Legal Drinking Age

Floor Speech

LEGAL DRINKING AGE -- (Senate - September 17, 2008)

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, the debate over the legal drinking age has continued for decades.

As a physician and surgeon, I have repeatedly dealt firsthand with the traumatic results of underage drinking.

Recently, a number of college presidents from across the country signed a public statement petitioning that the current legal drinking age be lowered to age 18.

I believe changing this law would pose a danger to our youth and communities.

Wyoming's First Lady, Nancy Freudenthal, wrote an important editorial addressing drinking on college campuses. It was printed in the Wyoming Tribune Eagle and the Casper Star Tribune. I believe Mrs. Freudenthal presents a compelling argument for keeping the minimum drinking age at 21.

I ask unanimous consent to have the editorial to which I referred printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Lowering the Drinking Age Is Not a Good Idea
(By Nancy Freudenthal)

When the leaders of our nation's institutions of higher learning have something to say, we naturally assume that it will be well-reasoned, responsible and grounded in factual evidence. That is why it was disappointing to see more than 100 college presidents and chancellors have signed on to what is now being called the Amethyst Initiative, which seeks to lower the legal drinking age from 21 to 18 because, as its proponents claim, ``Twenty-one is not working.''

I am very pleased the University of Wyoming has not signed on to this initiative, and in fact is addressing drinking on campus on many fronts, including ``education, training, enforcement and changing the environment around alcohol use,'' according to Dean of Students Dave Cozzens.

By viewing this issue through the narrow lens of alcohol-related problems on campus, these college presidents are ignoring the broader societal implications of throwing in the towel on the health and well-being of our young people.

The Amethyst Initiative's solution for reducing binge drinking and preventing underage drinking is to make alcohol more readily available to young people, which will only exacerbate the public health concern of underage drinking.

We believe that such an approach is irresponsible and would lead to more of the tragic consequences associated with underage alcohol use documented in the U.S. Surgeon General's 2007 Call to Action to Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking.

Teen deaths and injuries, traffic accidents, physical assaults and other violent acts, risky sexual behavior, and school failure, among other potentially lifelong consequences, would increase as a result.

Lowering the drinking age also runs counter to scientific research that shows underage drinking can affect brain development, which we now know continues into the mid-to late twenties. Scientific evidence further shows that underage drinking is related to future alcohol dependence and other substance abuse.

Approximately 96 percent of alcohol-dependent adults started drinking before the age of 21.

For the past 20 plus years, so many have worked tirelessly and diligently to keep our youth and our communities safe and healthy by reducing the prevalence of alcohol use among those under 21, with the current legal drinking age limit a large part of our success.

Although we are under no illusion that problems persist, we must continue to confront them head on, vigilantly and responsibly, and resist easy efforts to turn back the clock and undo years of steady progress.

Seventy-eight percent of Americans oppose lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18, so the public gets the message.

We recognize that colleges have a tremendous problem with binge drinking.

Young people are drinking more aggressively than ever before. The solution is really about changing the culture of alcohol consumption. In many respects, we have achieved this change in culture for youth tobacco use. We must now change the culture as it relates to underage drinking.

The bottom line is children who are connected to family, community and society are less prone to drink alcohol.

It's just a shame that some college administrators didn't do their homework, and our children are the ones who would pay the price.

When children drink, America loses.

Source