Michigan lawmakers are looking to place stricter penalties on drunken drivers in an effort to increase safety on Michigan roads, but some feel the policy-making is only a response to pressure from the federal government.
Two bills, unanimously passed in the state House, lower the blood alcohol level for drunken driving from .10 to .08 grams and stiffen penalties for drivers found to have a blood alcohol level of .15 grams or more.
If the bills are not passed by Sept. 30, Michigan stands to lose more than $9 million for next year's federal highway funding. The federal government would continue to cut funding 2 percent every year the state blood alcohol level is not lowered until 2008.
State Rep. William Van Regenmorter, R-Georgetown Township, introduced the bills and says lowering the blood alcohol level is an important public safety issue that needed to be addressed.
"I don't like the method the federal government uses by using financial penalties and incentives to make states do these things," he said. "In this case, the subject is so important, we need to put that aside."
A person with a .08 or .09 blood alcohol level under current law are considered "impaired" not "drunken," but are still at a great risk to motorists, said East Lansing police Deputy Chief Tom Wibert.
Anyone who is pulled over and measures .08 blood alcohol level is arrested, he said. A person's blood alcohol level is measured by breathalyzers or blood tests and measures the percentage of alcohol in a person's blood.
If the bills pass, drivers measuring a level of .08 or .09 would be considered over the legal limit and would be subject to the same penalties of the .10 level. Those measuring .15 would be punished with higher fines, longer license suspensions and a mandatory device installed in the driver's car which can detect alcohol on the driver's breath.
But some feel lawmakers were not solely focused on increasing public safety.
"I think this is a last ditch effort to keep funding," English senior Amelia Beamer said, adding the bill was being introduced for the wrong reasons.
State Sen. Virg Bernero, D-Lansing, said lawmakers were feeling a lot of pressure to pass the bills because of the threat of losing badly needed federal funding.
"There certainly is a feeling that we're over a barrel," he said. "Clearly what put this on the front burner was the financial crisis that would ensue if we do not act. That's what forced the issue, and once you examined the issue you'd be hard pressed not to vote for it."
The bill is necessary to keep Michigan roads safe, said Cheryl Timm, an animal science senior.
"It's putting tighter regulations in place and making people more aware the don't need to be drinking and driving," she said.
The bills have received positive feedback in the state Legislature, passing unanimously in the state House and in all committees they have been referred to.
Jeanne Pruett, president and CEO of Responsibility in DUI Law, Inc. based in Livonia, says the laws are unfair and too strict on first-time offenders.
"When people who have two drinks after work and get pulled over for a taillight, police ask if they are drinking, and being honest people they say 'yes' - the next thing they know, they are in handcuffs," she said.
