Prohibition: the act of, "banning the manufacture, transportation and sale of intoxicating liquors" was prevalent throughout the United States beginning in 1920 (History Channel). It was seen as a time to make America a better place, sobering it of culture filled traditions and stripping some of America's favorite activities. Why not though? At this time, it was the Roaring 20's. The United States was in one of her most prosperous times, the stock market was escalating like crazy, we were free of war, women were beginning to express themselves, but, no alcohol was involved. But once again, you cannot take alcohol away from Americans. Speakeasies and bootlegging arose and were skyrocketing through the roof in popularity. Gangsters like Al Capone even earned, "a staggering $60 million annually from bootleg operations and speakeasies" (History Channel). It got so bad that the government began to actually question how bad drinking was for Americans. Was it really something that if it was consumed it could kill them and that the only way to prevent this would be, "the ratification of the 18th Amendment"? (History Channel). Well, the United States took her first step towards making a greater America and adopted the 21st amendment in 1933, the amendment that would ultimately repeal the 18th amendment. After only 13 years, the United States Congress saw their error in their decision-making and brought back something that meant so much to so many people. In fact, they were actually wrong for once and made a change for the better. However, drinking would continue to find relegations left and right in the 20th century, specifically the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. "By the end of the 1970's and the early part of the 1980's the federal government once again became concerned about the minimum legal drinking age in each state" causing them to seek another change to their lawmaking (LegalFlip). With the creation of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984, states were given the choice of making their minimum age for purchase, possession, or consumption of alcohol to be 21 years of age or "lose approximately 10% of its federal funding for highway public transportation" (LegalFlip). So essentially, the United States Congress pushed their own states against the wall with this Act by forcing them into action for no apparent reasons other than choosing this magic number of 21 because of how alcohol affects the body at that age. Well, it is time for the United States to once again realize it has made a mistake and make a change for the better. The United States needs instate an act to allow the purchase, possession, and consumption of beer and wine federally to a minimum age of 18 because of the cultural purpose of drinking, the long term benefit and safety it will bring, and the actual lessened health factor beer and wine play on an 18 year olds brain. 

In 2016, the United States and, "Iceland, Japan, South Korea, and Thailand" all posses a legal minimum drinking age higher than 18 (Griggs). Numerous countries in Europe, South America, Africa, Oceania, and even North America all possess legal drinking ages at 18 or lower, but the United States triumphs every country in the world with an age of 21. An age where in the 2016, 18 year old Americans can have the right to vote, operate a motor vehicle, fight in war for their country, serve on a jury, but can't order a beer with their family at a restaurant? For what purpose? To look further into it, Mothers Against Drunk Driving is a big contributor and supporter to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, also known as MADD, was, "founded in 1980 (and) quickly gained national clout and lobbied lawmakers to raise the legal limit" (Griggs). MADD begins to cite out from their reasoning the positives, which can't go unnoticed, that the National Minimum Drinking Age Act has done for American society. The first statistic is that, "among young drivers (ages 16-20) killed in car wrecks, the percentage with positive blood-alcohol levels declined from 61% to 31%" in about 13 years (Griggs). The federal law currently for operating a motor vehicle in correlation with Blood Alcohol Content, or BAC, is as follows: A BAC of .08 cannot be broken for persons the age of 21 and over, and a .02 BAC for all minors (people under the age of 21). So pulling that statistic out even further, one must compare how badly we struggle with DUI's compared to other countries who possess a younger minimum drinking age. In Germany, beer has been existent culturally and brewed in areas of Bavaria since the 1400's. Beer in this European economical superstar isn't viewed as Americans under 21 view it, like a way to be rebellious and get heavily drunk, it is more viewed as a way to celebrate times with family and friends. Also, beer itself takes a lot longer in the body to get you intoxicated than say a shot of whiskey due to its alcohol content per serving. Germany in 2016 currently has a minimum legal drinking age of 16 for beer and wine, and 18 for liquor and spirits. So a place where drinking is legal for a wider spectrum of age than the United States must struggle much more with crime and other issues, right? Well, one must look at specific issues piece by piece. In the Surgeon General's Call to Action to Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking, it cites that underage drinking can lead to, "illicit drug and tobacco use, sexual assault, and the chance to get an STD" (Call to Action 10,11). So taking these piece by piece, one must compare American crime in these categories to German crime in the same. First, pull the illicit drug usage statistic. In 2015, the Untied States had 13.7% of the population struggle with annual cannabis usage while Germany had only 4.8% (NationMaster). Even for other drugs like opiates usage, the United States struggled with 0.57% of the population abusing opiates while Germany only had 0.3% (NationMaster). We are even seen as the, "world's largest consumer of cocaine, Colombian heroin, and Mexican heroin and marijuana" (NationMaster). As for the Surgeon General citing sexual assaults and STD's, the rape rate in the United States is at 27.3 and the rape rate in Germany is 9.4 (NationMaster). Looking at these at a general view, all of Germany's crime rates and percentages for what the Surgeon General cited that underage drinking will increase are substantially lower than that of the United States, even though Germany has a legal drinking age for beer and wine that is at 16. Why is this? Because they do not binge drink alcohol like Americans do. As in regards to drugs, look at Portugal. After, "Portugal decriminalized the use of all drugs in 2001," they have became the country with the second least drug influenced deaths (Ingraham). This only took the country 15 years and they completely decriminalized drugs, including weed, cocaine, heroin, and made it, "a public health issue" instead of a crime (Ingraham). Imagine if only Americans took away the glorification of drinking alcohol and allowed Her youth to consume beer and wine. Americans are raised with the mentality that everyone has to underage drink with fake identification systems and every time they consume alcohol under 21 years of age, it has to be for getting heavily intoxicated and such. Looking back at the issue with DUI's, Americans need to stress that the most. The amount of Americans criminalized each year is so out of hand that it is becoming one of the most prevalent crimes and can be deadly. Americans need to introduce beer and wine before the age of 21 brings liquor because it can teach current underage drinkers their limits with alcohol and how it affects them at a much smaller dose before it is all thrown in together and causes grave consequences. As for DUI's, the BAC for minors of .02 currently should be kept even if the minimum drinking age is lowered to 18. This way, it guarantees that persons aged 18-20 will learn to find appropriate means to getting from place to place when consuming alcohol and teach them how to appropriately transport themselves within society before they can start drinking liquor. Realistically, federally lowering the drinking age could increase the rate of DUI's and car accidents caused by young drivers in the short term. Current attitudes and behaviors toward drinking are not going to change overnight; however, over time, as the cultural attitude towards drinking shifts, these numbers should descrease. But after time, slowly introducing beer and wine into society like this, will create a more traditional view of drinking like the Germans do with beer or how the French do with wine. It won't be seen as much as a way to get drunk or hurt yourself, moreover a way to celebrate times with family or friends. Even with this mentality, slowly introducing alcohol like this to 18 year olds will give them a greater knowledge of how their body will react to alcohol in higher doses like liquor, and have them drive more responsibly, making America a safer place.

A second point that worries a large amount of Americans is how alcohol affects a minor's body. Scientists have argued for decades on what alcohol exactly does to one's brain more specifically and how the National Minimum Drinking Age Act is a good way to prevent this from getting out of hand. In fact, some scientists say, "the teenage years are one of the most important times for brain development" and "Neurons in the brain are growing and strengthening, connections are developing to allow the brain to transmit information faster and allow the brain to process more complex thoughts" (Christensen). Politics went hand in hand with this ideology in relying in what scientists were saying when in reality they knew nothing about alcohol's effect on the human body. Ironically, some politicians, including President Ronald Reagan who signed in the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984, were so off with their views on nutritional values for the human body. Just a week before signing this act, "Reagan had declared ice cream a nutritious food," just showing you how much politics really know for health concerns (Christensen). So who really knows how badly alcohol can affect the neuron growth and brain development when in all reality, this act was signed for highway funding in the first place. Also in Christensen's article, Dr. Abigail Baird brings forth many good points to underage drinking. First, the United States allows people the age of 18 on their roads but not allowed to consume alcohol, when realistically road traffic incidents is the fourth largest cause of death in the USA while alcohol related death doesn't even make the top ten. Baird even quotes to how influential and involved alcohol is in society, stating, "Find me a business dinner that you will go to where you are not offered alcohol" (Christensen). Once again ironically, road traffic incidents cause more deaths each year than alcohol related deaths, something the United States in a way encouraged by funding the production of highways when signing the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. But how badly does alcohol even affect the brain? Some of the smartest people in the United States consume alcohol at a young age each day. At Harvard, students who choose to drink hold a fraction of, "Seven out of ten are consuming five or more drinks in a row" (Christensen). One must also look at the other neurologists views on underage drinking, not the just the scientists provided by the government to view drinking rates. Due to variety in human bodies and growing patterns being so different, this age of 21 doesn't define broadly when someone is ready to consume alcoholic beverages. Dr. William Graf, a professor of pediatric neurology at Yale University states that, "There's no magic that happens physically when they are 21 as compared to age 18" (Christensen). Chang Se-Moon of the Korea Times and professor of South Alabama University also writes in his peer reviewed article that he believes the legal drinking age should, "not be higher than the age that young people can join the military or go to college" (Se-Moon). That statement should be viewed more critically, as the United States trusts the developed brain of an 18 year old man or woman to fight for the military but doesn't trust that same exact brain to consume a glass of wine freely in society. It is a very contradictory viewpoint on how alcohol and the brain are viewed by the United States Government.

Lastly, one needs to see the benefit of taking away the wait for one's 21st birthday to consume beer and wine and that states across the United States are already trying to spark a change. In Drew Saylor's peer reviewed journal on heavy drinking in college campuses, he addresses a very important fact on how Americans have created their culture of drinking. With the raise of the minimum drinking age in the United States, a created, "Culture of heavy alcohol use by making alcohol consumption clandestine and extreme" has been made (Saylor 330). Saylor brings forth the fact that all Americans need to see and need to aim to change the most because it can create a domino effect of taking down alcohol related incidents. Taking away the clandestine and extreme view of alcohol and that all persons aged 18-20 need to feel this sense of rebellion and urge to binge drink every time they consume alcohol would solve many issues exponentially. That is why, if beer and wine are introduced slowly into the young adult group, it will prevent more binge drinking specifically on college campuses and create a mindset for people of this age on how to consume and view alcohol as a whole. It will limit the vast production of fake identifications and make liquor binge drinking, the deadliest of the three types of alcohol to binge drink, more of a fearful activity rather than a fun and heavily participated activity. Numerous professors and people aren't the only ones seeking a change to the minimum drinking age, the peer reviewed article from the Russia Today shows otherwise. The article writes that, "New Hampshire, Minnesota, and California have been reviewing pieces of legislation that would bring their state laws in line with the rest of the world's- which would mean lowering the legal drinking age from 21 to 18" (Russia Today). The article seeks the same goals all supporters of this lowering do, "curbing underage binge drinking and getting teens to relax about fake ID's and to drink socially," something that European countries do each day and have much less of a problem with than the United States does (Russia Today). Even New Hampshire is addressing the same issue of allowing first beer and wine before providing liquor, as it teaches the social component of consuming alcohol and reduces the risk of binge drinking to the low concentration of alcohol in beer and wine. If states are already pushing the legislature for alcohol, why can't it be pushed federally?

On a lighter note, all of this sudden change in legislature may be confusing to the American public and needs to have the outlines of its specifics stated clear and upright. First, the proposed law change will immediately lower the minimum drinking age for consumption and purchase of beer and wine, federally, to the age of 18. This means that any liquor items such as whiskey, gin, and other spirits cannot be purchased or publically consumed until the age of 21 in the United States. If this law is broken, it will still maintain the legal consequences that fall into a Minor in Possession/Consumption and so on. Secondly, the law also directly is affected by the terms of operating a motor vehicle. Instead of changing the legal Blood Alcohol Content for "minors" consuming beer and wine from ages 18-20 to 0.08, the legal Blood Alcohol Content will stay at 0.02. This will teach these people at this age consuming beer and wine to stay off the roads when they drink. With this in mind, if a person aged from 18-20 is pulled over and has a BAC of .05, they are subject to be criminalized for Driving Under the Influence at the officer's discretion.

The United States Government needs to realize that it is ok to be wrong and that when they have been wrong in the past, good things have stemmed from it in the end. In an age where marijuana is being legalized in states and the age for driving a car is getting lowered and lowered, the United States Congress needs to push the need for curbing underage binge drinking. Since the Act in 1984, no ideas been able to be found for a short term change, but the best long term change possible is to provide the option to purchase and consume beer and wine at the age of 18. Even if some states disagree with this view, they can have the option to keep their state legislature with the law at 21 and view how other states like Minnesota or California handle the change. Looking back at the days of prohibition, amendments passed like the 18th amendment were proven to be unneeded and put to no good use. In fact, prohibition can be compared to today's age. Bootlegging and speakeasy businesses making millions could be compared to fake ID productions that make just as much in society. The 18th amendment could be compared to the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 and how it only increases the clandestine view of alcohol and almost guarantees underage binge drinking in highly populated young adult areas. America is in need of a dire change to society that in years, DUI's will be so much less of an issue and threat to American life and binge drinking will be lessened and be taught how to prevent it much more than today. A step can be made to make America this much better place than it already is, and give back some of the culture and tradition other country's possess that America lacks. As citizens of the United States, be the reason that DUI's stop in the United States and be the reason that the USA is no longer an outlier on the statistic sheet for minimum drinking age, but the embracer of the her culture and social drinking habits. 

