imagine being in college and not being able to legally drink. I wonder how many live we would save if we made the drinking age 30?
When I was 17-18 I had a few friends who had already graduated from high school and would have been able to purchase beer for me under your system. How effective do you think your system would be?
Marc
well, if it is supposed that raising the drinking age to 30 would save lives, if we lowered it to 16, would it save a lot more lives? what if we changed the speed limit to 40 and lowered the alcohol limit…would that make up for it?
i know, stupid question…i’m 24 and i don’t drink. yes, 18 year olds aren’t in the best state to make the best judgment calls, but the line has to be drawn between “adult” and “child”, and 18 sure is it. if you wish to redraw the line, then, by all means, we can talk that over…but for now the line is at 18. i don’t see why an 18 year old can’t drink. i think that you could severely penalize people that drive while drunk from 18 to about 21ish, but if 18-21 year olds aren’t able to have the best judgment, wouldn’t that be setting them up for failure?
maybe part of the problem lies with advertising alcohol. maybe it should be stopped, or severely limited or reformed.
i suppose the same case could be made of cars. car commercials are always made with the driver’s foot firmly pressed on the gas with very little traffic and disdain for speed limits. if you wish to buy into it, the two commercials could help to feed off of each other, making an 18 year old’s mind more susceptible to drinking to excess and then driving like a stunt driver. i don’t necessarily agree with it, but it’ll get brought up eventually.
So make it 19, then?
It’s my understanding that the reason 18-year-olds can’t drink is that when they tried lowering the age to 18 some years ago, the rate of alcohol-related deadly car accidents went way up. They tried it, it didn’t work, so it went back to 21. Best compromise they could come up with, I suppose.
It’s fine to say “well, punish 18-yo drunk drivers,” but that hardly makes it up to the people they kill.
I know it works fine in Europe, and if it worked here that would be great. But it doesn’t. I think the societal gap between us and European countries is too great for us to be able to work the same way; we drive far more and American drinking habits are very different.
The States can set any drinking age they care to, what made you think otherwise? That’s fine by me.
Of course, the Fed’s retain their control over their $$, and if they choose not to send some if it the way of a Sate that has an 18yo drining limit- why, that’s fine too.
Unless somehow you’re saying we want a law that forces the Feds to distribute highway funds in am manner not acceptable to Congress? :dubious: That would require a Constitutional admendment, and I’d be very much against that.
So, yes, the States should be free to set their own minimum drinking age- just like they already are and have been for the last 200 years or so.
No, I think the OP is arguing for Congress to repeal the law that limits highway funds. No Constitutional amendment required. Just Congress’ intent has to change. The OP is arguing that Congress should vote his way, because that would be the wisest thing to do and it would be consistent with the spirit (no pun intended, given the subject matter) of states’ rights.
Well, they “tried” it in New York for over twenty years. The Former President of Middlebury College has said raising the age did more harm than good. At the time, several legislators who opposed the NMDA of 1984 pointed out that New York still had fewer alcohol-related accidents per automobile than states with a 21 age.
well, i’d think that if you lowered the legal drinking age, there would be a suddden influx of teen drinking. that almost goes without saying…the ones that would have this new freedom would go out and abuse it promptly. it’d just take a small amount of time to work that through the system, then it’d be back to equilibrium.