Drug testing for driver's licenses: Clinton's unfair proposal


Arizona Daily Wildcat

[]

Imagine that there is a massive murder investigation here on campus. The only clue the police have is that the murderer has brown hair, and therefore every dark-haired person at the UA must undergo a thorough investigation.

As crazy as it sounds, things like this do happen. In fact, last week in a radio address to the entire nation, President Clinton announced his plan to require drug testing for minors applying for driver's licenses. "The evidence is that 90 percent of our children are drug free," he said, "So we're asking them, the 90 percent who are drug free, to be responsible enough to participate in this drug-testing program to help us identify the 10 percent who are on the brink of getting in trouble..."

But the reality is that the president cannot "ask" teens to cooperate with the investigation; he can only order them, due to the fact that the 16 and 17-year-olds who apply for driver's licenses are not old enough to vote. Doesn't this mean that these min or's rights as citizens of the United States would be eroded by the waves of Clinton's proposal?

The answer is: yes. The Constitution declares "the right of the people to be secure in their possessions... and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures... and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause... describing the place to be searc hed, and the persons or things to be seized." The "thing" being seized in this case is a urine sample, and the "probable cause" (or should I say "unprobable cause") is the mere fact that someone is under 21. If this proposal was passed, teens would be for ced to give up their civil liberties.

Think about it. Are teens really the major cause of auto deaths in the United States? The FBI 1995 crime statistics released last week reported that out of the 1.4 million arrests for drunk driving in 1995, "adults were most often arrested for DUI and dru g related accidents." If Clinton was seriously committed to ending these disasters, he would demand that everyone, regardless of age, pass a drug test. His policy seems to be screaming out, "The over 21 crowd is expendable; let's just forget about them."

In his radio address, Clinton informed us that 2,200 people between 15 and 20 years of age died in drug and alcohol related car crashes in 1995. But he failed to mention how many people over 21 died. The number is 14,389. That's a lot of adults, wouldn't you say, President Clinton?

It appears that Clinton's proposal, a part of his zero tolerance policy, is only a campaign ploy to portray him as being less liberal. The sad part is that, campaign ploy or not, teens would be forever affected. But before you jump on the Dole band wagon, realize that Bob Dole's views are no different. Dole's press secretary commented that "the policy is right...the timing, however, is suspect." Thus, regardless of who is elected, the proposal will most likely be passed. If a state did not comply, it woul d risk losing 5 percent of its federal highway funds the first year and 10 percent in each following year.

In today's society, it is realistic to assume that teens would eventually find ways to beat the system. Wouldn't you rather see them practicing their parking techniques than practicing ways to avoid testing positive? Unfortunately, the 10 percent of teens that decide to take drugs in this country are going to take them regardless of what the president says. Anyone could stay off drugs until the test was over and then turn back to old habits. This fact is sad, but true. No, if our politicians want to stop the problems that drugs cause, they're going to have to come up with something better than interrogating every person under 21.

In his anti-drug strategy, Clinton stated that his main goal is to "motivate America's youth to reject illegal drugs and substances." It's hard to believe that teens will be motivated when they discover that one of their natural rights has been stripped a way.

So again, imagine that everyone with brown hair on campus is a suspect. Now imagine that you are one of the dark-haired innocent people. How do you feel?

Jill Dellamalva is a sophomore majoring in English. Her column, 'Focused Light,' appears every other Friday.


(NEXT_STORY)

(NEXT_STORY)