Now
A Few Clouds
32°
High
32°
Low
21°
Full Forecast

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > News > Local
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

College heads seek debate on drinking age

Comments 91 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By JUSTIN POPE / The Associated Press

Tuesday, Aug 19, 2008 - 07:17:17 pm CDT

College presidents from about 100 of the nation’s universities, including Duke, Dartmouth and Ohio State, are calling on lawmakers to consider lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18, saying current laws actually encourage dangerous binge drinking on campus.

The movement, called the Amethyst Initiative, began recruiting presidents more than a year ago to provoke national debate about the drinking age.

“This is a law that is routinely evaded,’’ said John McCardell, former president of Middlebury College in Vermont, who started the organization. “It is a law that the people at whom it is directed believe is unjust and unfair and discriminatory.’’

Story Photo
In this 2003 file photo, a Lincoln police officer writes a citation following a college party. (LJS File)

Related Link(s):


The Amethyst Initiative
At UNL

Following implementation of an environmental approach designed to impact high-risk drinking among college students, this NU Directions project data reports:



* The percentage of freshmen who report abstaining from alcohol increased from 15.5% in 1997 to 35.5% in 2007



* The percentage of sophomores who report abstaining from alcohol increased from 18.6% in 1999 to 37.3% in 1007



* The percentage of freshmen who report that they did not binge in high school but binged in college decreased from 30.7% in 1993 to 18.8% in 2003



* The percentage of UNL undergraduate students who report binge drinking decreased from 62.7% in 1997 to 41% in 2007

Other prominent schools in the group include Syracuse, Tufts, Colgate, Kenyon and Morehouse.

But so far, no local schools appear on the list.

University of Nebraska-Lincoln Chancellor Harvey Perlman said he did not sign on to the Amethyst Initiative, but he did have the chance to do so.

“I do not think merely dropping the legal age to drink would have a beneficial impact,” he said in an e-mail.

“I do not think simple solutions usually lead to solving very complex problems. I think our programs have shown that we can impact the level of binge drinking, which is the style of drinking that puts our students most at risk.”

Doane President Jonathan Brand also was invited to sign, but declined.

Outreach programs that educate students about responsible alcohol consumption have proven effective in curbing binge drinking, Brand said.

“And that’s a much more effective approach than some sort of simplistic dropping of the legal age,” he said.

Nebraska Wesleyan University President Fred Ohles is similarly committed to alcohol-abuse awareness programs and also declined to join the Amethyst Initiative, spokeswoman Sara Olson said.

UNL senior Trevor Nieveen, a student government officer, sees pros and cons to the initiative.

On one hand, Nieveen said, the fact 18-year-olds can serve in the military but can’t legally drink seems odd. And he saw responsible drinking by those under 21 while studying abroad in Spain, where the drinking age is 18.

But Nieveen also worries about alcohol abuse among high school students and is skeptical that lowering the drinking age would automatically lead to more responsible drinking habits.

“There’s a huge maturity difference between 18 and 21,” Nieveen said.

Backlash already has begun at universities who did join the movement.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving says lowering the drinking age would lead to more fatal car crashes. It accuses the presidents of misrepresenting science and looking for an easy way out of an inconvenient problem. MADD officials are even urging parents to think carefully about the safety of colleges whose presidents have signed on to the initiative.

“It’s very clear the 21-year-old drinking age will not be enforced at those campuses,’’ said Laura Dean-Mooney, national president of MADD.

Both sides agree alcohol abuse by students is a huge problem.

Research has found that more than 40 percent of college students reported at least one symptom of alcohol abuse or dependence. One study has estimated more than 500,000 full-time students at four-year colleges suffer injuries each year related in some way to drinking, and about 1,700 die in such accidents.

A recent Associated Press analysis of federal records found 157 college-age people, 18 to 23, drank themselves to death from 1999 through 2005.

Moana Jagasia, a Duke University sophomore from Singapore, where the drinking age is lower, said reducing the age in the U.S. could be helpful.

“There isn’t that much difference in maturity between 21 and 18,’’ she said. “If the age is younger, you’re getting exposed to it at a younger age, and you don’t freak out when you get to campus.’’

The statement the presidents have signed avoids calling explicitly for a younger drinking age. Rather, it seeks “an informed and dispassionate debate’’ over the issue and the federal highway law that made 21 the de facto national drinking age by denying money to any state that bucks the trend.

But the statement makes clear the signers think the law isn’t working, citing a “culture of dangerous, clandestine binge-drinking,” and noting that while adults under 21 can vote and enlist in the military, they “are told they are not mature enough to have a beer.’’

Journal Star reporters Micah Mertes and Melissa Lee contributed to this story.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
BicycleMike wrote on August 19, 2008 10:03 am:
" What a crock! Yeah lowering the drinking age is going to stop binge drinking. So the 6 18 year kids sitting around on a Friday night are going to say to each other "Gentlemen would you care for a nice drink before we end the night, I could really go for 1 beer." "why yes, one drink would be very pleasurable." I can't believe how stupid this is. "

 pete wrote on August 19, 2008 10:06 am:
" this is the solution from our highest educated faction? help!!! talk about tunnel vision. all this would do is make the problem someone else's. glad to read UNL didnt sign on. "

 SB wrote on August 19, 2008 10:06 am:
" Of course all they have to do is tax alcohol higher and the debate is over since college students won’t be able to afford it anymore. Parents; you have 18 years to mold and brainwash them to your ways. The crazy college kids who abuse alcohol are the ones that have never been out from under the parent’s wing and experience their first alcoholic decision in college surrounded by peer pressure. No different than sex education; we don’t want to fully educate or offer responsibility, and then want them to make the decision WE feel is best for them. Give them all the rights, privileges, and education they are entitled to with the status of ‘adult’. "

 The Majority wrote on August 19, 2008 10:06 am:
" Congratulations to UNL for tackling this issue nearly a decade ago. Credible research shows that the majority of students do NOT high risk drink. It is a misperception that their peers drink more than they do that leads students to high risk drink. By illustrating that most students only have a few drinks when they choose to drink, it decreases the behavior.
On this age related issue, what kind of message does it send that we tell people you're old enough to die in some desert, you're old enough to make a decision about the leader of our country, but you're not mature enough to consume alcohol? "

 twentyfive wrote on August 19, 2008 10:08 am:
" Don't you think it's kinda funny that the CEO of MADD is a dude?

Eighteen seems a little young, maybe 19. I do agree that the age does perpetuate the problem a bit. It becomes riskier to drink, which heightens the attraction to do so. Once you can legally drink at a bar, it's like, "no big deal", "why was this so much fun before?". "

 CS wrote on August 19, 2008 10:11 am:
" It is not a complicated problem. It is a simple matter of defining adulthood-either you are or you are not. At 17, with permission, one can enlist in the military, or 18/19 depending on the state, children become adults and have the same rights and responsibilities as such. They can vote in elections, they can enlist in the armed forces on their own, they can sign contracts/loans, they can marry. Yet, for some reason, there is this idea that they can't make decisions about the things they ingest-apparently in America our genetics are so fragile that they can't handle alcohol until 21, despite sharing a common genome with the entire planet and observations that in most every country except ours alcohol consumption is not an issue that demands so much wasted time and politicization. "

 K. wrote on August 19, 2008 10:16 am:
" I would say if they are going to lower it, make it 19---we don't need high school seniors boozing during the school year. 19 or a in the military if they are 17 or older. "

 Tim Regler wrote on August 19, 2008 10:22 am:
" There is absolutely no science or fact to back up the claims made by the proponent of lowering the age to 18. None. There is however, loads of scientific data on brain development, as well as traffic death and personal injury statistics to support the 21 year old standard. Perhaps a good start in lowering the incidents on campus would be to take a cue from the excellent NU Directions program on the UNL campus, and create an environment that promotes healthy alternatives, and doesn't simply give in to the lies of popular media culture and the alcohol industry itself. That's to Chancellor Perlman for "getting it". "

 Adult wrote on August 19, 2008 10:22 am:
" I've thought for years how hypocritical it is that a U.S. citizen of 18 years of age is considered an adult in that they can vote in any election, get married without parental permission, and sign up for the military to go and fight and die for their country. But these same “adults” can't legally have a beer for three more years. The higher drinking age is a variation of prohibition, which we all know worked so well.

As the article states, most college age kids are going to drink, you are just driving the drinking into hiding and heightening its risks. If these kids could go to a bar, they would at least have the oversight of a bar tender who is trained to cut someone off if they have overindulged. They will be spending their money on a per-drink basis rather than a flat amount for as much as you can drink, as is the case at most keg parties and other social gatherings for underage drinkers. Anyone who has ever eaten at a buffet knows that if it’s “all you can eat”, you are likely to overeat. The same is true for an “all you can drink” party. "

 David Bowden wrote on August 19, 2008 10:23 am:
" Given the age mix at college, the present law encourages binge drinking, has done so since the age became 21, and adds to the number of drunk drivers insofar as underage students are concerned. Underage college students are aware they can't easily get a drink so they are more likely to drink too much when they have access to drinks. As they can't drink on campus nor in a bar, they must go to a party or and off campus apartment to drink. Then, they must drive home. When the drinking age was 19 almost all college students were legal by the end of their first year if not their first semester. Thus, they could walk (not drive) to the bar or pub. Further, they had to pay as they drank which tended to slow them down relative to say splitting a keg of beer, and were secure in the knowledge that they could go out another day and buy another beer. Less binge drinking, less drunk driving (at least for those students who live on campus).

I don't know the if a lower drinking age is a fix-all as many 19-21 year old people are not college students. But I do believe having underage and legal age people in a somewhat closed social system encourages binge drinking. At least by the underage students. It would of course be best if all people followed the law, but until they do it is somewhat unreasonable to expect campus police, city police, county sheriffs, et al to enforce laws that are ignored with so little thought.

I cannot say how a lower drinking age would affect all college-age drivers, but I am sure it would cut binge drinking and, for on-campus students, cut down impaired driving as they would be more likely to walk to a pub or bar.

A couple of side notes: As I recall when the drinking age was raised from 19 to 20 and then 21 a big argument in favor of the increase was to cut down on highschool student drinking. Wonder if it did.

Again, from memory, when the age was lowered from 21 to 20 and then 19 the basic premise was that if 19 year olds were old enough to get married, work, serve in the armed forces, and vote they were old enough to drink. Seems like the premise is still valid. "

 Young person wrote on August 19, 2008 10:23 am:
" As a young person I agree! When I was under the age it was more exciting to drink! When I turned 21 it just wasn't as fun anymore...maybe because I didn't have to sneak around and the danger of the madness had gone. I think people should consider ALL aspects of this debate. Think of when you were young. I'm sure a lot of you were of legal age to drink when you were 18 because of the laws then! "

 Reconcile wrote on August 19, 2008 10:29 am:
" I think this is a great and responsible step. The current law and how it is received by young adults gives alcohol a big rebellion element that adds to its appeal and abuse. I believe they would handle it much more maturely and openly if we didn't differentiate it from all the other adult privileges granted at 18-19 years old. And by doing this you would have students partying in the open and in safer places. Taking parties out of the basements and back on or near campus means students can walk home, avoid seedy situations easier and feel as if they are trusted to be adults. This will lead to more responsible drinking! That said, this will be a very tough battle because many of those among the "safe drinking" forces would rather see prohibition than responsible drinking. "

 Bo wrote on August 19, 2008 10:30 am:
" binge drinking is a trend and who is more trendy than an 18 year old? "

 Darwin wrote on August 19, 2008 10:38 am:
" Yes, according to the highly educated and learned heads of several universities, making alcohol more readilly available will reduce teenage drinking. Wait. What? They think that kids drink because it is hard to get? Hmm...

Lets go ahead and fix other societal problems with the same approach. Lets reduce gang violence by issuing every gang memeber a Uzi and providing free ammo. Lets combat the nations obesity crisis by giving overweight people gift certificates to McDonalds so they can get all the free fries and shakes they want. We could certainly reduce the number of airplanes that get hijacked by placing a large bomb onboard, with a big red button on each seat's armrest marked "detonate".

Making it easier for kids to get drunk will not reduce the number that get drunk. I would think the big-brains at the Universities would grasp that simple concept.

From now on I will leave all my doors and windows unlocked to avoid being burglarized. Oh, and parents, be sure to put a few Cobras in your baby's crib at night to make sure they dont get bit.

"Culling the herd through stupidity since 1805" "

 Look at Europe wrote on August 19, 2008 10:47 am:
" Most of their drinking ages are quite low, and they do not have near the problem because drinking is introduced properly. The taboo of alcohol does make it more exciting and contributes to the binge mentality. If a guy/girl can serve their country, then their country should serve them back - in a bar. I do think 19 is appropriate, with a military exemption. "

 Jay wrote on August 19, 2008 10:49 am:
" You know what I think leads to binge drinking? Living in Nebraska. "

 john wrote on August 19, 2008 10:51 am:
" As we all know, every other country in the world has drinking age of 18 or lower and we never hear them complain or even think about raising the drinking age. They should definitely lower it to 18-19, but start teaching responsible drinking and effects of it in high schools. As long as you educate kids while they are younger it should be more accepted that drinking is not the only option to enjoy your weekends. "

 Kels wrote on August 19, 2008 10:56 am:
" Umm, the drinking age was 18 NOT all that long ago and I guarantee more than half of you remember those days, was it any different than then is it now? 18 or 21 admit that people are always going to drink underage. "

 lonnie wrote on August 19, 2008 10:57 am:
" If you are mature enough to make life and death decisions in war then you sure as hell are old enough to drink alcohol "

 this is a great idea wrote on August 19, 2008 11:07 am:
" There have been many many studies done in other countries. why do you think USA has the highest drinking age and the worst track record for alcohol-related crimes in the world? I have become friends with people that come from other countries were the drinking age is 16 and they can't drive a car until 18 and they have NO problems with drunk drivers. it's an order of priorities, In nebraska you're still considered a minor at 18 so if this was the new drinking age parents would be held accountable for there child's actions. this would result in teenagers learning how to drink responsibly from a parent figure.

but on second thought maybe this is a bad idea since people would rather be their childs bestfriend than be a good parent in todays time "

 yeah this will work wrote on August 19, 2008 11:15 am:
" It would work so well maybe we should do the same with automatic weapons. Hey since automatic weapons cause so much death by being illegal maybe we should just allow anyone and everyone to own them including those that are 18. What a great idea. Seriously people. making it legal doesn't make people more responsible with it. And to think college head thought of this idea. Wow. Someone help us. "

 Tom Casady wrote on August 19, 2008 11:21 am:
" If you're interested in what the local police chief has said on this issue, here's a few past out takes:

"Changing the drinking age based on a feeling or an opinion that it might contribute to a taboo-induced binging phenomenon is an incredibly bad idea. This is an issue that demands research-based evidence, not just appealing debate points."

"Those that want to lower the drinking age have apparently forgotten the huge body of research in the 1970's and 1980's that showed lower rates of alcohol related fatal traffic crashes in those states with a drinking age of 21."

"It would be reckless to change a national policy correlated with a dramatic decline in alcohol related traffic deaths of young people without absolutely convincing research evidence to the contrary."

"I am open to being convinced by solid research, but so far, I have seen no evidence that the legal drinking age--whatever it may be--somehow causes or exacerbates binge drinking. Even if there was such convincing research, how would lowering the legal drinking age change things for the better? Wouldn't it just push the problem down from 21 to 18? Do we really want the legal drinking age to split the senior class? Is that somehow an improvement?"

"I've heard the argument repeatedly that by dropping the legal drinking age binge drinking by young people would be reduced, and they would be gradually introduced to the sensible use of alcohol as in places like Italy, France, the UK or Germany. I'm not buying the assertion that there is no problem with binge drinking by young people in Europe. That's not what I've witnessed. Even if there is such evidence, I am unconvinced that the cultural differences can be boiled down to the legal drinking age. Until I see some solid evidence, I think the only sane course of action is to maintain a drinking age of 21."

"This isn't a public policy that we should tinker with lightly. Lives are at stake."

"If the legal drinking age were 18, high school seniors would be going on birthday bar crawls."

"I guess instead of downing 21 shots on their 21st birthday the celebrants would be drinking 18 on their 18th birthday. I fail to see that as progress."

"Some of the supporters of a legal drinking age of 18 look back wistfully at 3.2% beer pubs from their youth. They've forgotten the bad stuff, and seem to now believe that everyone drank lightly and blissfully in Petticoat Junction. Need I remind them that girls were required to wear skirts to school, boys were sent home if their hair touched the shirt collar, and the family car was for the entire family? It's not 1960 anymore" "

 as wrote on August 19, 2008 11:24 am:
" Hmmmm - 18 year olds will be a major force in the election for president this year. They are also the ones dying overseas in Iraq. Saying that they can do these things but can't legally drink a beer is ridiculously hypocritical.
Look at Europe where kids as young as 16 - 18 are exposed to drinking & believe it's normal to have wine or some other beverage with a meal. Of course kids here will see how much of a keg they can down in one drink when they are consistently pushed away from it by the do-good, nanny state we have become "

 Ryan wrote on August 19, 2008 11:30 am:
" How about we stop treating alcohol like a taboo and more like the reality of humanity that it is? How about parents treat alcohol correctly at home to show kids when they are young how responsible adults treat alcohol? The solutions are simple but it just takes a little bit of responsibility from us adults to raise children and show them how to behave. "

 Erik wrote on August 19, 2008 11:32 am:
" Other countries such as Germany and Colombia allow 18 year olds to be served alcohol. I don't see why it can't be any different here in the States. "

 Really majority wrote on August 19, 2008 11:36 am:
" Because every student I know lied when asked about drinking habits- and they always rounded down from the actualy amount. "

 Ryan wrote on August 19, 2008 11:37 am:
" It may not hurt some of you to do some research before making the ignorant comments that there is 'NO' research out there saying lower drinking ages have an effect on alcohol related problems.

Did it occur to any of you that the rate of alcohol related deaths in America is incredibly higher than that of any country in the world (per capita)? Now, if you could name for me the other countries on the planet that have 21 as their legal drinking age.

(Silence).

Exactly. America is the only country in the world with 21 as the drinking age. Remember when America put limits on alcohol consumption with that little event called 'prohibition'? What happened then, folks? Oh, that's right - disrespect for the law, development of consumption problems, as well as ORGANIZED CRIME! Putting these limits on the consumption of alcohol only makes it that more enticing to those who aren't allowed. "

 hmm wrote on August 19, 2008 11:42 am:
" i completely agree that the drinking age should be 18. i work with chronic and persistent alcholics; if indeed the goal is to reduce something measureable, like alcohol related driving deaths, then the solution has nothing to do with the drinking age. rather, it has to do with public transportation. i think groups like madd are barking up the wrong tree. drinking alochol to the point of it becoming a serious health risk has nothing to do with age.... perhaps harvey perlman does not understand this. "

 jk wrote on August 19, 2008 11:59 am:
" Re: the automatic weapons arguement. nothing like comparing apples to tractors.

you should use the argument that you have to be 18 to buy a shotgun, but 21 to buy a handgun, at least then you'd be in the same ballpark. (notwithstanding the fact that you have to get permits, background checks, etc)

you can smoke at 18 which will kill you, you can join the military at 18 which could kill you. how are those decisions really that much differnt than the decision to drink?

if 19 is the age of majority in Nebraska, then all of those decisions should be made at that age. this would also decrese the # of high school seniors on bar-crawls. "

 Sven wrote on August 19, 2008 12:00 pm:
" Just returned from a vacation in Sweden. The laws there are a little curious, but they work. To buy in a package store, you have to be 20. To drink in a bar or restaurant, you have to be 18. Hmmmmm. Part of the reason is that the bars and restaurants generally serve low alcohol beer.
Now, two big differences. The drunk driving law is .o2% and is severely strict with penalties to match. Secondly, Swedes don't tend, as a society, to tolerate drunk or drugged behavior and this extends to youth as well. Not to say the problems don't exist... but at only a fraction of the level you'd find here.
The solution would be to ok the lower age, but somehow figure out how to make drinking to excess recognized as the boorish behavior it really is. If the Swedes could figure it out in the 90's, I should hope we could do something similar. "

 Nic F wrote on August 19, 2008 12:02 pm:
" Why not go down to the ripe old age of 11 like most of Europe? They don't seem to have the problems that we do here in the states. You know why? Because at 11 you listen to your parents and you watch what they do. When your parents only have 1 or 2 drinks in a sitting, you think that is normal. You grow up thinking that 1 or 2 drinks is just fine, and anything more would probably not be a good idea. Over here in the states, most people are introduced to drinking at parties where people are drinking way more then they should, so they then think that is normal. "You can't just have 1 or 2 drinks...that'd be weird." I'd say go lower then 18. Sure you'll have those kids who fall in the 11-21 age who can all of a sudden drink, and there will be some fall-out. Luckily a lot of those kids should be in school still so you should be able to have some education on the whole drinking thing. I think Europe got this one right with the lower age limit. "

 Pander Bear wrote on August 19, 2008 12:04 pm:
" Sure, lower it to 18 - but *only* for those who are active duty military members, or reserves currently on active duty. Everyone else waits till 21, or perhaps 25. This is all election-year pandering to college students. "

 Ignignokt wrote on August 19, 2008 12:07 pm:
" No, Chief Hopalong, I (for one) am not interested in what you have to say on the matter. It is your job to enforce the law, not create or modify it...but such is your track record, as evidenced by your attempts to meddle in the concealed-carry law. "

 Maybe wrote on August 19, 2008 12:16 pm:
" We should increase the age limit that you can serve and die for your country. If you honestly think about it, alcohol should be outlawed completely just like mary jane. The way I see it, nobody is old enough to drink. "

 Andy wrote on August 19, 2008 12:19 pm:
" I think if it is going to be lowered, it has to be 19. 18 is too young. Some kids, like myself spent their whole senior year of highschool being 18. Thats not what we need. Nothing like going out for a beer with your coach after a big win. "

 Jerome wrote on August 19, 2008 12:31 pm:
" So what is Perlman doing to help 'solve a complex problem"? His approach is one that runs away from a problem. Creating an environment that allows and fosters responsiblity may be more a part of a solutin than he would admit. It doesnt make sense to impose a prohibition mentality when such laws cannot be fairly and justly enforced. Would Perlman require students to take a class to modify their behavior if they broke the law? Seems like he isn't a part of the solution either Over the years plenty of athletes have gotten into crime situations that were alcohol related, does the NCAA compliance group overlook some instances for convenience? "

 wrote on August 19, 2008 12:33 pm:
" Smoking is allowed by 18 year olds. This too kills people and harms others. Why is this legal and alchol is not? "

 Cloud wrote on August 19, 2008 12:38 pm:
" . When Congress passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984, it explicitly allowed kids to drink at home or in "private clubs or establishments." Similarly, under most state laws, it's legal for those under 21 to consume alcohol under certain conditions. Only six states, mostly rural ones, ban underage alcohol consumption completely. "

 Timmmy wrote on August 19, 2008 12:39 pm:
" This is absolutely the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. First off lets make alcohol legal to a bunch of seniors in high school that way that wont binge in college. Wow thats like saying we should make meth legal or any other drug that way people wont binge on that. If you dont want students binging on something we should make the legal limit high enough that people will be responsible like maybe 25 or 26 most people are done with college except for doctors and lawyers and some other groups. The colleges that supported this should be ashamed of themselves. Do they not consider that after ballgames and high school events this will give some seniors a way to purchase alcohol for their friends and not only will this make it easier for students to drink but you will have more fatalities due to the fact that most high school students no matter what age drink irresponsibly. I want to tip my hat off to Harvey the UNL Chancellor obviously he knows what this would do and he did not sign it. For the rest of the Colleges and their leaders that support this you really need to consider what you are doing cause if my kids or family get hit by an 18 year old drunk driver I am going to be really mad. And so would any other family. "

 Larry wrote on August 19, 2008 12:43 pm:
" .That matters because there's evidence that drinking with your kids--not buying them alcohol for a party but actually drinking with them at home--is a good way to teach responsible drinking behavior.

A few years ago, a team of North Carolina researchers, led by public-health professor Kristie Long Foley, examined whether adults' approval or disapproval mattered when adolescents were deciding whether and how much to drink. Foley's team analyzed surveys of more than 6,000 people ages 16 to 20 in 242 U.S. communities. One predictable finding: kids whose parents gave them alcohol for parties were more likely to binge-drink. That discovery underscored years of research showing that the earlier people start to drink, the more likely they are to become alcoholics.

But another result was surprising: if kids actually drank with their parents, they were about half as likely to say they had drunk alcohol in the past month and about one-third as likely to say they had had five or more drinks in a row in the previous two weeks. As Foley and her colleagues wrote in a 2004 Journal of Adolescent Health paper, "Drinking with parents appears to have a protective effect on general drinking trends." "

 Lincoln Taxpayer wrote on August 19, 2008 12:48 pm:
" If they are old enough to fight and die for our country they are old enough to drink !!! "

 Hey Ryan wrote on August 19, 2008 12:55 pm:
" The drinking age was 18 not too many years ago and guess what? Binge drinking did not go down, in fact, it went up. There were more DWI's than now. More alcohol ended up in the hands of younger people because all the 18 year olds were buying for their high school friends.

As for Europe, the culture overall is much different than here so please don't say that because Europe doesn't have a drinking problem because of lower age limit doesn't mean it will work here.

Also, read Chief Casaday's blog before you spout off that we would be better off with a lower drinking age.

If it was up to me, I'd raise the drinking age to 30. "

 Heck wrote on August 19, 2008 12:59 pm:
" Of course if EUROPE does it, we should follow. Well why not just give babies a bottle of beer instead of formula? Or should we wait until kindergarten to turn them into a complete drunk. Wow, the mentality of some. I like Jays comment though about living in Nebraska will lead to binge drinking. "

 JP wrote on August 19, 2008 1:24 pm:
" Imagine a war veteran returning from being shot at on behalf of their country and then getting in trouble for drinking a beer. Preposterous. That being said, lowering the drinking age for everyone is still not a solution. It should however, be lowered on American military bases. "

 wake up wrote on August 19, 2008 1:25 pm:
" Ok, so it illegal for me to smoke pot or use other "drugs", but alcohol, which produces the same effects as a drug is ok, and now they want to lower it to 18? How stupid can some people be? Alcohol is a dangerous drug to play with. I know most people will disagree with me, but come on, why do most people drink? Because it tastes good or because it releases inhibitions and makes you look cool? It is so funny to see people who pride themselves on not using "drugs", yet they themselves have no problem having a couple of drinks and letting the alcohol take over their body. "

 Carly Smith wrote on August 19, 2008 1:34 pm:
" We just had a debate in my Current Events class about this topic. While some of my peers stated that it would be a good idea, I said that honestly, 18 year olds are not responsible or mature enough to handle something like this. Sure, 17 and 18 year olds drink now because they know 21 year olds, so whats going to happen if we lower the drinking age to 18??? I'll tell you what; even younger kids are going to start drinking because kids 12-16 know kids that are 17 and 18, especially in smaller towns like Arlington, where I'm from. "

 JB wrote on August 19, 2008 1:35 pm:
" When I was in college back in the 70's I turned of age at 19, but a lot of my friends ended up having to wait till they were 21. They drank just as much, but usually while driving around the country at night. Changing the drinking age put a lot of bars out of business in Kearney then. "

 Emery wrote on August 19, 2008 1:38 pm:
" Drinking rules and laws in other countries is relevant. That is a good way to help establish a sense of place and perspective. Cultural differences and university programs to fulfill a diversification goal must be more tolerant and understanding of global stndards. Failure to show ability to accept these "irrelevant" issues that are sensationalized by those who seek to control others is a problem. Isolationism and opposition to expanding liberties is also a problem if that moves us to an intolerant government who loses touch with the people. You cannot expect to attract brilliant minds to the university and call her innovative if you demonstrate prohibition and totalitarian constraints. "

 JC wrote on August 19, 2008 1:38 pm:
" When the age was 19 in Nebraska it was 18 in Iowa, Kansas, and Colorado. I think Kansas it was 3.2 beer. All the Omaha kids went across the river to the Joker to drink. "

 Mike in DC wrote on August 19, 2008 1:44 pm:
" The 21-yr old limit is odd indeed. One needs to merge the idea with "independence." In some European countries, alchohol isn't deamonized as much as driving is. You can obtain drink at 16, but cannot drive until 18 -- you learn to deal with alchohol BEFORE you learn to deal with 2 tons of steel that can either be an invaluable tool or a killing machine. This is not unreasonable. Maybe we should focus on teaching the disciplines that moderate excess... drinking, eating, sex... pick your poison. Excessive eating is more dangerous than other vice for premature death, yet nobody cares. Secondly, punish the abusers. Don't make alcohol criminal, make it's abuse criminal. Officers would have more time to deal with abuse / intox if they were not having to deal with babysitting establishments over the 18-21 yr population. I would be more against lowering the driving age than lowering the drinking age. "

 tom issaquah wrote on August 19, 2008 1:47 pm:
" Back in the 70's the drinking age was 19 in Nebraska. Lowering the age back to 18 encourages more drinking and stupid driving on the part of a college freshman away from home for the first time and being drunk. Hmmm!!!, Maybe that was me. Yes that was me. I was lucky and made it through that time. Binge drinking affects a very very small part of the college population. Lowering the drinking age makes it all right to "try it because it is legal". The 18 age drinking law starts to bring in the 16 and 17 year people as they perceive that they are "close" enough to 18 to "give it a try". This law is a bad idea!!! "

 tom issaquah wrote on August 19, 2008 1:52 pm:
" Another thought. 18 brings beer into the high school scene legally. That is why Nebraska was at 19 for a few years. Think about that when you say Cya to your high school senior going out for the night!! "

 wat wrote on August 19, 2008 2:07 pm:
" If you want adults to stop acting like children, then you need to start treating them like adults. As long as you find it satisfactory to prohibit and regulate behavior, there will still be children looking to rebel. You can't have it both ways by complaining about the boomerang generation when completely enabling them to act that way. I think 19 would be a suitable age. It surpasses high school just enough, but gives teenagers a little bit of time. Oh, and Perlman shouldn't be proud of himself at all. What was Lincoln and UNL ranked as in the Top Binge Drinking Towns again? "

 Mom wrote on August 19, 2008 2:07 pm:
" They don't have to be in college to binge drink. Lowing the drinking age will not help with this. It will help with kids getting MIPs but the DUIs will increase. Lets think about this. "

 mark wrote on August 19, 2008 2:49 pm:
" great - as long as they're also responsible for their own major medical and car insurance. Lower the drinking age, and suspend license for any DUI at any age, at any BAL. "

 questions for the peanut gallery wrote on August 19, 2008 2:53 pm:
" There's lots of questions here, that as far as I can tell, have never been researched thoroughly or by an unbiased source; most of the organizations cited in the article are funded by groups with a neo-prohibitionist bent and unfortunately, the highest-profile individual countering their claims is funded by a spirits lobbying group. Anyway, did the studies properly account for...
1) Drinking ages in this country were not uniform in the 1970s, which encouraged driving to jurisdictions where the drinking age was lower?
2) That the decrease in drunk driving deaths in states with a higher drinking age was not a function of individuals having (on average) more experience driving before reaching legal drinking age?
3) If drunk driving is actually the issue here, and not consumption, wouldn't it make more sense to strengthen the DUI statutes? Europe, the land of reasonable alcohol laws, also has DUI laws that make ours look tame by comparison. "

 Anthony wrote on August 19, 2008 2:59 pm:
" This is one of the smartest idea's I've seen. It's about time this country went away from its prude roots and started to open its eye. Countries in Europe have a lower drinking age and binge drinking isn't a problem there. Why? Because drinking wasn't made taboo.... "

 Angela wrote on August 19, 2008 2:59 pm:
" MADD has served a valuable purpose, but when it begins to shape policy that ignores alcohol as a part of our culture then the group enters into a dimension it has less influence and may be too ambitious. Respnsible drinking and behaviors that use designated drivers are goals to support, however when intolerance and crazy...mad...initiatives seek to control soical behaviors the line must be drawn and yes, even criticize MADD. "

 Texan in Nebraska wrote on August 19, 2008 3:05 pm:
" The bottom line is this: We (The U.S) is supposed to be the greatest and most free country in the world but we prohibit drinking for people under 21, while over in Europe (not sure about drinkin laws in other parts of the globe) I know that alot of countries the range is anywhere from 14-18 in Gemrany its 16! Ive also heardtell that some countries theres NO LIMIT!! and ours is the highest age! the land of the free and ya cant drink (legally) until 21?! thats some bull right there. "

 Stupid Idea wrote on August 19, 2008 3:24 pm:
" These college leaders are simply trying to find a way out of controlling the problem on their campuses. The scientific research on the effects of alcohol on the brain during the final and crucial developmental stage in the teens and early 20s should be enough to convince people that this is a stupid idea.

As a high school teacher, I completely agree with all the posters who have pointed out that many high school seniors are 18. Rather than eliminating binge drinking in college (which is not caused by the drinking age or perhaps my 72 year old uncle and his other elderly buddies would have stopped binge drinking long ago), lowering the legal age will simply increase binge drinking among high schoolers who would have much easier access to alcohol. "

 your arguments are totally weak wrote on August 19, 2008 3:25 pm:
" I want to hear something intelligent that will make me think that lowering the drinking age is a good idea. I'm sick of this lame, 'old enough to die for their country but.....' comment--when they go overseas to die for their country, we all know they're no obstaining from alcohol. Give me something better. The fact of the matter is, America is a gluttenous country. We do everything to excess. Yes, they can drink younger in Europe, but their attitudes towards alcohol aren't 'I can't wait for Friday because I'm gonna get soooo wasted'. There are too many 'adults' that now have children and teenagers with this attitude of 'they're gonna do it anyway', and I think that's the problem. People drink and drive every day, and the idea is not to get caught. We're fat, we're competing with our neighbors for more impressive 'stuff', we're drug addicts, we're a nation that doesn't know anything but instant gratification, and that's why I scoff at the thought of lowering the legal drinking age so that teenagers can legally crawl home from the bar. "

 Tairra wrote on August 19, 2008 3:45 pm:
" Teaching responsibility and ability to set limits is a part of higher education. To deny equal privileges or deny young adults at the university anything less than a full range of acceptable social activities does not instell what or how adults should act in a professional setting. From concerts to first Friday, students are put in a lessor status if they don’t share the same privileges , and yes risks, that are enjoyed by the Chancellor. Leaders lead by example and help foster acceptable social behaviors. Ignoring this role may be an easy course for the university to take....mediocrity seems to flourish as minds get older and feeble leaders fail to expand the minds and responsibilities of students. Nothing creates animosity and resentment as the phrase “do as I say, not as I do”. "

 Rhonda wrote on August 19, 2008 3:53 pm:
" This will be a very controversial issue. I'm 26 so it doesn't affect me by my age but I see it as this: If at 18 you can sign a legal document, 19 in Nebraska, you can fight for your country and die for it, which my cousin did last July 21st, and you can make your own decisions than why not change the law. You "may" see more accidents but in my own legal opinion it probably won't be anymore than what is now. People are going to drink underage if they want to. They are going to try and hide it from police what not. If you drop the legal age than you might not see as many flight to avoids etc. People will drink no matter what at age 21 or at 18. If they do lower the age then I should hope there will be more grants for more law enforcement officers and more grants for "You Drink You Drive You Loose" campaigns. You might see less binge drinking and you may not. "

 eyes rolling wrote on August 19, 2008 4:02 pm:
" So imagine the legal drinking age is 18, all campuses would need to be "wet" and now the 16 year olds are binge drinking. It is just the same as teaching safe sex. Newer stronger laws won't necessarily help. Focus on the education and help our youth make the right decisions. Alcohol will always be out there just like sex, and other drugs. Educate, Educate, Educate and treat kids like they are capable of making good decisions and they will rise to the occasion. "

 Jeremy wrote on August 19, 2008 4:02 pm:
" If people are worried about drunk driving, make stiffer laws for a DUI. How about instead of slapping a wrist of a drunk driver, send them to jail. 6 months for a first offence might teach them a lesson. I am from a small town and also in school at UNL. I can tell you i binge drank at both and made trips to the hospital with my friends who were all underage. Once I turned 21, my alcohol consumption dropped dramatically. I rarely go out and drink compared to sitting at home, or walking distance to the bars and drink. It is much safer than the back road driving I used to do when we had to sneak beer. "

 year olds wrote on August 19, 2008 4:22 pm:
" barely know their heads from holes in the ground. Legally drinking will only make this worse. "

 Personally... wrote on August 19, 2008 4:50 pm:
" ...I find this whole argument a moot point. Raising or lowering the drinking age won't have an effect because the age doesn't have anything to do with it. If an individual is going to drink, they will find a way and they will do so. So, change it to 18, 19, 21 or 30 like one poster said - it won't make a lick of difference. I graduated in 2002, so I'm not that far off of being 21. I can tell you that drinking at parties started when I was a sophomore in high school. The night before my 21st birthday I pondered what would change while I was sleeping that night that would make me more responsible to drink alcohol than I was at that present moment? I know a line has to be drawn somewhere, but it doesn't seem to me like that line is much of a factor in college binge drinking and alcoholism. "

 just me wrote on August 19, 2008 4:53 pm:
" I came from a military family and lived all over the world. I started having wine with meals at the age of 10 -- mostly for special occasion meals. I liked wine, not so much beer. Loved the smell of martinis and used to make them for my folks, but when I tasted them, they were awful. I have been sincerely inebriated once in my life, when I was 28 and going through a divorce. I vowed never to be so again, and haven't, and I'm LOTS older than 28. As with everything, it's the attitude and environment that makes the difference. I didn't provide drinks for grad parties and threatened to escort home any attendees who thought it was ok to drink anything stronger than soda pop. I agree with the posters who advocate younger drinking ages coupled with parent involvement...and, unfortunately, have to agree that parenting can be a deal breaker because too many parents are only in title, not in actions. Completely agree with posters that bring up the fact that 18 is ok to vote and to die for your country, but not old enough to tip a bottle once in awhile. "

 am wrote on August 19, 2008 5:06 pm:
" Binge driking will always be a problem no matter the age limit on it. Until someone finds a way to make drinking not "cool", its just not gonna happen. "

 UNL student wrote on August 19, 2008 7:23 pm:
" In reality the 21 and over law isn't necessary legal when 18 is when you are an adult and can go to war. Plus if you're 18 or in college and you want to drink you can get it anytime you want it, simple as that. Everyone knows it, so why not let the 18 year olds just go and buy there own beer so the 21 and over's in college don't have to go buy it for them all the time. Everyone does it or did it when they were in college. "

 T wrote on August 19, 2008 7:49 pm:
" 18 is a fine age for drinking. It's the parent's of the kids who drink who should be more responsible. I bet half of the people who posted here have on idea their kids get drunk on a nightly basis. "

 perfect.. wrote on August 19, 2008 8:07 pm:
" my son is a senior in high school this year and one of his buddies turned 18 in July. I just cant imagine all the fun they would have senior year. As being a parent for 17.5 years, I can assure you that most 18 year olds are not responsible enough to be drinking. "

 I am an Adult wrote on August 19, 2008 8:27 pm:
" Lets lower the drinking age to 20 years old. See how that works and then we can see about going down to 19 years of age. Seems to me if someone is legally an adult then they should not be denied the ability to buy and consume alcohol. Increase the punishment for buying minors alcohol and let adults buy and drink booze. "

 idobelieve wrote on August 19, 2008 8:54 pm:
" I have worked over 20 years at more than one bar. I can tell you the truth. If there is a will they will find away. Like using the house of a former House member for the so called primor party where everybody binged for a couple of hours then they would load up the school bus and give them all a safe ride to the bar or bars. Just because the campus is dry, it doesn't mean the students are dry. In fact if you belonged to a Greek House you binged every weekend that you didn't go home. If your child got to the campus without knowing about bingeing they learned about it the first day they were there. Where there is a will, there is a way.
There might be a way to stop the binge drinking but having a dry camup isn't working. Oh and having a wet campus isn't the answer either. That answer would have to come from someone much wiser than me. Good luck finding that person. "

 Yup wrote on August 19, 2008 9:30 pm:
" You need to consider the peer pressure on the legal aged high school students. They will be under considerable pressure to buy for their underage classmates. "

 Foggy wrote on August 19, 2008 9:32 pm:
" Federal Law ALLOWS it. State Law and Campus policy are the route to change. Congress passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984, it explicitly allowed kids to drink at home or in "private clubs or establishments." If you want to whine for wine, it is the legislature and Perlman who have to be convinced. "

 Look again wrote on August 19, 2008 11:46 pm:
" To the people saying that lowering the age is bad: think abou