THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, October 24, 1996 TAG: 9610240006
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 47 lines
The American Civil Liberties Union says it will go to court to overturn any federal policy aimed at denying driving licenses to teens who test positive for drugs - if the policy looks vulnerable to a lawsuit.
A spokesman for the ACLU denounced President Clinton's instruction to the nation's drug czar to draft a policy designed to prevent drug-using teens from driving. The spokesman cited the president's move as an example of ``drug mania gone crazy.''
He couldn't be more wrong. Driving is more than a privilege, the U.S. Supreme Court has said, but less than a right. A license to drive - governmental permission to operate motor vehicles on public roads - is granted only after applicants meet specific conditions and agree to obey traffic laws.
Applicants must demonstrate driving proficiency and knowledge of traffic laws, to cite a couple of conditions. And licenses may be yanked for driving recklessly or while intoxicated.
Congress - at Clinton's request - recently legislated cuts in federal highway funds for states that fail to take the licenses of teens arrested while driving with any alcohol in their blood. Tough? Yes. But driving is serious business. Better to send the message early to young drivers that society will not - repeat not - tolerate drinking and driving.
Same with drugs. Drug use is a challenge to any society. Drug use among Americans generally continues to drop. But drug use by teens has doubled during the Clinton years in the White House, as Republican presidential-nominee Bob Dole and other Republicans repeatedly remind voters. How best to reverse that trend?
Zero tolerance for drugs has diminished greatly drug use by uniformed personnel. Testing job applicants for drugs has brought drug use under control in the workplace. Letting teens know that evidence of drug use could bar them from driving legally would compel them to ponder whether experimenting with forbidden substances is worth the risk of not being able to tool around town behind the wheel of a car.
But, complained the ACLU spokesman, ``depriving somebody of the ability to drive may mean depriving them of the ability to go to school, get a job, support their families or do the kinds of things that prevent them from doing drugs.''
We'll chance that. Anyone serious about going to school, getting a job or supporting a family need not fear denial of a license if he/she steers clear of drugs. by CNB