Can Raising Taxes on Alcohol Reduce Drunk Driving Accidents?

A new study published in the American Journal of Public Health suggests that raising the taxes on alcohol could reduce the number of drunk driving related collisions.

Researchers from the University of Florida studied the results of a 2009 tax increase on alcohol in the state of Illinois. In that year, the state increased its excise tax on beer by 4.6 cents a gallon, on wine by 66 cents a gallon and on distilled spirits by $4.05 a gallon, or by 1 cent more that consumers pay per glass of beer or wine and nearly 5 cents more for a serving of spirits.

According to the researchers, alcohol-related traffic deaths in Illinois fell 26 percent. The decrease was higher among young people, at 37 percent. Fatal crashes involving alcohol-impaired and extremely drunk drivers fell 22 percent and 25 percent, respectively.

"Similar alcohol tax increases implemented across the country could prevent thousands of deaths from car crashes each year," Alexander Wagenaar, a professor in the Department of Health Outcomes and Policy at the University of Florida, said in a university news release. "If policymakers are looking to address dangerous drivers on our roads and reduce the number of fatalities, they should reverse the trend of allowing inflation to erode alcohol taxes.”

Wagenaar’s comments reflect the study’s observation that alcohol has become less expensive in recent years as the result of a decrease in alcohol tax rates. The study notes that having 10 or more drinks a day would have costs the average person approximately half of their disposable income in 1950. Modernly, however, having 10 or more drinks a day would cost the average person about three percent of their disposable income.

"This goes against the conventional wisdom of many economists, who assert that heavy drinkers are less responsive to tax changes, and has powerful implications for how we can keep our communities safer," said Wagenaar.

As with many studies, you have to ask yourself, “Is this a true cause and effect situation?”

U.S. News reported that David Ozgo, vice president for economic and strategic analysis for the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, had the same question. According to Ozgo, fatal collisions involving alcohol were decreasing before the tax increase.

 “In fact, the largest annual decline over the last eight years occurred in 2008, the year before the tax rate changed,” he said. “Importantly, Illinois alcohol-related traffic fatalities declined faster than the national average before the tax increase and this has not been the case since the tax increase.”

Ozgo’s observation makes us wonder whether it really is the tax that is causing the decrease in DUI related fatalities in the state.

Think about the averages alcohol abuser. Is the rather trivial increase in alcohol taxes mentioned above really going to stop someone from purchasing the alcohol? Is it going to keep them from driving after drinking?

This entry was posted on Monday, April 13th, 2015 at 7:33 am and is filed under Duiblog. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Continue Reading...

Will stronger penalties for DUI really reduce drunk driving?

A DWI task force in the state of Minnesota wants lawmakers to increase the penalties on people who are accused of committing a driving while intoxicated offense, and they also want to lower the threshold at which police and prosecutors can file stronger charges against an accused DWI offender -- even if it is just the individual's first offense.

While these suggestions may not necessarily become law, the mere fact that they are being thrown out there is both expected and also a little scary. The hope, from the task force's perspective, is that these suggestions become law and, thus, fewer people will be out on the road driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. With stronger penalties, who would want to be caught behind the wheel of a motor vehicle while inebriated?

But this is a fundamental misunderstanding of how someone who is intoxicated thinks. When you are inebriated, you aren't thinking clearly. If your car is nearby, you aren't thinking about the penalties associated with a DWI, nor are you considering the task force's push to get stronger penalties. The individual in this situation is just trying to drive home -- an admittedly terrible decision, but one influenced by the substance in his or her body.

Stronger penalties may make it seem like "something is being done" about drunk driving, but the truth is that drunk driving will always be a societal issue. We need to take alcohol abuse and drinking problems more seriously in this country. Throwing added punishment at a DWI offender will only make it more difficult for that person to turn his or her life around in the wake of the charge -- and that could lead them to drinking again.

Source: Star Tribune, "Task force wants Minn. lawmakers to get tough on DWI offenders," Abby Simons, Jan. 2, 2015

Tags: Drunk Driving Charges

Continue Reading...

Will Colorado’s Felony DUI Bill Reduce Drunk Driving?

In January, Colorado lawmakers will consider a new DUI bill (HB 1036) making repeat DUI offenses a felony. Currently, Colorado is one of just five states plus the District of Columbia without a felony DUI law. DUIs in the state are treated similarly in the eyes of the court whether it is a first or tenth offense.

Recent news about Denny Lovern, who racked up 16 DUI convictions in 30 years, has raised concerns that the state legislature hasn’t done enough to address serial drunk driving. If passed, the new law would create minimum jail sentences for drunk drivers with three or more offenses in the last five years.

Similar Colorado bills have failed in the past. Some debate whether a felony DUI bill would really make a difference in preventing impaired driving. They claim that some individuals will drive drunk no matter how severe the proposed punishment. And they point to figures from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) showing that while alcohol-involved highway deaths increased in 2012 (the latest year for which state-level data is available), DUI deaths decreased in four of the jurisdictions without felony DUI laws, including Colorado.

But supporters of the bill counter that a felony DUI law is about more than just dissuading potential drunk drivers or even punishing offenders—it is about public safety. Some believe putting hardcore drunk drivers behind bars is the only way to take people like Lovern off the road to keep them from injuring or killing others. Without the option of a felony DUI, the prosecutor in Lovern’s case is using charges like attempted first-degree assault and attempted manslaughter to try to obtain a jail sentence.

Why hasn’t a felony DUI law been passed in Colorado? Many believe it has to do with the high cost of incarceration, as well as a preference for treatment. However, treatment and punishment are not exclusive to one another and a felony DUI bill may give prosecutors and judges more choices for handling repeat offenders.

Do you think felony DUI laws and mandatory incarceration help reduce intoxicated driving, or do states need to focus on other options to deal with extreme repeat offenders?

//

Continue Reading...