First-time DUI offenders in Wisconsin would be required to use an ignition interlock device (IID) under a proposal from Senator Chris Larson, D—Milwaukee, and Representative Tony Staskunas, D—West Allis. Specifically, Senate Bill 320 would require:

“… a court to order the operating privileges of a person who commits a first offense related to operating a vehicle while intoxicated, regardless of his or her alcohol concentration, be restricted to operating vehicles that are equipped with an ignition interlock device.”

Current law requires use of ignition interlock devices (IID’s) for first-time offenders with blood alcohol content of 0.15 or higher and for all repeat offenders.

The National Motorists Association does not condone or promote drunk driving in any way. We do, however, encourage policymakers to consider thoughtful solutions to the drunk-driving problem. Unfortunately, IID’s don’t fall into this category. The devices have proven unreliable, and a well-documented California DMV study found first-time offenders with interlocks on their cars had higher subsequent accident rates than first-time offenders without the devices.

Last year Mothers Against Drunk Driving floated a proposal requiring IID’s in every new vehicle sold. We know that national efforts like these begin incrementally at the local or state level, and MADD is mobilizing its Wisconsin members to support this bill.

The NMA opposes this legislation because IID’s are not an effective deterrent to drunk driving and because, if passed, this legislation may pave the way for even broader use of the devices.

SB 320 was introduced this week and has been referred to the Judiciary, Utilities, Commerce, and Government Operations committee. Please contact the committee members as well as your own Senator and Representative to let them know this bill won’t make Wisconsin’s roads any safer.

First-time DUI offenders in Pennsylvania may find it more difficult and expensive to drive under a new proposal from Sen. John C. Rafferty, R-Collegeville. Senate Bill 1184 would require first-time DUI offenders to “participate in and comply with the ignition interlock program…” Current law requires use of ignition interlock devices (IID’s) only after a second DUI conviction.

According to a recent news article, first-time offenders also face a variety of other penalties including mandatory alcohol highway safety school, a 12-month license suspension, six months probation and a $300 fine.

The National Motorists Association does not condone or promote drunk driving in any way. We do, however, encourage policymakers to consider thoughtful solutions to the drunk-driving problem. Unfortunately, IID’s don’t fall into this category. The devices have proven unreliable, and a well-documented California DMV study found first-time offenders with interlocks on their cars had higher subsequent accident rates than first-time offenders without the devices.

Last year Mothers Against Drunk Driving floated a proposal requiring IID’s in every new vehicle sold. We know that national efforts like these begin incrementally at the local or state level, and MADD has thrown its support behind the Pennsylvania bill.

The NMA opposes this legislation because IID’s are not an effective deterrent to drunk driving and because, if passed, this legislation may pave the way for even broader use of the devices.

SB 1184 is scheduled to be taken up by the full Pennsylvania Senate during its upcoming session beginning Oct. 24. Contact your legislators and let them know how you feel about this important issue.

A new bill, introduced in the U.S. Senate in February by New York Senator Charles "Chuck" Schumer, would put $12 million in annual funding for five years into the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety program.

According to the Indiana Beverage Journal, Shumer's proposed addition to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010 would eventually lead to every motorist in America being subjected to automatic alcohol testing before turning his or her engine on. The journal reports that according to Schumer's bill, alcohol detection devices would become standard in all automobiles within five to ten years.

Senator Schumer's web page, on the other hand, claims, "...this legislation does not require this technology to be installed in any car..." 

In any event, restaurant groups agree that if the devices were installed, they would probably be set, for liability reasons, below the legal blood-alcohol limit of .08. Furthermore, the American Beverage Institute (ABI) points out in a recent web article that "even if these new devices were 99.99966% effective (and that's a big 'if'), there would still be almost 4,000 cases of misreadings per day."

The money, according to Senator Schumer in a Buffalo News report of July 8th,  "...would be used to develop better technologies--such as a steering wheel that determined blood alcohol content from the sweat of a driver's hands..." and contrasted this with Breathalyzers now used which "...can be circumvented, such as by having the passenger blow into the machine." People concerned about how taxpayers' money is being used might fairly ask whether such a steering wheel technology, even if it were perfectly accurate, could not also be circumvented, perhaps simply by the use of gloves.

The web site Washingtonwatch.com recently conducted an e-poll that showed 76% opposition to the Act. They also estimated the cost of the Act would be $38.31 per family.

And of course, we have to wonder whether this kind of study will, in fact, take us down the road toward the point where all drivers are subjected to these costly and invasive "protections." The National Motorists Association discusses ignition interlock devices here.

Concerned citizens may express their views to Senator Schumer through his web site, or to their own U.S. Senators, listed here.