The Case Is All Too Clear for Transportation Drug Testing

Almost two years ago our college-bound daughters and 14 other people were killed in the crash of an Amtrak train. Because a railroad crew chose to smoke dope on the job, our daughters’ productive lives were snuffed out.

Since that awful day we have worked nonstop to enact a federal law requiring mandatory random drug and alcohol testing for safety-critical transportation workers. Time is running out--this session of Congress is almost over.

Last year, during just one investigation, 26 truck drivers were arrested at California truck stops for drugs. On May 19 a truck driver rammed more than two dozen cars on a Los Angeles freeway. The police found amphetamines, a hypodermic syringe and a partly smoked marijuana cigarette in his cab.

At the end of July, 43 passengers from New Jersey placed their trust in a Gray Line bus driver. This church group’s trust was grossly misplaced. After the crash the driver was charged with possession of narcotics paraphernalia and driving under the influence. During a 1983 strike Greyhound Lines took applications from experienced intercity bus drivers, but 30% tested positive for marijuana.

The Federal Aviation Administration has removed from duty 70 air-traffic controllers because--you guessed it--they tested positive for drugs. A commercial airplane crashed in January in Durango, Colo., killing nine; the pilot tested positive for cocaine. The litany of death goes on and on and on.

We believe, and others have proved, that the mandatory random testing of safety-critical transportation professionals is the only effective deterrent to the drug and alcohol abuse that threatens workers and the traveling public. A strictly random testing program is also the fairest method for transportation employees, and it works. Public safety depends on drug-free and sober truck and bus drivers, airline pilots and air-traffic controllers, and railroad engineers and brakemen.

Next week the House of Representatives is expected to vote on an omnibus bill to combat the horror of drug abuse in our society. Why doesn’t this legislation include random testing of safety-critical transportation professionals?

Almost a year ago the Senate approved random transportation drug and alcohol testing by an 83-7 vote. On June 15 the House voted overwhelmingly, 377 to 27, to urge its conferees to adopt the Senate’s drug-testing bill. But Public Works Committee conferees still have not acted--no bill has been brought to the full House despite the vote of the 377 members. What does it take to get action on this life-saving measure?

The House Public Works Committee is chaired by Rep. Glenn M. Anderson (D-San Pedro). The Public Works aviation subcommittee is chaired by Rep. Norman Y. Mineta (D-San Jose). These two powerful congressmen from California can move the Senate bill to the full House for the vote that the traveling public deserves.

These two representatives have worked to keep the Senate transportation drug-testing bill out of the House omnibus drug bill, out of the airline bill that the Senate attached it to and off the House floor.

Random testing does not wait until a transportation worker endangers the public by acting irresponsibly. Random testing deters substance abuse from the start. The Senate bill would mandate employee protections: federally approved laboratories, strict chain of custody and privacy requirements, and stiff penalties against employers who violate these mandates--up to $10,000 per violation.

What does it take? California’s congressional representatives are the keys to getting this life-saving measure enacted into law. Californians can make the difference by demanding that Anderson and Mineta say yes to random transportation drug and alcohol testing.

If the random drug-testing legislation dies, it won’t be the only fatality on the hands of the members of the House Public Works Committee.