Senate Presses States for Tough Drunk-Driving Standard

The Senate voted Wednesday to set a tough national standard for determining when a driver is legally drunk and to withhold millions of dollars in federal highway funds from states that do not comply.

If the House and President Clinton go along with the Senate, the provision would create what amounts to one standard from coast to coast--an allowable blood-alcohol limit of .08%.

California already enforces that standard, along with 14 other states. But 35 states use a more lenient 0.10% blood-alcohol content as the threshold for being legally drunk.

The tougher standard passed the Senate on a 62-32 vote, with the majority brushing aside those who argued that Washington was again meddling in a matter better left to the states.

“This problem is much more than a state problem. It’s a national tragedy,” said Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio), co-sponsor of the measure.

“Happy hour for drunk drivers is over,” added Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.), the other co-sponsor.

The provision was approved as an amendment to the $173-billion, six-year highway spending bill being considered by the Senate. Under the Lautenberg-DeWine amendment, states that choose not to accept the tougher standard would lose 5% of their federal highway money in fiscal 2002 and 10% thereafter.

Support for the new standard crossed party lines, with 26 Republicans joining 36 Democrats.

Both California senators voted for the provision. “It’s gratifying to know that this amendment, if enacted into law, will save 600 lives per year, sparing so many families the tragedy that comes from drunk driving,” said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.).

Clinton, who appealed for the amendment’s adoption at an emotional White House ceremony Tuesday that included relatives of people killed by drunk drivers, praised the Senate action. “It will save hundreds of lives each year,” he said.

According to anti-drunk driving groups, about 17,000 of the 40,000 highway deaths in 1996 resulted from alcohol-related accidents.

“The Senate has shown tremendous leadership by passing this lifesaving amendment,” said Karolyn Nunnallee, national president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

Judith Lee Stone, president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, said: “The first battle for a national, uniform .08 law has been won.”

Denouncing the toughened standard were officials of the alcohol and restaurant industries, who argued that it is too low.

“It’s just nauseating, to be honest with you,” said John C. Doyle of the American Beverage Institute, a trade association that represents about 5,000 restaurants. “We’ve reached a point in the crusade against social drinking . . . where restaurants are saying: ‘Enough!’ ”

Doyle said the real safety problems are caused by serious abusers of alcohol, not social drinkers. “The average blood-alcohol content level among fatally injured drinking drivers is 0.17%, or more than twice the proposed .08% arrest level.”

A 1997 Department of Transportation study said the .08% level approximates the blood-alcohol content of a 170-pound man after four drinks within an hour, or a 137-pound woman after three drinks in the same time span.

Leading Senate opposition to the measure was Sen. Don Nickles (R-Okla.), who said states should have an unencumbered right to set their own standards.

“This is a heavy stick. This is a dagger that says you have to do it,” Nickles said. “We are trampling on states’ rights and encouraging this idea that, if there is a problem, there’s a federal solution and we won’t give you your money back.”

But DeWine said it is senseless for a driver to be legally intoxicated in one state but not another.

The more stringent .08% standard, he added, “is the same kind of common-sense standard that President Reagan pointed to when he signed legislation raising the national minimum drinking age to 21.”

The measure’s prospects in the House were uncertain Wednesday. But Rep. Nita M. Lowey (D-N.Y.), who plans to sponsor it in that chamber, predicted that the strong Senate vote would provide “the momentum we will need to pass this measure.”

Because of the enormous popularity of the highway funding bill, the massive legislation is attracting a raft of unrelated but controversial amendments. Another one coming up, sponsored by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), would kill a Department of Transportation program that gives 10% of contracts to firms owned by women and minorities.

Before completing the massive highway bill, perhaps next week, the Senate is also expected to consider proposals to impose restrictions on driving with an opened alcoholic drink and on the selling of alcoholic beverages at drive-through outlets.

Time staff writer Faye Fiore contributed to this story.