At the age of eighteen, we as Americans have the right to vote, serve our country in the military, live on our own and purchase goods like cigarettes and lottery tickets. However, we are not allowed to purchase and consume alcohol, despite underage drinking being one of the most common crimes committed in the United States. In colleges throughout the United States underage drinking is a central part of the typical lifestyle of a college student and it is often used irresponsibly. Throughout most of the United States history the drinking age was 18 years old, however in 1984, Congress passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act that required each state to increase the age for purchase and possession of alcohol from 18 to 21. States who did not adhere to this bill would lose ten percent of their federal highway funds. This being said, slowly all of the states changed their legal age to 21 by the later 1980’s. Congress forced each state to increase the drinking age and it has stayed at 21 years of age ever since. As a result of this law, the effects of drinking greatly increased and it started a trend in society that lead to underage individuals consuming more alcohol and going to dangerous lengths to obtain alcohol. The United States should lower back the drinking age back to eighteen in order to prevent the excessive behind the scenes drinking of underage citizens as well as reducing the violent and drastic measures that these citizens might go to. Instead, the United States should focus on developing a safer culture that encourages people to consume alcohol in moderation, not in the excessive amounts that underage individuals currently embrace. 

After looking at the article “Assessing the Effectiveness of Minimum Legal Drinking Age and Zero Tolerance Laws in the United States” by Robert Voas, I examined credible research and facts that shows why the United States decided to implement a higher drinking age in the mid 1980’s. The main reason for initiating this law was to reduce the number of drunk driving accidents among individuals ages 18 to 21. Research conducted in the 1980’s shows that that age group was responsible for a large number of drunk driving accidents. After implementing the law the drunk driving incidents among this age group drastically reduced. Voas goes on to write “In the last two decades, the rate of alcohol-related traffic deaths for youth younger than age 21 years has fallen from 22 per 100,000 in 1982 to 10 per 100,000 in 1997” (Voas 6). During this same time period the use of alcohol among high school seniors dropped about 15% and binge drinking among the same age group went down 9% (Voas 7). However, over the course of recent years underage drinking is becoming more prominent, this is mainly due to the culture in college students promoting binge drinking.

Along with examining the benefits of an increase in underage drinking I also analyzed the article “Return the Drinking Age to 18, and Enforce It” by Gabrielle Glaser. This article primarily revolved around why the current system is disastrous due to the way that culture is constantly changing for high school and college kids. Glasier goes on to say that “high school and college kids view dangerous binge drinking as a rite of passage” (Glasier 2). Glasier agrees with Voas that the law has successfully reduced drunk driving incidents, however with the current culture of the United States drunk driving is regressing among every age group. Along with this change in culture underage drinking has been happening in more risky settings like high school blowouts and fraternity parties. Particularly, college and high school students have chosen to forgo drinking in moderation and instead focus on consuming alcohol in excessive amounts which is incredibly dangerous. Glasier also highlights the change in today’s culture from back in the 1980’s when the law was forced introduced “Today’s law, likewise, encourages young people to dodge the system. Like Prohibition—and abstinence- only sex education – it’s been a dismal failure” (Glasier 7). Moreover, with the rapid increase of technology and the internet it has led to a massive market for affordable and easily accessible fake ID’s which, much like Prohibition, lead to a major underground market. Research has also been conducted on the change in culture, Glasier notes a study that focused on Alcohol and Drug deaths “between 1998 and 2005, the number of cases of alcohol poisoning deaths among 18- to 24-year-olds nearly tripled, jumping from 779 cases to 2290” (Glasier 11). Not only is alcohol being consumed more aggressively but it is also being consumed in high risk settings. Currently, the most beneficial solution for the United States is to lower the drinking age to 18 and instead allocate resources to educating the youth to drink in moderation to combat the dangerous culture change happening.

In addition to Glasier’s article I also reviewed “Should the U.S. Lower its Drinking Age” by Brandon Griggs which focused on the cultures in Europe that have drinking ages several years lower than the United States and what the drinking culture is like in both regions. Griggs argues that the younger that people drink the safer they are since it takes away from the mystique of being a “forbidden fruit” to them. This is a similar approach to that of European countries where alcohol consumption is far more common and casual than in the United States. Furthermore, Americans can serve in the military and be entrusted to vote, yet they are not allowed to consume alcohol, this leads to a mystique around alcohol which forces young individuals to become infatuated with drinking in excessive amounts. In addition, since these individuals who take part in underage drinking are not being educated in alcohol consumption since it is not legal for them to even drink, this gives way to dangerous drinking habits that carry on till after these individuals are over 21. Griggs argues that the majority of underage drinking is unsupervised and is extremely dangerous since individuals are uninformed about safe alcohol consumption matters. I agree with Griggs in this statement and due to the nature in which underage citizens are consuming alcohol the best course of action would be to focus on educating them on how to drink in a positive and safe environment. I also compared Griggs claims to an article by Timothy Cole “Old Enough to Live” which focused on similar central topics. Cole supported the claim that Griggs made about how the current underground underage drinking situation is extremely dangerous due to the lack of supervision and knowledge that those engaging in it possess. He argues that programs need to be put into place to teach young students how to engage in these behaviors in a same manner. By showing the dangerous underground drinking behaviors that are currently going on in the United States it is apparent that there absolutely needs to be a change in our alcohol consumption culture. 

Along with Griggs, Will Fulton also examined the effect of a lower drinking age in European countries in the article “Is It Time to Lower the Drinking Age to 18?”. Fulton gives a relatively unbiased opinion to the positives and negatives that a lower drinking age has produced in European countries. By looking at both sides of the argument it allows for Fulton to make a more credible opinion on the controversy. Fulton also provides an interesting point of view of both sides of the argument since he lived in both periods when the drinking age was 18 and when it was 21. Fulton argues that since Europe is the most similar in culture to the United States it would serve as an adequate model for lowering the drinking age. However, Fulton states that he was “fascinated by the level of respect and control young Europeans had when they drank” (Fulton 17). The main difference among European and United States drinking culture is that Americans drink much more excessively and in far riskier environments. If the United States were to allocate resources to educating young citizens on how to go about drinking it could result in establishing a culture like that of Europe. I also referenced Fulton’s claims with a scholarly article that referenced current United States laws “The Specific Deterrence of Administrative Laws” by David McArthur. McArthur’s article talks extensively about the policies that are currently in place in the United States that impact our culture differently. Importantly, he notes that European drinking is far more casual and then presents research to show the increasing trend amongst younger members of the United States who are engaging in binge drinking. This shows how the United States needs to make changes immediately to rectify the dangerous direction that our youth culture is heading towards regarding alcohol consumption. If a culture change to the United States were to be successful it would not only reduce alcohol related deaths but it would provide a healthier United States and even reduce alcoholism among all age groups. 

I also examined an article that argued for both sides of the age limit “The Pros and Cons of Drinking at 18” by Dale Archer. Archer provides research on how the 21-year-old age limit results in saving about 1,000 lives a year.  However, Archer notes a study by Choose Responsibility that states “twice as many 21-year olds died in alcohol-related auto accidents as 18-year-olds” (Archer 9). A policy that is primarily known for reducing drunk driving deaths among 18-year-olds is just re-distributing the deaths to when citizens become legal to drink alcohol. Furthermore, the article also references a David Hanson a Ph.D., who has studied alcohol and drinking over the past 40 years. Hanson writes that “less teens are drinking, when they do drink they actually drink more, and in fact, drink to excess” (Archer 12). Based off both these studies it is evident that the alcohol consumption problem in the United States is not due to the drinking age, but rather the culture that encourages excessive drinking. Furthermore, Hanson asserts that binge drinking doesn’t get the same publicity that drunk driving gets, despite it leading to alcoholism. (Archer 22). I believe that by reducing the drinking age to 18 it will allow for the government, universities, and parents to focus on explaining the positive and negative aspects that alcohol consumption can lead to. Finally, Archer explains the psychology behind a higher drinking age “when people are told not to do something, it can often bring an opposite reaction” (Archer 23). The drinking culture of the United States shows how both the excessive drinking and drinking age contribute to alcoholism and excessive drinking. 

To get a better perspective of why the drinking age should stay at age 21 I examined the YouTube video “Drinking Age Debate” which revolved around a 60 Minutes episode. In the clip, John McCardell a university president talks about the reckless and dangerous behavior that college students engage in when it comes to consuming alcohol. He argues that by enabling alcohol access it would not result in more safe drinking but that it would instead amplify this behavior (McCardell 3:03). The effect that a lower drinking age would have on college campuses would could be potentially dangerous if handled poorly. However, I agree along with Fulton that if the United States were to implement programs in colleges that taught students how to drink responsibly it would result in far less aggressive drinking culture for college students. Moreover, this problem would gradually decrease since individuals would engage in safer and more responsible drinking tendencies at an earlier age. Another one of McCardell’s main points was that the higher drinking age saves just about 1,000 lives a year from drunk driving accidents. Although, Archer presented research that showed how almost double that many lives are killed in drunk driving from individuals who are 21 years old. This means that the drinking age is just putting a temporary hold on the amount of lives that would be killed from drunk driving. In conclusion, the two main points that McCardell makes could be solved just by choosing to reduce the drinking age to 18 and allocate funds to educating citizens at a younger age about safe drinking tendencies.

I looked at the article “Lower the Drinking Age” by the Students for Sensible Drug Policy which focused on solutions that would allow for people to practice safe alcohol consumption. This article is important since it provides solutions that would allow for the United States to educate citizens. One of these solutions is to implement mandatory classes in high schools that would start educating children at an early age and teach them the basic consequences of drinking. Currently, the United States has programs that do this but students do not retain the information since they are not “legally” allowed to drink for many more years. Moreover, instituting an earlier drinking age would force parents to educate their children at earlier ages rather than letting the parents have the children sneakily experiment for themselves in risky environments. Another solution that the article presents is to input a system that requires individuals ages 18 to 20 to have a guardian over the age of 21 present whenever they consume and purchase alcohol. By inputting a guardian restriction, it will allow for people to drink in a safe area and reduce any possible excessive drinking. This restriction will also make it so those ages 18 to 20 will not be able to buy alcohol for individuals who are under 18 which will limit underground drinking which is dangerous and risky. In conclusion, by implementing all, or at least some, of these solutions it will allow for the United States to have a smoother transition into a lower drinking age as well as allowing for the culture to shift towards safer drinking habits.

The final article that I looked at “Young Driver Fatalities: The Roles of Drinking Age and Drinking Experience” by Peter Asch, focused on the negative relationship between underage drinking and driving accidents. The scholarly article provided numerous low bias research studies and statistics on underage drinking in numerous countries where the drinking age is 16, 18, and 21. Asch using research makes the claim that “the age-fatality-rate curves reflects the reduction in fatalities as individuals gain “maturity” and experience in driving” (Asch 514). However, this claim is followed by research that suggests that “learning is potentially greatest and first and declines as experience in both drinking and driving accumulates” (Asch 514). By showing the relationship between drinking and driving it reflects that both types of accidents are due to inexperience. Based off the evidence the research suggests that by implementing a younger drinking age and choosing to educate and therefore provide “experience” to individuals it would lessen the amount of alcohol related deaths for young individuals. Asch calls this the “age effect” and believes that if the right procedures are implemented it could reduce the amount of deaths. 

In conclusion, I am confident that by implementing the right procedures and solutions it would not only be possible but beneficial for the United States to lower the drinking age from age 21 to 18. The central claim that the higher drinking age reduces drunk driving accidents was countered by showing the higher amount of drunk driving deaths that are caused by individuals who are 21 years old. In addition, by allowing 18-year olds to engage in alcohol consumption, along with military service, the right to vote, and tobacco purchasing, it will provide a more mature group of individuals coming out of high school. The age reduction would also allow for these individuals to experience safer drinking habits in less risky environments than they currently are experiencing now. The current binge drinking and excessive drinking culture of the United States would be able to progress into a similar culture like Europe where citizens partake in well-controlled and responsible drinking habits, this would also lead to a major decrease in alcoholism. Moreover, this change would result in decreasing the dangerous and risky lengths that individuals go to acquiring alcohol when they are underage. In conclusion, by implementing a reduction in the drinking age from age 21 to 18 it would completely revolutionize the United States drinking culture into a more respectable and safer system for everyone while at the same time causing younger members of society to be more mature and responsible.
