Senate leader calls for states to oppose lower DUI limit

COLUMBUS - The president of Ohio's Senate intends to fight a federal law requiring states to lower the legal limit for drunken driving or lose federal highway money.

Sen. Richard Finan, R-Evendale, said yesterday that the Legislature should refuse to lower Ohio's limit to 0.08 percent from 0.10 - thereby forfeiting about $30 million next year. He said other states should do the same because the law infringes on their rights.

"I think it's time to stand up to say we're not going to be blackmailed," Finan said. "If the states that don't have the 0.08 limit stand up and say 'You can keep your money,' they would have to rethink how they do things in Washington, D.C."

Finan likely will get a fight from Mothers Against Drunk Driving and resistance from Gov. Bob Taft, a fellow Republican who supports the new limit but objects to the approach Congress took to get states to change their laws.

President Clinton signed a bill Monday setting the new standard.

The law requires each state's legislature to set the blood alcohol limit at 0.08 percent by 2004 or lose 2 percent of its highway money. The penalty would grow by another 2 percent each year and top out at 8 percent by 2007. States that adopt the standard by 2007 would be reimbursed for lost money.

Ohio and 30 other states define drunken driving with 0.10 percent blood alcohol content or do not set a standard. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have the 0.08 percent limit.

Finan said that after the election Nov. 7 he intends to contact other states about defying the law. He didn't rule out states filing a lawsuit against the federal government.

"Maybe it's time to take this kind of federal mandate and test it before the U.S. Supreme Court," he said.

Other legislatures are just as upset with the mandate, and the National Conference of State Legislatures opposes the new law because of Congress' "heavy-handed" approach in getting states to comply, said Eileen Doherty, an NCSL spokeswoman.

"The 0.08 limit shouldn't be considered the silver bullet in the fight against drunk driving. It's one option for legislators to consider, and it may not be the best option for every state," Doherty said.

Supporters say the new limit will save 500 lives per year nationwide and force Americans to take more care when they drink. In 1999, 15,786 Americans were killed in alcohol-related crashes, including 458 in Ohio.

Taft supports the new standard because it will limit drunken driving tragedies and the state needs the federal money to ensure that its roads are in good repair, said Kevin Kellems, the governor's spokesman.

The governor does, however, share Finan's "'strong objection to federal mandates in which others tell Ohioans how to make broad regulations that are more appropriately instituted at the state level," Kellems said.

Finan said he also opposes the measure because the law targets social drinkers, not the people who habitually drink too much and then drive. Ohio, he said, has aggressively targeted those offenders by passing laws toughening jail terms.

"If 0.08 was the answer, I would be leading the pack," Finan said.

The alcoholic beverage industry, which has lobbied strongly against the change, gave Finan $2,500 of his $168,145 in campaign contributions in 1999 - less than 1 percent, according to campaign finance reports.

The federal government since 1998 has offered states additional highway money as incentives to adopt the 0.08 limit. Four states and the District of Columbia have adopted lower limits since then. Those that did not received no punishment.

Andie Rehkamp, executive director for MADD's Southwest Ohio chapter, said states have had two years to fall in line.

"The federal government has given them the opportunity to lower the limit and the states have not acted," she said. "I'm not saying states rights don't matter, but states should recognize that saving human lives is the priority and having safe roads is a must."