College chiefs urge new debate on drinking age.

Interestingly, it appears that an organization called Amethyst Initiative has been rather stealthily recruiting university and college presidents the past year in an effort to galvanize renewed debate on the Drinking Age. Per the Organization's Statement Page, one could say that the organization is more or less making the typical libertarian argument against the Minimum 21 Drinking Age.

Twenty-one is not working

A culture of dangerous, clandestine “binge-drinking”—often conducted off-campus—has developed.

Alcohol education that mandates abstinence as the only legal option has not resulted in significant constructive behavioral change among our students.

Adults under 21 are deemed capable of voting, signing contracts, serving on juries and enlisting in the military, but are told they are not mature enough to have a beer.

By choosing to use fake IDs, students make ethical compromises that erode respect for the law.

How many times must we relearn the lessons of prohibition?

We call upon our elected officials:

To support an informed and dispassionate public debate over the effects of the 21 year-old drinking age.

To consider whether the 10% highway fund “incentive” encourages or inhibits that debate.

To invite new ideas about the best ways to prepare young adults to make responsible decisions about alcohol.

We pledge ourselves and our institutions to playing a vigorous, constructive role as these critical discussions unfold.

Not surprisingly--now that this organizational effort has become public--MADD is engaging in full battle mode, evidenced by their new splash page on their website.

This should be an interesting battle if it actually transpires. I consider MADD to be a social conservative, neo-Prohibitionist organization that seeks to legislatively implement a de facto prohibitionary ban of alcohol(through decreasing BAC down to levels that would make any public consumption of alcohol a crime and utilizing police state tactics to enforce it). One thing to keep in mind is that defining BAC level itself as a crime extends beyond DWI enforcement. The Texas Alcohol Beverage Commission made news a few years ago when it began Statewide sweeping of bars and hotels and arresting anyone who had a BAC over .08. This was fully supported by MADD. It did, however, spark, a fairly significant backlash in Texas because it made national headlines and threatened the Texas Hotel convention business.

I think MADD can be taken if the focus is on prohibition. Unlike Drugs, this issue affects the middle and upper classes, and alcohol has always been the drug of choice for Americans. "Old enough to die in war but not old enough to drink a beer" is no longer a slogan. I think MADD overreaches when they counter with by stating don't send your children to the likes of Colgate, Dartmouth, Duke, Ohio State, Syracuse, Texas A & M, Maryland or Tufts because they won't enforce alcohol laws. I think that overreach can be effectively countered with "our objective is to give our students an education and not a criminal record."