Car Interlocks Cheaper Than Results of Drunk Driving
By Rep. W. Ken Martinez
Grants Democrat
Which call would you prefer to receive at midnight some Friday?
"Mom, can you come pick me up, my car won't start."
Or, "Mrs. Smith, I have some bad news: Your son was killed tonight in an automobile accident."
It's no secret, 214 New Mexicans died in drunk driving accidents in 2002. We now know how to end DWI and drunk driving deaths in New Mexico— by using technology.
The Journal editorial "Legislator Blows It With Interlock Bill" asserted that I have not thought out this issue and my proposed solution is expensive, even though drunk driving is the nation's most frequently committed violent crime, killing someone every 30 minutes.
Why are we spending state money on drunk drivers after precious, innocent lives have been lost? It is time that New Mexico stop leading the country in alcohol-related deaths, and start leading the country towards the death of drunk driving.
Current technology will prevent a car from starting if an alcohol detection unit senses alcohol on the driver's breath. New "transdermal" technology detects alcohol on the driver's skin— as simple as touching a detection device.
Drunk or impaired— your car won't start. This device will serve the same concept as why we have seat belts, infant car seats, or catalytic converters. In five years we can protect ourselves from drunk drivers.
The technology will get better if we are serious, create a demand and enact this measure. We already have the need. In New Mexico we have some of the finest laboratories and universities in the country. Foster the invention. Let New Mexico reap the economic benefits of ending drunk driving nationwide.
You could be a victim. No amount of defensive driving protects anyone from a drunk driver. Statistics say three of every 10 Americans are involved in an alcohol-related crash at some time in their lives. Don't you want the car of anyone drinking to be immobilized to prevent them from driving?
This concept is not new. New Mexico law currently requires people to purchase liability insurance so that the victims in a car accident do not bear the costs of their injuries. This once novel idea was passed to protect you from drivers that weren't safe drivers.
Yes, there is a cost, but I have proposed the first amendment to the bill— a tax break to those who purchase cars with an alcohol detection device. Right now to buy a car, you pay 3 percent in excise taxes— $600 on a motor vehicle costing $20,000. If the vehicle you purchase has the alcohol detection device, under the measure that I propose, you don't have to pay that tax.
A few years ago we doubled the basic sentence for alcohol related deaths to six years. Bottom line— drunk driving deaths still went up. Now, there is a well intentioned proposal to increase that prison sentence to 15 years.
We'll be required to build more prisons. It costs approximately $30,000 to house someone in a correctional facility for one year. A 15-year sentence would cost all of us taxpayers $450,000 for one inmate. You and I will be paying in excess of $95 million to feed, clothe and rehabilitate those drunk drivers per year. Again, this money is spent, after someone has died.
Spend the money before anyone dies. Costs to prevent DWI will actually save money, and the savings will appear in lower car insurance premiums. Emergency room costs go down, as do health insurance costs. Apprehension, detection, prosecution, defense, incarceration and treatment of drunk drivers costs money. The price tag to nail a drunk driver is far more expensive than prevention is at the front end.
The phone rings at midnight. Ask yourself as a parent, which phone call would you rather receive, the car won't start or your son is dead?
When you have made your decision, revisit the Journal editorial where it says this proposal is too expensive and calls upon Legislators to "blow off" this bill?
My grandmother used to say, "Don't send flowers to my funeral, send them to me while I am alive."
She was right, if we spend the money now to prevent DWIs then there will be no reason to send flowers to the funerals of the victims of drunk driving.
Rep. Ken Martinez is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
opinion 
E-mail Story
Print Friendly
