Pubdate: Sun, 17 Jun 2007
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Page: B08
Copyright: 2007 The Washington Post Company
Contact:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/491
Authors: J. Michael Walsh, and Robert L. DuPont
Note: J. Michael Walsh is president of the Walsh Group, a policy 
research organization. Robert L. DuPont is president of the Institute 
for Behavior and Health.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?224 (Cannabis and Driving)

THE DRUGGED DRIVING EPIDEMIC

Why the Mayhem at a Southeast Festival Wasn't the Fluke You Might Think It Was

More than three dozen men, women and children were hurt at a 
Southeast Washington festival by a driver police say was high on 
crack. Two days later, another allegedly drug-addicted driver crashed 
into a crowd of students at a bus stop in La Plata, injuring four.

These were not isolated incidents, and they raise the question of how 
we can get drug-impaired drivers off the streets.

If readers think the government is doing something to protect 
innocent lives from drugged driving, they should think again. The 
government response has lagged far behind the growing evidence that 
we face an epidemic of drugged driving.

For example:

. The federal government's 2004 U.S. National Survey on Drug Use and 
Health estimated that 10.6 million Americans had driven a motor 
vehicle under the influence of an illegal drug or drugs during the 
previous year.

. Several studies have shown that 80 percent of drug users drive 
after having used illicit drugs and that many drive even while in the 
process of using the drugs.

. A recent toxicology study conducted at the University of Maryland's 
Shock-Trauma Unit in Baltimore found that 65.7 percent of injured 
drivers tested positive for either alcohol or commonly abused drugs. 
More than half (50.9 percent) tested positive for drugs other than 
alcohol, with over 26 percent testing positive for marijuana. Alcohol 
was detected in 30.6 percent of the drivers.

Despite this evidence that driving under the influence of illegal 
drugs is common, drugged drivers are far less frequently detected, 
prosecuted or referred for treatment than drunk drivers.

In most states, proving drugged driving requires showing that an 
illegal substance caused the impaired driving rather than showing 
less-onerous "per se" evidence, a standard requiring only that it be 
proved that a driver had been using drugs when he or she got behind 
the wheel. The good news is that 15 states, including Virginia, have 
recently passed legislation to make it easier to convict drugged 
drivers by establishing such standards for drug use. That doesn't do 
much for people in Anacostia and La Plata; neither the District nor 
Maryland has a "per se" drugged driver law.

Progress has been slow because of institutional incentives at the 
federal level that make reducing drugged driving a lower priority 
than the fight against drunken driving. Federal highway laws require 
states to have per se standards for drunken driving as a condition 
for receiving full highway funds. No such requirement exists for 
drugged driving.

In 2005, a bipartisan group in Congress attached legislation to the 
omnibus transportation bill to help states combat drugged driving. 
This modest legislation authorized $1.2 million a year for research, 
mandated a report to Congress within 18 months on policy options for 
drugged driving and required the transportation secretary to 
recommend a model law for states that want to pass drugged driving legislation.

Over the past two years not one of these actions has been fully 
funded by Congress or carried out by the Bush administration. In 
fact, the drugged driving program in the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration (NHTSA) was effectively eliminated in 2006 
through a congressionally mandated merger with other programs. The 
report to Congress is long overdue.

This year, the White House has asked Congress to fund the $1.2 
million in drugged driving research. If passed, this provision will 
raise the proportion of NHTSA resources being used to reduce drugged 
driving from 0.2 percent of the agency's budget to 0.3 percent.

Leaders on Capitol Hill need to offer more than lip service to this 
fight. At a minimum, Congress should demand that the administration 
issue its report on drugged driving and prepare a model law. Congress 
should hold hearings on why the fight against this national public 
health and safety problem has been allowed to wither.

Congressional hearings can highlight the stories of prosecutors who 
are restricted by antiquated laws, police officers who don't have the 
tools to identify drugged drivers and parents whose innocent children 
have been injured or killed.

- -- J. Michael Walsh

Potomac

- -- Robert L. DuPont

Rockville

J. Michael Walsh is president of the Walsh Group, a policy research 
organization. His email address  Robert L. 
DuPont is president of the Institute for Behavior and Health. His 
e-mail address is  ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom