Debate, dialogue needed on issue of drinking age

The news certainly created plenty of conversation.

And that was the idea behind a proposal, signed off on by about 100 college presidents from across the country, that the U. S. revisit the law that does not allow people younger than 21 to buy or consume alcoholic beverages.

But, as is so often the case, the debate quickly degenerated into name calling and finger pointing.

First the college presidents from a number of schools said, after trying to deal with the problems of students drinking illegally, they asked that there be a debate about our current law.

One of their reasons was that the current law causes students to find ways to skirt the law and that it makes the problem of binge drinking even worse.

“This is a law that is routinely evaded,” John McCardell, former president of Middlebury College in Vermont said in an Associated Press story.

“It is a law that the people at whom it is directed believe is unjust and unfair and discriminatory,” McCardell told the AP.

The reaction and criticism was fast and furious.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving told the AP that changing the law would cause more fatal wrecks.

They also said the presidents were using incorrect research statistics, and that they didn’t want to have to deal with problem drinking on their campuses.

But according to news accounts of the proposal the presidents made a point to say they were not saying the age should be changed.

According to their position paper they were trying to seek “an informed and dispassionate debate” over the issue and the federal highway law that made 21 the de facto national drinking age by denying money to any state that bucks the law.

But it’s obvious they don’t think the current law is working, and they want to discuss ways to deal with the issue of problem drinking on their campuses.

They continue by saying the law creates a “culture of dangerous, clandestine binge-drinking.”

And in the argument lots of people use, the position paper goes on to say that people can vote at 18 and serve in the military but aren’t considered mature enough to drink alcohol.

Before the federal government made the drinking age mandatory across the nation, some states, including South Carolina, let 18-year-olds consume beer and wine but not “hard liquor.”

That created problems as well.

But, drinking and driving among young people, and the problems it causes are a serious issue.

And of course the issue of binge drinking and the problems it creates are serious issues as well.

No matter how you feel about what the drinking age should be there are “bigger problems.” Trying to have a discussion and a dialogue about those is a worthwhile goal.

The problem may not be about age but education, responsibility and maturity.

And that’s pretty hard to legislate no matter what age you let people “drink legally.”