A bill that could potentially criminalize first-time operating-while-intoxicated offenders is on a list of proposals to be considered in the Wisconsin Legislature this fall. Penned by Gov. Scott Walker, it already has the support of a few Democrats.
Currently, Wisconsin is the only state in the nation that does not press criminal charges against first-time offenders. As a state that stands out as one with the highest number of drunken-driving related motor accidents and fatalities, such legislation has to be a step in the right direction.
Or is it?
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that 32 percent of 2008 motor vehicle crash fatalities in the U.S. involved at least one person with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher, meaning 3,744 involved a drunken driver. In 2009, drunken driving incidents resulted in 238 deaths in 2009, as reported by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. Such figures provide a compelling case for more stringent action to curb driving under the influence. The proposed measure, however, might not be the best approach, at least as far as urban areas are concerned.
Many city-dwelling, first-time offenders might be people who have simply had a little too much to drink but feel they can safely drive back home. In Wisconsin, which has an unusually high inclination toward alcohol already, it is not unnatural to expect people to go overboard once in a while, especially college students. As much as criminalizing first-timers might discourage potential offenders, it also inevitably tarnishes the record of otherwise law-abiding citizens.
The economics of this matter are also unfavorable. Criminal charges need to be tried in circuit courts, rather than municipal courts. Wisconsin circuit courts dealt with over 41,000 criminal traffic cases, of which more than 11,000 remained pending for the next year. A barrage of first time OWI cases can overload the circuit courts and result in additional hours and money spent. At a time when the state deficit looms threateningly over legislative proposals, this seems like an unnecessary financial burden on the state.
While stopping drunken driving before it happens is a seemingly great way to tackle the problem, it is hard to see what positive effect this law could have. The stigma of drunken driving won't curb the behavior of those already indulging in it.
A report on the Mothers Against Drunk Driving web site shows that a ""first time offender on average has driven drunk 87 times prior to being arrested."" This begs the question whether criminalization of first time offenders will be effective, considering the driver has likely driven drunk before.
The root of the problem is inadequate options available to people looking to get home after a few drinks. Improvement in mass-transit may prove to be a much better option in the long run. For example, a program called ""Scooter Man"" is currently operational in nine British cities. Scooter Man provides chauffeurs to intoxicated people looking to get home in their own cars. The chauffeurs arrive to the pickup location on small, foldaway minibikes which can be disassembled and stowed in the trunk of a car.
This concept makes a lot of sense for bigger cities like Milwaukee and Madison, and investing in such programs might prove to be very beneficial in the long run. It promises relatively quick returns while fueling a local business idea and providing part-time employment for anyone with a license and a clean driving record. Similar ideas can be explored by lawmakers for rural areas.
Lawmakers should take Wisconsin's culture into account and propose innovative drunken driving prevention programs. State legislators can set a national precedent by exploring innovative ideas that are tailored to the state's distinct needs and adopting measures focused on awareness that prevent drunken driving in the first place.
Anurag Mandalika is a graduate research assistant in the Department of Biological Systems Engineering at UW-Madison. Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
