This past month, a group of three Republican representatives from Wisconsin proposed a bill aiming to lower the state’s drinking age to 19. Infamous stories of drinking deaths on college campuses have emerged in recent years. Also knowing that “1,825 college students between the ages of 18 and 24 die from alcohol-related unintentional injuries, including motor-vehicle crashes,” according to research published in the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, makes one think that there needs to be a change. Perhaps these lawmakers are onto something.
Clearly, America’s approach to alcohol education is not working. It may seem counterintuitive to lower the drinking ages, but there are a host of potential advantages, not only for the youth of the nation, but also for the country as a whole.
These benefits can be seen across the Atlantic. European countries, such as Spain, Italy, and France, all have lower drinking ages than the United States. There, alcohol is viewed as a cultural component, not as a tool to get drunk. Teenagers, and sometimes children, may drink wine or beer with their parents over family dinners. This approach eases youth into the drinking scene and removes the thrill of breaking the law. Representative Adam Jarchow, among the lawmakers that proposed the bill to Wisconsin state legislatures, explained to WMTV in Madison that, “The idea is if you prohibit people fr doing something until they are 21, the natural inclination is to be a little bit rebellious when they’re young, (and) then to overindulge.” We believe that lowering the drinking age will ignite a cultural change, normalizing the act of drinking responsibly in moderation, and ending alcohol’s taboo attraction.
Additionally, both lawmakers and parents should be aware that the reality of the matter is that teenagers will drink, no matter the legal age. According to the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, underage consumers account for 17.5% of the national spending on alcohol. But, lowering drinking ages, and subsequently encouraging the cultural European model, will help them be more safe when they do.
Young adults would be in regulated areas, such as bars or restaurants, not fraternity houses or house parties, where most accidents occur in relation to binge drinking. Some critics cite concerns over a potential increase in drunk driving incidents, but in fact, reports by the American Economic Review, the Southern Economic Journal, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and Forbes, show that since the national drinking age was raised to 21 in 1984, the rate of driving accidents and fatalities in Europe has decreased more than in the US.
After living in England for two years, where children aged 16 can have wine or beer under family supervision, Wren Sablich ‘18 says, “I just think that was a good thing to start when you’re younger so you know how to control yourself when you’re older.” She notes a specific time when she went to her neighbor’s house for dinner in eighth grade, and was offered a beer or a glass of wine along with the neighbor’s two kids, who were at that time in seventh and sixth grade. “It’s safer because if you’re starting in your house with your parents. When you go out it’s safer because you’ve already had alcohol before so you know your limits,” she adds.
At 18, teenagers become legal adults. They are allowed to join the military, vote, and serve on juries. One can risk his or her life serving our country on foreign turf, but cannot enjoy a celebratory beer upon returning home. This needs to change. Scholium applauds the representatives from Wisconsin for their progressive proposal, and urges Pennsylvania lawmakers to reconsider the current drinking age in our state.