A federal agency is recommending that states stop offering community
service to repeat drunken drivers in lieu of jail time and require them to
get treatment.
Those are two of a group of proposals the National Transportation Safety Board is
pushing in letters to U.S. Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater and the nation's
governors.
A federal transportation law enacted in 1998 already calls for taking highway
construction money from states that do not implement specific measures designed to
crack down on repeat drunken drivers by Oct. 1.
But four of the five members of the independent NTSB are suggesting that law
should be further improved. They suggest, in part, that repeat offenders should be
monitored electronically as an alternative to jail time.
In Illinois, legislators and law enforcement officials already had been reviewing
ideas to crack down on repeat drunken drivers in the wake of a Daily Herald
investigation that found nearly 185,049 licensed drivers had more than one drunken
driving court action on their records and the most chronic offenders regularly drive
illegally after jail stints that rarely were longer than two years.
"One of the things that happened is people thought the drunken driving problem went
away," said Don McNamara, a regional director for the Department of
Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. "Because of your
series and some other activity, we're seeing a resurgence of people saying, 'What
can we do to stop the carnage on the highway?'" In the letters to state and federal
officials, the independent NTSB suggests that the definition of repeat offender be
broadened beyond those with multiple court convictions to those who have re-ceived
administrative sanctions.
The board also recommends public officials should uniformly look back at least 10
years when considering whether to treat someone charged with driving drunk as a
repeat offender. The 1998 law, for instance, only requires states to consider tougher
sanctions against drivers with a drunken driving conviction in the previous five
years. Board members note some states consider only the three-year period previous
to an offense, while others consider a driver's lifetime record.
McNamara especially applauded as "very positive" the proposal to broaden the period
and definition of repeat drunken drivers because he believes Illinois officials and
others don't always properly identify all hardcore drunken drivers.
The federal transportation department is required by law to file a response to the
NTSB recommendation within 90 days. "We will actually follow up ourselves and
move forward," McNamara said. Another idea the NTSB recommends is the earlier
use of ignition interlock devices that require an offender to prove he or she is not
legally drunk in order to start a vehicle. "Immobilization should occur at the time of
arrest, not conviction," the letter to Slater states.
Marti Belluschi, the DUI prevention adviser for Illinois Secretary of State Jesse
White, said the NTSB proposal calling for home monitoring could address some
people's concerns about jail overcrowding. But she raised concerns about
eliminating the option of community service. Working in a morgue, for instance,
she said, might be a better deterrent for some offenders than serving jail time.
"We will be working with (the state transportation department) on the appropriate
pieces of legislation for Illinois," Belluschi added.
