C: Documents and Settings Russell My Documents Drunk Driving Assessment

Transportation Committee Wabe House of Representatives TO: You FROM: Ferguson Williams Chairman SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DRUNK DRIVING DATE: Today

Review the attached data and make appropriate recommendations concerning what policies the Transportation Committee should consider in the fight against repeat drunk driving. Concern yourself only with sanctions or measures that could be imposed in drunk drivers. Do not address the issue of the best blood alcohol concentration (BAC) or any police patrolling issues.

There is still money in the research budget. If you do not have enough information here, please request an additional research project that will obtain the information you need. You should specify: what you need to know, how you plan to obtain the information, and whom you would ask for information.

Your memo with recommendations should be addressed to me and may not be longer than five pages.

Information on Drunk Driving and

1 Data from the Studies

The problem of drunk driving in the United States Drunk driving has been a serious problem on American roads and streets for several decades. Approximately 15,000 people are killed each year in traffic accidents in which one or both drivers had been drinking.

Although only a small percentage of people stopped for drunk driving are ever stopped again, some repeat drunk drivers are stopped repeatedly. Repeat drunk drivers tend to be young men, and many are alcoholics.

Suggested solutions to the problem of drunk driving An amazing variety of remedies have been suggested to address the problem of drunk driving. They can be classified into several categories, including: . Alcohol policy, such as placing the legal definition of “drunk” at .10% blood alcohol concentration (BAC) or .08%, or another figure . Patrolling, such as setting up roadblocks or using improved methods to recognize drunk driving or to test for sobriety . Dealing with the drunk drivers after they have been caught in the act. This is the subject of your analysis.

Many types of measures are used to deal with people after they have been caught driving drunk. Different states use different measures in varying degrees of severity. Some measures apply to all drunk drivers, while others apply only to repeat drunk drivers. Virtually all experts on drunk driving agree that the first step in dealing with a drunk driver is to conduct an assessment. An assessment is an evaluation of the drunk driver’s situation. It is used to determine which sanctions should be imposed on the offender—such as jail, fines, treatment, or education. Experts think an assessment is important because different offenders will respond to different sanctions. After an assessment, some of the more common measures are:

2 Short-term incarceration Drunk drivers may be put in jail—sometimes for only a day or two, and sometimes for several months. Some states jail first-time drunk drivers, while others wait until the second or third offense. Jail is sometimes used in conjunction with other measures; for example, an offender might have a jail sentence waived or shortened if he participates in alcohol treatment.

Long-term incarceration Sometimes drunk drivers are incarcerated in prison for a year or more. States usually imprison drunk drivers only after several offenses, such as five or more. One problem with long-term incarceration is that it is very expensive for the state. If a large number of drunk drivers were incarcerated for long periods, new prisons would need to be built, which would be very expensive.

Incarceration with work release Under a work release program, an offender spends nights and weekends in jail but is able to go to work during the day. An offender is thereby able to keep his job, provide for his family, and maintain ties to his community.

Fines All states levy fines on drunk drivers. Fines for first-time offenders are typically several hundred dollars, while fines for repeat offenders can be thousands of dollars. For repeat drunk drivers, fines are often more than the offenders can pay. Large fines imposed on repeat drunk drivers are seldom paid.

Driver’s license suspension All states suspend a drunk driver’s license. The time of suspension may be a few days to more than a year. Suspensions are shorter for first-time offenders than for repeat offenders.

3 Occupational licenses Most states offer occupational licenses to drunk drivers. These licenses allow the offenders to drive to work, to alcohol treatment, or other necessary places. They are usually valid only for certain hours. Offenders are not allowed to drive for other purposes or at unapproved times.

Treatment Most states treat drunk drivers for alcoholism. Treatment involves the offender learning how to control his need for alcohol. It usually includes counseling. Alcoholics Anonymous is a successful non-governmental treatment approach.

Education Education includes several areas: 1) education about alcoholism; 2) education about social dynamics, family dynamics, and resisting peer pressure to drink; and 3) education for job skills so that the offender can get a job. In referring to the first type of education, about alcoholism, education and treatment are very similar, and there is no accepted distinction between the two. People often refer to “treatment and education” without differentiating them.

Intensive supervision or probation Sometimes drunk drivers are required to report frequently, as often as daily, to probation officers. They often have to undergo sobriety checks and participate in treatment programs. Failure to keep appointments or maintain participation in treatment can result in being sent to jail or prison.

Home confinement or electronic monitoring With electronic monitoring, an offender is able to live at home but not allowed to leave home except to go to work or for other approved activities. Offenders typically wear bracelets on their ankles that need to be within a short distance of a base unit in the home; if the offender goes too far from the base unit, an alarm will sound at the probation officer’s office.

4 Ignition Interlock Devices (IIDs) IIDs are installed in an offender’s vehicle. The vehicle will not start unless the driver blows into an alcohol-sensing device. If the driver is not sober, the car will not start. In addition, the driver will need to blow into the device periodically, or the engine will stop. The IID costs over $1,000. The cost is borne by the offender.

Seizing the vehicle Sometimes a drunk driver’s vehicle is seized. It may be returned after a specific amount of time or it may be sold. If it is returned, the offender must pay for storage. If it is sold, the offender loses his vehicle as well as paying a fine. A problem with this sanction is that judges are often reluctant to seize an expensive car driven by a first-time offender, and offenders with many drunk driving arrests frequently have vehicles that are worth less than the cost of seizure.

Victim impact panels Offenders are sometimes required to listen to the victims of drunk drivers. They hear of relatives killed and lives ruined by the actions of drunk drivers. The panels frequently become very emotional.

Special license plates Sometimes offenders are required to use special license plates on their cars. They may be a different color than the state’s other plates, or they may have special stripes on them. They may be clearly marked as “drunk driver” plates so that anybody can tell what they are, or they may begin with specific digits so that police officers can tell what they are but most people will not notice that they are special.

The data from the studies

Quotations from focus group and individual interviews The following quotations were taken from focus group discussions and individual interviews with four types of people who deal with drunk drivers in their jobs:

5 . Police officers . Jail and other corrections officers, including parole or probationary officers . Judges and other court officials . Treatment, education, and counseling professionals

The first quotations are about the overall approaches to take in dealing with drunk drivers.  “Focus on the first offense. Make it bitter.”  “We don’t have penalties that are strong enough. The first offense is the most important. That’s where we get them.”  “Treating the first offense as civil, instead of criminal, trivializes the offense. Are we doing a disservice to society and the offender? If we were tougher the first time, maybe they would not recidivate.”

The next quotations are about the “traditional” sanctions of fines, incarceration, and license suspension. Fines  “We need fines. Money is high on the list of consequences for people.”  “High fines are ineffectual. They are already so astronomical. These offenders are usually at the bottom of the economic ladder anyway. Higher fines won’t do any good.”  “Fines become irrelevant when they get very high.”  “Fines are for the short term. Six months or a year down the road, they’ve forgotten what they paid.”  Intoxicated people can’t pay fines. Fines won’t change behavior. They are not effective.”  “Extremely high fines are not useful. A $5,000 fine might as well be a $5 million fine. High fines keep them from getting their license and reinforce the cycle of depression and hopelessness—one more reason to drink. Smaller fines would have more of an effect than larger fines.”  “With fines you might as well be talking about the Academy Awards. Fines are not a part of their reality. They can’t pay them. A fine does nothing to deter people.”

6  “There needs to be fines. All taxpayers should not have to pay for treatment of an offender who pays nothing. The offenders should pay the fines and should accept responsibility for their actions. If they are too poor and can’t pay it, they can pay it later. Maybe they could use community service to work it off.”

Incarceration  “Incarceration is a slap and wakeup. Something needs to happen for the offenders to get treatment.”  “What works is fear of jail—fear of being taken away from drinking.”  “Everything that is done needs to be in conjunction with jail time. First-time offenders should go to jail. The first offense needs to criminalized. Even if there is no jail time, the first offense needs to be recorded as a criminal offense.  “Most drunk drivers are good working citizens who have a drinking problem. They are not criminals. I don’t look on an alcoholic as a criminal.”  “Long term incarceration tends to make criminals out of people. They say, ‘I’ll do my time.’ We create tough hardened people. Even with treatment, if there is no incentive. They are not invested in the treatment and it probably isn’t effective.”  “There should be a threat of incarceration if you fail in your treatment and education programs.”  “Drunk drivers in jail are taking up bed space that could be used for more serious criminals.”

Incarceration with work release  “Without work release, you punish the offenders’ families. You can’t keep them in jail if they have a job and family. You’re putting his family on welfare.”

License suspension  “Suspension is not working. Just look at the number of people we have driving after losing their licenses.”  “Suspension creates a lot more work for law enforcement. The drunk drivers are still out there. They’re just driving without a license.”

7  “The state of Wabe is turning people into criminals. Wabe is a rural state without much mass transportation. By suspending the licenses of so many drunk drivers, it is forcing them to drive without licenses. They need to drive in order to go to work.”

The next quotations are about other measures, primarily treatment and education. Treatment and education  “Incarceration shows the severity of the offense, but you can’t make a lifestyle change with incarceration. You need education and treatment.”  “What works is a combination of treatment, sanctions, close monitoring, and incentives. You can reduce your jail time by one-half by longer monitoring.”  What works is a combination of treatment, supervision, testing, and regular follow-up in the community. But these things work best in conjunction with jail or the threat of jail. The offender may get electronic monitoring if he follows orders, or he may get his incarceration stayed. Jail alone is usually not effective.”  “Early and harsh intervention works, with all offenders, including first-time offenders, receiving a comprehensive assessment and a follow-up plan and a strong education component about alcohol and family relations.”  “Traditional sanctions work most effectively if they can be used persuasively to keep people in counseling or establishing the terms of counseling. Incarceration has to be kept in the mix as what will happen if they don’t complete their counseling or do what they are supposed to do.”  “Give them a choice. Go to jail, take away the drugs, and give them a chance to go into treatment and education. They are more susceptible to change—even if they are just trying to get out of jail. They learn something; it gives them other options.”  Education is vital. Rehabilitation often does not have an impact without education. You can’t do one without the other. The offenders have to learn what alcohol does to your body—physiologically, developmentally, and behaviorally—what it does to others, and that drunk driving is wrong.

8 The last quotations are about other measures. Vehicle seizure  “I would like to see more vehicles seized. It has great merit.”  “You don’t need a license to drive, but you do need a car.”  “It’s a humongous waste of time. Seizure is a lot of work for absolutely nothing. It is totally ineffective as a deterrent.  “Most of the time you end up with a $50 piece of junk. They just get another car.”

Special license plates  “The police are more likely to stop somebody with special plates, so the driver would not drink and would drive carefully.”  “Special plates discriminate against the family members who are not responsible.”  “Public shame is rarely effective. It makes other people feel good, but it does nothing for the community, and it doesn’t do anything to change the behavior.”

Ignition Interlock Device  “It is effective. I would like to see that across the board for all counties for the third offense and above.”  “It doesn’t work. Most men in rural areas know how to re-wire a car to get around the device.”

9 Telephone Survey with Experts The following table includes the results of four identical telephone surveys. The respondents were the same four types of officials who deal with drunk drivers in their jobs: law enforcement, corrections and probations, court systems, and treatment and education. Each respondent was asked to evaluate the effectiveness of 15 sanctions used in fighting drunk driving, using a “1 to 5” scale in which “5” meant “very effective” and “1” meant “not at all effective.” The following table shows the percentage of each type of respondent who gave each sanction a rating of “4” or “5.”

Effectiveness of Measures Percent Receiving the Highest Ratings Of “4” or “5” on a “1 to 5” Scale In Which “5” Means “Very Effective”

Measure Type of Respondent Law Corrctn/ Court Treat/ Enformt Probat. System Eductn Intensive supervision or probation 62% 63% 66% 75% Treatment, such as drug or alcohol 54 58 77 77 treatment Education on alcoholism or alcohol abuse 46 47 51 52 Ignition Interlock Device 44 58 30 58 Victim Impact Panels 30 43 36 62 Education to develop employable skills 42 53 38 46 or get a GED Long-term jail or prison sentences 48 57 43 38 Education on family dynamics and 44 47 28 51 resisting peer pressure Incarceration with work release 28 38 43 42 Seizing the drunk driver’s vehicle 44 52 12 42 Jail time on the first conviction 38 32 33 43 Home confinement or electronic 32 32 20 45 monitoring Short-term jail sentences 30 22 31 35 Suspending the drunk driver’s license 32 28 15 30 Special license plates, recognizable by 40 28 10 20 the public Sample Size = 50 60 61 69

10 Adult residents of the Sheffield metropolitan area The following table includes the results of a telephone survey of adult residents of the Sheffield metropolitan area. Sheffield is the largest city in Wabe. Survey respondents were asked if legislators should support or oppose ten countermeasures to drunk driving.

Percentage Distribution of Support for Drunk-Driving Countermeasures Survey of Residents of the Sheffield Metropolitan Area

Percent Indicating Legislators Should Support or Oppose Countermeasures Should Should Should Should Definitely Probably Probably Definitely Support Support Oppose Oppose All people convicted of drunk driving 72% 24% 3% 2% must attend victim impact panels Anyone convicted of drunk driving automatically loses his/her driver’s 40 31 21 9 license for one year. Require all convicted drunk drivers who are alcoholics to have 39 34 17 9 psychological treatment. Mandatory jail time for anybody 28 37 22 12 convicted of drunk driving All convicted drunk drivers have 28 30 22 21 special license plates on their cars Require all new cars to have an ignition 26 28 21 25 interlock devices More government funds for treatment programs for people with alcohol 21 43 24 13 problems. Have the police take away and impound a convicted drunk driver’s car for one 17 27 29 26 year, before returning the car to them. Anyone convicted of first drunk driving 15 24 36 25 offense pays a fine of at least $5,000 If a person is convicted of a second drunk-driving offense, have the police take away the drunk’s car for good and 13 19 34 35 then sell the car to the public at an auction. Sample Size = 400

11 National telephone survey of Americans aged 16+

Should penalties for violating drinking-driving laws be… Type of Driver Response Total Sample Other Drivers Drinking Drivers* Who Drink** Much more severe 43% 23% 41% Somewhat more severe 27 25 30 Stay the same 25 NA NA Somewhat less severe 3 NA NA Much less severe 1 NA NA Sample size = 6,002 1,300 2,193 *Drinking drivers reported driving within two hours after drinking in the past year. **“Other drivers who drink” reported drinking alcohol, but not within two hours of driving. NA = Data not available.

Perceived Effectiveness of Strategies to Reduce Drunk Driving (% “Very Effective”) Type of Driver Strategy All Respondents Drinking Drivers* Providing people who have had too much to drink an alternative way of getting home other 60% 55% than self driving Making bars and stores that sell alcohol more legally responsible for selling to minors/drunk 55 44 patrons Increasing police and other law enforcement 49 36 efforts to arrest drunken drivers Making treatment of alcoholism and alcohol 41 29 abuse problems more available to people Limiting the amount of certain types of alcohol advertising and producing more public service 36 21 announcements and dangers Reducing the number of places selling alcohol or making it more difficult to get alcohol at 28 14 certain times or days of week Increasing costs of alcohol for example, 20 6 through higher taxes on liquor sales Sample size = 6,002 1,300 *Drinking drivers reported driving within two hours after drinking in the past year.

12 Most Likely Outcome First Time Drunk Driving Arrest (Multiple Responses Accepted)* Outcome Total Sample Fine 46% License suspended / Restricted 41 Going to jail 20 Attend class on DWI* 12 Probation 10 Reprimand / Warning 8 Community service 7 Being arrested / convicted / record 4 Treatment program 4 Other 3 Nothing 5 Don’t know 5 Sample size = 6,002 *Respondents were asked what they thought would be the most likely outcome for a person arrested for drunk driving for the first time. Multiple answers were allowed. ** DWI = Driving While Intoxicated (Also know as Driving Under the Influence – DUI)

If drinking and driving, what will happen? (Percent saying: “Will get stopped by the police” and “Will have a crash”) Gender of Respondent Response Total Sample Male Female Will get stopped by police 32% 27% 37% Will have a crash 44 37 50 Sample size = 6,002 2,607 3,395 *Drinking drivers reported driving within two hours after drinking in the past year.

13 Mail survey of drivers who had lost their licenses The following tables show the results of a mail survey of drivers who had lost their licenses, mostly for drunken driving: How has not having a driver’s license affected your job? It hasn’t. I have the same job. 48% I have the same job but my duties have changed. 19 I lost my job but got another one easily 5 I lost my job and not having a driver’s license made it 29 difficult to find a new job.

Overall, has your life been different without a license compared to when you had a regular driver’s license? No, my life is about the same overall 5% Yes, my life is more difficult overall 45 Yes, my life is much more difficult overall 50

What are the main ways you get around without a Driver’s License? I get rides from friends 76% I get rides from family members 69 I drive anyway 52 I walk or ride a bicycle 52 I take public transportation 21 All others 7

How often do you use public transportation to get where you need to go? Very often 5% Often 10 Occasionally 13 Rarely 12 Never 60 Sample size = 358

How often do you drive without a license? Every day 17% Almost every day 14 3 to 4 times a week 11 1 to 2 times a week 3 3 to 4 times a month 6 1 to 2 times a month 3 Only in emergencies 17 Never 29

14 In your own words, please describe how not having a license has affected your life? (Open-ended question) I have to depend on others 26% I am restricted in the area I can travel 21 I lost my job 14 It is hard to get to work 14 I still drive 14 It is hard to get a job 10 I have little or no social life 7 I can’t visit my family 5 It is hard to get to school 5 I can’t support my family 5 Sample size = 358

Sources of the information included in this exercise:

All of the data included in this assessment are real. The sources of the data are:

Focus Groups, In-Depth Interviews, and Four Surveys of Experts

Russell G. Brooker, Laura M. Cleary, and Richard W. Yob, Evaluation of Alternatives to Incarceration for Repeat Drunken Driving (Madison, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, 2001). The study was conducted by The Dieringer Research Group, Inc. for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. The author of this exercise was the principal investigator in that project. The complete study is available at: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/library/publications/topic/safety.htm

Telephone survey of a cross section of adults in the Sheffield metropolitan area (n=400)

Barndon K. Applegate and Francis T. Cullen, “Public support for drunk-driving countermeasures: Social policy for saving lives.” Crime & Delinquency, April 1995, V. 41 #2, pp. 171 +. The study was conducted in the Cincinnati area. In this exercise, some data are omitted and some terms have been changed for consistency with the rest of the exercise. The names of some measures have been shortened for the sake of continuity and simplicity, but all of the numbers are accurate.

15 National telephone survey of a cross section of Americans of driving age (n=6,002)

National Highway Traffic Administration, 2001 National Survey of Drinking and Driving: Volume I: Summary Report (NHTA, Washington, D.C., 2003). The survey was conducted by The Gallup Organization. A summary of the study is available at: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/alcohol/

Mail survey of drivers who had lost their driving licenses (n=358)

Russell G. Brooker, Laura M. Cleary, and Richard W. Yob, Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Occupational Licensing Program (Madison, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, 2002). The study was conducted by The Dieringer Research Group, Inc. for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. The author of this exercise was the principal investigator in that project. The complete study is available at: http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/library/research/reports/safety.htm