[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 62 (Tuesday, May 13, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H2570-H2576]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     THE TRAGEDY OF ALCOHOL-RELATED DEATHS ON OUR NATION'S HIGHWAYS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 1997, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Bilirakis] is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration estimates that two in every five Americans, 40 percent, 
will be involved in an alcohol-related crash at some time in their 
lives. I rise today to reflect on the tragedy that drunk driving has 
brought to victims and their families around the United

[[Page H2571]]

States. I was encouraged to learn that from 1990 to 1994, there was a 
20-percent decline in alcohol-related deaths on our Nation's roads. 
However, in 1995, alcohol-related traffic deaths increased for the 
first time in a decade. These statistics deeply trouble me, especially 
since our Nation has made a commitment to educate the public on the 
dangers of driving while under the influence of alcohol.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Oregon [Ms. Furse].
  Ms. FURSE. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to be part of this special 
order, because 45 percent of the fatalities on our Nation's highways 
are alcohol-related. It is, as the gentleman mentioned, a tremendous 
problem. One of the things that I was most shocked about was to find 
that in emergency rooms across this Nation, emergency room personnel 
are very often not allowed to give information when a person comes in 
from a traffic accident with a high blood alcohol level, so a wonderful 
woman from Oregon came to me, a nurse, and she had changed the law in 
Oregon which said that emergency room personnel may make this 
information available.
  As the gentleman knows, last year we passed a bill here in this House 
asking for a study to see about just allowing that emergency room 
personnel to report high blood alcohol levels. What we found in Oregon 
was absolutely shocking. Sixty-seven percent of the people who came in 
through emergency rooms with high blood alcohol level, who had been 
driving, were never charged with drunk driving because they were unable 
to give this information out.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I really recommend what the gentleman is saying, 
that we need to educate people that this is a major, major problem in 
our country. We have young people, I believe it is six young people a 
day, who die on our highways in alcohol-related accidents. So I am 
hoping this study will show that where we can have emergency room 
personnel involved with the law enforcement to let people know, let law 
enforcement know that there has been alcohol involved in an accident, 
we may be able to reduce this tremendous carnage on our highways.
  I really thank the gentleman for holding this special order, because 
it is, obviously, a major health problem in our country.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her 
involvement in this and in so many other issues. She has just been so 
stellar on my Subcommittee on Health on all issues, particularly 
preventive health care. That is basically what we are talking about 
here, preventive, the education that goes along with us. I thank the 
gentlewoman for joining us.
  Mr. Speaker, in 1995, more than 17,000 people were killed in alcohol-
related traffic crashes, including 2,206 youths. Mothers Against Drunk 
Driving, MADD, and many other important organizations, such as ``Remove 
Intoxicated Drivers,'' RID, Students Against Driving Drunk, SADD, and 
Campaign Against Drunk Driving, CADD, have been working to protect 
people from being injured or killed in drunk driving-related crashes.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Ramstad].
  Mr. RAMSTAD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of my colleagues' efforts 
to bring attention to the tragedy of drunk driving, and to discuss 
briefly a bill I have introduced with 20 of our colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle to establish a national commission on alcoholism to 
deal with this fatal disease in a comprehensive and cost-effective way.
  Mr. Speaker, alcoholism killed over 100,000 Americans last year. That 
is more than all illegal drugs combined. Half of our Nation's convicted 
murderers committed their crimes under the influence of alcohol. My 
colleague, the gentleman from Florida, and my colleague, the 
gentlewoman from Oregon, already discussed the devastation caused by 
drunk drivers. Alcoholism is truly a painful struggle with a staggering 
public cost. Untreated alcoholics incur health care costs at least 
double those of nonalcoholics. In indirect and direct costs together, 
the public, the American taxpayer, pays at least $86 billion because of 
alcoholism.
  I recently spoke with a former radio talk show host and city council 
member from Minneapolis. Her name is Barbara Carlson. Barbara told me 
the absolutely heartrending story of a young neighbor of hers killed by 
a drunk driver. It had so affected Barbara that she called her old 
station and asked for special air time, just to talk about this 
terrible tragedy and the scourge of drunk driving in this country.
  Mr. Speaker, Barbara Carlson put it best when she said we will never 
reduce the 17,000 deaths that occurred last year alone in alcohol-
related crashes unless and until we address the root cause of 
alcoholism. That is why we are introducing this legislation to create a 
national commission on alcoholism, to develop a practical, achievable 
public policy to deal with this costly, fatal disease. Mr. Speaker, we 
need a national strategy. To deal with illegal drugs, we have the 
Office of Drug Control Policy. We do not have a concerted national 
effort to deal with our No. 1 killer, alcoholism.
  Let me just explain this bill very briefly, Mr. Speaker. This bill, 
H.R. 1549, would establish the Harold Hughes-Bill Emerson Commission on 
Alcoholism, named after two exceptional public servants who everyone in 
this body knows and who passed away last year; Harold Hughes, a very 
distinguished Democrat Governor and former U.S. Senator from Iowa, and 
Bill Emerson, a colleague of ours, a Republican member from Missouri. 
Both men were passionate advocates in the struggle against alcoholism, 
and both men strongly advocated the creation of this commission, and 
they handed this off to me to chief sponsor.

  This temporary commission to deal with the problem of alcoholism will 
include 12 appointed members and also the director of the National 
Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. I foresee prevention and 
treatment experts on this commission, representatives of Mothers 
Against Drunk Driving, academic and medical professionals, 
representatives of the business community, recovering people, and 
Members of Congress.
  The commission will be charged with specific tasks, including ways to 
streamline existing treatment and prevention programs, and develop a 
national strategy to counter this deadly and costly epidemic. Within 2 
years the commission will be charged with submitting its 
recommendations to the Congress and the President, and then disband. I 
strongly urge my colleagues to cosponsor H.R. 1549.
  Mr. Speaker, only by addressing the underlying problem of alcoholism 
will we ever reduce the incidence of drunk driving in America. Again, I 
thank the gentleman for yielding, and for his efforts in this important 
effort to deal with drunk driving.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. I thank the gentleman for his great work on this 
issue, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. Speaker, Mr. Tom Carey, who is a resident of my district in 
Florida and a co-founder of Remove Intoxicated Drivers, RID, is with us 
tonight. Tom lost his wife to a drunk driver, and has been an 
inspiration to those who have lost their loved ones to drunk driving.
  Over the past 4 days MADD held its National Youth Summit on Underaged 
Drinking right here in Washington, DC. The event included high school 
students from each of the 435 congressional districts across the 
country. These students joined together to develop creative approaches 
to fight drunk driving. This afternoon the students who attended the 
summit met with Members of Congress and their staffs to share their 
suggestions. I am particularly proud to see students involved in such a 
noble cause, and I am convinced that their efforts this past weekend 
will go a long way towards saving lives.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey].
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, the gentleman 
from Florida [Mr. Bilirakis], for coordinating this very important 
discussion on the problem of drunk driving in America.
  As the House sponsor of the 1995 zero tolerance law for underage 
drunk driving and the current cosponsor of two pieces of legislation 
that will strengthen our Nation's drunk driving laws, I wholeheartedly 
agree that Congress must focus more attention on this issue. As we 
heard tonight, drunk driving fatalities are on the rise for the

[[Page H2572]]

first time in a decade. In 1995, the year for which most of the recent 
statistics are available, more than 17,000 Americans were killed in 
alcohol-related traffic fatalities.
  The sad reality is that our drunk driving laws have failed thousands 
of families across the Nation. Our criminal justice system has been too 
lax for too long on drunk drivers. In fact, impaired driving is the 
most frequently committed violent crime in America. That is an outrage. 
A license to drive should not be a license to kill.
  Back in 1995, Senator Byrd and I launched an effort with Mothers 
Against Drunk Driving to close a legal loophole in 26 States that 
allowed underage drivers to drive legally with alcohol in their system, 
as long as their blood alcohol content did not exceed the State's legal 
DWI limit. That loophole existed, despite the lethal consequences of 
teenagers who mixed drinking and driving. In fact, 40 percent of 
traffic fatalities, as the gentleman knows, involve underage drivers, 
and they are alcohol-related.
  As a result of this law, 39 States have now adopted zero tolerance 
laws that send a very clear message: If you are under 21, consumption 
of alcohol combined with driving will be treated under State law as 
driving while intoxicated, end of story. These laws have saved hundreds 
of lives across the country, and I am very hopeful that all 50 States 
will make zero tolerance the law of the land.
  Zero tolerance was an important victory in our war on drunk driving, 
but we must do more, much more. That is why Senator Frank Lautenberg, 
Senator Mike DeWine and I have joined Mothers Against Drunk Driving, 
highway safety advocates, law enforcement groups, drunk driving 
victims, in introducing two important pieces of legislation to 
strengthen our Nation's drunk driving laws.
  Using the proven sanctions methods of the 1984 national minimum 
drinking age law and the 1995 zero tolerance law, these bills will 
compel States to lower the legal level of driving while intoxicated to 
a more reasonable level, and strengthen penalties for repeat drunk 
drivers.
  Mr. Speaker, more than 3,700 Americans were killed in 1995 by drivers 
with blood alcohol concentration below .1. This is the legal definition 
of driving while intoxicated in 36 States. In recognition of this 
problem, 14 States, including Florida, California, Virginia, and 
Illinois, have adopted laws lowering the DWI level to .08. The .08 laws 
have also been adopted by many industrialized nations. Lowering the DWI 
level to .08 is supported by the American Automobile Association, the 
National Sheriffs Association, the International Association of Chiefs 
of Police, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and our 
Nation's largest insurance companies. The American Medical Association 
even recommends .05 DWI.
  Why should we lower the DWI standard to .08? First, .08 is a level of 
intoxication at which critical driving skills are impaired for the vast 
majority of drivers.
  Second, the risk of a crash increases substantially at .08 and above. 
In fact, a driver with .08 BAC is 16 times more likely to be in a fatal 
crash than a driver with no alcohol in his system.
  Third, Americans overwhelmingly agree that you should not drive after 
three or four drinks in one hour on an empty stomach, the equivalent of 
.08 blood alcohol level.
  Last, but certainly not least, .08 laws save lives. A study of the 
first five States to enact .08 found that those States experienced a 
16-percent reduction in fatal crashes involving drivers with a BAC of 
.08 or higher, and an 18-percent decrease in fatal crashes involving 
drivers with a BAC of .15 or higher.

                              {time}  1715

  Overall, the study concluded that up to 600 lives would be saved each 
year nationwide if every State adopted the .08 standard. Now there are 
some who are trying to claim that .08 BAC is too low a level of 
intoxication and that our bill will target social drinkers who drink in 
moderation. This could not be further from the truth. It takes a lot of 
alcohol to reach .08 BAC.
  According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Association, a 170-
pound man with an average metabolism would reach .08 only after 
consuming four drinks in 1 hour on an empty stomach. A 137-pound woman 
with an average metabolism would need three drinks in an hour to reach 
that level.
  We should keep in mind that if you have any food in your stomach or 
you snack while you are drinking, you could drink even more if you 
choose and not reach .08. That is a lot of liquor. In addition to 
lowering the legal definition of DWI, we need legislation to establish 
mandatory minimum penalties to convict drunk drivers and keep them off 
our roads. We must stop slapping drunk drivers on the wrist and start 
taking their hands off the wheel.
  That is why The Deadly Driver Reduction Act will require States to 
mandate a 6-month revocation for the first DWI conviction, a 1-year 
revocation for two alcohol-related convictions, and a permanent license 
revocation for three alcohol-related offenses.
  Studies by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration show 
that about one-third of all the drivers arrested or convicted of DWI 
each year are repeat offenders. Drivers with prior DWI convictions are 
also more likely to be involved in fatal crashes. This second piece of 
legislation will close the loopholes in State laws that too often allow 
convicted drunks drivers to get right back behind the wheel.
  Mr. Speaker, last Friday at the National Press Club, Redbook magazine 
and Mothers Against Drunk Driving honored five mothers who are the foot 
soldiers in this battle. These courageous women have vowed to make 
something good come out of a tragic loss of a child to a drunk driver.
  One of those mothers, Mary Aller, is a constituent from Mamaroneck, 
NY, whose 15-year-old daughter, Karen, was killed by a drunk driver in 
1991 who spent only a few months in jail. Mary went on to establish the 
Westchester County chapter of MADD. She is truly an inspiration to us 
all.
  The evidence, Mr. Speaker, is compelling that adopting .08 as the 
national DWI standard and establishing mandatory minimum penalties will 
reduce the carnage on our Nation's roads. Our Government has an 
obligation to act when lives are at stake, and we owe it to all those 
mothers to adopt these bills.
  I thank my colleague for having this session tonight. I appreciate 
the opportunity to share some words with you.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to commend to all my colleagues' attention the 
article ``Drunk Driving Makes a Comeback'' from the May edition of 
Redbook magazine, and I submit that article for the Record.

                        [From Redbook, May 1997]

                     Drunk Driving Makes a Comeback

                           (By Joey Kennedy)

       Anyone who knew Dana Ogletree knew he was a devoted father. 
     Whether the 36-year-old Brooks, Georgia, resident was fishing 
     with his five children, taking them to the Six Flags 
     amusement park, or going to car races with his only son, Dana 
     Jr., he was involved with his family. But today Shandra 
     Ogletree, 37, is raising her children (now ages 10 to 20) 
     alone. On December 20, 1995, as Dana was riding to work with 
     a coworker, the car was struck broadside by a 17-year-old boy 
     who had been drinking and also smoking marijuana. Dana died 
     the following morning, after emergency surgery. Also killed 
     were his coworker, David Harris, and the three young children 
     of David's fiancee, whom he was going to drop off at their 
     father's.
       ``It has been hard,'' Shandra Ogletree admits. ``We think 
     of all the things Dana won't get to see. The birthdays. The 
     graduations. He won't ever get to walk his daughters down the 
     aisle. And my son won't get to have man-to-man talks with his 
     dad.'' She is also bitter that the driver received a prison 
     term of only ten years--``though he killed five people.'' 
     Meanwhile, Shandra notes, ``I lost my busband of 19 years, my 
     high school sweetheart. And my children lost a wonderful 
     father.''
       Dana Ogletree was one of 17,274 people who died in alcohol-
     related traffic crashes in 1995, the last year for which 
     statistics are available. Each of those deaths represents a 
     catastrophe for another American family.
       What's shocking to many is that the figure also represents, 
     for the first time in almost a decade, an increase in the 
     number of drunk-driving fatalities compared to the preceding 
     year. The long national campaign against drunk driving has 
     stalled, it seems. While deaths from drunk driving are up, 
     fund-raising for Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) is 
     down, as is the amount of media coverage given to the drunk-
     driving issue. Efforts to lower the legal blood alcohol 
     concentration from .10 to .08 percent continue to founder in 
     many states, thanks to vigorous lobbying by the liquor and 
     hospitality (restaurant and bar) industries. Nationwide, the 
     number of arrests for driving

[[Page H2573]]

     while intoxicated went down from 1.8 million in 1990 to 1.4 
     million in 1995.
       Despite these discouraging facts, the anti-drunk-driving 
     campaign--begun by MADD in 1980 and joined by legislators, 
     the law enforcement community, and other public safety 
     groups--can look back on notable successes. Public awareness 
     of the issue has dramatically improved. ``There was a time 
     when drunk driving was treated pretty much as a joke, like 
     some kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar,'' says 
     Dwight B. Heath, Ph.D., an anthropologist at Brown University 
     who studies behavior related to alcohol. ``Not anymore.'' 
     Efforts by MADD and others have led to raising the minimum 
     drinking age to 21 and to so-called zero-tolerance laws that 
     punish underage drinkers who are caught driving with any 
     alcohol content in their blood. ``You've heard so much about 
     drunk driving that there is a perception that it's a problem 
     either fixed or almost fixed,'' says Katherine Prescott, 
     national president of MADD.
       But the problem is not fixed, as so many families can 
     attest. In fact, 41 percent of all traffic fatalities involve 
     alcohol. While the anti-drunk-driving message has clearly 
     gotten through to many Americans (see Redbook's national 
     survey, page 93), thousands of husbands, wives, and children 
     are still being killed by those who party hard and get behind 
     the wheel. ``There's still a segment of our population that 
     thinks it's perfectly appropriate when you drink, to drink 
     all you can,'' says Susan Herbel, Ph.D., vice president of 
     the National Commission Against Drunk Driving. Researchers 
     who conducted a recent large-scale national survey of 
     drinking-and-driving behavior estimated that there were 123 
     million incidents of drunk driving in the U.S. in 1993.
       Is there any way to jolt legislators and the public out of 
     their complacency, make drunk driving a hot issue again--and 
     make the roads safer for our families? Anti-drunk-driving 
     advocates are urging action on a number of fronts.


                        get through to the guys

       If drunk driving is, as MADD says, a ``violent crime,'' 
     then who is committing it? Says Dr. Herbel, ``Drunk driving 
     is very much a male problem.'' Men are four times more likely 
     than women to drive after they've been drinking, one study 
     found. And the segment of the population most likely to drink 
     and drive is made up of white males between the ages of 21 
     and 34, in blue-collar jobs, with a high school education or 
     less, according to a study by the Harvard School of Public 
     Health.
       How to stop them? Strict law enforcement--sobriety check-
     points, saturation patrols by police departments--does change 
     drinking-and-driving behavior in the short term. But Dr. 
     Herbel points out that these efforts require a huge 
     commitment of resources by state and local police, and their 
     effects taper off unless they are kept up consistently.
       ``There are those who feel you can rely on enforcing laws 
     to solve the drunk-driving problem, but I don't agree with 
     that,'' she says. ``Until drunk driving gets to be a behavior 
     that is just not socially acceptable, we're not going to stop 
     it.'' Dr. Herbel believes the anti-drunk-driving message 
     should be modeled after the antismoking campaign, with its 
     many community-awareness programs and education efforts 
     that start in grade school.
       Employers could play a role as well through education 
     efforts and even spot-checks of the status of employees' 
     drivers' licenses. ``The men who are most likely to drink and 
     drive usually work, and their jobs are important to them,'' 
     Dr. Herbel says. ``Employers should make it clear that 
     drinking and driving is not acceptable.'' Better yet, 
     employers could refer at-risk workers to counseling 
     programs--so long as local communities cooperate by making 
     such programs readily available.
       The best way to reach at-risk men may be through their 
     wives or girlfriends. Focus groups have found that men aged 
     21 to 34 are more likely to be influenced on the drinking-
     and-driving issue by the women in their lives than by public 
     service announcements, bartenders, or male friends, according 
     to Bob Shearouse, national director of public policy at MADD. 
     Experts are unsure how to translate this finding into a 
     public-awareness campaign, however. The Harvard study on at-
     risk men found that some of their wives and girlfriends 
     ``described fear of verbal or even physical retribution'' for 
     trying to stop drinking-and-driving behavior. ``For the 
     unlucky woman involved with a man who has a tendency to be 
     violent, especially after drinking, intervening could be 
     dangerous,'' note MADD's Prescott. ``You have to be careful 
     about advising women to do that.''


                     let the media send the message

       While a certain segment of males may be the most likely to 
     drink and drive, they obviously aren't the only culprits; the 
     gospel about drunk driving must be preached to everybody. And 
     Jay Winsten, Ph.D., director of the Center for Health 
     Communication at the Harvard School of Public Health, says 
     the message is fading and deaths are up for one reason: ``The 
     mass media is paying far less attention to this problem than 
     it was several years ago.''
       Since the issue of drunk driving was widely covered in the 
     eighties and early nineties, it stands to reason that there 
     would be fewer news stories on the issue now. After all, why 
     should journalists report on a story that already feels 
     familiar to much of the public? Because doing so saves lives, 
     Dr. Winsten says. He cites a period of high media attention 
     in 1983 and 1984--a time when MADD was fresh on the national 
     scene--that was accompanied by a drop in alcohol-related 
     deaths. In 1986, Dr. Winsten says, deaths went up and 
     remained fairly level until 1988, when the Harvard School of 
     Public Health recruited the entertainment industry to help 
     promote the notion of the designated driver (an idea imported 
     from Scandinavia). During the next four television seasons, 
     more than 160 episodes of prime-time shows, including Cheers, 
     L.A. Law, and The Cosby Show, featured designated drivers in 
     some way, and networks sponsored public-service 
     announcements. The result? A 26 percent decline in drunk-
     driving fatalities over that four-year period.
       ``These days, we're getting designated-driver mentions in 
     about a half dozen episodes per season,'' says Dr. Winsten. 
     ``The public has bought the concept of the designated driver, 
     but they have to make the decision to use it over and over 
     and over again. And they rely in part on cures and 
     reminders from the media.''
       MADD's Prescott acknowledges that her organization is no 
     longer a ``hot topic'' with the media. ``It's as though our 
     having becoming credible and being successful hasn't helped 
     us with the media. Now, we're like all the other charities.'' 
     Further crowding MADD's issue are major news stories that 
     thrust other worthy causes, such as car-airbag safety, into 
     the spotlight. ``That's been a major topic of conversation in 
     Washington. Now, the last thing I want to do is offend anyone 
     who has lost a child,'' emphasizes Prescott, who herself lost 
     a son to drunk driving. ``But we're talking about a dozen 
     deaths in 1995, when we know that more than 17,000 people 
     died in 1995 because of drunk driving.''
       As advocates for a variety of causes, from breast cancer 
     research to recycling, have discovered, those who want 
     coverage for their message must find ways to make it feel 
     fresh. Dr. Winsten thinks that, for drunk driving, a debate 
     over ``social host responsibility'' might serve that purpose. 
     ``Should you be liable for a civil lawsuit if your party 
     guest kills someone on the way home, as is already the case 
     in some states?'' he asks. ``People disagree on this issue, 
     but it doesn't matter as long as the issue of drunk driving 
     is being discussed.''
       One of the ways MADD will bid for a higher profile this 
     year is to focus on drinking by people under age 21. ``Our 
     current environment makes it acceptable for underage people 
     to drink, to walk into a store and buy liquor even though 
     it's illegal,'' Prescott says. ``We think this youth 
     initiative will get the public's attention. Underage drinking 
     has to be dealt with by communities, schools, churches, and 
     homes.'' MADD will kick off its effort this month by hosting 
     a National Youth Summit on Underage Drinking in Washington, 
     D.C. Student delegates from each of the nation's 435 
     congressional districts will discuss possible solutions to 
     the underage-drinking problem and deliver recommendations to 
     members of Congress.
       And in June, the National Highway Traffic Safety 
     Administration hopes to stir public debate when it 
     launches Partners in Progress, an ambitious program that 
     has brought together numerous groups to develop strategies 
     to curtail drunk driving. Their goal: to reduce yearly 
     alcohol-related fatalities to no more than 11,000 by the 
     year 2005.


                     take on the alcohol lobbyists

       Anti-drunk-driving advocates have also been tangling with 
     the liquor and hospitality industries over the issue of 
     lowering the legal blood alcohol concentration limit from .10 
     to .08 percent, an effort that has thus far been successful 
     in only 14 states (see ``How to Save Hundreds of Lives This 
     year,'' page 92). In practical terms, .08 means that an 
     average 160-pound man can still have four drinks in one hour 
     on an empty stomach before he would reach the legal limit for 
     driving--a level that seems surprisingly lenient to many 
     people. Dr. Herbel says the liquor and hospitality industries 
     are fighting hard against the .08 limit because they see it 
     as a step toward zero tolerance--that is, making illegal any 
     amount of alcohol in the bloodstream of someone who is 
     driving--which could, obviously, have a big impact on their 
     businesses. ``Those industries believe that, as soon as .08 
     passes in all states, somebody will start a movement for .06 
     or .04,'' says Dr. Herbel.
       While that battle is being waged, anti-drunk-driving 
     advocates are pursuing other legislative remedies: the Crime 
     Victims' Bill of Rights, sponsored by Senator Dianne 
     Feinstein (D-CA), which would ensure that victims of all 
     kinds of crime, including drunk driving, have certain basic 
     rights; and the Deadly Driver Reduction Act, which would 
     entail license revocation for drunk-driving offenders.
       The boy who killed Dana Ogletree was an underage drinker. 
     ``Where did he get that beer?'' asks Shandra Ogletree, angry 
     that the details haven't come out. ``Did someone sell it to 
     him? Or did he have an older friend buy it for him?''
       Until everyone who might be responsible for a drunk-driving 
     accident--not only the drinker, but store clerks, friends--
     recognizes his or her role, the problem won't be solved, 
     Shandra argues. And thousands of families will continue to 
     suffer the consequences.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for sharing in

[[Page H2574]]

this very important special order and for all of her work and research 
and the study on this subject. We oftentimes ask ourselves, what is the 
proper role of Government? Certainly, we on this level have not really 
done enough on this subject, and we need to continue to look at it and 
do more.
  Mr. Speaker, I recognize the gentleman from California [Mr. Capps].
  Mr. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
certainly want to commend him for holding this very important special 
order to call attention to the problems of underage drinking and drunk 
driving.
  Mr. Speaker, few tragedies bring as much pain to families and 
communities as fatal accidents caused by drunk driving, especially when 
young people are involved. The community of Santa Barbara, which I am 
very proud to represent, was struck by this plague over the weekend 
when 3 college students were killed when their truck veered off 
Gibraltar Mountain road.
  Alcohol was a factor in this accident, and all 3 were under the legal 
drinking age. My heart truly goes out to the grieving family and to the 
friends of these young people, many of whom I know personally. Nothing 
that we can say or do today will bring them back, but we must all try 
to learn important lessons from this terrible loss of life.
  Mr. Speaker, it is sometimes useful for us in Congress to share 
personal stories from our own lives in order to advance important 
policy objectives. The issue of drunk driving has had a profoundly 
personal impact on my own life. On May 23, I will commemorate the 1-
year anniversary of a horrible car accident that nearly claimed my life 
and the life of my beloved wife Lois.
  Returning home from a campaign appearance, our car was struck by a 
drunk driver. I had to be cut from the wreckage with the ``jaws of 
life.'' I suffered serious injuries that required surgery and months of 
rehabilitation. This coming week, next week, my family and friends will 
gather together for a celebration of gratitude for all those who saved 
us, helped us heal, brought us back to life.
  I will always be grateful to the police, to the rescue personnel, to 
the doctors, the nurses, the physical therapists, family, and others 
who brought us back to life. Without them, I would never be standing 
here in this great Chamber this evening.
  But tragically, many families are not as fortunate as we were. And 
that is why it is so important to convene events like MADD National 
Youth Summit. This week, hundreds of young people, including Amy 
Yglesias from Santa Maria, CA, which I am also very proud to represent, 
have come to this Nation's capital for this unprecedented summit 
meeting. Here, they will discuss and develop solutions to the problems 
of underage drinking and drunk driving.
  Back home in our district, MADD is also sponsoring important events. 
This past Sunday, for example, my wife and daughter and I ran in a 
MADD-DASH, a 5-mile benefit run near Highway 154, the very road on 
which our accident occurred.
  Congress can pass important laws on this subject. We can pass laws on 
the drinking age, on alcohol accessibility, on alcohol advertising. But 
only when our young people are fully engaged in the battle themselves 
will we have a chance to succeed.
  I commend Mothers Against Drunk Driving and all those who worked to 
make this week's summit a reality and for putting together innovative 
events in our districts.
  Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues on the floor this evening all join 
me in pledging to work toward the day when our communities will no 
longer suffer the heartbreaking pain brought on by drunk driving 
accidents that claim the lives of young people and too many of our 
citizens.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the leadership he is giving to 
this effort.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for sharing his own 
personal story with us. I am not sure that there are too many Members 
of Congress who do not have similar stories to tell either about close 
friends or family members.
  Mr. Speaker, Mothers Against Drunk Driving should also be commended 
for the Youth in Action Campaign, which is dedicated to educating 
students about the dangers of drinking and driving. I mentioned a 
statistic earlier that more than 17,000 individuals died in 1995 from 
alcohol-related crashes. It is all too easy for us to forget that this 
number is not just a statistic. These were 17,000 people who also had 
stories. They had families and friends who cared for them and loved 
them dearly.
  One of those stories happened in Spring Hill, FL. On December 22, 
1995, Monica Nicola and her 2 daughters Danielle, 9 years old, and 
Stephanie, 8 years old, went to the mall to have their pictures taken 
with Santa Claus. After having their pictures taken, Monica was driving 
her daughters home when a van in front of her car suddenly swerved. By 
the time Monica realized that the van was swerving, it was too late to 
react. A car had crossed the centerline, missed the van and hit 
Monica's car head on.
  When she regained consciousness, Monica realized that she had a 
broken leg. She could see Danielle, who suffered a broken arm and 
bruises, but she could not see 8-year-old Stephanie. Stephanie was 
pinned down, out of sight, and died immediately at the scene.
  Stephanie was not the only one who tragically lost her life in a 
terrible accident. A passenger who was riding with the drunk driver 
also died. Monica and the man who caused the accident were airlifted to 
the hospital together. The man's breath smelled so strongly of alcohol 
that it was overpowering.
  It turns out that the driver had a number of accidents since 1982, 
several DUI's, no license, and no insurance. But none of that stopped 
him from driving that night. In January of 1997, the driver was 
sentenced to 40 years, 40 years in prison, but not before the Nicola 
family had to endure an entire year without justice.
  Today the Nicola family, John, Monica, and Danielle, reside in 
Pinellas County, FL, my county. The Nicolas are not alone in their 
suffering, but their story is so very important for all of us to hear. 
It awakens us to the fact that there are real people behind the 
statistics we hear so often.
  Drunk driving knows no social or economic boundaries. Indeed, I am 
sure that we all know, as I said earlier, of a relative, friend, or 
celebrity who at one time or another got behind the wheel of a car 
after one too many drinks.
  Many Floridians may recall the story of Olympic diver Bruce Kimball 
and the night he killed two teenagers in Brandon, FL. Ironically, Bruce 
Kimball has experienced both sides of a drunk driving collision, first 
as the victim and then as the offender.
  For those of you who are not familiar with this story, let me take a 
few minutes to review this tragic story. Bruce Kimball won a silver 
medal in diving at the 1984 Summer Olympics. Just prior to the 1988 
Olympics, he had a few drinks and got in his car to drive. The Houston 
Chronicle wrote an article on Bruce in October of 1994 which recounts 
his story. To paraphrase the Chronicle, his father Dick was, and still 
is, the diving coach at Michigan, and so Bruce Kimball gravitated 
naturally to that sport. Bruce blossomed quickly, eventually winning 14 
Junior Olympic national titles, and at 17 stamped himself as one of 
this country's top prospects with a fifth-place finish at the 1980 
Olympic trials. The following October, as he was driving friends home, 
his van was hit head on by a drunk driver and suddenly Bruce was 
fighting not only for his future, but for his life as well. His skull 
was cracked. Every bone in his face was broken. His spleen was 
ruptured. His liver was lacerated. His left leg was broken. His 
bleeding was torrential, and 14 hours of reconstructive surgery was 
needed to put him back together.
  Yet, a mere 9 months later, he returned to diving. He was often 
referred to as ``the Comeback Kid.'' And when he won a silver medal in 
platform diving at the 1984 Games of Los Angeles, he stood as a true 
profile in courage.
  As he trained in Florida for the 1988 Olympic trials, he was still 
considered the second best diver in the world. Those trials were less 
than 3 weeks away on the night of August 1, when Bruce Kimball roared 
down a dark and narrow street in Brandon behind the wheel of a speeding 
sports car.
  About 30 teenagers were gathered at the end of that dead-end street 
in a place they called the spot, and in an instant Kimball plowed into 
them, killing 2 of them and injuring 4 others. His

[[Page H2575]]

blood alcohol level, a prosecutor later claimed, was .2, which was 
twice the legal limit under Florida law. His speed at impact was 
estimated at 75 miles per hour.
  Kimball was sentenced to 17 years in prison, but in November 1993, 
after undergoing extensive drug and alcohol rehabilitation at four 
different Florida institutions, he was released after serving 5 years. 
After being released, Bruce started a part-time job in a Chicago high 
school coaching diving. Two times Bruce Kimball has had the opportunity 
to rebuild his life. Unfortunately, the victims of this tragedy will 
never have that chance.
  Mr. Speaker, the stories about Stephanie Nicola and Bruce Kimball 
remind us that drunk driving can affect anyone's life. Yet, what is 
most unfortunate is that these terrible events did not have to occur. 
They could have been avoided had the drivers taken responsibility for 
themselves and not driven their cars while impaired.
  These drunk drivers are not evil people, Mr. Speaker. They are just 
irresponsible. They go out on the town to have fun. They have a few too 
many drinks and, believing that they are okay to drive, turn the 
ignition on and zoom off.

                              {time}  1930

  If they are lucky, they make it home. But all too often something 
terrible happens, someone gets hurt or, even worse, someone gets 
killed.
  Last week a North Carolina jury held a drunk driver Thomas Jones to 
the highest level of accountability for killing two Wake Forest 
University students. The jury sentenced Mr. Jones to life in prison for 
his actions.
  I believe that this verdict, Mr. Speaker, is evidence that Americans 
are no longer willing to tolerate this type of irresponsible behavior.
  Much of this change in attitude is in large part due to the 
grassroots organizations throughout the United States which have taken 
the lead in educating students and parents about the dangers of 
drinking and driving. Groups like MADD, CADD, SADD, and RID have made 
tremendous progress in promoting responsibility and raising awareness 
about the dangers of drunk driving. These grassroots organizations have 
pushed for legislative changes regarding drunk driving.
  In my home State of Florida, they played an integral role in lowering 
the legal blood alcohol content from .10 to .08. According to the 
Centers for Disease Control, States that have lowered the legal blood 
alcohol content to .08 have experienced a significant decline in the 
proportion of fatal crashes relative to other States which have not 
adopted these laws.
  Other examples of success by grassroots campaigns in Florida during 
the past 10 years include raising the legal drinking limit to 21 years 
of age and instituting mandatory license revocation for anyone caught 
drinking and driving.
  However, Mr. Speaker, I am convinced that the most significant 
accomplishment by drunk driving opponents has been, as mentioned 
earlier, the nationwide awareness and acceptance that drinking and 
driving is a serious problem. I want to commend all of those who have 
given their time and energy to make this cause very worthwhile.
  Mr. Speaker, we must continue our fight to end this terrible problem 
which affects so very many of us. We in Congress have a moral 
obligation to join together with grassroots organizations in raising 
the awareness about the dangers of drunk driving. I thank my colleagues 
for joining me in this special order to strengthen our commitment and 
resolve to keep our Nation's roads safe from drunk drivers.
  I have a number of facts here. I call it the Fact Sheet on Alcohol-
Impaired Driving. This is from the Centers for Disease Control, dated 
May 13, 1997. I am going to submit that as a part of the Record in the 
interest of time here this evening.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Strickland].
  Mr. STRICKLAND. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to 
me. I am happy to join the gentleman tonight. I want to thank him for 
taking the time and the effort to bring this critical problem to our 
awareness.
  Young people unfortunately oftentimes do not plan ahead as they 
should. They sometimes act impulsively when they should not. As I have 
visited many high schools in my district, recently have been encouraged 
to see banners decorating the hallways and the lobby areas reminding 
young people that, as prom season approaches, this is a very critical 
time. It is a time when they need to be sensitized to the dangers of 
drinking and driving.
  I would like to say that I am encouraged as I have seen high schools 
especially making special efforts to see that prom night is a time of 
safety as well as entertainment and enjoyment for our young people. And 
they have done that by not only trying to educate the young people 
regarding the dangers of drinking and driving but also making after-
prom activities available which in some cases last all night in a safe 
and secure and well-supervised setting.
  I think the gentleman is right. The greatest effort that we can make 
in terms of keeping our young people safe during this prom season is to 
educate them to the dangers and then to take those steps necessary to 
make sure that their activities are well supervised. Nearly every year 
in my State of Ohio, we read some tragic story about young people who 
have gone to the prom and then had a tragic accident. I am hopeful that 
this year in my State and in my district as well as across the country 
that the efforts that the gentleman and others are making to raise this 
issue in terms of public awareness will prevent such a tragedy from 
happening. I am happy to join the gentleman and to thank him for his 
efforts.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio, who is a 
very busy and active member of my Committee on Commerce. And I also 
thank the gentleman for reminding us that this is prom season. We have 
talked about MADD and SADD and RID and CADD, et cetera. There are other 
organizations out there that have helped. But one of the things that 
has really pleased me is for instance Busch Gardens down in Tampa, FL, 
and so many other private entities, if you will, have gotten really 
involved and have invited the young people into their facilities during 
this period of time so that they can have a good time and not have to 
travel long distances and go from one location to another for their 
proms. All of that is helping. Of course what we do here is going to be 
of great help, too. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Souder].
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's leadership on 
this issue. In addition to commenting on this, there is another related 
matter I want to raise tonight. I appreciate the gentleman yielding 
some time.
  I met earlier today with Michael Larrance from Hamilton High School 
in my district who is out here for the conference. He has formed a 
group at his high school of students who are committed not only to 
trying to combat alcohol abuse but also drug abuse, teen pregnancy and 
other issues and the need to stress abstinence in these areas.
  I worked recently to put together a play that he has taken to other 
schools, too, to try to address this. I think it is very important that 
we encourage efforts among the students themselves to combat this. 
Having a son 17 who is a junior in high school and a daughter who is 
19, I am very concerned when they have hit prom season and a lot of the 
spring seasons and the various trips that they go on, about what they 
and their friends, and you always worry about who they are riding with, 
not only their behavior.
  I also know that my friend, Senator Tom Wyss, in Indiana has been 
battling hard with open container laws and various things in Indiana 
that have been huge fights because there is a lot of money that goes 
into trying to keep us from putting difficult standards on. But the 
zero tolerance type of policies a lot of schools are putting in, 
efforts of police forces to crack down on this, is not only good for 
our kids but for the rest of us. It is frightening to think of somebody 
who is alcohol drenched or drug crazed driving down the highway, and 
you are minding your own business and all of a sudden your life is 
taken out of your hands because of someone else's behavior.
  One of the things I visited over 20 years in the last 6 months, 
talking

[[Page H2576]]

about particularly narcotics abuse but including alcohol and tobacco 
abuse, and one of the things that I have become concerned with is 
a bill that we are dealing with later this week regarding narcotics. I 
am afraid and I am sorry to announce this, but apparently our war 
against drugs is over. That is the good news. Unfortunately, if this 
bill we are working on later this week on international issues survives 
the legislative process, the drug producers and the drug shippers will 
have won instead of our Nation, because we are now going to give up the 
current drug certification process.

  Many Americans will wonder what I am talking about. Section 490 of 
H.R. 1486 ends, repeat, kills off provisions in current law which 
require the President to certify to Congress if a country produces 
illegal drugs or ships them to kill U.S. children. In place of the 
current law, the bill the House is considering replaces drug 
certification with a pile of loopholes and exceptions that are 
virtually certain to mean no country, including Mexico, will ever been 
decertified for U.S. foreign aid.
  Here is what section 490 does. It allows the President to, and I 
quote, ``to the extent considered necessary by the President,'' end 
quote, to hold back foreign aid or instruct the U.S. representative at 
the World Bank to vote against loans to countries if a series of 
conditions suggested in the legislation are violated.
  Just to be sure that the law is absolutely weak, the legislation 
allows the President to ignore even the new and timid standards if 
acting against a pro-drug country, including Mexico, will, and I quote 
again, ``affect other United States national interests.''
  When I read this provision in the bill, I thought to myself, what a 
nice gift this will be for President Clinton's weak-on-drugs choice to 
be U.S. Ambassador to Mexico to take with him. We are looking at 
appointing an ambassador to Mexico who believes in so-called medicinal 
use of marijuana. There is no medicinal use of marijuana.
  There is a medicinal use of THC, which is found in other drugs. It is 
a back-door effort to legalize drugs. If the policy of the Congress is 
not to stand up when we send an ambassador to Mexico who is supporting 
back-door legalization and we take out the drug certification process, 
what message is this to the kids? We are telling them on one hand, do 
not drink, do not do drugs. On the other hand, what we are saying is, 
if trade is more important and all of us, and I know in Florida it is 
important, in Indiana it is increasingly important. Nobody is saying 
that trade is not important, nobody is saying we do not have huge 
immigration questions to deal with. At the same time, we cannot be so 
concerned about risking some trade or irritation as we work through 
this that we back off our focus on the drug war.
  So I hope to have more to say on this later this week. But I wanted 
to take this opportunity to come down and say that sometimes we only 
talk about marijuana and cocaine, and we forget that alcohol is the No. 
1 problem among teens. But we also need to understand as a Nation that 
these things are closely interrelated, and abusers of one are abusers 
of another. We need to send a clear, concise, consistent message across 
the board that we stand against this abuse. It is critical for our 
country, for the future of our young people. It is important in our 
international policy. We cannot send our children the message that 
money is more important to us than our lives and safety and their own 
character development which gets impaired when you use any kind of 
narcotics, whether it is alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, heroin.
  I know in Florida we have had an outburst of the heroin problem, too. 
We need to look at all these things. I commend the gentleman again 
tonight for his efforts on drunk driving and all those teens and 
parents who have been involved in SADD and MADD and those who have been 
particularly affected by this. Nothing is more tragic than to talk with 
somebody, as we have had in all of our districts and all over the 
country, somebody who has lost a life--lost a mother, a father, or lost 
one of their cherished children because somebody could not handle the 
alcohol and somebody was not responsible and because of that, somebody 
else is dead.

  I thank the gentleman for his efforts and thank him for yielding me 
time tonight.
  Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for reminding us 
that these drugs, if you will, and alcohol are certainly very 
interrelated. And our wars, in terms of trying to protect our young 
people, must include both drugs as well as alcohol and other ills that 
are really out there, so many of them.
  I thank the gentleman for his great work on this subject.
  Mr. PAPPAS. Mr. Speaker, just a few weeks ago, several of my 
colleagues and I came to the floor to discuss the increasingly growing 
problem of juvenile crime in our Nation. All too many of the stories 
and statistics that I heard my colleagues discuss stemmed from alcohol 
abuse.
  Alcohol abuse among our Nation's youth has indeed become a very 
serious problem. According to a recent Washington Post-ABC News survey 
of teens and parents, alcohol abuse was identified as the biggest drug 
problem facing young people today. I have also seen several studies and 
reports that reveal that possibly more than half of the country's 
population that is over the age of 12 is currently using alcohol.
  Let me just repeat that: more than 50 percent of the Nation's 
teenagers use alcohol. We are talking about 8th, 9th, and 10th graders.
  Among other things, this is the same age when many young people are 
first learning to drive. Simply stated, the two do not mix. We cannot 
begin to tackle the problems of drunk driving without at the same time 
addressing underage drinking.
  For the past few years, I have stood on the steps of the Somerset 
County Courthouse in a candlelight vigil as the names of victims of 
drunk driving are read. I pray that next year fewer names are read off.
  We are all probably aware of the tremendous peer pressure that so 
many young people face today. But this week, students from across the 
country gathered in Washington for the National Youth Summit To Prevent 
Underage Drinking. These students discussed ideas and made 
recommendations to curb this problem.
  The idea of students and elected officials working together to tackle 
this problem has been very successful in Somerset County, NJ. While 
serving as a Somerset County freeholder, I helped form the Somerset 
County Youth Council in which I asked local school principals to 
recommend young people to come together and form a council to advise 
the local elected officials about the pressures facing our youth and 
strategies for addressing those needs.
  This youth council became involved in a wide variety of youth related 
efforts such as substance abuse prevention ideas, self-esteem building 
projects, peer leadership programs, and community service and civic 
projects.
  I am also proud to say that I have been involved for a number of 
years in the 4-H program, and have always felt that this program goes a 
long way in directing our Nation's youth in positive directions.
  I applaud the efforts of the students that came to Washington this 
week. I wish them well as they return home to share their efforts and 
recommendations with their classmates and friends. I also want to call 
upon the Nation's elected officials, leaders, teachers, and parents to 
encourage these efforts and provide a positive model for these 
youngsters.
  Maybe, if we all put our shoulders to the same wheel, we can work to 
create a brighter future for America.

                          ____________________