Fully a decade after Choose Responsibility founder John McCardell argued in a New York Times oped piece that the 21-year-old drinking age was counterproductive, another small college president, Tom Chema of Ohio’s Hiram College, made the same point on WCPM Radio, arguing that the age prohibition does nothing to stop binge drinking and indeed contributes to it. The law, he said, “is just not working.”
CR president Barrett Seaman, participating in the same radio debate, asked whether or not MLDA-21 was the best way to curb drunk driving deaths, which was its original intent. Buried in some of the research that purportedly supported the higher drinking age law is data that suggests that stiffer enforcement of existing drunk driving laws for all age groups is far more effective and ought to be the focus of the law, rather than an age-specific ban on drinking.
Most of those who called into the show supported a lower age limit.
Listen to (or watch) the discussion here