[Senate Hearing 112-111]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 112-111
FIGHTING DRUNK DRIVING:
LESSONS LEARNED IN NEW MEXICO
=======================================================================
FIELD HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
AUGUST 10, 2011
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
68-538 WASHINGTON : 2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, [email protected].
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas,
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts Ranking
BARBARA BOXER, California OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine
BILL NELSON, Florida JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ROY BLUNT, Missouri
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
TOM UDALL, New Mexico PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania
MARK WARNER, Virginia MARCO RUBIO, Florida
MARK BEGICH, Alaska KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
DEAN HELLER, Nevada
Ellen L. Doneski, Staff Director
James Reid, Deputy Staff Director
Bruce H. Andrews, General Counsel
Todd Bertoson, Republican Staff Director
Jarrod Thompson Republican Deputy Staff Director
Rebecca Seidel, Republican General Counsel and Chief Investigator
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on August 10, 2011.................................. 1
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 1
Witnesses
Ronald Medford, Deputy Administrator, NHTSA, U.S. Department of
Transportation................................................. 3
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Michael R. Sandoval, Director, Traffic Safety Division, New
Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT).................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Hon. Richard J. Berry, Mayor, City of Albuquerque................ 14
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Richard Williams, Chief of Police, Las Cruces Police Department.. 19
Prepared statement........................................... 21
Lora Lee Ortiz, Executive Director, MADD New Mexico.............. 22
Prepared statement........................................... 24
Cameron Crandall, M.D., Emergency Physician and Associate
Professor and Vice Chair for Research, Department of Emergency
Medicine, University of New Mexico............................. 26
Letter, dated August 9, 2011 to Hon. Tom Udall, from Sandra
Schneider, MD, FACEP, President, American College of
Emergency Physicians....................................... 28
Prepared statement........................................... 29
Susan Ferguson, Ph.D., Program Manager, Driver Alcohol Detection
System for Safety, Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety..... 36
Prepared statement........................................... 38
David A. Culver, Vice President, Government Affairs, Distilled
Spirits Council of the United States........................... 40
Prepared statement........................................... 42
Appendix
Letter, dated August 17, 2011 to Hon. Tom Udall from J. Steven
Richards, House Manager, Alvarado Sober Living House........... 47
Professor Martina Kitzmueller, Research Professor of Law,
University of New Mexico School of Law, prepared statement..... 48
Richard Roth, Ph.D., Executive Director, Santa Fe Impact DWI,
prepared statement............................................. 50
FIGHTING DRUNK DRIVING:
LESSONS LEARNED IN NEW MEXICO
----------
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 10, 2011
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Albuquerque, NM.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:38 a.m. at the
University of New Mexico School of Law, 1117 Stanford Drive,
Northeast, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87106, Hon. Tom Udall,
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. I do not know if--the dean of the law school
was here, and I guess I missed him. Oh, yes, yes. There you
are. OK. I meant--sorry we may be running just a little bit
late. I ran into the press out there and got waylaid, so
thanks. Thanks, Dean. Great for you--to have you here and to
host us.
Good morning, and I would like to welcome all of you to
this official hearing of the Commerce, Science, and
Transportation Committee. The focus of today's hearing is on
drunk driving, and the successes and opportunities we face in
ridding our roads of impaired drivers.
I believe New Mexico is the ideal place to hold this
hearing for two reasons. Number one, our state has faced great
challenges in combating DWI, and, number two, through focused
efforts, we have made progress in the battle.
We have had an important story to tell, one that can help
other states and other communities who face similar challenges.
And that will help them learn how to replicate our success.
We are fortunate to have here with us today three panels of
witnesses. They represent a cross-section of advocates, law
enforcement, health professionals, and government, all working
together to save lives. Their testimony will help us understand
the long road we have taken to get to where we are, and why we
must continue to make combatting drunk driving a priority.
As all of you may be aware, it was not too long ago that
New Mexico ranked first in the Nation in alcohol-related
fatalities. I remember it all too well. In the years before I
was elected to serve as New Mexico Attorney General, our state
ranked worst in the Nation for DWI fatalities, not just once,
but seven times. In fact, New Mexico was in the top three worst
in the Nation from 1982 through 1992.
During that time, DWIs accounted for nearly 50 percent of
all fatal crashes in New Mexico. Now, those dismal rankings and
statistics--they should have been enough to spur change. But
unfortunately, that just was not the case. It would take a
tragic crash in 1992 that killed a family of four on Christmas
Eve for New Mexico to act on the problem in our backyard.
In that crash, a drunk driver was speeding the wrong way
down the highway at over 90 miles per hour. He crashed head-on
into a car traveling in the correct direction, killing a mother
and her three young daughters. On Christmas Eve, their lives
ended tragically, their families' lives forever altered, and it
was entirely preventable.
It is hard to imagine anything positive resulting from such
a horrendous crash. It shakes me to the core just thinking
about it. But there was something positive that emerged. This
tragedy galvanized public opinion against drunk driving, and
helped us advance legislation to reduce drunk driving in New
Mexico, and improved the safety of our roads.
After that crash, I worked hard with Nadine Milford, the
mother and grandmother of the victims of that terrible
accident. Together, Nadine and I and many others--many I see
here in the audience--were successful in passing legislation
that reduced the legal limit for DUI from .1 to .08 in New
Mexico. We were among the first States in the Nation to pass
this legislation, far in advance of the Federal law.
We also were successful in passing legislation to close
drive-up liquor windows and to impose tougher penalties for
repeat offenders.
During those years, we made significant progress in
reducing drunk driving fatalities in New Mexico. But there was
still much work to be done, and in the years that I have been
serving in Congress, New Mexico has taken additional steps to
address drunk driving. That includes enacting all-offender
ignition interlock legislation, helping to further reduce drunk
driving in New Mexico.
Today we will hear more about the path that New Mexico has
taken in the hopes that other states will be able to learn from
our successes. Additionally, we will learn that despite all the
progress that has been made to end drunk driving, it remains a
significant challenge today.
But our work still is not done. Today drunk driving still
accounts for 30 percent of all traffic fatalities. That is why
I introduced the ROADS SAFE Act at the Federal level. This
legislation will refund a research program to develop passive,
in-vehicle alcohol detection systems that could, in time, end
drunk driving. We will hear more about this program before the
hearing concludes.
Before we move on to the first panel, I would like to
acknowledge the testimony submitted for the record by Dick
Roth. Dick was unable to join us today, but he is a recognized
expert on ignition interlocks, and is from the State of New
Mexico.
I would also like to acknowledge Linda Atkinson. Linda is a
tireless advocate who has worked for more than 20 years to
reduce and eliminate drunk driving in New Mexico, and I am
happy to see she is able to join us today. Linda, why don't you
stand up and be recognized here? Thank you. She says, do you
remember that was our task force report that we made in--after
the Christmas Eve crash to the legislature. We had a task force
working for 18 months, and we were able to at the crucial
point, be able to tell the legislature what this task force had
done, and what their recommendations were.
Linda, I also look forward to receiving your written
testimony. I know you will give us some real insights.
Last, but definitely not least, I want to thank the
University of New Mexico Law School, my law school, and in
particular, Dean Kevin Washburn and his staff members, Carmen
Rawls and Tony Anderson. They generously opened their doors to
us for this hearing and helped us make today possible with all
their hard work.
And finally, welcome to New Mexico and to the Land of
Enchantment to all of our out-of-state witnesses and staff
members. We hope you will stay here a long time and spend a lot
of money.
[Laughter.]
Senator Udall. For today's hearing, we ask all witnesses to
provide their oral comments in 5 to 6 minutes. Their written
testimony will be put into the official record. If they have
longer testimony, they are welcome to submit it for the record.
And I understand that some of you in the audience may also
wish to offer testimony. We welcome your comments, and we will
keep the record open through Friday, August 19, to allow
sufficient time to submit something for the official record.
Senator Udall. And I think by keeping that record open by
August 19, some of you that hear this testimony will then be
able to respond to it and give us your ideas in your written
testimony. And we really, really look forward to that.
If you have a written statement today, you can give it to
one of my staff members, also on my left here is the Commerce
Committee Senate staff, or you can e-mail directly to the
Commerce Committee, which I believe is the e-mail address which
is on the handout you received when you came here and walked in
the door.
And now I would like to welcome our first panel of
witnesses. The first panel--in the first panel we welcome the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Deputy
Administrator, Ron Medford, and the New Mexico Department of
Transportation's Traffic Safety Division Director, Michael
Sandoval. Great to have you both here. And, Administrator
Medford, why don't you kick it off and start?
STATEMENT OF RONALD MEDFORD,
DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, NHTSA,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Medford. Good morning.
Senator Udall. You bet. Thank you. Great to have you here.
Mr. Medford. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today.
Impaired driving is one of the most serious traffic risks
facing the Nation, killing more than 10,000 people every year.
Every day, approximately 30 people die in motor vehicle crashes
that involve an alcohol-impaired driver. Put another way, in
the United States, someone dies about every 48 minutes due to
an impaired driver. The annual costs of alcohol-related crashes
totals more than $51 billion. Addressing this challenging issue
is one of our highest priorities at NHTSA.
I would like to commend the Committee and you personally,
Mr. Chairman, for your leadership on this very important issue
and on highway safety in general. Since the enactment of
SAFETEA-LU in 2005, the Nation has enjoyed consistent
reductions in highway fatalities and injuries, and the work of
the Committee has been a major contributor to this progress.
While we are pleased that the safety impacts are positive,
I know we share the view with the Committee that much more
needs to be done to reduce the suffering and economic cost of
highway crashes, and particularly the criminal behavior of
driving while impaired.
The impaired-driving problem is complex and requires a full
range of countermeasures to be effective. From our decades of
experience and research, we know that effective measures
include High Visibility Enforcement, training for law
enforcement personnel, enhanced prosecution and adjudication,
and zero tolerance for under-age drinking. We also put a
special emphasis on reaching high-risk populations, such as
those with high blood alcohol concentrations and repeat
offenders.
We continuously reassess our approach and remain focused on
finding even more effective and efficient means for fighting
impaired-driving. We also work with State, local, and industry
partners to develop and test new strategies and new techniques.
NHTSA supports strong laws for high BAC offenders and for
drivers who try to circumvent the law by refusing to submit to
a BAC test. We support even tougher impaired-driving laws and
improved enforcement and adjudication of these laws as key
strategies in efforts to reduce impaired-driving.
The ignition interlocks are another critical component of a
comprehensive impaired-driving program. A summary of 10
evaluations of interlock programs in the United States and
Canada indicated that interlocks cut DUI recidivism by at least
50 percent compared to similar offenders without interlocks.
Based on this strong evidence, NHTSA recommends that ignition
interlock programs be more widely implemented. I am pleased to
point out that New Mexico has been a leader in ignition
interlock program development, and currently has one of the
highest rates of interlock installations per capita in the
Nation.
Advanced technology could also play an integral role in
reducing impaired-driving. NHTSA is working to develop vehicle-
based alcohol detection technologies. Such technologies have
the potential to prevent drunk drivers from operating vehicles,
and if widely deployed, could be invaluable in our efforts to
eliminate drunk driving. The goal is to develop a non-invasive,
seamless technology that accurately measures driver BAC and
prevents a legally-impaired driver from operating a motor
vehicle.
The Driver Alcohol Detection System, or DADSS for short, is
being developed in partnership with the automotive industry,
and has the potential to save a significant number of lives
every year. It is estimated that nearly 8,000 lives could be
saved annually by a system that could prevent driving by those
who are over the legal limit for alcohol. You will hear more
about this from other speakers today.
But the most important component needed to reduce impaired-
driving is strong leadership and commitment at the highest
level of state and local government to enact strong and
effective impaired-driving laws, and to implement multifaceted
programs.
New Mexico is a model for the Nation in this regard. Our
agency recognized this leadership and vision in 2004 when New
Mexico applied for and won, through a competitive process, a $3
million NHTSA grant to develop and implement a comprehensive
impaired-driving program. Over the next 5 years, the State's
Department of Transportation worked in concert with other state
organizations to implement a number of innovative and effective
strategies that have significantly reduced impaired-driving in
New Mexico.
The model demonstrated by New Mexico now allows other
States to identify deficiencies in their impaired-driving
program, develop methods to address those deficiencies, and
gain support and resources to implement those methods. This
model has been proven to be so effective that we now encourage
all States to adopt it.
I know, Mr. Chairman, that you have made combatting
impaired-driving a centerpiece of your efforts as New Mexico's
Attorney General in the 1990s, and continue that work today in
the Senate. And with initiatives like this hearing to call
attention to this serious public health problem, we
congratulate you for doing so.
In the coming weeks, NHTSA will kick off its Annual
Impaired Driving National Crackdown from August 19 through
September 5. This campaign has helped to reduce impaired-
driving nationwide by 17 percent between 2004 and 2009. To keep
the campaign fresh, we have developed a new look and feel for
this year's campaign, with a ``Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over''
theme. This is a new theme for us this year. New Mexico has
been an active partner in this campaign, and we look forward to
maintaining our partnership with the State on the national
campaign and on collaboration with State initiatives.
The success of New Mexico's demonstration project has shown
that by working together, using effective evidence-based
strategies, we can overcome this long-time problem and
ultimately save many more lives.
Thank you again for this opportunity and I would be glad to
answer any questions that you have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Medford follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ronald Medford, Deputy Administrator, NHTSA,
U.S. Department of Transportation
Good morning Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee. I
appreciate the opportunity to testify before this committee;
particularly in such a lovely and humidity-free city.
Impaired driving is one of the most serious traffic risks facing
the Nation, killing more than 10,000 people every year. In fact, every
day, approximately 30 people die in motor vehicle crashes that involve
an alcohol-impaired driver. Put another way, in the United States,
someone dies every 48 minutes due to an impaired driver.\1\ The annual
cost of alcohol-related crashes totals more than $51 billion.\2\
Addressing this challenging issue is one of our highest priorities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CDC, Injury Prevention and Control. Impaired driving.
www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-
drv_factsheet.html.
\2\ Blincoe L, Seay A, Zaloshnja E, Miller T, Romano E, Luchter S,
et al., The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2000. Washington
(D.C.): USDOT, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA);
2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to commend the Committee, and you Mr. Chairman, for
your leadership on this very important issue and on highway safety in
general. Since the enactment of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) in
2005, the Nation has seen consistent reductions in highway fatalities
and injuries and the work of this committee has been a major
contributor to this progress. While we are pleased that the safety
impacts are positive, I know we share the view with the Committee that
much more needs to be done to reduce the suffering and economic cost of
highway crashes and particularly the criminal behavior of driving while
impaired (DWI).
The impaired-driving problem is complex and requires a full range
of countermeasures. Research has shown that effective measures include:
High Visibility Enforcement (HVE);
training for law enforcement personnel;
enhanced prosecution and adjudication; and
zero tolerance for underage drinking.
We also put a special emphasis on reaching high-risk populations,
such as high BAC (blood alcohol concentration) or repeat offenders. We
continuously re-assess our approach and remain focused on finding even
more effective and efficient means for fighting impaired driving. We
also work with State, local and industry partners to develop and test
new strategies and techniques.
Strengthening impaired driving laws and improving enforcement and
adjudication of these laws are key strategies in efforts to reduce
impaired driving. The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)
supports strong laws for high BAC offenders and for drivers who try to
circumvent the law by refusing to submit to a BAC test.
Ignition interlocks are another critical component of a
comprehensive impaired driving program. A summary of 10 evaluations of
interlock programs in the United States and Canada indicated that
interlocks cut DWI recidivism by at least 50 percent, and sometimes
more, compared to similar offenders without interlocks.\3\ Based on
this strong evidence, USDOT recommends that ignition interlock programs
be more widely implemented.\4\ I am pleased to point out that New
Mexico has been a leader in ignition interlock program development and
currently has one of the highest rates of interlock installations per
capita in the Nation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Elder R., Voas R., Beirness D., et al., Effectiveness of
ignition interlocks for preventing alcohol-impaired driving and
alcohol-related crashes. Am J Prev Med 2011;40(3):362-376.
\4\ CDC Community Guide: Impaired Driving: Research & Activities,
http://www.thecommunity
guide.org/mvoi/AID/ignitioninterlocks.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advanced technology could also play an integral element in reducing
impaired driving. The Department is working to develop vehicle-based,
alcohol detection technologies. Such technologies have the potential to
prevent drunk drivers from operating vehicles, and if widely deployed,
could be invaluable in our efforts to eliminate drunk driving. The goal
is to develop non-invasive, seamless technologies that can accurately
measure driver BAC and prevent a legally impaired driver from operating
a motor vehicle.
The Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety, or DADSS for short,
is being developed in partnership with the automotive industry, and has
the potential to save a significant number of lives annually. It is
estimated that nearly 8,000 lives could be saved by a system that could
prevent driving by those who are over the legal limit for alcohol.\5\
You will hear more about this from other speakers today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ DADSS (Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety.) http://
www.dadss.org/. Accessed on 8/9/11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
But the most important component needed to reduce impaired driving
is strong leadership and commitment at the highest levels of State and
local government to enact strong and effective impaired driving laws,
and implement multi-faceted prevention programs.
New Mexico is a model for the Nation in this regard. Our agency
recognized this leadership and vision in 2004, when New Mexico applied
for and won, through a competitive process, a $3 million USDOT grant to
develop and implement a comprehensive impaired driving program. Over
the next 5 years, the State's Department of Transportation worked in
concert with other State organizations to implement a number of
innovative and effective strategies that have significantly reduced
impaired driving in New Mexico. The model demonstrated by New Mexico
allows states to identify deficiencies in their impaired driving
program, develop methods to address those deficiencies, and gain
support and resources to implement those methods. This model has proven
so effective that we now encourage all states to adopt it.
In the coming weeks, USDOT will kick off its annual Impaired
Driving National Crackdown, from August 19 through September 5. This
campaign has helped to reduce impaired driving nationwide by 17 percent
between 2004 and 2009. To keep the campaign fresh, we have developed a
new look and feel this year, with a ``Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over''
theme. New Mexico has been an active partner in this campaign, and we
look forward to maintaining our partnership with the State on the
national campaign and on collaboration on State initiatives.
The success of the New Mexico demonstration project has shown that
by working together and using effective, evidence-based strategies, we
can overcome this long-time problem, and ultimately save many more
lives.
Thank you again for this opportunity. I would be glad to answer any
questions you may have.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Administrator Medford.
And, Director Sandoval, please go ahead with your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL R. SANDOVAL, DIRECTOR,
TRAFFIC SAFETY DIVISION, NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (NMDOT)
Mr. Sandoval. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is
Michael Sandoval. I am the Director of the New Mexico
Transportation's Traffic Safety Division. I am here on behalf
of my Cabinet Secretary, Alvin Dominguez. I have been with the
NMDOT for over 13 years. I would like to thank you for allowing
me to testify today on this very important issue.
The following is a chronological listing of important
events over the last 7 years that have had a significant impact
on the overall reduction in DWI-related deaths in New Mexico. I
thought it would be important to show the progression of
significant projects, programs, and laws that contributed to
the State's overall success.
Starting in calendar year 2004, 219 people died in alcohol-
related crashes in New Mexico. At that time, it was the third
straight year where no progress was made in reducing DWI-
related deaths in our State. New Mexico was in the top three
worst States in the Nation on this issue.
Also in 2004, NMDOT was made the lead agency to fight
against DWI. DWI became one of the major priorities for our
department. This prompted a review and evaluation of all DWI-
related funding and projects under the DOT's purview. With the
help of many partners, this sparked the beginning of a change
in culture regarding this deadly issue in our State.
In 2004, DOT was awarded, through a competitive process, a
DWI demonstration project by NHTSA in the amount of $3 million.
The project was focused on DWI enforcement and public awareness
in the counties where DWI was the deadliest. This included San
Juan, McKinley, Santa Fe, Bernalillo, Dona Ana, and Rio Arriba
Counties, along with the Navajo Nation.
Unique enforcement and public awareness partnerships were
developed in these areas based on the diversity and the culture
of the population. This project was well above and beyond the
yearly funding provided by NHTSA through the regular Section
402 program.
In 2005, 194 people died in correlated crashes. This starts
a downward trend in the number of people dying resulting from
DWI each year. The downward trend has continued through 2010,
where a record low of 139 people died in correlated crashes in
our State. This translates into a 36 percent reduction since
2004.
Through this NHTSA project, full-time DWI law enforcement
officers were hired in each of the identified counties, up to
four in each county. This was above and beyond the normal
workforce of the police agency. This allowed the new officers
to dedicate 100 percent of their time to enforcing DWI laws
through high visibility checkpoints and saturation patrols.
Culturally sensitive media campaigns were developed and
launched in each of the identified counties. For example,
counties where heavy Native American populations existed had
slightly different messaging than counties with heavy Hispanic
populations. Targeted enforcement directed at serving alcohol
to minors and serving alcohol to intoxicated persons became a
priority. There were many bars and restaurants that were not
abiding by the Liquor Control Act when it came to these issues.
Legislation was passed and signed into law mandating all
convicted DWI offenders to install an ignition interlock device
in their vehicle. New Mexico was the first State to pass such a
law requiring first offenders to install ignition interlock
devices.
And finally, in 2005 a DWI leadership team was formed and
met monthly on major issues. This committee was co-chaired by
the DWI Czar and by my position. This committee was important
in establishing policy change. Overall DWI funding was also
discussed so that not to duplicate efforts or to spend money on
unproven strategies.
In calendar years 2006 and 2007, 191 and 176 people died,
respectively. This marked the third straight year that
fatalities had declined in our State, and this was statistical
evidence that DWI-related deaths were once again on a steady
downward trend.
Projects and programs continued to mature, including a big
media campaign in the Four Corners area. This included specific
television, radio, and billboard ads directed at the Native
American population. All ads included Native American
participation input and input on the type of messaging.
A court monitoring project, administered by our department,
was implemented to assure that minimum mandatory penalties were
being included in judgment and sentencing documentation. The
focus was six county courts. The ignition interlock law was a
big point of emphasis. It was important to assure that
interlocks were installed on convicted offenders' vehicles on a
consistent and wide-spread basis. The NMDOT is responsible for
the Ignition Interlock Indigent Fund, and the program. The
Motor Vehicle Division's responsibility is the driver's
licensing portion.
In calendar year 2008, 143 people died in our State due to
DWI. At the time, this was a record low for the number of
deaths in our State. New Mexico was now out of the top 10 worst
States for DWI-related motor vehicle deaths. Also, New Mexico,
because they were out of the top 10, would lose funding of
approximately $1 million because the State was no longer in the
top 10, and this is related to the criteria in the NHTSA
Section 410 program.
The State worked with McKinley County to incorporate a
cross-commissioning agreement between the City of Gallup, the
county of McKinley, State police, and the Navajo Nation. This
agreement started the beginning of the McKinley County DWI Task
Force, which allowed law enforcement to cross State and tribal
jurisdictional lines to enforce DWI-related laws.
And finally, NMDOT conducted a Traffic Safety Summit to
gather information and input on the State's new comprehensive
traffic safety plan. This was a Federal Highway Administration
mandate to incorporate both behavioral and engineering
solutions aimed at reducing overall traffic fatalities. This
plan incorporated DWI prevention strategies and further
increased the exposure of DWI-related projects and programs.
Calendar year 2009 to present, New Mexico has continued to
see a reduction in alcohol-related crash deaths. A new record
low was established in 2010, which was 139 deaths. After the
first 7 months of this year, Mr. Chairman, New Mexico is once
again on pace to reach a new record low.
Although New Mexico's effort was a comprehensive approach,
looking back, I believe the following three strategies had the
most impact on our success. First, implementing the targeted
high visibility enforcement and public awareness campaign, with
a focus on both a statewide general message and a specific
message for local high-risk areas. It was important for law
enforcement to have dedicated DWI officers and/or DWI units
that were visible and well-known throughout the community. If
law enforcement is forced to incorporate DWI enforcement into
their other duties, it is likely it would not have a
significant impact on deterring drunk driving. Bottom line, if
people do not believe they will be caught, they are more likely
to engage in this dangerous behavior.
Second, passed laws that are tough on first offenders--
tough sanctions for first offender have two positive effects.
First, tough laws act as a deterrent to drunk driving in the
first place. If people believe even the first offense will have
a significant negative impact on them, they will be less likely
to engage in the behavior. Too many believe that a first
offense will just be a slap on the wrist. Passing the ignition
interlock law for the first offender was a major milestone in
reducing the occurrence of drunk driving. And, second, if you
have tough laws for first offenders, they will be less likely
to become a second offender or a repeat offender.
And, third, implementing a court monitoring program with
open communication with the judiciary. This both supported law
enforcement efforts to help ensure that there are consistent
consequences for DWI offenders. Although law enforcement makes
the arrest on the front end of the process, they are heavily
involved in the back end judicial process. Law enforcement felt
supported after the DWI conviction when the offender received
the sanctions that were originally outlined in the law. Second,
it is difficult to assess what impact laws are having if they
are not implemented consistently. Too many times, new laws are
passed and don't have the expected positive effect. This may
have to do more with the inconsistent implementation rather
than the law itself.
So, finally, Mr. Chairman, on behalf of my Cabinet
Secretary, Alvin Dominguez, I would like to thank you for your
time and your invitation to speak. I would like to close by
saying that although the downward trend shows success and that
significant progress has been made in our State, no one will be
satisfied until there are zero deaths on our roadways as DWI
deaths are 100 percent preventable.
I would be happy to answer any questions or provide more
information. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sandoval follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michael R. Sandoval, Director, Traffic Safety
Division, New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT)
Good Morning, my name is Michael Sandoval and I am the Director of
the New Mexico Department of Transportation's Traffic Safety Division.
I am here on behalf of my Cabinet Secretary Alvin Dominguez. I have
been with the NMDOT for over 13 years. I would like to thank you for
allowing me to testify today on this very important issue.
The following is a chronological listing of important events over
the last 7 years that have had a significant impact on the overall
reduction in DWI-related deaths in New Mexico. I thought it would be
important to show the progression of significant projects, programs,
and laws that contributed to the State's overall success.
Calendar Year 2004
219 people died in alcohol related crashes in New Mexico. At
the time, it was the third straight year where no progress was
made in reducing DWI-related deaths in the State. New Mexico
was in the top three worst States in the Nation on this issue.
The NMDOT was made the lead agency on the fight against DWI.
DWI became one of the major priorities for the NMDOT. This
prompted a review and evaluation of all DWI-related funding and
projects under the NMDOT's purview. With the help of many
partners, this sparked the beginning of a change in culture
regarding this deadly issue.
The NMDOT was awarded through a competitive process, a DWI
Demonstration project by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) in the amount of $3 million dollars. The
project was for focused DWI enforcement and public awareness in
the counties where DWI was the deadliest (San Juan, McKinley,
Santa Fe, Bernalillo, Dona Ana, Rio Arriba, and Navajo Nation
Reservation). Unique enforcement and public awareness
partnerships were developed in these areas based on the
diversity and culture of the population. This project was above
and beyond the yearly funding provided by NHTSA through the
Section 402 program.
Calendar Year 2005
194 people died in alcohol related crashes in New Mexico.
This starts a downward trend in the number of people dying as a
result of DWI each year. The downward trend has continued
through 2010 where a record low of 139 people died in alcohol-
related crashes in New Mexico. This translates into a 36
percent reduction in alcohol related deaths since 2004.
Through the NHTSA project, full-time DWI law enforcement
officers were hired in each of the identified counties (up to
four in each county). This was above and beyond the normal
workforce of the Police agency. This allowed the new officers
to dedicate 100 percent of their time to enforcing DWI laws
through high visibility checkpoints and saturation patrols.
Culturally-sensitive media campaigns were developed and
launched in each of the identified counties. For example,
counties with heavy Native American populations had slightly
different messaging then counties with heavy Hispanic
populations.
Targeted enforcement directed at serving alcohol to minors
and serving alcohol to intoxicated persons became a priority.
There were many bars and restaurants that were not abiding by
the Liquor Control Act when it came to these issues.
Legislation was passed and signed into law mandating all
convicted DWI offenders to install an ignition interlock device
in their vehicle(s). New Mexico was the first State to pass
such a law requiring 1st offenders to install interlock
devices.
A DWI Leadership was formed and met monthly on major issues.
This committee was Co-Chaired by the DWI Czar and the Director
of the Traffic Safety Division. This committee was important in
establishing policy change. Overall DWI funding was also
discussed so that not to duplicate efforts or spend money on
unproven strategies.
Calendar Year 2006/2007
191 people died in alcohol-related crashes in 2006. 176
people died in alcohol related crashes in 2007 which marked the
third straight year that fatalities declined. This was
statistical evidence that DWI-related deaths were on a steady
downward trend.
Projects and programs continued to mature including a big
media campaign in the four corners area. This included specific
television, radio, and billboard ads directed at the Native
American population. All ads included Native American
participation and input on the type of messaging.
A court monitoring project (administered by the NMDOT) was
implemented to assure that minimum mandatory penalties were
being included in judgment and sentencing documentation. The
focus was the six-county courts. The ignition interlock law was
a point of emphasis. It was important to assure that interlocks
were installed on convicted offender's vehicles on a
consistent, widespread basis. The NMDOT is responsible for the
ignition interlock fund and program. The Motor Vehicle Division
is responsible for the ignition interlock driver licensing.
Calendar Year 2008
143 people died in alcohol related crashes in 2008. At the
time, this was a record low for the number of deaths in New
Mexico related to DWI. New Mexico was now out of the top ten
worst States for DWI-related motor vehicle deaths. Also, NM
would lose funding (approximately $1 million) because the State
was no longer in the top ten (this is related to the NHTSA
Section 410 program).
The state worked with McKinley County to incorporate a cross
commissioning agreement between the City of Gallup, County of
McKinley, State Police, and the Navajo Nation. This agreement
started the beginning of the McKinley County DWI Task Force
which allowed law enforcement to cross State/Tribal
jurisdictional lines to enforce DWI-related laws.
NMDOT conducted a Traffic Safety Summit to gather
information and input on the State's Comprehensive Traffic
Safety Plan. This was a Federal Highway Administration mandate
to incorporate both behavioral and engineering solutions aimed
at reducing overall traffic fatalities. This plan incorporated
DWI prevention strategies and further increased the exposure of
DWI-related projects and programs.
Calendar Year 2009-Present
New Mexico has continued to see a reduction in alcohol related
crash deaths. A new record low was established in 2010 which was 139
deaths. After the first 7 months of 2011, NM is once again on pace to
reach a new record low. Although New Mexico's effort was a
comprehensive approach, looking back I believe the following three
strategies had the most impact on success:
1. Implementing a targeted high visibility enforcement and
public awareness campaign with a focus on both a statewide
general message and a specific message(s) for local high risk
areas. It was important for law enforcement to have dedicated
DWI officers and/or DWI units that were visible and well known
throughout the community. If law enforcement is forced to
incorporate DWI enforcement into their other duties, it is
likely that it would not have a significant impact on deterring
drunk driving. Bottom line, if people don't believe they will
be caught, they are more likely to engage in this dangerous
behavior.
2. Passed laws that our tough on the first offense. Tough
sanctions for a first offender have two positive effects.
First, tough laws act as a deterrent to drinking and driving in
the first place. If people believe that even the first offense
will have a significant negative effect on them, they will be
less likely to engage in the behavior. Too many people believe
that a first offense will just be a slap on the wrist. Passing
the ignition interlock law for the first offender was a major
milestone in reducing the occurrence of drunk driving in New
Mexico.
3. Implementing a court monitoring program with open
communication with the Judiciary. This both supported law
enforcement efforts and helped to assure that there are
consistent consequences for DWI offenders. Although law
enforcement makes the arrest on the front end of the process,
they are heavily involved in the back end judicial process. Law
enforcement felt supported when after the DWI conviction, the
offender received the sanction outlined in the law. Second, it
is difficult to assess what impact laws are having if they are
not implemented consistently. Too many times new laws are
passed and don't have the expected positive effect. This may
have more to do with an inconsistent implementation rather than
the law itself.
On behalf of my Cabinet Secretary Alvin Dominguez, I would like to
thank you for your time and your invitation to speak. I would like to
close by saying that although the downward trend shows success and that
significant progress has been made in New Mexico, no one will be
satisfied until there are 0 deaths on our roadways as DWI deaths are
100 percent preventable.
I would be happy to answer any questions or provide more
information. Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Director Sandoval. And I think
one of the things that you have highlighted is how we have
slowly been moving down. I remember in the 1990s, in that early
period, we were up over 300 deaths a year. And what you have
told us here in 2010, we are at 139. So, the difference between
that 300 number and 139, those are all saved lives, and we
should be proud of that. But just as you summarized your
testimony, you know, we need to be vigilant. We always need to
be doing better, and I don't think any of us are going to be
happy until the number is down to zero. So, thank you for your
testimony.
Mr. Medford, I am going to start my questioning with you.
As you mentioned, the Driver Alcohol Detection System for
Safety, which is--we call, I guess, the acronym DADSS--has the
potential to save nearly 8,000 lives annually. This program is
a joint effort, or you could call it a public/private
partnership between the automakers and NHTSA.
Some may feel this technology should be developed solely by
automakers, but could you talk more about the importance of the
Federal role in developing this critical technology, and why--
why it is important that the automakers and NHTSA work with
each other?
Mr. Medford. Mr. Chairman, we--at NHTSA, we have a number
of cooperative research programs with auto companies where we
share--we think we share the responsibility for finding
technical solutions to difficult problems. And the truth is
that this problem is related to the driver and the condition of
the driver. And we think the technology, which has to work well
in the vehicle, has to include the vehicle manufacturer as part
of understanding how to incorporate a technology into their
vehicle.
So, this is not a new model for us in terms of cooperative
research programs. We are developing safety systems. We do it
frequently. We have got a number of ongoing joint cooperative
research programs and other safety technologies. This is one
that gets a lot of visibility, but it is probably one of the
most important things that we are doing. So, we think it is a
perfectly appropriate and not an uncommon way for us to jointly
do research to solve a difficult technical problem.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Another question for you, Administrator Medford, some may
be concerned with developing in-vehicle alcohol detection
systems and think that cars should not be the solution. Can you
talk more about the role that advancements in vehicle
technology have played in improving the safety of our roads?
Mr. Medford. Yes. I think that, first of all, the
technology that we are developing for the alcohol--you know, it
is a part of kind of a comprehensive strategy for alcohol, and
I mentioned that in there. There really has to continue to be a
very comprehensive program, including this technology if we can
get it to work effectively.
But we have a number of safety technology research programs
that we have developed with the auto companies. I think the--
probably the one that is most prominent, and it is probably the
most effective safety technology since the seat belt, is
something called ``electronic stability control,'' where we
worked and did cooperative research with the industry to then
develop a test method and now a Federal regulation. By 2012,
every new vehicle in the United States will have to have this
technology, which really is able to detect and correct for
driver error. If somebody oversteers or understeers a vehicle,
instead of going off the road and rolling over and killing
themselves, this technology detects it before it happens, and
makes a corrective action with the driver not having to do
anything. And so, we have lots of technologies like that.
We have got another major program that we are doing through
the Intelligent Transportation System today, which is a
vehicle-to-vehicle communications technology, which we think is
going to be probably the next largest safety improvement in
vehicle safety in the next decade, where we are having vehicles
communicate with each other and then sharing information, and
then taking corrective action.
So, there are lots of examples of pretty tough challenging
and technical problems that we have dealt with cooperatively
using research. And we think this one is appropriately done in
the same way.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much, and I appreciate your
answer on that question.
Mr. Sandoval, in your testimony, you mentioned targeted
messaging to address drunk driving. And I have heard that one
of the most successful campaigns was the 100 Days and 100
Nights of Summer. Can you tell me more about the campaign and
how it would target drunk driving?
Mr. Sandoval. Sure, Mr. Chairman. A lot of the last DWI
mobilization periods were only a two-week or less period, and I
think with 100 Days of Summer, because it was such a long
period of time, 100 days, we were able to get a stronger
commitment from law enforcement.
And what that turned into was a higher level of enforcement
over a longer sustained period of time. And when you couple
that with the summer months when driving is higher, when there
is a higher percentage of fatalities, we were able to get a
bigger, stronger bang for our dollar. And we were able to have
that consistent message over a longer period of time.
Senator Udall. All right. Thank you. In your remarks you
mentioned that New Mexico lost funding as it successfully
addressed drunk driving and rose--it got out of the top 10
offenders, and as a result of that, then lost funding. How
critical was that funding to advance the Department of
Transportation's efforts? And would you agree it's important to
maintain funding levels in the next surface transportation
reauthorization to help States combat drunk driving and improve
the safety on our roads?
Mr. Sandoval. So, Mr. Chairman, part one of that question
is, that funding was very critical. When you coupled that extra
funding that we received with the demonstration project it
awarded, that really gave New Mexico the shot in the arm that
it needed. We needed some additional resources to do some
different things to get the trend moving in the right
direction, so that fund--funding was critical.
The second part of your question, I have been doing this
for 14 years, and I have never seen the amount of momentum and
progress that we have made in the last several years. And I
think any cuts to future funding could really potentially harm
the progress and possibly have us move back in the wrong
direction. So, I am hopeful that funding will at least be
maintained so that we continue our momentum and continue our
progress.
Senator Udall. Great. Thank you very much. And that
completes my questions for you. We are happy to have you stay,
but I know that the both of you have busy schedules and things
to do. So, you are excused at this point, and we will--we are
going to be moving on to the second panel here.
Mr. Sandoval. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Udall. So, we are going to be calling up the second
panel at this point.
The second panel today includes the Albuquerque Mayor,
Mayor Berry; the Executive Director of the New Mexico Chapter
of MADD, Lora Lee Ortiz; the Las Cruces Police Department,
Chief Williams; and Dr. Cameron Crandall from the University of
New Mexico Department of Emergency Medicine.
And, Mayor Berry, great to have you here. I know this is
something in terms of an issue that you have been interested
in, and we really look forward to hearing from you. And,
please, why don't you start the testimony, and we will just
move down the line here.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. BERRY, MAYOR,
CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE
Mr. Berry. Well, thank you, Senator Udall. And thank you
for inviting me to present testimony and allowing me to address
this important topic of driving under the influence in New
Mexico.
First of all, as Mayor of Albuquerque, please allow me,
again, to welcome you obviously to your home State, but also to
all the visitors with us today from out of state. Welcome to
our wonderful city. We hope you have an opportunity to
experience our unique and culturally rich community and all
that it has to offer while you are here.
The City of Albuquerque encompasses 181 square miles, and
it includes both rural and metropolitan areas. With over
545,000 residents in the city, and over 900,000 people in the
overall metropolitan area, we are the largest city in the State
of New Mexico.
And as you know, Senator, New Mexicans are incredibly and
justifiably proud of our heritage, history, and unique culture.
Like any other large and geographically diverse State, we have
our share of challenges, including DUI.
DUI is a complicated problem with no single solution. I
believe strongly that a multi-pronged approach encompassing
education, enforcement, adjudication, treatment, and
rehabilitation are the keys to positively impacting DUI in any
community, including Albuquerque. Preventing and combating DUI
in Albuquerque is a top priority for our city, this
Administration, advocacy groups, such as MADD and others, and
the city's police department.
We are pleased to report that fatal crashes in general have
dropped from 38 in 2008 to 32 in 2010 in Albuquerque, and
alcohol-related fatalities are on a decline recently. In 2008,
there were 11 alcohol-related fatalities, and the number
dropped slightly to 9 fatalities in 2009, then back up to 11 in
2010. And for the current year to date, we have had 3 alcohol-
related fatalities. While this is an encouraging recent drop,
we must remain committed to the cause so that the trend
continues.
I have every reason to believe that our officers are
working hard to fight drunk driving in our city as DUI arrests
are up by 7 percent over this time last year.
I would like to take a few minutes to share with you this
Administration's current strategies for addressing DUI in the
City of Albuquerque.
Within the area of enforcement, we believe checkpoints are
an effective tool in apprehending offenders and getting them
off the road. For 2011, arrests at sobriety checkpoints have
increased by 23 percent as compared to this time last year.
We maintain good working relationships with our partners
and other local law enforcement agencies, which allows us a
coordinated approach to DUI. APD frequently conducts multi-
agency sobriety checkpoints with the Bernalillo County
sheriff's department and New Mexico State police.
The Albuquerque Police Department has increased the number
of DUI saturation patrols, and generally conducts at least one
saturation patrol per day. Saturation patrols have proven to be
very good for combatting DUI, and are oftentimes statistically
somewhat more effective than checkpoints.
APD has increased the number of Drug Recognition Expert
certified officers by over 20 percent, so that when individuals
exhibit signs of impairment for which alcohol has been ruled
out, they can identify other potential legal and illicit drugs
which may be the source of impairment.
Our DUI-seizure sergeant has implemented a system in
collaboration with the City Attorney's Office to hold DUI
offenders more accountable in seizure hearings.
We have conducted biannual DUI warrant roundups for
offenders who fail to appear in court or fail to comply with
conditions as set by the court.
As it relates to the use of emerging technologies to fight
DUI, the Albuquerque Police Department is working with the
State's Scientific Laboratory Division, which sets regulations
for the use of intoxilyzer machines in order to seek the
capability to improve our system. For example, once approved by
the State lab, the department plans to upgrade intoxilyzer
software so that breath card information is automatically
uploaded to the District Attorney's office by e-mail in
preparation for prosecution. This provides greater protections
for the chain of custody of evidence and relevant data.
Also, within the area of advancing technology, we have
acquired new equipment to assist with DUI enforcement, such as
a new BAT mobile, laser speed measurement devices for each DUI
officer, dash and/or lapel cameras, portable breath testers,
and tint meters.
Under the umbrella of awareness, the department has taken
steps to highlight the problem of DUI in our community with the
intent to encourage people to make better choices. APD has
utilized electronic billboards to advertise DUI-seizure
auctions, and advised the public of the consequences of DUI.
They submit DUI arrest information to the local newspaper,
which regularly features the mug shots of individuals who have
been recently arrested for DUI.
APD has expanded efforts to include a public awareness and
education campaign. The traffic division has increased the
number of community functions their officers attend to include
presentations at schools and businesses to educate about the
dangers of drinking and driving.
The department works in close collaboration with the local
Mothers Against Drunk Drivers organization. Representatives of
MADD attend checkpoints, assisting group presentations and
coordinate the Victim Impact Panel, a very powerful tool to
show offenders the very real and negative consequences of
drinking and driving.
Our traffic division lieutenant has instituted a program
with an emphasis on accountability for officers and supervisors
working within the DUI grant overtime. This has resulted in an
increase in the number of DUI arrests per officer hour worked.
We plan to continue to improve our public education and
awareness campaign and reeducate patrol officers on DUI-seizure
procedures.
In general terms, I believe we are on the right track in
combating DUI in Albuquerque and throughout New Mexico, but we
must remain vigilant.
For the last several years, the State has had an aggressive
marketing campaign, including compelling television ads geared
at various demographics, which have been significantly impacted
by DUI. The marketing campaign is funded by the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The ads, combined with
additional funding, targeted for high-incident counties, such
as Bernalillo County, have likely contributed to the decline in
DUI fatalities in our region.
I'm encouraged by programs such as Power Talk 21,
spearheaded by Mothers Against Drunk Drivers. This initiative
attempts to reach young people by asking parents to talk to
their kids about drinking and emphasizing the importance of
waiting to drink until the age of 21. We cannot take for
granted the impact of what drinking at a young age has in terms
of negative implications for potential addiction. According to
MADD's research, individuals who start drinking early in their
teens have a greater chance of becoming alcoholics later in
life.
We also must continue to treat the problems that are
leading to DUI in our cities. For example, DUI and Drug court
programs appear to have a very positive impact on recidivism.
The rigorous requirements with a focus on accountability and
rehabilitation have resulted in high success rates among drug
and DUI court graduates.
In closing, Senator, thank you for allowing me the
opportunity to talk to you about our local approach to DUI and
share my perspective on this matter of great public interest.
Public safety is of the highest priority to me as a mayor, and
I am grateful to you for recognizing the importance of this
issue and seeking to understand how it impacts our community.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Berry follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Richard J. Berry, Mayor, City of Albuquerque
Chairman Rockefeller, Senator Udall, and distinguished Committee
members, thank you for inviting me to present testimony and allowing me
to address the important topic of driving under the influence in New
Mexico.
First, as the Mayor of Albuquerque, please allow me to welcome you
to our wonderful city. We hope you have an opportunity to experience
our unique and culturally rich community and all that it has to offer.
The City of Albuquerque encompasses 181 square miles and includes
both rural and metropolitan areas.
With over 545,000 residents in the city and over 900,000 people in
the overall metropolitan area, we are the largest city in the State of
New Mexico.
As Senator Udall can attest, New Mexicans are incredibly and
justifiably proud of our heritage, history and unique culture. Like any
other large and geographically diverse state, we have our share of
challenges, including DUI.
DUI is a complicated problem with no single solution. I believe
strongly that a multi-pronged approach encompassing education,
enforcement, adjudication, treatment and rehabilitation is the key to
positively impacting DUI in any community, including Albuquerque.
Preventing and combating DUI in Albuquerque is a top priority for
our city, this administration, advocacy groups such as MADD and others
and the Albuquerque Police Department.
We are pleased to report fatal crashes in general have dropped from
38 in 2008 to 32 in 2010 in Albuquerque and alcohol-related fatalities
are on the decline recently. In 2008 there were 11 alcohol-related
fatalities, and the number dropped slightly to 9 fatalities in 2009,
then back up to 11 in 2010 and for the current year to date, we have
had 3 alcohol-related fatalities. This is an encouraging recent drop
but we must remain committed to the cause so that the trend continues.
I have every reason to believe that officers are working hard to fight
drunk driving in our city as DUI arrests are up by 7 percent over this
time last year.
I'd like to take a few minutes to share with you this
Administration's current strategies for addressing DUI in Albuquerque.
Within the area of enforcement, we believe checkpoints are an
effective tool in apprehending offenders and getting them off the road.
For 2011, arrests at sobriety checkpoints have increased by 23 percent
as compared to this time last year.
We maintain good working relationships with our partners in other
local law enforcement agencies which allows for a coordinated approach
to DUI. APD frequently conducts multi-agency sobriety checkpoints with
the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department and the New Mexico State
Police.
The Albuquerque Police Department has increased the number of DUI-
saturation patrols, and generally conducts at least one saturation
patrol a day. Saturation patrols have proven to be a very good tool for
combating DUI, and are often more effective than checkpoints.
APD has increased the number of Drug Recognition Expert certified
officers by over 20 percent so that when individuals exhibit signs of
impairment for which alcohol has been ruled out, they can identify
other potential legal and illicit drugs which may be the source of
impairment.
Our new DUI-seizure sergeant has implemented a system in
collaboration with the City Attorney's Office to hold DUI offenders
more accountable in seizure hearings.
We have conducted bi-annual DUI Warrant Round Ups for offenders who
fail to appear in court or fail to comply with conditions set by the
court.
As it relates to the use of emerging technologies to fight DUI, the
Albuquerque Police Department is working with the state's Scientific
Laboratory Division which sets regulations for the use of intoxilyzer
machines in order to seek the capability to improve our systems. For
example, once approved by the state lab, the department plans to
upgrade intoxilyzer software so that breath card information is
automatically uploaded to the District Attorney's Office by e-mail in
preparation for prosecution. This provides greater protections for the
chain of custody of evidence and relevant data.
Also within the area of advancing technology, we have acquired new
equipment to assist with DUI enforcement, such as: a new BATmobile,
laser speed measurement devices for each DUI officer, dash and/or lapel
cameras, portable breath testers and tint meters.
Under the umbrella of awareness, the department has taken steps to
highlight the problem of DUI in our community with the intent to
encourage people to make better choices.
APD has utilized electronic billboards to advertise DUI-seizure
auctions and advise the public on the consequences of DUI. They submit
DUI arrest information to the local newspaper which regularly features
the mug shots of individuals who have been recently arrested for DUI.
APD has expanded efforts to include a public awareness and
education campaign. The traffic division has increased the number of
community functions their officers attend to include presentations at
schools and businesses to educate about the dangers of drinking and
driving.
The department works in close collaboration with the local Mothers
Against Drunk Drivers' organization. Representatives of MADD attend
checkpoints, assist in group presentations, and coordinate the Victim
Impact Panel, a very powerful tool to show offenders the very real and
negative consequences of drinking and driving.
Our traffic division lieutenant has instituted a program with an
emphasis on accountability for officers and supervisors working DUI
grant overtime. This has resulted in an increase in the number of DUI
arrests per officer hour worked.
We plan to continue to improve our public education and awareness
campaign and re-educate patrol officers on DUI seizures procedures.
In general terms, I believe we are on the right track in combating
DUI in Albuquerque and throughout New Mexico but we must remain
vigilant.
For the last several years, the state has had an aggressive
marketing campaign including compelling television ads geared at
various demographics which have been significantly impacted by DUI. The
marketing campaign is funded by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration. The ads, combined with additional funding targeted for
high-incident counties such as Bernalillo County, have likely
contributed to the decline in DUI fatalities in the region.
I am encouraged by programs such as Power Talk 21, spearheaded by
Mothers Against Drunk Drivers. This initiative attempts to reach young
people by asking parents to talk to their kids about drinking and
emphasizing the importance of waiting to drink until the age of 21. We
cannot take for granted the impact that drinking at a young age has in
terms of negative implications for potential addiction. According to
MADD's research, individuals who start drinking early in their teens
have a greater chance for becoming alcoholics later in life.
We also must continue to treat the problems that are leading to DUI
in our cities. For example, DUI and Drug Court programs appear to have
a positive impact on recidivism. The rigorous requirements with a focus
on accountability and rehabilitation have resulted in a high success
rates among Drug and DUI court graduates.
In closing, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to talk to
you about our local approach to DUI and share my perspective on this
matter of great public interest. Public safety is of the highest
priority to me as a mayor, and I am grateful to you for recognizing the
importance of this issue and seeking to understand how it impacts our
communities.
Senator Udall. Mayor Berry, thank you very much for that
testimony, and thank you for all your hard work on this issue.
And I think all of us know how important it is to our
constituents to work with them and get them motivated on this.
Chief Williams, great to have you here today. I was just
down in the City of Las Cruces. It is a little bit warmer down
there than here----
Mr. Williams. Just a little bit.
Senator Udall.--so I hope we cooled things off a little for
you by inviting you up here. Please proceed with your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD WILLIAMS, CHIEF OF POLICE,
LAS CRUCES POLICE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Williams. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
the opportunity to provide you the law enforcement perspective
regarding this very concerning issue.
My name is Richard Williams, Chief of Police for the Las
Cruces Police Department. I have been in law enforcement for
over 20 years. I began my career with the New Mexico State
Police, and I have been stationed in communities throughout New
Mexico. I have witnessed rural law enforcement as well as
metropolitan law enforcement during my career, and I have an
intimate knowledge of the DUI problem in New Mexico.
Let me tell you a little bit about our department. Las
Cruces Police Department is authorized 183 commissioned
officers, and we patrol 77 square miles of municipal boundary
in southern New Mexico. Our community has a population of
approximately 97,000 people according to the 2010 census
numbers, and our officers answer anywhere between 157,000 to
158,000 calls for service each year.
The City of Las Cruces has its share of DWI problems as
well as new offenders who move into and visit our community
each year. The city is blessed to have a major university, New
Mexico State University, and is surrounded by three military
installations: White Sands Missile Range, Fort Bliss Army
Installation, and Holloman Air Force Base in Alamogordo.
We have numerous dairies, farms, and ranches that surround
our municipality.
There is no shortage of new offenders as we have a
revolving population that lives and works in our community.
Approximately 75 percent of our arrests involve first-time
offenders.
In research and the statistics surrounding this topic, I
found that the Las Cruces Police Department, on average,
apprehends 522 DWI offenders each year. The Sheriff's
Department apprehends a similar amount, and the State Police
apprehend close to 400 DWI offenders each year.
Law enforcement in Dona Ana County apprehends anywhere
between 1,300 and 1,600 DWI offenders each year. In the City of
Las Cruces, we investigate on average 4 fatal crashes each
year, and for the last 2 years, half of these crashes have
involved alcohol.
The advances in vehicle safety and technology can only do
so much when an impaired person decides to drive drunk.
In law enforcement, we are at the front of the efforts to
stop DWI offenders. When all other efforts do not stop an
offender from driving drunk, we rely on our officers to
physically stop these offenders and remove them from our
streets.
There are several things that law enforcement has done
extremely well as we work to enhance public and traffic safety.
Many agencies have made the apprehension and criminal
prosecution of offenders a significant priority for their
agencies, and have included these efforts in their strategic
plan, goals, and strategies.
Many agencies seek out grant funding to augment normal
patrol efforts to apprehend these DWI offenders through
operations such as DWI checkpoints, directed patrols, and
saturation patrols.
Some jurisdictions have implemented a vehicle seizure
program to stop repeat offenders and target those who are
arrested for driving with a revoked license as a result of a
DWI. Last year, the City of Las Cruces seized 348 vehicles that
were either driven by a repeat drunk driver or one of those
individuals who was driving with a revoked license as a result
of DWI.
Many agencies also participate in awareness campaigns, such
as the 100 Days and Nights of Summer campaign, driver education
programs, or other various programs that are designed to
increase awareness regarding the problems associated with this
crime.
There are still many challenges, though, that law
enforcement faces as we strive to prosecute--to apprehend and
prosecute these offenders. To begin with, there are
difficulties the average officer has in identifying a drug-
impaired driver as compared to an alcohol-impaired driver.
There is also an enormous amount of paperwork that is
associated with the arrest of a DWI offender. This large amount
of paperwork ties up an officer for anywhere between 1 to 3
hours for a single arrest during their shift. That takes the
officer out of service, and they are no longer available to
assist in our community. And I can assure you, our call volume
is ever increasing, and these lengthy investigations are taking
time away from proactive patrols and visibility.
Officers are also facing an ever increasing difficult court
battle, and the traditional standard of proof beyond a
reasonable doubt is evolving into proof beyond all doubt. In
addition, the administrative revocation hearings have some
areas that have been turned into discovery hearings or mini-
trials, and they go well beyond the scope of the license
revocation. Also, challenges to our sobriety testing methods
have caused officers to limit their testimony regarding
horizontal gaze nystagmus.
And finally, the budget. Budget constraints have limited
resources and are impacting our ability to proactively search
for impaired drivers as we strive to answer the basic calls for
service.
So, DWI will remain a priority for law enforcement as the
number of offenders will never completely diminish. We have
seen a reduction in the number of DWI arrests, and it is our
hope that the message is getting through to our citizens, and
make sure they understand that it is no longer socially
acceptable to drive drunk in New Mexico.
Law enforcement will continue to place significant emphasis
on traffic safety and the apprehension of impaired drivers. We
must create a perception of risk so that offenders weigh the
costs and risks associated with driving impaired.
While we have come a long way, the problem still exists. We
must make the enforcement of DWI laws a priority, and law
enforcement has a huge role in securing our communities.
Thank you, sir, for the opportunity, and I will stand for
any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Williams follows:]
Prepared Statement of Richard Williams, Chief of Police,
Las Cruces Police Department
Introduction
Good morning. My name is Richard Williams and I am the Chief of
Police for the Las Cruces Police Department. I have been a law
enforcement officer for (20) twenty years. I began my career with the
New Mexico State Police and I have been stationed in many communities
throughout New Mexico. I have witnessed rural law enforcement and
metropolitan law enforcement during my career and I have intimate
knowledge of the DWI problem in New Mexico.
The Las Cruces Police Department is authorized (183) one hundred
and eighty-three commissioned officers and we patrol (77) seventy seven
square miles of municipal boundary in southern New Mexico. Our
community has a population of approximately (97,000) ninety seven
thousand people, according to the 2010 census numbers and our officers
answered (158,000) one hundred and fifty eight thousand calls for
service in 2010.
Nature of the Problem
The City of Las Cruces has its share of DWI problems and new
offenders who move into or visit our community each year. Our city is
blessed to have a major university (New Mexico State University), and
is surrounded by (3) three military installations (White Sands Missile
Range, Fort Bliss Army Installation, and Holloman Air Force Base). We
also have numerous dairies, farms and ranches that surround our
municipality. There is no shortage of new offenders as we have a
revolving population that lives and works in our community.
Approximately (75 percent) seventy-five percent of our arrests involve
first time offenders.
In researching the statistics surrounding this topic, I found that
the Las Cruces Police Department on average apprehends approximately
(522) five hundred twenty-two DWI offenders each year. The Sheriff's
Department apprehends a similar amount and the New Mexico State Police
arrests close to (400) four hundred DWI offenders. Law enforcement in
Dona Ana County apprehends between (1,300-1,600) one thousand three
hundred and one thousand six hundred DWI offenders each year. We also
investigate on average (4) four fatal crashes in the City of Las Cruces
each year with half of these crashes involving alcohol. The advances in
vehicle safety and technology can only do so much when an impaired
person decides to drive drunk.
Law Enforcement's Perspective
Law enforcement is at the front in the efforts to stop DWI
offenders. When all other efforts do not stop an offender from driving
drunk, we rely on our officers to physically stop these offenders and
remove them from our streets.
There are several things law enforcement has done extremely well at
as we work to enhance public and traffic safety.
Many agencies have made the apprehension and criminal
prosecution of offenders as a significant priority for their
agencies and have included these efforts in their strategic
plan, goals, and strategies.
Many agencies seek grant funding to augment normal patrol
efforts to apprehend DWI offenders through operations such as
DWI Checkpoints, Directed Patrols, and Saturation Patrols.
Some jurisdictions have implemented a vehicle seizure
program to stop repeat offenders and to target those who are
arrested for Driving with a Revoked Drivers License.
Last year we seized (348) three hundred forty-eight
vehicles that were either driven by repeat drunk drivers or
those with a revoked license.
Many agencies participate in education and awareness
campaigns such as the 100 Days and Nights of Summer campaign,
driver's education programs, and various other programs
designed to increase the awareness of the problems associated
with this crime.
There are still many challenges that law enforcement faces as we
strive to apprehend and prosecute these offenders.
The difficulties the average officer has in identifying drug
impaired driving as compared to alcohol impaired driving.
There is an enormous amount of paperwork associated with the
arrest of a DWI offender. This large amount of paperwork ties
up an officer for (1 to 3) one to three hours during a shift
for a single arrest and takes the officer out of service to our
community.
Our call volume is ever increasing and these lengthy
investigations are taking away from time spent on traffic
patrol or proactive patrol.
Officers are facing ever increasing difficult court battles
and the traditional standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt
is now evolving into proof beyond all doubt.
Administrative revocation hearings have in some areas been
turned into discovery hearings that go well beyond the scope of
the license revocations.
Challenges to traditional sobriety testing methods have
caused officers to limit their testimony regarding Horizontal
Gaze Nystagmus.
Budget constraints and limited resources are also impacting
our ability to proactively search for impaired drivers as we
strive to answer calls for service.
Future Considerations
DWI enforcement will remain a priority for law enforcement as the
number offenders will never completely diminish. We have seen a
reduction in the number of arrests for DWI and it is our hope that the
message is getting through to our citizens that it is no longer
socially acceptable to drive drunk.
Law enforcement will continue to place a significant emphasis on
traffic safety and the apprehension of impaired drivers. We must create
a perception of risk so that offenders weigh the costs and risks
associated with driving impaired. While we have come a long way the
problem still exists. We must make the enforcement of DWI laws a
priority and law enforcement has a huge role in securing our
communities.
Thank you and I'll stand for questions.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Chief Williams.
And, Lora Lee Ortiz, and you are with MADD. You are the
Executive Director. Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF LORA LEE ORTIZ, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MADD NEW
MEXICO
Ms. Ortiz. Thank you. On behalf of MADD, I thank Chairman
Rockefeller and Ranking Member Hutchison, for the opportunity
to submit testimony before the Committee, and for holding this
important hearing. I thank Senator Tom Udall, who has been a
steadfast supporter of MADD's efforts to eliminate drunk
driving. Many of New Mexico's successes today are due to his
efforts while serving as Attorney General of New Mexico, and
his leadership on drunk driving is to be commended. His efforts
have saved lives.
I also thank the Committee for introducing Mariah's Act,
the Motor Vehicle and Highway Safety Improvement Act of 2011.
This legislation represents a dramatic step forward in the
effort to save lives on our Nation's highways. From MADD's
perspective, this committee's bill will put into motion
critical initiatives to literally eliminate drunk driving in
the United States.
Specifically, I call attention to the authorization of the
Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety, or DADSS program,
also known as the ROADS SAFE Act, a bipartisan bill introduced
by Senators Udall and Corker. In the House, Representatives
Moore, Capito, Shuler, and Sarbanes have introduced identical
legislation.
DADSS is a program to provide an advanced in-vehicle option
for consumers. This technology could potentially eliminate
drunk driving and is a result of a research agreement between
NHTSA and many of the world's leading auto manufacturers.
The purpose of this ambitious program is to research,
develop, and demonstrate non-invasive, in-vehicle alcohol
detection technologies that can very quickly and accurately
measure a driver's BAC. The Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety estimates that 8,000 lives could be saved if the
technology is widely deployed in the United States.
Just a few years ago, New Mexico was rated as one of the 10
worst States for drunk driving fatalities. Thanks to the
leadership of people like Senator Udall, New Mexico has turned
a corner. We are proud of our success on the front line in the
fight against drunk driving. However, we must not become
complacent in our efforts. The following should outrage all of
us.
In 2009 alone, still over 100 people were killed in New
Mexico because of drunk driving, representing 32 percent of all
highway fatalities. Drunk driving costs $570 million per year.
Nationwide, over 10,000 people died in 2009 due to a drunk
driver. Over 350,000 people were injured last year in drunk
driver crashes. Fifty to 75 percent of convicted drunk drivers
will continue to drive on a suspended license, and drunk
driving costs our Nation $129 billion every year.
In 2006, following research approving countermeasures, MADD
announced its campaign to eliminate drunk driving, which
supports more resources for high visibility law enforcement,
requires convicted drunk drivers to install an ignition
interlock device, and turns cars into the cure through the
development of advanced in-vehicle technology.
The centerpiece of New Mexico's efforts has been to make
sure every convicted drunk driver receives an ignition
interlock, which works like a breathalyzer attached to a
vehicle's ignition system, allowing a DWI offender to continue
to drive. They just cannot drive drunk.
The research on interlocks is crystal clear and
irrefutable. In fact, the Center for Disease Control recently
endorsed requiring interlocks for all convicted DWI offenders.
In 2005, New Mexico was the first State to implement this
requirement. The downward trend in fatalities began and has
continued through today.
We strongly urge this committee to work with the EPW
Committee to develop a strategy to encourage every State to
adopt an all-offender interlock law as part of the
reauthorization bill.
Another component of New Mexico's success was the
establishment of a Statewide DWI Coordinator. Mr. Chairman, as
you know, DWI is a very complex issue. While State murder codes
are typically one page long, State DWI codes can run hundreds
of pages. What is more, you have many different agencies
working to stop drunk driving, but they may not be
communicating with each other effectively.
Providing one central point of contact allows government
agencies, community advocates, like MADD, and the public one
office to contact. We applaud the Committee's efforts to
include the establishment of a DWI Coordinator for high-risk
states.
MADD would also like to commend the Committee for including
paid ads, such as ``Driver Sober or Get Pulled Over,'' focused
on drunk driving. In New Mexico, we take high visibility law
enforcement seriously, and from June through September, we hold
100 Days and Nights of Summer, where we strive to conduct 100
sobriety checkpoints. Summer is one of the most dangerous times
on the road, and conducting sobriety checkpoints, along with
advertisements announcing these events, educates drivers. If
they choose to drink and drive, they will get caught.
New Mexico has been at the forefront in the fight against
DWI. Ignition interlocks play a major role in our 36 percent
reduction in DWI fatalities, as did conducting numerous
sobriety checkpoints so that drunk drivers do know if they
drive drunk, they will get caught.
Finally, the appointment of a coordinator helped New Mexico
focus its efforts and improve the State's efficiency in
fighting DWI.
MADD applauds this committee's leadership to eliminate
drunk driving, and specifically thanks the Committee for
including several important provisions. We would like to
acknowledge Section 109, High Visibility Enforcement Program;
Section 107(g), grants to States that adopt and enforce
mandatory alcohol ignition interlock laws; Section 11, Driver
Alcohol Detection System for Safety research; Section 102,
inclusion of performance measure development and additional
oversight to the Secretary of Transportation to ensure that
States spend funds on activities that will save the most lives
and prevent the most injuries.
Thank you for holding this important hearing to advance our
Nation's highway safety program. This committee is to be
commended for their leadership on these issues. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ortiz follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lora Lee Ortiz, Executive Director,
MADD New Mexico
On behalf of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and MADD New
Mexico, I would like to thank Chairman Rockefeller and Ranking Member
Hutchison for the opportunity to submit testimony before the Committee
and for holding this important hearing. I would also like to thank
Senator Tom Udall who has been a steadfast supporter of MADD's efforts
to eliminate drunk driving. Many of New Mexico's successes today are
due to Senator Udall's efforts while serving as Attorney General of New
Mexico and his leadership on drunk driving is to be commended. His
efforts have helped to save many lives.
I would also like to thank the Committee for recently introducing
Mariah's Act, or the Motor Vehicle and Highway Safety Improvement Act
of 2011 legislation. This legislation, which would reauthorize the
Nation's highway and vehicle safety programs, represents a dramatic
step forward in the effort to save lives on our Nation's highways. From
MADD's perspective, this committee's bill will put into motion critical
initiatives to literally eliminate drunk driving in New Mexico and in
the United States.
Specifically, I would like to call attention to the authorization
of the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety, or DADSS program
contained in Mariah's Act. The provision is also known as the ROADS
SAFE Act, a bipartisan bill introduced by Senator Udall and Senator Bob
Corker. In the House, Representatives Shelley Moore Capito, Heath
Shuler, and John Sarbanes have introduced identical legislation.
DADSS is a program currently underway to provide an advanced in-
vehicle option for consumers. This technology could potentially
eliminate drunk driving. DADSS is the result of a research agreement
between NHTSA and many of the world's leading auto manufacturers.
The purpose of this ambitious program is to research, develop, and
demonstrate non-invasive in-vehicle alcohol detection technologies that
can very quickly and accurately measure a driver's BAC. The Insurance
Institute for Highway Safety estimates that 8,000 lives could be saved
if the technology is widely deployed in the U.S.
New Mexico and National Statistics
Just a few years ago, New Mexico was rated as one of the ten worst
states in the Nation for drunk driving fatalities. Thanks to the
leadership of people like Senator Udall, former Governor Bill
Richardson, and his creation of a statewide DWI Czar to coordinate DUI
efforts, New Mexico has truly turned a corner.
In New Mexico we are proud of our success, but realize much more
must be done. New Mexico has been on the front line in the fight
against drunk driving. However, we must not be complacent in our
efforts. The following should outrage us all:
In 2009 alone, 114 people were killed in New Mexico because
of drunk driving.
This represents 32 percent of all highway fatalities.
Drunk driving costs New Mexico $570 million per year.
Nationwide, 10,839 people died in 2009 due to a drunk
driver.
Over 350,000 people were injured last year in drunk driving
crashes.
50-75 percent of convicted drunk drivers will continue to
drive on a suspended license.
Drunk driving costs our Nation $129 billion per year.
Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving
Fortunately, MADD has a plan for the Nation. In 2006, following
research of proven countermeasures, MADD announced its Campaign to
Eliminate Drunk Driving which:
First, supports more resources for high-visibility law
enforcement;
Second, requires convicted drunk drivers to install an
ignition interlock device; and,
Lastly, turns cars into the cure through the development of
advanced in-vehicle technology.
Ignition Interlocks in New Mexico
One major prong of MADD's Campaign was chosen as a result of our
success in New Mexico. The centerpiece of New Mexico's efforts has been
to make sure every convicted drunk driver receives an ignition
interlock. The device works like a breathalyzer and is attached to the
vehicle's ignition system. The interlock allows a DWI offender to
continue to drive wherever they need to go--they just can't drive
drunk.
The research on interlocks is crystal clear and irrefutable. In
fact, the Centers for Disease Control recently endorsed requiring
interlocks for all convicted DWI offenders. New Mexico was the first
state to implement this requirement. In 2005 ignition interlocks for
all offenders were mandated. The downward trend in fatalities began and
has continued through today. Fatalities decreased from over 500 per
year to 139 in 2010. This year's trends indicate continued increases in
the number of interlocks for all convicted DWI offenders and, as a
result, our DWI fatalities have been reduced by in by 36 percent.
MADD believes that New Mexico's success could be replicated
nationwide and that incentives for states are an important step toward
making this a reality. While MADD has been successful in New Mexico and
several other states, we are now hitting roadblocks from the alcohol
industry and DWI defense attorneys as we try to pass this law in other
state legislatures.
We strongly urge this committee to work with the Senate Environment
and Public Works (EPW) Committee to develop a strategy to encourage
every state to adopt an all-offender interlock law as part of the
reauthorization bill.
Under this committee's jurisdiction, incentives could be offered to
states which enact an all-offender interlock law in the first half of
the life of the new Federal law, and under the Environment and Public
Works (EPW) Committee's jurisdiction, an all-offender interlock Federal
standard could be included for the second half of the life of the law.
This lifesaving measure is sound policy.
DUI Czar
Another critical component of New Mexico's success was the
establishment of a statewide DUI coordinator, or DWI Czar, to insure
that state and local agencies were focused and coordinating their
efforts to maximize efforts to stop drunk driving.
Mr. Chairman, as you know, DWI is a very complex issue. While state
murder codes are typically one page long, state DWI codes can run
hundreds of pages. What's more, you have many different agencies
working to stop drunk driving but they may not be communicating with
each other. For example, prosecutors need to talk with probation who
must communicate with law enforcement. The DMV is responsible for
licensing these drivers and lawmakers must constantly improve DWI laws
to protect the public.
All of these different groups need coordination and providing one
central point of contact is critical because it allows government
agencies, community advocates like MADD, and the public one office to
turn to for questions about DWI, and action to end it. We applaud the
Committee's efforts to include the establishment of a DWI Czar in
Mariah's Act for high-risk states. We would like to see every state
establish this important office. Recently it was decided that New
Mexico's DWI Czar would no longer continue. MADD hopes that this
important position is reinstated. Although we have made great progress
in the state, we must not become complacent.
High Visibility Enforcement
MADD would also like to commend the Committee for including at
least three paid ad crackdowns in Mariah's Act. This includes two
crackdowns, now known as Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over, focused on
drunk driving. New Mexico, through the DWI Czar, has also made a
commitment to high visibility law enforcement.
In New Mexico, we take high visibility enforcement seriously and
from June through September we have what is called 100 Days and Nights
of Summer where we strive to conduct 100 sobriety checkpoints. Summer
is one of the most dangerous times on the road and conducting sobriety
checkpoints, along with paid advertisements or earned media announcing
these events, teaches drivers that if they choose to drink and drive,
they will get caught.
Conclusion
New Mexico has been at the forefront in the fight against DWI. Our
focus on ignition interlocks has played a major role in our 36 percent
reduction in DWI fatalities. In addition, we have worked to conduct
numerous sobriety checkpoints through programs like 100 Days and Nights
of Summer to make sure that drunk drivers know if they drive drunk,
they will get caught. Finally, the appointment of a DWI Czar helped New
Mexico to coordinate its efforts and improve the state's efficiency in
fighting DWI.
MADD applauds this committee's leadership to eliminate drunk
driving and specifically thanks the Committee for including several
important provisions Mariah's Act. Specifically, we would like to
acknowledge:
Section 109--High Visibility Enforcement Program, with at
least three national crackdown periods;
Section 107(g)--Grants to States That Adopt and Enforce
Mandatory Alcohol-Ignition Interlock Laws;
Section 111--Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety
Research;
Section 102--Inclusion of performance measure development
and additional oversight authority to the Secretary of
Transportation to ensure states spend funds on activities that
will save the most lives and prevent the most injuries.
Thank you for holding this important hearing to advance our
Nation's highway and highway safety programs. You are to be commended
for your leadership on these issues.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Ms. Ortiz.
Dr. Crandall, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF CAMERON CRANDALL, M.D., EMERGENCY
PHYSICIAN AND ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AND VICE CHAIR FOR RESEARCH,
DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO
Dr. Crandall. Mr. Chair, I want to thank you for the
opportunity to provide testimony on New Mexico's experience
with alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes.
My name is Dr. Cameron Crandall. I am an emergency
physician and an Associate Professor and Vice Chair for
Research in the Department of Emergency Medicine at the
University of New Mexico. In addition to practicing emergency
medicine, I have a long-standing interest and background in
injury prevention.
I work at University Hospital in Albuquerque, which is the
only Level 1 Trauma Center in New Mexico, and as such, we treat
a higher proportion of alcohol-related trauma compared to other
New Mexico hospitals. As an emergency physician, I see
firsthand the tragic consequences of impaired driving, which
includes significant suffering, short- and long-term
disability, and, in too many cases, death.
Nationally, we know that there is about 1 death every 45
minutes due to a drunk driving crash, or around 30 to 32 deaths
per day. In 2008, there were almost 12,000 people killed in
alcohol-related crashes in the United States. In the same year
in New Mexico, there were 143 alcohol-related crash deaths.
This is, however, only a portion of the problem. There were
more than 10 times as many individuals, over 1,700 persons, who
experienced an injury from an alcohol-related crash.
It is important to recognize the contribution that even
small amounts of alcohol have in causing impairment. Any level
of alcohol in a person's body will reduce attention, task
completion, peripheral vision, and reaction times. Impairment
begins as soon as alcohol can be detected in the blood, and all
of these factors add up to an increased risk of injury and
death.
In New Mexico, 39 percent of fatal crashes involved
alcohol. In a recent report, among crashes involving injuries
but no deaths, only 8 percent involved alcohol. What this means
is that the presence of alcohol increases the likelihood that
the crash will be fatal.
There are significant economic costs associated with
alcohol-related crashes, and each alcohol-related motor vehicle
crash fatality costs over $3 million with over $1 million in
direct costs, and over $2 million in lost earning potential and
lost quality of life. In New Mexico, we estimate that all of
the alcohol-related crashes in 2008 had a combined impact of
almost $1 billion in both direct and indirect costs. And on a
per capita basis, this would translate to $466 for every person
in New Mexico.
Another important consideration is that alcohol-related
crashes involve both intoxicated and sober individuals. As
such, everyone is only one step away from a potentially life-
changing experience. Estimates are that about 30 percent of
Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related crash at some
time in their lives. This does not mean that the individuals
themselves will be drinking; in fact, many of these individuals
will not be drunk; they will simply be injured or killed by
someone who is.
In New Mexico, about 36 percent of our victims involved in
alcohol-related crashes are sober. Over recent years, we have
seen tremendous improvements in the reduction of alcohol-
related motor vehicle injury crashes and deaths. And alcohol-
related motor vehicle crash fatality rates in New Mexico have
dropped significantly from a rate of around 11.9 per 100,000
persons in 2002 to 7.2 per 100,000 in 2008, representing a 39
percent reduction.
A number of potential factors help explain this reduction
in New Mexico, and these include, number one, public education
efforts, such as the ``You Drink, You Drive, You Lose'' media
campaign; number two, innovative engineering solutions, such as
the ignition interlock devices; three, active law enforcement
programs, such as the 100 Days and Nights of Summer with its
``Superblitzes,'' DWI checkpoints and saturation patrols; and
finally, number four, legislative efforts to curb drinking and
driving, such as closure of drive-up liquor store windows and
regulatory efforts, such as the ``three strikes'' law for
rescinding liquor licenses authorized under the Liquor Control
Act.
We must continue these efforts and look for new and
innovative strategies to further reduce drunk driving, and the
ROADS SAFE Act that you have co-sponsored will support the
development of passive in-vehicle alcohol detection systems is
one such innovative strategy. And I am pleased to offer that
the American College of Emergency Physicians, our national
agency, supports this legislation, and I have a letter of
support by the College president to include in the record.
Senator Udall. That will be included without objection.
Thank you.
[The information referred to follows:]
American College of Emergency Physicians
Washington, DC, August 9, 2011
Hon. Tom Udall,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Udall:
On behalf of the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP),
our 29,000 members and the nearly 124 million patients we treat every
year, we want to express our support for your legislation, the
``Research of Alcohol Detection Systems for Stopping Alcohol-related
Fatalities Everywhere (ROADS SAFE) Act of 2011'' (S. 510).
As emergency physicians, we witness first-hand the consequences of
impaired driving and the toll it takes on families, communities and the
Nation. It is a tragedy that someone in this country dies every 45
minutes from an alcohol-related crash and, even worse; it is a tragedy
that is preventable.
The ROADS SAFE Act would authorize $60 million over 5 years for the
Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) program. DADSS was
created as a joint, public-private venture between the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Automotive Coalition for
Traffic Safety (ACTS), which is comprised of the world's leading auto
manufacturers, to explore the feasibility, potential benefits and
public policy challenges associated with using in-vehicle technology to
prevent drunk driving.
ACEP is optimistic that the research being conducted by DADSS will
develop the solutions, such as devices to determine a driver's blood
alcohol level by simply touching the steering wheel or engine ignition,
which will help prevent the thousands of drunk driving fatalities
nationwide each year.
Thank you for conducting this field hearing to examine the critical
issue of drunk driving and we hope that it will encourage public
support for the passage of the ROADS SAFE bill.
We look forward to working with you to enact this important
legislation so that we don't have to tell even one more family that
their loved one was killed by a drunk driver.
Sincerely,
Sandra Schneider, MD, FACEP,
President.
CC: Senator Bob Corker
Dr. Crandall. New Mexico's commitment to reducing drunk
driving has been effective, but more work does need to be done,
and no one effort is sufficient. It has been the combined
effort of many strategies that will continue to reduce the
impact of drunk driving in New Mexico.
I want to thank you for letting me offer my testimony, and
I would be pleased to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Crandall follows:]
Prepared Statement of Cameron Crandall, M.D., Emergency Physician and
Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Research, Department of
Emergency Medicine, University of New Mexico
Mr. Chair, Senator Udall and other Honorable Members of the
Committee:
I would like to thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony
on New Mexico's experience with alcohol related motor vehicle crashes.
My name is Dr. Cameron Crandall. I am an emergency physician and an
Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Research in the Department of
Emergency Medicine at the University of New Mexico. In addition to
practicing emergency medicine, I have a long-standing interest and
background in injury prevention.
I work at University Hospital in Albuquerque, which is the only
Level 1 Trauma Center in New Mexico and, as such, we treat a higher
proportion of alcohol-related trauma compared to other New Mexico
hospitals. As an emergency physician, I see firsthand the tragic
consequences of impaired driving which includes significant suffering,
short and long-term disability, and in too many cases, death.
Nationally, we know that there is 1 death every 45 minutes due to a
drunk driving crash, or 32 deaths per day. In 2008, there were almost
12,000 people killed in alcohol-related crashes. In the same year in
New Mexico, there were 143 alcohol-related crash deaths. This is,
however, only a portion of the problem. There were more than 10 times
as many individuals, over 1,700 persons who experienced an injury from
an alcohol-related crash.
It is important to recognize the contribution that even small
amounts of alcohol have in causing impairment. Any level of alcohol in
a person's body will reduce attention, task completion, peripheral
vision, and reaction times. Impairment begins as soon as alcohol can be
detected in the blood. All of these factors add up to an increased risk
of injury and death.
In New Mexico, 39 percent of all fatal crashes involved alcohol.
Among crashes involving injuries but no deaths, only 8 percent involved
alcohol. What this means is that the presence of alcohol increases the
likelihood that the crash will be fatal.
There are significant economic costs associated with an alcohol-
related crash. Each alcohol-related motor vehicle crash fatality costs
over $3 million, with over $1 million in direct costs and over $2
million in lost earning potential and quality of life. In New Mexico,
we estimate that all of the alcohol-related crashes in 2008 combined
had an impact of almost $1 billion in both direct and indirect costs.
On a per capita basis, this translates to $466 for every person in New
Mexico.
Another important consideration is that alcohol-related crashes
involve both intoxicated and sober individuals. As such, everyone is
only one step away from a potential life-changing experience. Estimates
are that 30 percent of Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related
crash at some time in their lives. This does not mean that these
individuals themselves will be drinking; in fact, many of these
individuals will not be drunk; they may simply be injured or killed by
someone who is. In New Mexico, 36 percent of our victims involved in
alcohol-related crashes are sober.
Over recent years, we have seen tremendous improvements and
reduction in alcohol-related motor vehicle crash injury and death.
Alcohol-related motor vehicle crash fatality rates in New Mexico have
dropped significantly, from a rate of 11.9 per 100,000 persons in 2002
to 7.2 per 100,000 in 2008, a 39 percent reduction.
A number of potential factors help explain this reduction in New
Mexico, these include:
1. public education efforts such as the ``You drink, You drive,
You lose'' media campaign,
2. innovative engineering solutions such as ignition interlock
devices,
3. active law enforcement programs, such as the ``100 Days and
Nights of Summer'' with ``Superblitzes,'' DWI checkpoints and
saturation patrols; and
4. legislative efforts to curb drinking and driving, such as
closure of drive-up liquor store windows.
We must continue these efforts and look for new and innovative
strategies to further reduce drunk driving. The ROADS SAFE Act (S. 510)
co-sponsored by Sen. Tom Udall, which will support the development of
passive in-vehicle alcohol detection systems is one such innovative
strategy. The American College of Emergency Physicians supports this
legislation and I would like to include a letter of support by the
College president in support.
New Mexico's commitment to reduce drunk driving has been effective,
but more work must be done. No one effort is sufficient. It is the
combination of many strategies that will continue to reduce the impact
of drunk driving in New Mexico.
Senator Udall. OK, thank you very much, Dr. Crandall. And I
know the kind of devastation you must see every day with
victims coming into the emergency room. And I am going to ask
you about that in a little bit.
But I have the--my first question is for the whole panel,
and it really deals with the issue of the repeat, the chronic,
the habitual offenders that we know are a big part of the
problem. And all of your testimony highlights how far we have
come as a State in addressing drunk driving and saving lives.
Unfortunately, though, I still read far too often in the
paper and see on the news stories of the lives lost. And one of
the frustrating elements of these stories is how many lives
have been lost to habitual offenders. And we kind of see that
over and over again. Sometimes these folks have been involved
six times, seven times, nine times. I think recently here we
saw even more times than that.
And what I would like to know is what each of your thoughts
are on what needs to be done to address chronic, habitual
offenders. Is the--and even with an interlock license, many
drivers are still able to offend. Is there something we can do
there? Do you believe that the passive in-vehicle alcohol
detection system could help address the chronic offender issue?
Mayor, do you want to----
Mr. Berry. Sure. Mr. Chairman--Senator, we always go back
it seems to when I was in the legislature as well. The
discussion oftentimes comes down to the big five, you know,
education, enforcement, adjudication, treatment, and
rehabilitation. We see far too often people--repeat offenders
of DUI in the State of New Mexico.
I think there are a number of things we can work on from
the adjudication standpoint--mandatory jail time, tougher
penalties, making it the situation where if you have proven
time and time again that you are a person who is willing to get
behind the wheel of a vehicle intoxicated, at some point there
has to be a price to pay for that--that is extreme in my
opinion.
We look at the judicial system, and we are currently
working with the--in the City of Albuquerque with the judiciary
here locally and with our fire departments and our police
department and the folks in the county to try to work on ways
that we can collaborate to combat this. Streamlining the
judicial system in certain ways, giving judges the tools in
their toolbox to be able to make more positive impact.
New Mexico currently has a--the law in New Mexico, it is a
felony after three convictions. Well, maybe we should look at
making it a felony after two convictions. Currently, it is a
DWI seizure after your--I believe it is your second offense.
Maybe we should start looking at that on some first offense
basis. I mean, there are just lot of things that we can do.
If we work with our friends in the legislature, at State
government, with Governor Martinez, and really come up with
ways to make it less attractive in the first place in the
education standpoint, but also make the penalties on the back
side of the equation tougher, I think could be meaningful.
Senator Udall. Thanks, Mayor.
Chief?
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, a couple of things that come to
mind in regard to this issue are, some of these individuals who
are repeat offenders, they are going to continue to offend or
continue to drive drunk, if you will, unless we physically stop
them. And so, that is where my thoughts come behind, we need to
be very cognizant at the Federal, State, and local level to
ensure that we do not remove the element of enforcement in
regard to our fight against DWI.
Some of these individuals, we have seen them time and time
again. I arrested an individual several years back. He had 11
DWIs, and 12 did not matter. Thirteen would not have mattered
to this individual. The only thing that would have stopped this
individual is for the individual to be placed in jail, in
custody, incarcerated.
And so, yes, I would agree with the Mayor that we are doing
a lot of things that are very innovative here. I think as a
State, we have not lacked innovation or creativity in any of
these types of technologies, programs, funding, and so on and
so forth. But at the end of the day, if there is an individual
who decides to drive drunk, that individual has to be stopped,
and that is where it stops--with the law enforcement officer.
So, I would like to see that those people that are
continuously repeat offenders, that they are incarcerated and
that they are removed, because they are far too dangerous to
share the same roads that you and I and our families and
everyone in this audience and this community share. And they
need to be incarcerated.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Chief.
Ms. Ortiz. Mr. Chairman, I believe there has to be a
completely comprehensive approach. All of the things that we
have put in the toolbox, all those tools that have gone in
there have been more effective in reducing fatalities. And I
think that we always have to remember we want to keep our drunk
drivers off the road, but we want to make sure that we reduce
fatalities and injuries here in the State. And that
comprehensive approach is going to be so important.
We believe interlocks is such an important piece to that,
but it also comes to the seizures. You cannot prevent a
person--if a person has the ability to sign a waiver or some
kind of paper that they are not going to do that, that they
will not drive. We just do not believe that happens. We believe
that 50 to 75 percent of people still drive. So, we have to
somehow take the ability away.
And with the seizures, whether it is a second offense and
beyond, you are then creating some disincentive for that
person. There is a big loss there, and I think that that is a
really important part of it.
The judicial system, the adjudication process is so
important. We have been very innovative here in New Mexico and
have developed some laws that are just wonderful. If we can
make sure that we are implementing those laws and that people
are being held accountable, I think that is another way of
reducing that.
But I believe--truly believe that the DADSS program would
address this and save lives as well. And I think that is just a
very key and important piece to that puzzle.
Senator Udall. Great. Thank you.
Dr. Crandall?
Dr. Crandall. Senator Udall, I agree with my panel members
here that there be a comprehensive approach. And the way that I
think about it is needing to look at engineering solutions,
education solutions, as well as enforcement. And all three of
these need to work in concert. And there are opportunities at
each of these levels.
I think that the ignition interlock provides a very unique
opportunity to stop individuals who have been convicted of DWI.
However, there are many ways around the system, as has been
testified, and we need to strengthen that. And that is why I
think the passive detection system really needs to go another
step beyond that. If we can create systems that cannot be
subverted, then there is a great opportunity for preventing
individuals who are intoxicated from driving.
In terms of enforcement, I think that we--looking in terms
of correction at least, for individuals who are in the
correction system. Unfortunately our dollars are short. And
colleagues of mine who work on the Parole Board frequently
mention that individuals who are simply arrested and
incarcerated for DWI are not getting into treatment sessions;
that money is thin and services are thin, and individuals move
around in different facilities, and it is difficult to get them
in needed treatment while they are incarcerated. And once they
are removed or in the community, we really need an intensive
supervised probation, really have someone over them to provide
some measure of control.
And then finally, we need to continue on this education
theme and judicial education, making sure that J and S's
incorporate all the necessary components that will lead to
effective strategies, and continuing to really raise what I
think has ultimately been the most successful issue in New
Mexico, is that it is now an issue on our plates. We all
understand that this is an issue. We cannot let fall off.
As the number of deaths will go down, it may not be as high
on our radar screen, and so we have to remind everyone how
serious a problem this is.
Senator Udall. Thank you, all of you, for your answer on
that question.
I would like to ask Ms. Ortiz, Lora Lee, about the whole
issue of--you talk about a comprehensive approach. And, you
know, many advocate that laws like interlocks should only be
applicable to chronic or high BAC offenders. And yet studies
have shown the average drunk driver--this is an amazing
statistic--the average drunk driver has driven drunk 87 times
before the first arrest. What needs to be done to prevent drunk
driving by those that have never been arrested?
Ms. Ortiz. I think that we talked about the education piece
is a huge component, that high visibility law enforcement, and
letting people know that there will be a consequence, and then
consequently, holding them accountable when there is a
consequence. I think that is just a really important piece of
the factor, so that involves everything from the law
enforcement officer through that judicial process, through the
probationary period. And it really includes family members as
well, and that treatment piece that needs to come into play.
But in all honesty, the only way that you are going to
prevent it 100 percent is with some of these passive detection
systems that will protect all of us. And this DADSS program,
the technology that could take place as a result of that could
prevent--it could prevent it 100 percent. It could completely
eliminate drunk driving. And that is what we need to work
toward in figuring out how can we eliminate this, because with
as much education as we have done over the years, the
improvement is still there, but so many lives are still being
lost, and so many people are being injured.
It impacts the family. It impacts the community. It impacts
the workforce. It impacts the economy. And we just have to
continue to be innovative and think about what can we do
technology-wise to completely eliminate it.
Senator Udall. Great. Thank you.
Dr. Crandall, I cannot imagine how hard it must be for you
to work in the emergency room and know that every victim of
drunk driving you see is completely--it is a completely
preventable crash. And that must be a very, very difficult
situation.
Your testimony on the costs of drunk driving are
staggering. And as I pushed to get ROADS SAFE passed, I am
often asked about its cost and where the funding will come
from. And I just want to confirm from your testimony, each
alcohol-related crash fatality costs over a million dollars in
direct costs alone. So, if technology proves viable and
automakers make it available in cars at a 5-year program cost
to the government of $60 million, those funds would be more
than recouped and trauma costs averted. Is that correct? Am I
looking at that in the right way? And do those numbers make
sense to you?
Dr. Crandall. Yes, they do. In fact, we have to remember
that these are not just medical costs for, say, the intoxicated
individual. You have to consider all the other individuals who
are touched by the crash, other passengers or individuals in
other vehicles may sustain health care costs.
We spend a tremendous amount of fire and emergency medical
services response to motor vehicle crashes. We have a
significant law enforcement response. Investigation of time
that it takes out of individuals to dedicate to writing up
reports and testifying in court.
All of these add up to the costs. There are property costs
as well, property damages, court costs, and ultimately,
insurance costs.
So, there are a lot of potential opportunities for--to save
money, not just medical, but also a number of other sort of
personal costs. And then, of course, the other savings in terms
of having individuals who do not die, and their continued
productivity.
So, at least a million dollars is estimated to save, I
think, in direct costs alone. And so, if we can offset 60
deaths, then you would essentially pay for that $60 million.
Senator Udall. All right. Thank you.
Mayor Berry, one of the issues has to do with
transportation, and I know this is something that you have
looked at a lot and worked at. And I think the approach you
have talked about is clearly making a difference on saving
lives in Albuquerque.
I am wondering on the transportation front, if there are
more options for people to get to places, for example, taking
the bus, or opportunities to walk, those kinds of things, do
you think that would help reduce drunk driving? And what has
been your experience in that respect?
Mr. Berry. Well, Mr. Chairman, that is a topic of rather
frequent conversation in City Hall, and it has been for a
number of years. There have been a number of safe ride
programs, other initiatives put into place to try to address
that exact issue, with an end goal of ensuring that someone who
has been drinking does not get behind the wheel of a vehicle.
Some of those programs have been more successful than others.
Currently what we are doing at the City of Albuquerque--I
will tell you a little what we are doing currently and then
about some additional plans that we have with transportation in
general.
We have extended the hours on Central Avenue. Albuquerque
is a little unique in our transportation demographic. Almost
half of our ridership in Albuquerque is on the central
corridor, which is not necessarily normal for a city of our
size. So, we have this very highly-used corridor.
So, one of the things that we have done is we have extended
the hours of operation during the summer. And what we have done
on Central Avenue is we have taken route coverage to 12:30 a.m.
on Mondays through Saturdays from June through the end of the
State Fair. And what we have also done is we operate those
routes until 1:30 a.m. on Friday and Saturday evenings as well.
So, we are trying to give people more options.
One of the things we talked about for Albuquerque is the
next logical step for transportation, is bus rapid transit. And
as a Mayor, I believe that is a good option. We talked to the
Federal Transportation Administration, talked somewhat with
your staff, I believe, about some of these issues.
The more options we can put into place, the better we are
going to be for not just the overall transportation picture,
but to give people options. Couple that with walkability,
making sure that people get on foot from place to place, have
pedestrian--making sure we have pedestrian-friendly corridors.
Those are all things we can do, and we are continuing to reach
for those.
Senator Udall. Thank you. And I think all of us appreciate
you working on that and moving forward in that area.
Chief Williams, when you talked about law enforcement and
your approach to this, you mentioned in your testimony several
challenges that law enforcement faces. And you face challenges
in the apprehension end and the prosecution end. I wonder if
you have additional recommendations on that front.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, yes, sir. It all boils down to
a limited number of resources. And just let me provide you an
example, if you will.
In 2004, when I was a captain in the New Mexico State
Police, the State Police was authorized 604 officers, and they
had 605 officers. Today, 2011, 7 years later, they are at 490.
So, that is our entire State. That is the fifth largest State
geographically in the United States.
At the time in 2004, myself and actually the current Chief
of the State Police, we prepared a staffing study. We had gone
through the Staff and Command College through Northwestern
University where we learned how to do staffing studies. And we
conducted that staffing study, and we utilized different
variables, including geography, and population, and shift
rotations, and all of the things that are necessary to do that.
And we utilized some of the most conservative numbers that were
available to us. And at the time when we were completed with
that study, it said that the State police needed an additional
300+ on top of the 600 that they have--that they had.
And so, if that is the case, then and if really law
enforcement is our last line of defense, really quite honestly
that is what we are, we want that line to be a very formidable
line of defense. And I do not think we are there. I think the
budget and all the issues that have happened, the economy, have
taken its toll, not only on law enforcement. I would say it is
everywhere. But it has taken its toll in our correction system,
it has taken its toll in our courts, and it has certainly taken
its toll in law enforcement.
So, I would consider that limited number of resources--we
need to dedicate the number of resources to the problem to
impact it appropriately.
I drove up this morning. I left Las Cruces this morning,
and I saw two police officers, and they were on a billboard. I
saw no one else between Las Cruces and Albuquerque--230 miles.
Is that a formidable line of defense? I say no. So, I think
that we need to concentrate and really get those efforts--and
that is just one example. There are communities, there are
cities. And, you know, I feel very fortunate where we are at in
Las Cruces, but in some of the other areas, in the rural areas
of the State, they are not so lucky.
So, I would just ask that we focus in on placing the
resources where they need to be.
Senator Udall. Right. Well, this has been an excellent
panel, and I think it really demonstrates for me the fact that
all across the board we need to tackle this problem, to be
vigilant, to keep up the pressure, and that we are doing it at
the local level and the State level. And clearly, there need to
be improvements if you--as you have just said, Chief. I mean,
it is unacceptable to drop from a level of 605 to 490. I mean,
the problem is still out there, and it needs to be tackled.
So, we appreciate all of your efforts. We appreciate MADD
and Dr. Crandall, where our heart goes out to these ER docs who
are in the situation like you are on an every day basis, having
to deal with the devastation that has been wrought by drunk
drivers.
So, with that, we are going to move to our third panel.
Thank you very much. Very much appreciate the testimony. And
any additional thoughts you have in writing, we are happy to
hear.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks, Chief.
OK. As we switch over here, the last panel today includes:
Dr. Sue Ferguson, the Program Manager for Driver Alcohol
Detection System for Safety, Automotive Coalition for Traffic
Safety; and David Culver, the Vice President of Government
Affairs for the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States.
Why don't you--Sue, why don't you go ahead and start off
with your testimony, and we will move the way we did on the
other panels? Thank you for being here.
STATEMENT OF SUSAN FERGUSON, Ph.D.,
PROGRAM MANAGER, DRIVER ALCOHOL DETECTION SYSTEM
FOR SAFETY, AUTOMOTIVE COALITION FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY
Dr. Ferguson. Thank you, Senator Udall, for hosting this
hearing and for your continued leadership on drunk driving
prevention, particularly on the advanced alcohol detection
system for safety.
Senator Udall. Maybe move that microphone just a little
closer to you.
Dr. Ferguson. OK.
Senator Udall. Yes, that will be good.
Dr. Ferguson. Particularly on the advanced alcohol
detection research program known as DADSS, which I am here to
describe. I am the Program Manager for this exciting activity
which is making substantial progress.
Your ROADS SAFE legislation, which would provide increased
long-term funding for DADSS, is essential for the long-term
success of this research program.
We are pleased to see that your measures included in safety
legislation, introduced recently by Senator Pryor of Arkansas,
your Committee Chairman, Senator Rockefeller, and others.
Chairman Rockefeller's continued support of the measure and the
DADSS program is heartening, as is the support of Secretary
LaHood and NHTSA Administrator Strickland.
The driver alcohol detection system for safety is a
research partnership between the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration and the Automotive Coalition for Traffic
Safety, that is developing technologies to prevent vehicles
from being driven when a driver's blood alcohol concentration
is at or above .08 percent, which is currently the legal limit
throughout the United States.
At the end of this five-year initiative in the second half
of 2013, there will be one or more promising research vehicles
available to demonstrate promising alcohol detection
technologies.
The starting point for DADSS is a strong conviction for in-
vehicle alcohol detection technologies to be acceptable to
drivers, many of whom do not drink, let alone drink and drive.
They must be non-obtrusive; that is, accurate, fast, and
reliable. They must be durable, and they must require little or
no maintenance.
To ensure that sober drivers who are under the legal limit
will be inconvenienced, ACTS has developed stringent DADSS
performance requirements, stipulating very high levels of
accuracy and precision and very fast measurement times, less
than half a second.
DADSS devices will be required to meet the exacting
standards for in-vehicle use required by automakers, such as
long-term reliability, maintainability, and durability, and
must be compatible for mass production at a moderate price. And
as we have designed this program and looked for certain
technologies, we have taken these aspects into account.
Two technologies have been investigated. One is a touch-
based approach, allowing assessment of alcohol in human tissue,
and a breath-based approach that allows assessment of alcohol
concentration in the driver's exhaled breath.
Phase I of the DADSS program is now complete, and we tested
three proof-of-principle prototypes. We have done bench testing
that has determined the prototype's accuracy, precision, and
speed of measurement, and identified what additional
development might be needed.
Limited human subject testing that has been conducted with
the Harvard Medical School, allowed us to establish the
relationship of blood and breath samples from the subjects with
measurements from the prototype devices. Based on this testing,
it was concluded that both touch-based and breath-based sensors
have the potential in the next phase of development to measure
BAC very quickly and with high levels of accuracy and
precision.
Phase II will go beyond proof-of-concept devices to develop
and demonstrate an in-vehicle system, and that will be
forthcoming in the next few months.
Although impressive progress has been made to date,
significant additional development is needed. The technology
developers have proposed modifications to the sensors that will
enable them to meet the DADSS specifications at the end of
Phase II. Accuracy and precision performance has to improve and
measurement time has to decrease to meet or exceed performance
specifications.
For touch-base technology, a sensor redesign is needed to
meet the rigors of the vehicle environment. For breath-based
technology, additional sensor development is needed, and
optimal vehicle sensor locations will be identified based on
human breath aerodynamics in the vehicle across a wide range of
environmental conditions. All of these technical challenges can
be met with the additional development planned for Phase II.
Consumer willingness to buy DADSS-equipped vehicles will
come about only if the public concerns are taken into account
during the development process. ACTS has begun that process
with a series of focus groups around the United States,
including one set here in Albuquerque, New Mexico. And these
opinions will influence development of the technology. In 2012,
a broader understanding of consumer sentiment will be sought
through a national survey of drivers.
While impressive progress has been made to date, the
successful culmination of efforts to develop non-invasive in-
vehicle alcohol detection technologies will depend on continued
and accelerated funding of the DADSS program. The technologies
must meet a very demanding set of performance requirements for
in-vehicle acceptability, and research vehicles need to undergo
extensive field testing.
We need to understand how drivers will interact with these
systems, and extensive human subject testing will be needed to
measure performance under a wide variety of conditions.
As many have already said, the benefits of a successful
DADSS program should not be underestimated. DADSS integrated
within the vehicle has the potential to save up to 8,000 lives
per year, eliminating the deaths and injuries caused by
alcohol-impaired driving for generations to come.
Once again, Senator, thanks for the opportunity to speak at
this hearing today. I would be glad to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Ferguson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Susan Ferguson, Ph.D., Program Manager, Driver
Alcohol Detection System for Safety, Automotive Coalition for Traffic
Safety
Thank you, Senator Udall, for the opportunity to speak at this
hearing and thank you for your continued leadership on drunk driving
prevention, particularly on the advanced alcohol detection research
program, known as DADSS, which I am here to describe.
In 2009, close to 11,000 people died on the Nation's highways and
hundreds of thousands more were injured because of alcohol-impaired
drivers. Although these numbers have been gradually coming down, the
loss of so many lives every year is unacceptable. Strong DUI laws and
enforcement of those laws can help to deter people from driving while
over the legal limit, but we know that in spite of the best efforts of
law enforcement and the judicial system, many millions of drivers will
continue to drive when impaired by alcohol, and thousands of deaths and
injuries will continue to occur every year. The solution to this
problem is to develop vehicles that will prevent alcohol-impaired
drivers from operating their vehicle.
In 2008, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
and the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS) began a five-
year, $10 million initiative, known as the Driver Alcohol Detection
System for Safety (DADSS) Program, to explore the feasibility, the
potential benefits of, and the public policy challenges associated with
a more widespread use of non-invasive technology to prevent alcohol-
impaired driving. This research and development effort is funded
jointly by NHTSA and most of the world's leading automakers (BMW,
Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai/Kia, Jaguar Land Rover,
Mazda, Mercedes Benz, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen,
and Volvo). The DADSS program is developing technologies that would
prevent the vehicle from being driven when the device registers that
the driver's blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is at 0.08 percent or
above (the legal limit throughout the United States). This is a data-
driven, scientific research program, with the technologies to be
demonstrated in one or more research vehicles by the second half of
2013. As we move forward with this technology and demonstrate its
effectiveness, the research has suggested the American public will want
to voluntarily adopt the technology in their vehicles.
The starting point for DADSS is a strong conviction that for in-
vehicle alcohol detection technologies to be acceptable for widespread
use among drivers, many of whom do not drink and drive, it must be
seamless with the driving task; it must be non-intrusive, that is,
accurate, fast, reliable, durable, and require little or no
maintenance. Sober drivers who are under the legal limit of 0.08
percent should not be inconvenienced with such systems. This requires
that the performance requirements be extremely stringent.
The DADSS Program
In 2007, ACTS formed a Blue Ribbon Panel of experts including
representatives from automotive manufacturers and suppliers, public
interest organizations, government representatives both domestic and
international, and experts in the science of alcohol toxicology,
behavioral impairment, human factors, and research, to advise the DADSS
program on technical and policy issues. The DADSS program then
undertook a comprehensive review of emerging and existing state-of-the-
art technologies for alcohol detection, and the development of
performance specifications. A Request For Information (RFI) was
published as a means by which the DADSS program was first communicated
to potential vendors. The goal of the RFI was to establish the level of
interest among technology developers in taking part in the research,
the kinds of technologies available, and their states of development
relevant to in-vehicle application. Based on an evaluation of the 17
responses received, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was sent to eight
organizations with prior experience in alcohol detection or related
technologies. Subsequent to a detailed and rigorous evaluation process,
three contracts were awarded for the development of Phase I proof-
of principle prototypes.
Two approaches were identified for Phase I development as having
considerable promise in measuring driver BAC non-invasively: (1) Tissue
Spectrometry, a touch-based approach allowing assessment of alcohol in
human tissue, and (2) Distant Spectrometry, a breath-based approach
allowing assessment of alcohol concentration in the driver's exhaled
breath. In the touch-based approach, measurement begins by shining an
infrared light on the user's skin (similar to a low-power flashlight).
A portion of the light scatters several millimeters through the user's
skin before returning back to the skin's surface where it is collected
by an optical touch pad. This light contains information on the
tissue's unique chemical properties which can be analyzed to determine
the tissue alcohol concentration. The breath-based approach makes it
possible to perform a contact-free, quick, unobtrusive measurement of
the driver's breath alcohol by using the concentration of carbon
dioxide as a measure of dilution of the driver's exhaled breath.
Multiple sensors placed in the vehicle cabin will allow the system to
ensure that the breath sample is from the driver and not other
passengers.
Demanding Performance Standards
Performance standards for in-vehicle alcohol detection devices must
be much more rigorous than current alcohol-testing technologies if they
are not to inconvenience drivers. To that end, ACTS has developed
extremely stringent performance specifications.\1\ Requirements for
very high levels of accuracy and precision and very fast measurement
times (less than half a second) will ensure that drivers who are under
the legal limit will not be inconvenienced. We continue to address
long-term reliability and system maintenance requirements, the
influences of vehicle environment, and issues related to user
acceptance, and the technologies must meet the exacting standards for
in-vehicle use adopted by automakers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The performance specifications with definitions, measurement
requirements, and acceptable performance levels are provided in the
DADSS Subsystem Performance Specification Document (http://
dev.dadss.org/performance-specification/download).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To validate the performance of the Phase I prototypes, unique
standard calibration devices (SCDs) were developed by ACTS for both the
breath- and touch-based systems. These SCDs go well beyond current
alcohol-testing specifications. Two different SCDs were developed for
prototype testing; one breath-based and one touch-based. There are two
aspects that were addressed. First, samples of simulated ``breath'' and
``tissue'' were developed to provide a calibrated alcohol concentration
in vapor and/or liquid to the prototype. These samples provide close
facsimiles of human breath and tissue and must exceed the DADSS
specifications by an order of magnitude. Next, hardware was developed
to deliver the breath-based and touch-based samples to the prototypes
for blood alcohol measurement. The SCDs that were developed met the
needs for Phase I testing, but additional work is required in order to
undertake Phase II testing. Specifically, advances need to be made both
in the accuracy and precision of the breath-based and touch-based
samples, and refinements are needed for the delivery systems.
Phase I Effort Completed
The Phase I effort, now complete, focused on the development of
working proof-ofprinciple prototypes capable of rapidly and accurately
measuring the driver's BAC non-intrusively. The prototypes, which were
required to address just the accuracy, precision, and speed of
measurement specifications, did not attempt to simulate the visual
appearance, choice of materials or intended manufacturing process. The
overall aim was to validate the potential design approach, as well as
point to areas where further development and testing may be necessary.
Three Phase I proof-of-principle prototype devices were delivered in
mid 2010 and were tested at the laboratories of QinetiQ North America.
The testing program was designed to determine whether the devices
demonstrate the potential to meet the stringent performance
specifications established for non-invasive alcohol testing. Bench
testing was undertaken to determine the prototypes' accuracy,
precision, and speed of measurement, and to identify what additional
development might be needed. Limited human subject testing, conducted
with the Harvard Medical School, permitted an understanding of the
relationship among the various measures of blood alcohol provided
through blood and breath samples, and those provided by the breath-
based and touch-based prototype devices.
Based on the results of prototype testing, sensors demonstrating
both the touch-based approach and breath-based approach are judged to
have the potential in Phase II development to measure BAC quickly, and
with high levels of accuracy and precision. Currently one of each of
the breath-based and touch-based devices have come close to meeting
accuracy requirements, but have fallen short on precision measurements.
Significant additional development is needed, but the developers have
identified potential modifications to the devices that will enable them
to meet the DADSS specifications at the end of the Phase II
development.
Phase II Program
Phase II is the major development effort that will lead to one or
more research vehicles to demonstrate the technologies. The Phase II
program is envisaged to span approximately 2 years and will include
only those technologies that have successfully completed Phase I. It is
anticipated that Phase II development will begin in the fourth quarter
of 2011.
Although impressive progress has been made to date, as technology
development continues into Phase II there are many different facets of
performance that need to be addressed to prepare the technology for in-
vehicle use. Accuracy and precision have to improve, and measurement
time has to decrease to meet or exceed performance specifications. With
respect to touch-based technology, a sensor redesign using solid state
components is planned to meet the rigors of the in-vehicle environment.
This requires a new approach both for the sensor architecture and for
the algorithms used to estimate tissue alcohol concentration. For the
breath-based technology, sensor development needs to be accelerated to
improve accuracy and precision, and optimal vehicle sensor locations
need to be identified based on in-vehicle human breath aerodynamics,
across a wide variety of environmental conditions. Revised prototype
designs have been proposed to address vehicle integration and consumer
affordability. Both breath-based and touch-based sensors will need to
meet the exacting standards automakers require for all new vehicle
safety equipment. The development of standard calibration devices
required to test the Phase II sensors is ongoing and significant
improvements will need to be made to ensure sensors meet the exacting
DADSS requirements.
These technical challenges can be met with the additional
development planned in Phase II.
Consumer Feedback to the Design Process
As technology development progresses and decisions are being made
about best practices for integrating such technology into vehicles,
researchers are soliciting public opinions about the proposed in-
vehicle alcohol detection devices. Consumer willingness to deploy the
technology in their vehicles will depend on how public attitudes are
taken into account during the development process. The failed adoption
of seat belt ignition interlocks in the 1970s taught us the need to
understand in advance the issues and concerns of the driving public.
DADSS has been conducting focus group testing around the United States
to gauge public perceptions and concerns about the different technology
approaches, and these opinions will influence development of the
technology. In the coming years a broader understanding of consumer
sentiment will be sought through a national survey of drivers.
DADSS Will Make a Difference
The technical and public policy challenges are substantial, but the
potential benefits to society of in-vehicle alcohol detection systems
are compelling. DADSS has the potential to save up to 8,000 lives per
year (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 2010),\2\ and there is
evidence that the public is ready for in-vehicle devices to combat
alcohol-impaired driving. Two-thirds of drivers say they consider the
use of advanced technology to keep alcohol-impaired drivers off the
roads to be a ``good'' or ``very good'' idea.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. 2011 http://
www.iihs.org/research/fatality_
facts_2009/alcohol.html. Accessed August 1, 2011.
\3\ McCartt, A. T., Wells, J. K., Teoh, E. R. 2010. Attitudes
toward in-vehicle advanced alcohol detection technology. Traffic Injury
Prevention, 11, 158-164.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While impressive progress has already been made, there is much more
to be done before this research is ready for consumer application. S.
510 (ROADS SAFE Act of 2011) will help accelerate this effort and open
the door to a future where alcohol-impaired driving fatalities are a
rarity versus the chronic traffic safety problem it remains today.
The benefits of a successful DADSS Program should not be
underestimated. We are on the cusp of being able to eliminate the
deaths and injuries caused by alcohol-impaired driving for generations
to come.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much.
Mr. Culver, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF DAVID A. CULVER, VICE PRESIDENT,
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, DISTILLED SPIRITS COUNCIL
OF THE UNITED STATES
Mr. Culver. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. My name is David
Culver, and I am Vice President of Government Affairs for the
Distilled Spirits Council of the United States. DISCUS is a
national trade association representing America's leading
distillers that produce or market nearly 70 percent of all
distilled spirits brands sold in this country.
It is an honor today to recognize our newest craft
distiller affiliate member, Mr. Colin Keegan from Santa Fe
Spirits, who I am pleased is able to be with us here.
On behalf of DISCUS, I appreciate the opportunity to speak
today on the topic of drunk driving. I do not claim to be an
expert on all aspects of this topic, but I have had extensive
experience working on Federal anti-drunk driving issues during
my tenure at DISCUS.
Specialists at our sister organization, The Century
Council, have spent careers working to prevent and combat drunk
driver, and their work is a part of our social responsibility
policies. The Century Council is an independent not-for-profit
organization funded by many of the same companies that fund
DISCUS, and was founded 20 years ago to develop and implement
programs that fight drunk driving and under-age drinking.
For over 75 years, the Distilled Spirits Council has been
committed to the elimination of drunk driving through education
programs and the enactment of comprehensive drunk driving laws.
Through The Century Council, the spirits industry also has
worked in partnership with law enforcement and the judicial
community to target hardcore drunk drivers, those with a BAC of
.15 or above and repeat DWI offenders.
These initiatives include stricter penalties for hardcore
drunk drivers and resources and developing programs that focus
on these drivers, who are the source of a disproportionate
share of highway crashes.
Last year, Mr. Chairman, you took another positive step in
the fight against drunk driving by introducing the ROADS SAFE
Act. DISCUS commends you for your effort, and we are pleased to
reiterate our support for this important legislation. The bill
provides funding for research to develop in-car alcohol
detection technology, and would be a voluntary option for
automobile purchasers, and would be set at the .08 BAC limit.
We also support the objectives that this technology be highly
accurate, moderately priced, and unobtrusive to the responsible
driver.
DISCUS will once again urge Congress to act swiftly and
pass the current legislation, the ROADS SAFE Act of 2011.
Prior to introducing the ROADS SAFE Act, all stakeholders
were given the opportunity to share their thoughts on the
legislation with your staff. They provided a clear explanation
of the bill and its objectives, and addressed our concerns
about the import of this legislation, which are summarized
below.
First, there was unease that the purpose of the driver
alcohol detection system for safety, DADSS program, was to
develop technology that would be mandatory in all cars. Some
participants of the DADSS program envisioned a mandatory device
at some time in the future, but it is not the stated objective
of the program or the research. DISCUS does not support
mandating installation of these devices in all cars, nor does
the bill have this requirement. MADD, a strong proponent of
this legislation, also underscored that this technology,
``would be an optional safety feature on new cars, not mandated
on all vehicles,'' in its March 21, 2011 press statement
applauding introduction of the ROADS SAFE Act.
Second, there was a question whether interlock devices
would be set a level lower than the .08 BAC legal limit. In
response, your staff stated that interlocks will not be widely
accepted if they are set below this legal limit, and provided
assurances to address these concerns. Our support for this
legislation hinges on the requirement that the device be
accurately calibrated at the .08 BAC legal limit. MADD also
emphasized in its March 21 press statement that, ``The
technology would be set at .08 BAC, not lower.''
Third, the bill states that the driver alcohol detection
system should be accurate at other BAC levels ``as may be
established by applicable Federal, State, or local law.'' Your
staff has repeatedly assured DISCUS that this provision is
intended to account for the current Federal .04 BAC limit for
commercial drivers, and zero tolerance limits established by
States for individuals under the legal drinking age.
Opponents of the bill see ambiguity in this provision and
worry that it is a clear indicator that the device could be set
at levels below the .08 BAC legal limit. While DISCUS does not
share that view, we do respectfully suggest that the Committee
consider ways to tighten up and amend the language of this
provision to reflect your true intentions.
With this information in hand, the decision for DISCUS to
support this bill was not difficult. In sum, the bill provides
funding needed for research to develop in-car alcohol detection
technology that would be a voluntary option for new car buyers,
and would be set at the .08 BAC legal limit.
We appreciate the opportunity to convey our views and look
forward to working with you on the passage of this bill.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Culver follows:]
Prepared Statement of David A. Culver, Vice President,
Government Affairs, Distilled Spirits Council of the United States
Senator Udall and members of the Committee, my name is David Culver
and I am Vice President of Government Affairs for the Distilled Spirits
Council of the United States (DISCUS). DISCUS is a national trade
association representing America's leading distillers that produce or
market nearly 70 percent of all distilled spirits brands sold in this
country. Over the years, DISCUS has served as the distillers' voice on
public policy and legislative issues in our Nation's capital, state
capitals and foreign capitals worldwide. Our members include Bacardi
USA, Beam Global, Brown-Forman, Constellation Brands, Diageo, Florida
Caribbean Distillers, Luxco, Moet Hennessy USA, Patron Spirits Company,
Pernod Ricard USA, Remy Cointreau, Sidney Frank Importing Company, and
a group of 40 craft distiller affiliate members from across the
country. It is an honor to recognize our newest craft distiller member,
Mr. Colin Keegan from Santa Fe Spirits, who I am pleased is able to
join us today.
On behalf of DISCUS, I appreciate the opportunity to speak today on
the topic of drunk driving. I do not claim to be an expert on all
aspects of this topic, but I have had extensive experience working on
Federal anti-drunk driving issues during my tenure at DISCUS.
Specialists at our sister organization, The Century Council, have spent
careers working to prevent and combat drunk driving and their work is
part of our social responsibility policies. The Century Council is an
independent not-for-profit organization funded by many of the same
companies that fund DISCUS and was founded 20 years ago to develop and
implement programs that fight drunk driving and underage drinking.
These programs have been launched across the Nation bringing them to
millions of parents, youth, educators, law enforcement officials, and
traffic safety professionals.
For over 75 years, the Distilled Spirits Council has been committed
to the elimination of drunk driving through education programs and the
enactment of comprehensive drunk driving laws. Our history of
responsibility includes anti-drunk driving PSA's dating back to the
1930s, funding the development of a breathalyzer in the 1940s, serving
on the Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving in the early 80s, and
co-sponsoring with the Department of Transportation the highly
successful ``Friends Don't Let Friends Drive Drunk'' public service
campaign in the 1980s that continues today. In addition, in 2001,
DISCUS and The Century Council forged a coalition with the Mothers
Against Drunk Driving (MADD) in support of a .08 BAC level coupled with
comprehensive drunk driving measures.
Through The Century Council, the spirits industry also has worked
in partnership with law enforcement and the judicial community to
target hardcore drunk drivers--those with a BAC of .15 or above and
repeat DWI offenders. These initiatives include stricter penalties for
hardcore drunk drivers and resources in developing programs to focus on
these drivers who are the source of a disproportionate share of highway
crashes. Distillers are proud of our longstanding commitment to social
responsibility and will continue to lead the way in preventing and
combating drunk driving.
Last year, Senator, you took another positive step in the fight
against drunk driving by introducing the ROADS SAFE Act. DISCUS
commends you for your efforts and we are pleased to reiterate our
support for this important legislation. The bill provides funding for
research to develop in-car alcohol detection technology that would be a
voluntary option for automobile purchasers and would be set at the .08
BAC limit. We also support the objectives that this technology be
highly accurate, moderately priced and unobtrusive to the responsible
driver. DISCUS will, once again, urge Congress to act swiftly and pass
the current legislation, the ROADS SAFE Act of 2011.
Prior to introducing the ROADS SAFE Act, all stakeholders were
given the opportunity to share their thoughts on the legislation with
your staff. DISCUS and our industry colleagues were grateful for this
opportunity. Your staff provided a clear explanation of the bill and
its objectives, and addressed our concerns about the import of this
legislation, which are summarized below.
First, there was unease that the purpose of the Driver Alcohol
Detection System for Safety (DADSS) program was to develop technology
that would be mandatory in all new cars. It is known that some
participants of the DADSS program envision a mandatory device at
sometime in the future, but that is not the stated objective of the
program or the research. DISCUS does not support mandating the
installation of these devices in all cars, nor does the bill have this
requirement. MADD, a strong proponent of this legislation, also
underscored that this technology ``would be an optional safety feature
on new cars, not mandated on all vehicles'' in its March 21, 2011 press
statement applauding the introduction of the ROADS SAFE Act.
Interlock devices should be an option for people when they purchase
a new car, not a government-required feature in every car. After all,
nearly 40 percent of the adults in the United States do not even drink
alcohol and the overwhelming majority of those adults who choose to
drink do so responsibly.
Second, there was a question whether interlock devices would be set
at a level lower than the .08 BAC legal limit. In response, your staff
stated that interlocks will not be widely accepted if they are set
below this legal limit, and provided assurances to address these
concerns. Our support for this legislation hinges on the requirement
that the device be accurately calibrated at the .08 BAC legal limit.
MADD also emphasized in its March 21 press statement that ``the
technology would be set at .08 BAC, not lower.''
Third, the bill states that the driver alcohol detection system
should be accurate at other BAC levels ``as may be established by
applicable Federal, state or local law.'' Your staff has repeatedly
assured DISCUS that this provision is intended to account for the
current Federal 0.04 BAC limit for commercial drivers and zero
tolerance limits established by states for individuals under the legal
drinking age. Opponents of the bill see ambiguity in this provision and
worry that it is a clear indicator that the device could be set at
levels below the .08 BAC legal limit. While DISCUS does not share that
view, we do respectfully suggest that the Committee consider ways to
tighten up and amend the language of this provision to reflect your
true intentions.
With this information in hand, the decision for DISCUS to support
this bill was not difficult. In sum, the bill provides funding needed
for research to develop in-car alcohol detection technology that would
be a voluntary option for new car buyers and would be set at the .08
BAC legal limit.
All sectors of the distilled spirits industry--from suppliers to
wholesalers to retailers--share the common objective of preventing
drunk driving. We have been gratified to note that progress has been
made in fighting drunk driving, but we all know more needs to be done.
DISCUS thanks you for your commitment to this issue and we will look
forward to helping you enact the ROADS SAFE Act during this Congress.
Thank you for allowing me to speak on behalf of the Distilled Spirits
Council at today's hearing.
Senator Udall. Thank you. Thank you, both of you, very much
for your testimony.
Mr. Culver, DISCUS and The Century Council have been key to
moving forward with ROADS SAFE. And I am also pleased to see
industry support broadening to include the Wine and Spirits
Wholesalers and the National Beer Wholesalers Association.
Their support is in part due to the efforts of DISCUS and The
Century Council and your members in helping to combat the
misinformation that has been spread by opponents.
Can you explain further on the importance of industry
supporting ROADS SAFE and the DADSS research program?
Mr. Culver. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that question.
First, I'll start with saying that all sectors of the
beverage alcohol industry are vehemently opposed to drunk
driving. This is a commitment that the industry shared for
decades. We also have a long-standing commitment to research,
and DISCUS in fact can trace our commitment back to the 1940s
when we helped fund the development of breathalyzer.
But with regards to the ROADS SAFE Act, your staff has done
an excellent job explaining to the industry what this bill does
do and what it does not do. And it has been key to our decision
to support this bill. They made it very clear to us that the
bill would fund the research for ignition interlock technology,
that the bill would be--that the device would be voluntary--a
voluntary option on new vehicles, and that it would be set at
the .08 BAC legal limit. We support all of these points.
And I should also mention that we believe that the bill
respects the rights of the responsible social drinker, while
keeping the focus on keeping drunk drivers off the roads. So,
it is for these reasons that I think DISCUS and others in the
industry have decided to support this bill.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Ms. Ferguson, opponents to ROADS SAFE legislation have
frequently compared the technology being developed to an
ignition interlock, and have stated false claims about the
accuracy and reliability of this new technology. Can you go
into a little more detail into accuracy and reliability of the
new system?
Dr. Ferguson. Certainly, Mr. Chairman. You know, when we
began thinking about DADSS and what would DADSS look like, it
was clear to us that it was quite a different technology than
ignition interlock in so many ways. And we understood that in
order for such a technology to succeed, that it really did have
to be unobtrusive and visible, if you like, to the sober
driver.
And so, when we first began this effort and ACTS pulled
together the Blue Ribbon panel of experts, we used some of our
experts to try and put together a very rigorous set of
performance requirements, and we have posted those on our
website.
So, what we were particularly focusing on is a technology
that would be very accurate, very precise, very quick, but also
would be able to perform in a vehicle in a manner that you
would want, like every other safety equipment would have to be
reliable, and durable, maintenance free, so that in no way was
it going to inconvenience the driver.
And when it comes to accuracy and precision, we actually
adopted a standard that is more than 10 times greater than the
current standard for alcohol-related testing devices, and so
much so that we actually are in the process of developing our
own testing equipment because there is not even any equipment
out there that can test the levels of accuracy and precision
that we are requiring.
The other aspect, obviously we have set the time it has to
measure within less than half a second, which basically means
that it is the same as it today. The amount of time you take
when you get in your vehicle today for the vehicle to decide
that it is OK for you to start it. There is some technology in
there that is part of the theft reduction that actually does a
quick test to make sure it is OK. And we have decided that that
less than half a second is the standard that we are going to
use.
Beyond that, when it comes to in-vehicle equipment, we have
adopted the very stringent standards of the automobile
industry, and we are using a six sigma process for reliability.
In other words, there is a 99.99966 percent chance that that
component will be defective, and that is absolutely the highest
standard in the industry, and we are requiring that as well.
So, we have taken many steps to make sure that this
technology will be highly accurate, reliable, and durable, and
will not inconvenience the sober driver.
Senator Udall. The program is currently, Ms. Ferguson,
entering Phase II and has a way to go before it can even be
considered for vehicle deployment. Can you talk a little
further about how you see the technology being implemented in
the future? Would it be sold as an option in vehicles, perhaps
for parents wanting to ensure their child does not drive drunk?
Dr. Ferguson. Well, from the beginning, we have always said
that this is a voluntary, not mandatory, program. And it is
interesting really. I have been in the highway safety field for
20 years, and in that time we have seen massive, I think,
implementation of all kinds of safety technology that involves
sensors in the vehicle. And we see DADSS sensor as another kind
of sensor in the vehicle.
I think it is important to understand it in that way. But
as we implement it, as manufacturers implement safety
technology, it is typically done as an option that people can
buy for their vehicle.
As we have been talking to people around the country and
asking them about their concerns, one of the things that they
have expressed, particularly parents obviously, is that they
would like to have this technology to be available when their
children reach teenage years. And I have to say I am a parent,
and when my daughter was a teenager, she had all sorts of
restrictions that nobody else had. But I would have loved this
kind of technology. And I am hoping that 1 day I will be a
grandmother, and certainly by the time my grandchildren are old
enough to drive, that this technology will be available.
We are doing a lot of the research in the field, both the
focus groups and we will be doing national surveys and
additional focus groups, because we want to be sure that
everybody's concerns are met, so that when this technology
finally has been developed and is available in vehicles, it
meets all of those concerns that people have. And they will
voluntarily want to adopt this in their own vehicle.
Senator Udall. Great. I have a couple of concluding
remarks, but I first just want to thank both of you. And I know
you had to sit through the other panels. We very much
appreciate that. And we hope you learned a little bit also from
their testimony. But thank you for being here today, and to
thank everybody else that is here in the audience.
I think it is clear from these three panels we have made
progress, but we still have a lot to do, no doubt about it. And
one of the best things, I think, we could do is to enact ROADS
SAFE and ignition interlock laws on a nationwide basis. We
clearly, as the panels have urged here, need continued
awareness and enforcement campaigns.
And Dean Washburn, You are still here. I wanted to mention
these new programs that are out, that are innovating here at
the law school, you have a program called the DWI/domestic
violence prosecution in practice class. The reason I came to
the University of New Mexico was because I wanted to see how
law came to life. And I think you have one of the best, if not
the top, clinical law programs in the country, and one of
that--one of those clinical law components is focusing on DWI
prosecution, so students have the opportunity, which I did as a
law student here, to go through that and to be able to see what
is going on, experience the court system, and represent the
State of New Mexico. So, thank you. Thank you for that.
And I think it is clear, you know, we will get to a day
when we can get in our car and know that our drive home is
safe, and we will no longer need to fear that a drunk driver
may alter our lives or the lives of our families. And we want
that to happen.
And I want to just thank all the advocates and others that
are here for their tireless efforts. And I also want to thank
the Committee, Chairman Rockefeller, and Ranking Member Kay
Bailey Hutchison, for their support. They--in Washington we
have done hearings on this issue in a number of different
contexts, and both of them have been very supportive as well as
other committee members.
And we have a very capable staff member here with us, Alex
Hoehn-Saric. He joined us today from Washington. He is working
hard with Chairman Rockefeller to ensure that combating drunk
driving remains a priority in the next surface transportation
reauthorization bill, and that the resources we need are
available and in that bill.
And then finally, just let me remind all of you that the
record will remain open until August 19. We welcome your
written testimony. You can submit it to us today or at my
Albuquerque office, or e-mail it directly to the Committee.
And so, with that, we wish you a very, very good day. And
the Committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:16 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Alvarado Sober Living House
Albuquerque, NM, 17 August 2011
To: Senator Tom Udall ([email protected])
cc: U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Attn: Alexander D. Hoehn-Saric, Senior Counsel
From: J. Steven Richards, House Manager
Re: Written Testimony regarding Drunk Driving subcommittee hearing,
Albuquerque, NM, August 10, 2011
Senator Udall:
I am writing this letter and submitting my testimony to the Drunk
Driving subcommittee hearing pursuant to our conversation in
Albuquerque following the hearing on August 10, 2011.
My qualifications to provide testimony are greater than the average
member of the general public. I am a treatment/rehabilitation
professional, have a Paralegal Studies AAS degree with criminal
litigation specialty, am currently a last semester senior about to get
a BA in Psychology, will be pursuing a dual masters degree (Social Work
and Business Administration), am a professional journalist, and also am
an alcoholic/addict in recovery who has experienced the legal system as
an offender. I feel that this rather unique combination of experience
and education gives me a well-rounded perspective on the subject
matter.
I found the hearing and testimony very informative as well as
encouraging. The vast majority of testimony I heard I agree with
wholeheartedly. I would like to emphasize that I do not support
incarcerating first-time offenders except in the most heinous of
circumstances.
It has been proven that rehabilitation and treatment in combination
with either alternative sentencing options or offender reentry is an
effective way to deal with first-time substance abuse offenders--
effective in terms of both results and cost-effectiveness.\1\ DUI and
Drug Courts also have proven to be very effective ways of dealing with
alcohol/substance abuse offenders, with astoundingly low recidivism/
relapse rates for participating offenders.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Valentine, D. C., Albers, N. A., Huebner, B., and Department of
Criminology and Criminal Justice, U. o.-S. (2006, June 30). Alternative
Sentencing & Strategies for Successful Prisoner Reentry. Retrieved
August 17, 2011, from University of Missouri System: https://mospace.
umsystem.edu/xmlui/handle/10355/2597.
\2\ Roman, J., Townsend, W., & Avinash Singh Bahti, P. (2003,
July). Recidivism Rates for Drug Court Graduates: Nationally Based
Estimates, Final Report. Retrieved August 17, 2011, from National
Criminal Justice Reference Service: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/
201229.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The testimony of importance I provide is in order to point out a
big gap--a weakness in the system that leads many to relapse and re-
offend. That gap is in what happens to a substance use offender after
they are discharged from the system, whether it be from incarceration,
probation/parole, DUI/Drug Court, treatment, or rehabilitation.
This is a very crucial period, one which often makes or breaks
those in early recovery--a period that often determines if the ex-
offender is able to successfully become established in long-term
recovery.
If they return to their pre-incarceration/pre-recovery environment
(living and working situation), it often spells disaster. The ex-
offender in early recovery needs a living, working, and social
environment conducive to staying clean and sober. If they go back to a
dysfunctional home or work environment, especially one in which
alcohol/drug use is still taking place, it is next to impossible for
them to maintain their recovery. Supportive living/housing environments
(such as those found in Sober Living or Halfway Houses) and supportive
employment counseling & services (or training/education) can be crucial
to the recovery of such ex-offenders.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Kedia, S. (2005). Treatment Effectiveness for Repeat DUI
Offenders in Tennessee (2003-2004). Retrieved August 17, 2011, from The
University of Memphis: Institute for Substance Abuse Treatment
Evaluation: http://isate.memphis.edu/Reports/ADAT-03-04.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In New Mexico, if not nationally, Halfway and Sober Living Houses--
with the exception of those receiving governmental funding--operate
with no functional external oversight. This leaves such facilities ripe
for ownership/management dysfunctionality and corruption, placing ex-
offender residents at high risk of relapse and recidivism. Fly-by-night
operations abound, and respectable effective sober living facilities
are few and far between. Not only are more Halfway and Sober Living
Houses sorely needed, but minimal functional oversight and regulation
is necessary in order to eliminate all the fly-by-night operations that
do the ex-offender, and therefore the public good, a gross disservice.
In conclusion, while I agree with, support, and applaud all of the
testimony presented at the hearing, there is a severe lack that needs
to be addressed. Law enforcement, sentencing, and alternative
sentencing has come a long way and is progressive and fairly well-
developed. Treatment and rehabilitation, while still under-utilized and
minimally deployed, is gaining ground at a rapid pace. The severe lack
lies in the availability of supportive living environments (Halfway &
Sober Living houses), the oversight and regulation of such, and in
employment support. Without properly addressing these subjects, most
substance abusers will never leave the revolving door of relapse and
recidivism, and will continue to be a much larger burden on society
than a well-integrated program of rehabilitation and alternatives to
incarceration.
Thank you for allowing me to submit/provide testimony on this
subject. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at
the above address, e-mail, or phone number.
______
Prepared Statement of Professor Martina Kitzmueller,
Research Professor of Law, University of New Mexico School of Law
Introduction
It is an unfortunate reality that New Mexico faces serious problems
with both driving while intoxicated and domestic violence crimes.
Alcohol is involved in 40 percent of all fatal traffic accidents in the
state,\1\ resulting in 143 deaths in 2009.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\&& NM Department of Public Safety, http://www.dps.nm.org/
lawEnforcement/dwi/.
\2\ DWI Resource Center, http://www.unm.edu/ dgrint/fars/
summ08.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Bernalillo County alone, District Attorney Kari Brandenburg has
shared that there are approximately 7,000 DWI prosecutions per year. A
significant portion of these result in dismissal.\3\ While there are a
variety of reasons, some of these dismissals are attributable to the
finite resources of the District Attorney's Office. The District
Attorney has stated that her office is forced to operate below 75
percent of the funding currently needed to manage such a caseload.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ MADD [DRAFT] Interim Report for 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2005, the rate of domestic violence in New Mexico was 26 per
1,000 with an estimated 1 in 3 women and 1 in 7 men age 18 and over
suffering from domestic violence during their lifetimes.\4\ In 2005,
there were 36,594 statewide victims of domestic violence, with each
victim suffering an average of 5.5 incidences of violence. In
Bernalillo County alone, there were approximately 5,000 domestic
violence cases filed by the DA's office. As over one third of instances
of domestic violence in New Mexico involve alcohol or drug use, alcohol
use is an overriding problem that needs to be addressed in both the DWI
and domestic violence contexts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ All statistics from Incidence and Nature of Domestic Violence
In New Mexico IX: An Analysis of 2008 Data From The New Mexico
Interpersonal Violence Data Central Repository.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall, the state has an urgent need to reduce the incidents of
these crimes through both preventative measures as well as the improved
prosecution of these crimes. One of the programs instituted to
effectuate this change is the DWI and Domestic Violence Prosecution in
Practice course at the University of New Mexico School of Law.
Prosecution in Practice
In May 2010, the School of Law and the Governor's office announced
a new law school course titled DWI and Domestic Violence Prosecution in
Practice, funded through a grant from the New Mexico Department of
Transportation, Traffic Safety Bureau.
As New Mexico's only law school, all interested parties realized
that the UNM School of Law is in the unique position of preparing
students to prosecute domestic violence and DWI cases specifically
within New Mexico and its criminal justice system. Unlike out-of-state
law schools or general clinical programs, DWI and Domestic Violence
Prosecution in Practice educates and prepares students to address the
specific needs of DWI and domestic violence prosecution in the state of
New Mexico, with its unique issues under its specific laws.
The Prosecution in Practice Program enrolls up to 8 second- or
third-year law students per semester. It includes both a classroom and
field experience component. Students receive four credit hours for
their work in the course. The field experience includes 10 hours per
week of direct hands-on experience in prosecuting DWI and domestic
violence cases. The students are supervised in their field work
principally by the course instructor, only occasionally by a field
prosecutor with at least 5 years related practice experience.
The classroom component includes interdisciplinary instruction in
the social, economic, psychological, and cultural dynamics of the
addictive and violent behaviors. The UNM Medical School has committed
to assisting by providing a specialist in the field of addiction. The
New Mexico Domestic Violence Leadership Commission has provided its
assistance in securing training and other resources directed at
domestic violence education, and several other community agencies are
participating as well.
Students who finish the Program emerge ready to enter a district
attorney's office upon graduation with a strong foundation desirable to
any employer, seriously reducing the time needed for training. A
prepared next generation of assistant district attorneys is ready to
assist in the continued effective prosecution of DWI and domestic
violence crimes. In addition, the students bring information from
outside the field of law to contribute to the various district
attorneys' offices.
To provide a complete education, the Program explores beyond the
legal practicalities and educates students on the causes behind and
treatment of DWI and domestic violence cases. Through partnering with
medical and psychological educators as well as community activists and
government resources, such as MADD, the New Mexico Domestic Violence
Leadership Commission and victim advocate groups, students get a well-
rounded education to prepare them not only to prosecute, but to help
work toward the prevention and reduced recidivism of DWI and domestic
violence offenses and offenders. Students also explore legislative
policy avenues for addressing these crimes and may chose to participate
in the legislative process as part of their experience.
The case split within the Practicum is 80 percent DWI cases and 20
percent domestic violence cases. The predominant focus is thus on the
prosecution of drunk driving. The Practicum selects domestic violence
cases where alcohol was a factor in the offense, to further the
students' understanding of the interrelation between different alcohol
related offenses. Prosecuting at the same time drunken driving and
alcohol related instances of domestic violence, students learn how
alcohol abuse impacts community safety on every level.
After the First Year
After a start-up phase where Professor Hope Eckert developed
logistical protocols and student materials, created the curriculum and
made contact with various community agencies, DWI and Domestic Violence
Prosecution in Practice had its debut in the fall 2010 semester and
then continued through the spring of 2011. In the first year, students
handled 50 cases and 126 court appearances (hearings and trials).
The Program was a success in meeting its objective of educating and
preparing students to prosecute DWI and domestic violence cases.
Metropolitan Court Chief Judge Judith K. Nakamura, who sponsored the
program in her courtroom, has expressed her satisfaction with the
course as well as her support for its renewal. Students have expressed
how much they enjoyed the course, how much they learned, and how much
more prepared they feel for the practice of law. In fact, several are
looking specifically at prosecution careers and have interviewed with
various district attorney offices.
As the program develops, it is the expectation that it will be able
to offer additional resources to the state such as training or CLE
programs and materials to further the understanding, prevention and
prosecution of DWI and domestic violence cases.
Because of this success, the Practicum was just renewed for two
more years through an additional grant from the Traffic Safety Bureau
Division of the New Mexico Department of Transportation. UNM School of
Law is very grateful for this support and looks forward to future years
of preparing students for the challenges of DWI and domestic violence
prosecution in New Mexico.
______
Prepared Statement of Richard Roth, Ph.D., Executive Director,
Santa Fe Impact DWI
Ignition Interlocks in New Mexico
Ignition Interlocks are the equivalent of having a probation
officer in the front seat of an offender's vehicle on duty 24 hours a
day paid for by the offender. The interlock samples the offender's
breath alcohol content, BAC, and will prevent the vehicle from starting
if the offender has been drinking. All BAC measurements are recorded
and reported monthly to a judge or his designee.
New Mexico has reduced its rates of alcohol-involved crashes,
injuries, and fatalities by over 40 percent since its first mandatory
ignition interlock law was passed in 2002. Since 2005, the mandatory
interlock sanction period has been 1 year for first offenders, 2 years
for second offenders, 3 years for third offenders, and lifetime with 5-
year judicial review for a fourth or greater conviction.
As a sanction for drunk driving, ignition interlocks have been
proven to be effective, cost-effective, and fair. Their effectiveness
is demonstrated in Figure 1 in which the re-arrest rates of interlocked
offenders is compared to that of offenders whose licenses are revoked
and who should not be driving at all. Interlocked DWI offenders have
only one fourth the re-arrest rate of revoked offenders.
Figure 1 From NHTSA Region 1 Ignition Interlock Institute
Presentation by Roth, April 12, 2011.
By preventing drunk driving, interlocks reduce the alcohol involved
crashes, injuries and fatalities that are so costly to society. For
every one dollar that offenders spend on interlocks, there is a three
dollar savings in the economic impact of drunk driving crashes.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Roth, Richard, Voas, Robert, Marques, Paul (2007) ``Interlocks
for First Offenders: Effective?,'' Traffic Injury Prevention, 8:4, p
351.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost everyone considers Interlocks a fair sanction for drunk
driving. But even 85 percent of convicted offenders consider the
interlock a fair sanction for drunk driving.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Anonymous surveys of convicted DWI offenders, R. Roth 2005-
2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Mexico leads the Nation in the use of interlocks to reduce
drunk driving.\3\ Over 50,000 interlocks have been installed since 2002
and there are 13,500 interlocks currently installed. Figure 2 shows
that NM has more installed interlocks per capita than any other state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Estimates of Currently Installed Interlocks in the U.S.''
October 2010, http://www.rothinterlock.org/presentations.htm.
Figure 2 R Roth. Estimates of Currently Installed Ignition
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interlocks in the U.S.
As more and more people become aware of the interlock sanction,
the general deterrent effect contributes to reducing overall drunk
driving even of those who have never been arrested. New Mexico seems to
have reached that tipping point as shown in Figure 3 the increase in
installed interlocks and the decreases in drunk driving crashes,
injuries and fatalities are highly correlated.
Figure 3 As the number of installed interlocks increased in NM, the
number of alcohol-involved crashes, injuries, and fatalities decreased.
Research shows that interlocked offenders have reduced recidivism
even after interlocks are removed as shown in Figure 4 where
interlocked offenders are followed for up to 8 years.
The bottom line is that the New Mexico Interlock Program has made a
major contribution to outstanding reductions in alcohol-impaired
driving as shown in the following figures.
Figure 5 shows a 36 percent reduction in the alcohol-involved crash
rate between 2002 and 2008.
Figure 6 shows a 49 percent reduction in the alcohol-involved
injury rate between 2002 and 2008.
Figure 7 shows a 49 percent reduction in the alcohol-involved
fatality rate between 2002 and 2010.
Figure 8 shows that New Mexico shows that the rate of alcohol-
impaired driving fatalities fell 38 percent from one of the worst in
the Nation in 2004 to the national average in 2008.
And most importantly, there are 373 New Mexicans alive in 2011 who
would have been killed by drunk drivers if our 2002 fatality rate had
continued to the present.
Figure 9 shows the number of New Mexicans who have died in each
year from 2002 to 2010. It also shows the number of lives saved because
of the reduction in alcohol-involved fatalities.
Interlocks have both specific deterrent effects on interlocked
offenders and a general deterrent effect on the general population.
There is no question of their effectiveness, their cost-effectiveness,
and their fairness to offenders. What is still needed in most states
are laws that get a larger fraction of offenders to install interlocks
and changes in outdated Federal legislation that limits their use.
* * * * * * *
Richard Roth is an Emeritus Professor of Physics who does DWI
research and advocates for DWI sanctions that are effective, cost-
effective, and fair. He is the Executive Director of Impact DWI, Inc.
Many of his publications, presentations, and reports are available on
his website www.RothInterlock.org.
* * * * * * *
Santa Fe Impact DWI is a 501C3 non-profit organization dedicated to
reducing DWI in New Mexico by coordinating Victim Impact Panels and
supporting anti-DWI efforts in education, prevention, enforcement,
adjudication, and treatment.
Visit our website at www.impactdwi.org.