Despite the public awareness campaigns warning Americans not to drink and drive, having a drink with dinner before driving is still legal and safe for adults 21 and older. But a key federal agency, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), wants to crack down on responsible drinking and driving. This month, the board urged states to slash the current 0.08 percent blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit for driving to “0.05 or even lower.”
The recommendation comes as part of the NTSB’s annual “Most Wanted List” of transportation safety improvements. Once again, the agency’s plan calls for an “end to substance impairment in transportation.” While that’s a laudable goal, instead of focusing on habitual drunk drivers or those who mix alcohol with drugs, lowering the legal BAC limit targets moderate drinkers who pose little risk to traffic safety.
{mosads}But how many drinks does it take to reach 0.05 percent BAC?
A 120-pound woman could reach that level with just a single drink. Two beers with dinner and a 150-pound man could pass the .05 threshold.
If imposed, the NTSB’s guidelines would criminalize this perfectly responsible behavior without targeting the hardcore drunk drivers who cause the vast majority of drunk driving accidents.
The statistics clearly show who the most dangerous drunk drivers are, and it’s not those who enjoy a happy hour cocktail before commuting home. Roughly 70 percent of drunk driving fatalities are caused by drivers with BAC levels of 0.15 or higher, nearly double the current legal limit. Drivers with a BAC level between 0.05 and 0.07 — the key targets of the NTSB recommendations — accounted for less than 1 percent of traffic fatalities.
The NTSB claims that “impairment begins before a person’s BAC reaches 0.08 percent. … In fact, by the time it reaches that level, the risk of a fatal crash has more than doubled.”
That sounds terrifying, but let’s consider that impairment in context. Research shows that drivers using a hands-free cellphone while driving are as impaired as a driver with a 0.08 BAC. And texting and driving impairment poses an even greater crash risk.
Lowering the legal limit to 0.05 is such a bad idea that even Mothers Against Drunk Driving can’t get behind it. When the NTSB first peddled the proposal to lower the legal limit back in 2013, the activist group came out as a firm “neutral,” refusing to back it.
MADD founder Candy Lightner, who left the organization because it got too radical, went further in blasting the plan, calling it “impractical” and “a waste of time.”
“You could go to 0.0 and that would save lives. You could go to a 40 mph speed limit and that would save lives, but you have to look at what’s realistic,” she said.
And the most realistic and effective way to cut down on drunk driving isn’t to attack low-risk social drinkers. State policymakers and federal regulators should embrace policies that target those most likely to harm others with their drunk driving habits. Strengthening penalties for chronic, highly intoxicated drunk drivers and ensuring those drivers install ignition interlocks on their vehicles are better uses of our limited tax dollars.
Lowering the legal limit isn’t an effective way to crack down on drunk drivers, but it could have serious ramifications for the average person who just wants to relax with a beer after work.
Longwell is managing director of the American Beverage Institute.