Some University Presidents Shirk Responsibility to Protect Students From Dangers Of Underage Drinking

Key Members of Congress, Public Health Experts and Educators Cite Effectiveness of 21 Law

New Nationwide Insurance Survey Reaffirms Public Supports 21 Drinking Age

and Parents Do Not Want to Send Teens to Party Schools  

For Immediate Release on 8/19/2008

Contact Information

Misty Moyse 
469-420-4558 
misty.moyse@madd.org

WASHINGTON & DALLAS—As students head back to school, more than 100 college and university presidents have signed on to a misguided initiative that uses deliberately misleading information to confuse the public on the effectiveness of 21 law.  The initiative is led by another organization with a political agenda of lowering the drinking age in the name of reducing college binge drinking.   

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) National President Laura Dean-Mooney said, “Underage and binge drinking is a tough problem and we welcome an honest discussion about how to address this challenge but that discussion must honor the science behind the 21 law which unequivocally shows that the 21 law has reduced drunk driving and underage and binge drinking.”

MADD, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), the American Medical Association (AMA), National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Governors Highway Safety Association and other science, medical and public health organizations, and all members of the Support 21 Coalition call on these college and university presidents to remove their names from this list and urge them to work with the public health community and law enforcement on real solutions to underage and binge drinking. Additionally, MADD is asking the public to write letters to their Governors and college presidents to support the 21 law and ask those on the initiative list to remove their names.

“As the mother of a daughter who is close to entering college, it is deeply disappointing to me that many of our educational leaders would support an initiative without doing their homework on the underlying research and science,” said Dean-Mooney. “Parents should think twice before sending their teens to these colleges or any others that have waved the white flag on underage and binge drinking policies.” 

What the Experts Say

Top science, medical and public health experts as well as congressional and state leaders agree on the effectiveness of the 21 minimum drinking age law in saving lives.

University  of Miami President and former U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala, said maintaining the legal drinking age at 21 is a socially and medically sound policy that helps parents, schools and law enforcement protect our youth from the potentially life-threatening effects of underage drinking. "As a three-time university president, I can tell you that losing a student to an alcohol-related tragedy is one of the hardest and most heart-rending experiences imaginable," Shalala said. "Signing this initiative does serious harm to the education and enforcement efforts on our campuses and ultimately endangers young lives even more.  I ask every higher education leader who has signed to reconsider. I am old enough to remember life on our campuses before the 21 year drinking rule. It was horrible."                   

Ronald M. Davis, Immediate Past President of the AMA said, ”It is impossible to ignore the scientific evidence demonstrating the dangers of underage drinking. A young adult’s brain is a work in progress, marked by significant development in areas of the brain responsible for learning, memory, complex thinking, planning, inhibition and emotional regulation. If we lower the age at which young adults are legally allowed to purchase alcohol, we are lowering the age of those who have easy access to alcohol and shifting responsibility to high school educators. The science simply does not support lowering the drinking age.”

"The traffic safety and public health benefits of the 21 minimum drinking age law have been well established, with the Department of Transportation estimating nearly 1,000 lives saved each year as a result.  I strongly support this lifesaving law, and will not consider any effort to repeal or weaken it in any way,” said Congressman James L. Oberstar (D-MN), Chairman , U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

“Drunk driving needlessly kills thousands of young people every year.  That’s why I wrote a law to create a national drinking age of 21 and why we fight so hard to reduce drunk driving and save lives on our roads,” Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) said.  “This small minority of college administrators wants to undo years of success—that defies common sense.  We need to do all we can to protect the national drinking age -- a law that saves the lives of drivers, passengers and pedestrians across the country each year.”

“Countless lives have been saved since Congress raised the national minimum drinking age to 21 in 1984.  We need to maintain this important law and the life-saving protection it gives our teens and others on the roads,” said U.S. Senator David Vitter (R-LA), a member of the Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works.

“Age 21 drinking laws are effective in preventing deaths and injuries,” said NTSB Acting Chairman Mark V. Rosenker. “Repealing them is a terrible idea. It would be a national tragedy to turn back the clock and jeopardize the lives of more teens.”

Adrian Lund, president of IIHS, said, “This initiative aims to lower the drinking age without proposing a realistic substitute.  It reflects ignorance about the years of research comprising the scientific justification for 21 laws. Sound policy should be based on sound science.  What is the evidence that education programs would be an effective replacement for minimum drinking age laws? There is none. If states lower the drinking age again, more teens will drink and drive and more will die.”

The Public’s Perspective

The public strongly disagrees with efforts to lower the drinking age. According to a new survey released today by Nationwide Insurance, 78 percent of adults support 21 as the minimum drinking age and 72 percent believe lowering the drinking age would make alcohol more accessible to youth.  

“While advocates argue a lower drinking age will curb teen binge drinking, our survey shows only 14 percent of Americans agree and 47 percent believe it will actually make a huge problem worse,” said Bill Windsor, Associate Vice President of Safety for Nationwide. “Americans feel so strongly about teen binge drinking more than half say they are less likely to vote for a politician who supports lowering the legal limit or to send their child to a known “party school.”