madd state report 2011

8/3/2019 MADD State Report 2011

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/madd-state-report-2011 1/32

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

CAMPAIGN TO ELIMINATE DRUNK DRIVING

FIFTH ANNIVERSARY REPORT TO THE NATION



Dear Highway Saety Friend:

As honorary chairman o the Campaignto Eliminate Drunk Driving, I want tocommend Mothers Against Drunk Driving(MADD) and the campaign’s stakeholderson 5 years o tremendous achievement.Like many o MADD’s eorts over theyears, the Campaign to Eliminate DrunkDriving reinvigorated the national debate

on drunk driving and challenged everyone to use all the tools

at their disposal-including technology.

The National Highway Trac Saety Administration (NHTSA)believes in the Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving becauseit works. From our early partnership on a series o nationwidetown hall meetings on ignition interlocks, to the emphasis onsobriety checkpoints, to supporting vehicle-based solutions,the campaign has made a dierence.

State and local enorcement ocials are the cornerstone o NHTSA’s saety program, and we will continue to supportthem. Our new, high visibility law enorcement campaign,

Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over, hammered that messagehome to our most at-risk populations.

When the Campaign began, only one state required interlocksor all convicted drunk drivers. Only three states requiredinterlocks or high blood alcohol concentration (BAC) oend-ers. Today, thanks in large part to the campaign, 32 states nowrequire interlocks or all or high BAC drunk drivers. This prog-ress is phenomenal.

Finally, the campaign called or new, vehicle-based solutions.Just a concept 5 years ago, the Driver Alcohol Detection Sys-tem or Saety, or DADSS, is a potential technological solutionnow entering the testing and prototype phase. This project is

literally the “moon shot” or our generation to save lives on thehighway by turning the vehicle into the cure or drunk driving.

NHTSA is proud to partner with MADD on the Campaign toEliminate Drunk Driving and congratulations to all our high-way saety partners who have worked to make the campaigna reality. I look orward to working with you in uture yearsto once and or all eliminate drunk driving in America.

Thank you and best wishes.

HONORARY CHAIRMAN DAVID STRICKLAND

David StricklandHonorary Chairman



TABLE OF CONTENTS

1

A LETTER FROM HONORARY CHAIRMAN DAVID STRICKLAND

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS

2 FROM MADD’S PRESIDENT

3 TAKING A TOLL IN DOLLARS AS WELL AS LIVES

4 A NEW HOPE

5 SOBRIETY CHECKPOINTS

6 IGNITION INTERLOCKS

7 INTERLOCK LAWS 2006-2011

9 TURNING CARS INTO THE CURE FOR DRUNK DRIVING

10 NEW APPROACHES TO FURTHER HELP ELIMINATE DRUNK DRIVING

10 DUI COORDINATOR

11 CHILD ENDANGERMENT12 NO-REFUSAL WEEKENDS

13 RATING THE STATES

14 A STATE-BY-STATE SUMMARY

28 OUR ROAD AHEAD

HHHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHH

H

HH

HH

H

HHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHH

H

HH

HH

H

HHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHH

H

HH

HH

H

HHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHHH

HHH

H

HH

HH

H

HHH



FROM MADD’S PRESIDENTOn July 7th this year, we would have celebrated mydaughter Alisa’s 35th birthday. Wow – 35.

I awoke that morning wanting to call her to giveher some gu about making me older. She wouldhave laughed her un giggle and oered me a gra-cious, “You’re the youngest mom I know in your agegroup.” I would have replied, “You’re my avoritedaughter in your age group.” That is our amily joke.She loved amily jokes. During a trip to Connecticutone year, her younger brother kept asking the classic,

“Are we almost there yet?” The reply was “Four, maybe ve hours.” Follow-ing that trip, it became Alisa’s stock response. Everything took “our, maybeve hours.”

Her two best riends were talking ater a recent Walk Like MADD® eventabout what their lives are like now — and what Alisa would be doing today.Through their laughter, they shared that they weren’t sure who her mate wouldbe but were sure he would have to tolerate cats, lots o cats. She could not turnaway a stray. The same nurturing spirit would have made her a natural mother.Her riends, both new moms themselves, elt certain Alisa would have hadkids. They shared how much lie changes with a newborn and how painul itis to think about not being able to share that with Alisa, the one person who

most loved taking care o others.

My heart ollows that dream. I can imagine her calling me up to ask i I couldcome over and watch the baby. A boy or girl would be equally joyul or her.Beore the child was born, we would have decorated the room with second-hand treasures she’d ound. But the exquisite bliss o her child would trulyhave been all that mattered to her. How I long to just be able to quietly observeher cuddling her baby.

My imagination strays to other experiences we might have had. I would haveloved sharing in her plans or her wedding. How earthy it would have been.

She would have no doubt been a bareoot bride — quite possibly on a beachsomewhere. She hated shoes — even had a sign on her bedroom door: “onlybare eet allowed.”

She was so very loyal to her riends and amily. She loved her little nephewsand had a knack or instantly soothing them as well as lighting up their aces.Today, their lives as college students would be so enriched with her involve-ment as she gently guided them rom her wise-auntie vantage point. Herriends always say she was a do-the-right-thing kind o person.

Whatever path her career took, she would have ollowed her heart. Perhapsit would have had something to do with dance, because she loved it so much.Her choice would have been guided by her passion. I can see her working oran environmental group to save the planet somehow. Long beore it was acommon thing to do, Alisa demanded that her amily recycle.

To be sure, she would have been the rst person to call her sister and nephewsliving on the North Carolina coast ater Hurricane Irene to make sure theywere sae. As I write this today, the electricity is still out ollowing the hur-ricane. Were she here, I know she would call me and assure me the electricitywould be turned on in “our, maybe ve hours.”

Sadly, I will never receive that call because her lie was taken beore it really

began — when she was only 15 — by someone who chose to drink and drive.

The th anniversary o MADD’s Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving®is a time to refect on our progress — but not to rest on our laurels. We’llsave the victory celebration or the day when loved ones are no longer let todaydream about how things might have been — the day when we achieve ourgoal o no more victims.

Jan Withers

MADD National President

2



TAKING A TOLL IN DOLLARS AS WELL AS LIVES

drunk driving

cost the United

States $132

billion in

2009 alone

While Alisa and Jan have paid the ultimate price, drunk driving also places an

enormous nancial burden on the United States. According to new research

rom the Pacic Institute or Research and Evaluation, drunk driving cost the

United States $132 billion in 2009 alone. This includes $61 billion in

monetary costs, plus quality-o-lie losses valued at $71 billion. The ederal

government paid $4.5 billion o this bill, while state and local governments

paid $3.2 billion. Employers paid $10.7 billion, including $3.7 billion related

to crashes involving work trips and $7 billion related to crashes outside o

work involving employees and benet-eligible dependents. As we struggle

to nd solutions to dicult budget issues, the ght against drunk driving

presents a valuable opportunity or saving money as well as lives.

3



drunk driving

fatalities

reduced by

almost half

A NEW HOPESince MADD’s ounding more than 30 years ago, remarkable progress has been made inthe ght against drunk driving, reducing drunk driving atalities by almost hal. MADD hasalso put a human ace on this crime. What was once a punch line on late night television isnow considered unacceptable, yet it is still tolerated.

Despite great progress, drunk driving atalities have remained relatively stagnant since themid-nineties, with roughly one out o three highway deaths caused by a drunk driver. In2006, MADD ocused on proven strategies to once again drive the country orward. The re-sult was the Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving, an initiative launched with the supporto then U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters, highway saety and law enorcementgroups, leaders rom the automotive community and members o the alcohol industry.

The Campaign has three components:

SUPPORT THE HEROES WHO KEEP OUR ROADS SAFE. High-visibilitylaw enorcement catches drunk drivers and discourages others rom driving drunk.

TURN CARS INTO THE CURE. Tomorrow’s cars will protect each o us,

automatically determining whether or not the driver is at or above the illegal limito .08 blood alcohol content and ailing to operate i the driver is impaired.

REQUIRE CONVICTED DRUNK DRIVERS TO BLOW BEFORE THEY GO.

Ignition interlock devices, or in-car breathalyzers, require all convicted drunkdrivers to prove they are sober beore they can start their cars.

In the last ve years, the Campaign has made signicant strides, but there is still much workto be done. In order to ully implement the vision o a nation without drunk driving, MADD

calls on the country to rededicate itself to these proven DUI countermeasures

and eliminate the primary threat to the American family on our roads.

4



Sobriety checkpoints remain the primary methodthrough which law enorcement protects thepublic rom drunk drivers. According to theCenters or Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),sobriety checkpoints reduce impaired driving a-talities by 20 percent.

The idea is to generate media, whether paid orearned, to draw attention to the checkpoint and

discourage drunk drivers rom ever getting behindthe wheel. In act, a checkpoint that catchesno drunk drivers is successul because thedeterrent eect worked. MADD, through ourlocal and state oces, works to encourage locallaw enorcement agencies to conduct theseimportant checkpoints.

NHTSA now conducts two drunk driving paid-ad “crackdowns” per year, one around the LaborDay holiday and the other during the Christmasand New Year’s holiday. This past Labor Day

marked the introduction o a new slogan:Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over.

Thirty-eight states currently conduct sobrietycheckpoints. The other 12 conduct saturationpatrols. MADD calls on every state to

conduct these lifesaving checkpoints and

calls on Congress to continue its support

for high-visibility enforcement campaigns in

the next highway reauthorization bill.

In addition to sobriety checkpoints, law

enorcement and driver licensing authorities canimmediately revoke driving privileges o suspectedDUI* oenders upon arrest. This countermeasure,known as Administrative License Revocation(ALR) has demonstrated success in reducing atalcrashes by nine percent. It’s important that everystate make use o ALR laws to protect the publicrom drunk drivers by deterring people romcommitting the crime.

*DUI reers to Driving Under the Infuence, also known in some states as

OUI (Operating Under the Infuence) or DWI (Driving While Intoxicated.)

5

LAW ENFORCEMENT ON THE FRONT LINE

SOBRIETY CHECKPOINTS AND ALR:



When MADD was rst ounded, driver’s licensesuspension was thought to be an eectivecountermeasure or convicted drunk drivers.However, conservative estimates now indicatethat convicted drunk drivers drive drunk morethan 80 times beore being caught. What’s more,50 to 75 percent o convicted drunk driverscontinue to drive with a suspended license.Why do they do this? Because they can. Clearly,

long-term license suspension is not an eec-tive consequence or the majority o convictedoenders.

An ignition interlock device is the most currenttechnology proven to eectively stop convicteddrunk drivers rom repeating the crime. The de-vice is a breath-test system linked to a vehicle’signition. Beore convicted drunk driving oend-ers start their vehicles, they must rst blowinto the device. The vehicle will not start unlessthe driver’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC)

is below a pre-set limit.

Interlocks have various eatures designed toensure that oenders can’t beat the system.

Some are calibrated to have rolling retests,which require a driver to provide breath tests atregular intervals, preventing drivers rom askinga sober riend to start the car or to drink whiledriving or to leave the car idling in a parking lotwhile drinking. Use o interlocks oten reducesrepeated oenses by more than two-thirds.

The device is leased rom an interlock provider

or approximately $50 to $75 per month. Anadditional service charge, typically between$50 and $100, is required to install the device.Taxpayers are not penalized, since everystate with an all-oender interlock law requiresthe oender to pay these costs. When theinterlock sentence is over, the oender simplyhas the device removed and resumes normaldriving privileges.

EVERY STATE, EVERY OFFENDER

IGNITION INTERLOCKS:

6



INTERLOCK LAWS

2006

MANDATORY UPON .08 CONVICTION

MANDATORY WITH A BAC OF AT LEAST .15

MANDATORY WITH REPEAT CONVICTION

MANDATORY .08 UPON REINSTATEMENT

DISCRETIONARY

NO INTERLOCK LAW AT ALL

2011

New Mexico was the rst state to require all convicted drunk drivers to use this liesavingdevice. Since the law was rst implemented in 2005, drunk driving atalities have droppedby 36 percent. Arizona soon ollowed suit, and that state’s atalities have since dropped bymore than 46 percent. These atality reductions demonstrate the need or every state to requireinterlocks or all convicted drunk drivers.

7

WASHINGTON, DC

HWASHINGTON, DC

H



32 states have adopted

laws requiring interlocks forfirst-time offensesIn just ve years, the Campaign has gainedwidespread support or interlocks, adding 15states to the list o those requiring the devicesor all rst-time oenders. In addition, 13states require ignition interlocks or oend-ers with a BAC o .15 or higher, two states

require interlocks or oenders with a .16BAC and one state requires interlocks or.17 oenders. In total, 32 states have ad-opted laws requiring an interlock on rstoense at some level. (Caliornia has arobust our-county pilot program coveringmore than 13 million people.) As a pointo comparison, in 2006, 101,000 ignitioninterlocks were installed on the vehicleso convicted oenders; in June 2011, thenumber rose to 249,000. In total, 89 millionAmericans are now protected by all-oender

ignition interlock laws.

MADD believes every state should protectits communities by requiring all convicteddrunk drivers to use an ignition interlock

device. Interlocks are a practical and airway to deal with drunk driving. Mass transitalternatives are scarce, except in major cities,making cars necessary or commuting towork, going to the grocery store and othereveryday necessities. Ignition interlocks

enable oenders to keep their jobs and tosupport their amilies while protecting thepublic rom convicted DUI oenders.

Therefore, MADD calls on every state

that doesn’t have an all-offender law

to pass one during its next state

legislative session. MADD also calls

on the federal government to provide

bold measures in the next highway

reauthorization bill to ensure that all

states achieve this goal.



While sobriety checkpoints and ignition interlockscurrently represent two o the best available ap-proaches to drunk driving prevention, the time hascome to use technology to turn cars into the cure ordrunk driving. A 2006 technology summit hosted byMADD spurred the Automotive Coalition or TracSaety (ACTS) to undertake the challenge o creat-ing a new passive, in-vehicle technology that candetect whether or not the driver is drunk and regis-ters a BAC o .08 or higher. ACTS stipulated thatsuch a device must be inexpensive, unobtrusive andhassle-ree or a sober driver. I successul, this newtechnology would prohibit an impaired driver romoperating a car.

In 2008, ACTS entered into a cooperative researchagreement with the ederal government to developthe Driver Alcohol Detection System or Saety(DADSS). This ve-year, $10-million agreementrepresents the beginning o the nal chapter in theght against drunk driving.

DADSS research is currently being conducted in

several laboratories, coordinated by QinetiQ NorthAmerica, outside Boston. Harvard Medical Schoolis conducting human subject testing. Two technolo-gies are being considered in Phase II o the project,which, once completed in 2013, will yield an in-vehicle technology that can accurately and quicklydetect the driver’s BAC. The Insurance Institute orHighway Saety estimates that this technology couldsave almost 9,000 lives per year.

The two technologies are considerably dierent.Takata-TruTouch Technologies has developed asystem that requires the driver to touch a deviceembedded in a part o the vehicle, possibly the steer-ing wheel or dashboard. The technology then usesinrared spectrometry to “see” into the tissue o thedriver and make an accurate reading o the driver’sBAC. The other technology, developed by Autoliv,uses inrared technology to measure BAC byanalyzing the driver’s breath.

While Phase II will result in a drivable test vehicle,much more needs to be done in order to make thistechnology ready or the vehicle showroom. In ad-dition, the public must be assured that DADSS willbe seamless and unobtrusive or the sober driver.To provide resources needed to complete DADSS,Senators Tom Udall and Bob Corker and Repre-sentatives Shelley Moore Capito, Heath Shuler andJohn Sarbanes have introduced the ROADS SAFEAct, S. 510 and H.R. 2324. This legislation wouldauthorize $60 million o new unds or Phase III o DADSS, assuring its path out o the lab and onto

the streets.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman JohnRockeeller and Ranking Member Kay BaileyHutchison have also included ROADS SAFE aspart o the Surace Transportation Re-AuthorizationBill. MADD calls on Congress to pass this

legislation and to make ROADS SAFE law.

TURNING CARS INTO THE CUREFOR DRUNK DRIVING



NEW APPROACHES TO FURTHERHELP ELIMINATE DRUNK DRIVING

In the last ve years, MADD has witnessed the success o additional approaches to eliminate drunkdriving. States have utilized several highly eective countermeasures to protect the motoring public.We, thereore, ask all states to implement the ollowing drunk driving countermeasures:

• DUI COORDINATOR

• DUI CHILD ENDANGERMENT LAWS

• NO-REFUSAL CRACKDOWNS

10

Judges, prosecutors, law enorcement, DMVs,probation ocers, parole ocers and others mustwork together in order to protect the public romdrunk drivers. Coordinating this eort can be anoverwhelming task.

While New Mexico used ignition interlocks as itscenterpiece in reducing drunk driving atalities by36 percent, it also appointed a central DUIcoordinator (known in New Mexico as the DWICzar) to coordinate its drunk driving eorts. Thecoordinator’s role was to promote collaborationand coordination o anti-DWI eorts across thestate government, coordinate sobriety checkpoint

crackdowns (known in New Mexico as Super-Blitzes) and work with law enorcement and courtsto utilize all available tools to stop drunk drivers.

MADD calls on all states to appoint

statewide DUI coordinators to ensure that

state agencies work together to share

scarce resources and stop drunk drivers.

DUI COORDINATOR



11

O the 10,839 people killed in drunk drivingcrashes in 2009, 181 were children underthe age o 15. More than hal o them werepassengers o drunk drivers. As a nation, weshould all nd this unacceptable.

In 2009, 11-year-old Leandra Rosado wastragically killed when an SUV carrying herand seven other children crashed on the

Henry Hudson Parkway in Manhattan. Theadult driver, who had a BAC o .132, wasthe mother o one o the other passengers.

Leandra’s ather, Lenny Rosado, channeledhis grie over the death o his only daughterinto tireless advocacy or Leandra’s Law.The New York law requires all convicteddrunk drivers to use ignition interlockdevices, and makes driving drunk with achild passenger under the age o 16 in thecar a elony punishable by up to our years

in prison.

From December 18, 2009, when Leandra’sLaw went into eect, through July 2011,1,409 people were arrested in New YorkState or driving drunk with a child in thecar. This equates to more than our peopleper day arrested specically or that oense.Clearly, child endangerment has reacheda crisis level in our nation. States must actnow to pass tougher laws and send a mes-

sage that it is not okay to drive drunk, worsestill with a child in the car.

Therefore, MADD calls on all states

to make DUI child endangerment a

felony and include additional ignition

interlock time for adults who commit

this crime.

LEANDRA’S LAW AS A NATIONAL MODEL

CHILD ENDANGERMENT



12

One important issue that continues to hinderprogress on DUI reorm is oenders’ reusalo BAC testing when they are pulled over. Insome states, implied consent to BAC testing isassumed as a condition o driving on the road.In other states, reusing to give a BAC sampleis common practice and oten leads to a casedismissal or a lesser plea in court.

A number o states have responded byimplementing no-reusal weekends. Duringno-reusal weekends, police set up enhancedenorcement like sobriety checkpoints. Judgesstay on call around the clock to issue warrantsauthorizing police to draw oenders’ blood ortesting i oenders reuse to cooperate withpolice by providing breath samples.

These programs are highly publicized, so thatthe public and potential drunk drivers knowthat they can’t evade the consequences o drunkdriving. The BAC is one o the most importantpieces o evidence reviewed by prosecuting

attorneys as they determine whether to pros-ecute, reduce the charge to a lesser oense ordismiss the case.

No-reusal crackdowns have proven eectivein lowering reusal rates. They also mayreduce caseloads and ensure oenders’ rights todue process.

Texas is an example o a state in which morethan hal o suspected DUI oenders reusedBAC testing in 2005. Several Texas countiesresponded by participating in no-reusal week-ends. The results have been very promising. Inact, one county, Montgomery County, reducedreusals by over 50 percent while increasingDUI convictions and reducing DUI dismissals.

MADD calls on all states to utilize the

national DUI crackdown events to hold

no-refusal weekends.

NO-REFUSAL CRACKDOWNS



RATING THE STATES’ DRUNK DRIVING EFFORTSTo celebrate ve years o Campaign progress while advocating or stronger legislation to ght drunk driving, MADD has compiled anational progress report. The report uses a ve-star system to rates states on their implementation o proven drunk driving counter-measures. It’s important to note that not all stars are equal. While all o these are valuable DUI countermeasures that states should adopt,we know that ignition interlocks and sobriety checkpoints are the two most eective ways to dramatically reduce atalities and injuries.

Each star that a state earns represents passage o a particular law or participation in one o the ollowing drunk driving countermeasures:

Conducting Sobriety Checkpoints

Sobriety checkpoints are proven to reduce DUI atalities by an average o 20 percent by acting as a general deter-rent to drinking and driving. They are also cost-eective, reducing drunk driving expenses by at least six dollarsor every dollar invested.

13

Participating in No-refusal EventsOenders who reuse to submit to BAC testing present a signicant challenge to law enorcement and thecourts. Driving is a privilege, not a right. No-reusal weekends have proven successul in reducing the numbero oenders who reuse BAC testing. No-reusal stars are given to states with a 10 percent or lower reusalrating or or those states that participate in no-reusal or warrant initiatives.

Requiring Ignition Interlocks for all Drunk Driving OffendersMore than 15 peer-reviewed studies recommend requiring ignition interlocks or all convicted DUI oenders.This year the Centers or Disease Control recommended every state pass an all-oender ignition interlock law.New Mexico and Arizona have reduced DUI atalities by 36 and 46 percent, respectively, through the adoptiono this liesaving law.

Utilizing Administrative License RevocationAdministrative License Revocation (ALR) has been around or some time. The concept is swit punishmentor drunk driving through the immediate conscation o an oender’s driver’s license by the arresting ocer.During sobriety checkpoints, ALR must be heavily publicized in order to deter potential drunk driving oenders.Studies show that ALR reduces DUI atalities by as much as nine percent.

Enhancing Penalties for DUI Child EndangermentDUI child endangerment is an issue everyone should agree on. Sadly, there are too many stories like that o Leandra Rosado, where an adult chooses to drive drunk with a child or children in the vehicle. Enhanced penalties,such as making this crime a elony, are important ways to make adults think twice beore acting so irresponsibly.



Alaska requires ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers. However, drunk driving deaths could be urther reduced by enacting a

child endangerment law, utilizing sobriety checkpoints and engaging in other high-visibility law enorcement activities. Sobriety checkpoints

are legal in Alaska but are not oten conducted.

ALASKA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL

FIRST-TIME CONVICTED

DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H2

High-visibility law enorcement eorts have helped reduce drunk driving atalities in Alabama. In 2011, Alabama became the nal state

to enact an ignition interlock law. Unortunately, the law is limited to repeat oenders and rst-time oenders with a BAC o .15 or greater.

The next step is to require these liesaving devices or all convicted drunk drivers.

ALABAMA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H3

A STATE-BY-STATE SUMMARY

Arizona’s 46 percent drop in drunk driving atalities is due in large part to its law requiring ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers

as well as increased law enorcement eorts. As a ve star state, Arizona can continue its progress by appointing a statewide DUI coordina-

tor.

ARIZONA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSALH H H H H5

15



4In 2009, Arkansas enacted a law requiring ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers. Other legislation was passed at that time,

including an open-container law. These laws, along with continued eorts in high-visibility law enorcement, will help stop drunk driving.

ARKANSAS

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H

Colorado’s all-oender interlock law has helped cut down on drunk driving atalities. It’s also one o the ew states with a compliance-

based removal system, penalizing oenders i interlocks show they attempted to drive drunk. To urther aect positive change, MADD

urges Colorado to implement more no-reusal events.

COLORADO

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H

Caliornia has made progress toward ending drunk driving, but more action is needed. On July 1, 2010, a pilot program went into eect, requir-

ing interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers in our counties covering 13 million people. The pilot program should be expanded statewide,

as other counties in the state are missing opportunities to protect people rom drunk drivers. The state should also look at improving its child

endangerment law.

CALIFORNIA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H4

4

In 2011, Connecticut lawmakers enacted legislation requiring interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers. Once this measure takes eect in 2012,

Connecticut’s level o drunk driving should decrease. Unortunately, a loophole exists until at least 2013, allowing nearly all rst-time drunk

driving oenders to receive diversion, ree o the interlock requirement. Additionally, Connecticut is one o 11 states with no child endanger-

ment law. We hope this will change in 2012.

CONNECTICUT

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H3

16



4Delaware has a good, but underutilized, toolbox available to enorce drunk driving laws. The state currently requires interlocks or rst-time

oenders with a BAC o .15 or greater. However, in a majority o rst-time oender cases , the blood alcohol concentration level is used as aplea-bargaining chip resulting in ew actual interlock installations. MADD urges lawmakers to stop this practice by passing legislation requir-

ing interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers with no plea bargains allowed.

DELAWARE

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H

4Drunk driving atalities in Florida have decreased since 2006, due in large part to high-visibility law enorcement eorts and increased use o

ignition interlocks or some convicted drunk drivers. The next step is to require interlocks or a ll convicted drunk drivers. Additionally, the

breathalyzer reusal rate in Florida is around 40 percent, highlighting the need or no-reusal enorcement activities.

FLORIDA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H

Georgia’s high-visibility law enorcement eorts and expanded use o ignition interlocks or repeat oenders have helped decrease drunk driv-

ing. However, Georgia lawmakers hold the key or urther progress. Passage o legislation requiring ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk

drivers promises to save even more lives in Georgia.

GEORGIA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

High-visibility law enorcement eorts in Washington, DC are critical to eliminate drunk driving. To make District roads saer, MADD asks

the District Council to require all convicted drunk drivers to blow beore they go with an ignition interlock. As this is a national priority and a

signicant part o the highway bill, our nation’s capital should set an example.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

3

3

17

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H



4Hawaii recently enacted a law requiring ignition interlocks or all rst-time convicted drunk drivers. We hope to see a signicant reduction in

the state’s very high drunk driving death rate as a result. MADD encourages more no-reusal law enorcement activities and the expansion o its interlock requirement to include repeat oenders.

HAWAII

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H

High-visibility law enorcement, combined with an ignition interlock law or all convicted drunk drivers, helped Illinois achieve a double-digit

percentage decrease in drunk driving deaths. While earning one o MADD’s highest ratings in this report, more progress is needed in Illinois

because o the state’s high atality rate. MADD urges the governor to appoint a DUI coordinator to improve communication among the various

state agencies involved in the adjudication process and to close loopholes in the current interlock law.

ILLINOIS

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H H

Indiana currently lacks many necessary tools or meaningul progress against drunk driving. Some judges require interlocks or rst-time

oenders, but legislative leadership is needed to require these devices or a ll convicted drunk drivers, along with extra penalties or those

who drive drunk with a child passenger in a vehicle.

INDIANA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H

The people o Idaho are not as well protected rom drunk drivers as they could be because law enorcement is not allowed to conduct sobriety

checkpoints. In addition, lawmakers need to advance meaningul legislation that addresses rst-time convicted drunk drivers by requiring inter-

locks or all convicted drunk drivers.

IDAHO

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H3

5

2

18



Iowa utilizes ignition interlocks to combat drunk driving, but the devices are not required or all convicted drunk drivers. MADD urges law-

makers to enact legislation requiring interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers and to legalize sobriety checkpoints, which have the potential toreduce atalities by 20 percent. This is especially important, as atalities have been on the rise in the state.

IOWA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H

In 2010 and 2011, liesaving ignition interlock legislation passed the House but stalled in the Senate. Legislators have the power to help assist

in the elimination o drunk driving by passing legislation requiring all convicted drunk drivers to blow beore they go. MADD urges the Ken-

tucky Senate to enact legislation that could help save he lives o about 200 people per year.

KENTUCKY

Louisiana was one o the rst states to pass an all-oender ignition interlock law. However, the state still lacks ALR, strong administrative

oversight o the post-DUI licensing process and judges committed to implementing the mandatory interlock law. Louisiana needs a DUI coordi-

nator to help overcome those actors that inhibit the eectiveness o the s tate’s interlock law.

LOUISIANA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H

In 2011, Kansas enacted a law requiring ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers. This change came ater consecutive annual increases

in drunk driving deaths, in contrast to overall national reductions. With strong enorcement eorts and the new ignition interlock law in place,

Kansas should be able to turn the corner on drunk driving. MADD urges the governor to appoint a DUI coordinator to continue moving Kansasin the right direction.

KANSAS

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H H

2

5

4

19

3 INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H



In 2008, Maine enacted an ignition interlock law but limited its application to repeat oenders only. Maine should improve the interlock law by

requiring the devices or all convicted drunk drivers. MADD believes driving drunk with a child passenger in a vehicle is a orm o child abuse,and Maine helped make the punishment t the crime by creating a DUI child endangerment law.

MAINE

High-visibility law enorcement and enactment o Melanie’s Law requiring interlocks or repeat oenders have helped reduce drunk driving in

the state. While Massachusetts has come a long way, more progress is necessary, including passage o pending legislation expanding Melanie’s

Law to include rst-time convicted drunk drivers.

MASSACHUSETTS

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

Michigan could be doing much more to stop drunk driving. Most drunk driving arrests in the state do not result in convictions, but in lesser

charges. The state’s recent reorm eorts required ignition interlocks or rst-time oenders with a BAC o .17 or greater, reerred to as “Super

Extreme DUI” oenders. MADD believes that any drunk driving at .08 or above is extreme enough to merit an interlock. In addition, Michigan

does not allow law enorcement the option o sobriety checkpoints, proven to save lives, and lacks an ALR law.

MICHIGAN

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H

In 2011, the state’s ignition interlock law improved slightly. The new law requires interlocks or rst-time oenders with a blood alcohol

concentration o .15 or greater. However, most (53 percent) rst-time oenders in the state receive diversion and are unaected by this

requirement. Maryland needs to require all oenders to have interlocks and end diversion practices.

MARYLAND

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

1

3

3

20

4 INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H HH



Minnesota recently increased the use o ignition interlocks by making it an option or all convicted drunk drivers. However, despite their initia-

tive in conducting a pilot program, the state has yet to take the next step o making interlocks mandatory or all convicted drunk drivers. In ad-dition, the state currently limits law enorcement’s power to stop drunk driving and protect the public by ailing to allow sobriety checkpoints.

Minnesota should encourage more no-reusal law enorcement activities to help hold drunk driving oenders accountable.

MINNESOTA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H

Expanded use o ignition interlocks or repeat oenders and high-visibility law enorcement eorts have helped decrease drunk driving deaths

in the state by more than 20 percent s ince the Campaign began. Missouri can make even more progress by requiring interlocks or all convicted

drunk drivers and by adding extra penalties or those who drive drunk with a child passenger in the vehicle.

MISSOURI

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

Montana has nibbled around the edges o drunk driving reorm by passing measures that toughen penalties or repeat oenders. Now, more

attention must be paid to rst-time oenders. The legislature should ocus on the entire drunk driving problem, including rst-time convicted

drunk drivers, in order to save lives, especially in light o the state’s high atality rate. Law enorcement should also be given more tools to

stop drunk driving, including the use o sobriety checkpoints and no-reusal crackdown activities.

MONTANA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H

Lawmakers have blocked progress to stop drunk driving by halting DUI child endangerment and all-oender ignition interlock legislation. As a

result, law enorcement and prosecutors do not have all the resources needed to stop drunk driving in the state. Mississippi should enact legisla-

tion requiring ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers and make the punishment t the crime or those who drive drunk with a childin a vehicle.

MISSISSIPPI

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H

1

3

2

2

21



Nebraska’s 2008 all-oender ignition interlock law received a acelit in 2011, adding an administrative component. This change was made to

ensure judicial compliance with the mandatory interlock law. The new law also creates extra penalties or those who drive drunk with a childpassenger in the vehicle. To see even urther improvements, the governor could appoint a DUI coordinator to make sure all the pieces are in

place to help stop drunk driving.

NEBRASKA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H H

New Hampshire could make signicant progress against drunk driving i the current interlock law, which is limited to rst-time oenders with

a blood alcohol concentration o .16 or greater, was changed to include all convicted drunk drivers. New Hampshire is also the only state in the

nation without an adult seatbelt law.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

A 2010 New Jersey law requires ignition interlocks or repeat and rst-time oenders with a blood alcohol concentration o .15 or greater.

The state could do more to stop drunk driving i ignition interlocks were required or all convicted drunk drivers. New Jersey is also missing

another key anti-drunk driving tool, as it does not utilize ALR ollowing a drunk driving arrest or reusal.

NEW JERSEY

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H

Nevada has experienced a signicant decrease in drunk driving since the Campaign began, but more can be done. The state could improve its rating

and better protect the public by requiring all rst-time convicted drunk drivers to blow beore they go with an ignition interlock. No-reusal activities

would also help hold accountable drunk drivers who reuse to be tested or intoxication ollowing a suspected drunk driving arrest.

NEVADA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

5

3

2

3

22



New Mexico became the rst s tate to require ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers when it passed the liesaving legislation in

2005. Since then, 15 states have ollowed its lead, and New Mexico’s drunk driving deaths have declined by 36 percent thanks to the legislation andstrong law enorcement eorts. The state still needs a child endangerment law. MADD also urges the governor to reappoint a DUI coordinator,

a position that contributed to the state’s dramatic decline in drunk driving atalities but is currently vacant.

NEW MEXICO

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

North Carolina was one o the rst states to require interlocks or rst-time oenders with a blood alcohol concentration o .15 or greater

when it passed the legislation in 2007. To extend a decline in drunk driving deaths, North Carolina should continue its leadership role by

requiring interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers.

NORTH CAROLINA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

North Dakota recently enacted a 24/7 Sobriety Program to combat drunk driving. However, this program applies only to repeat oenders,

not to all convicted drunk drivers. North Dakota must address the entire drunk driving problem, which is why MADD urges the state to require

ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers.

NORTH DAKOTA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

Leandra’s Law, requiring ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers and making it a elony to drive drunk with a child passenger in

a vehicle, changed the state’s perception o drunk driving. With continued enorcement eorts and more interlocks or convicted drunk

drivers, New York is working diligently to stop drunk driving. We hope to see atality reductions as a result.

NEW YORK

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H

3

3

4

3

23



Ohio needs an upgrade to its current interlock law, which is limited to repeat oenders. Ater years o bypassing this legislation, MADD urges

the Ohio legislature to address drunk driving, starting with the rst oense, by making all convicted drunk drivers blow beore they go with anignition interlock.

OHIO

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

Many consider Oregon a leader in trac saety. However, Oregon lags behind on several drunk driving issues, including sobriety checkpoints.

The state does require ignition interlocks or rst- and second-time convicted drunk drivers, and in 2011, Oregon improved its interlock law to

require the devices or nearly 11,000 o the 24,000 drunk driving arrests that result in diversion.

OREGON

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H

High-visibility law enorcement eorts led the way to a 20 percent decline in drunk driving deaths rom 2008 to 2009. Despite the reduction,

more than 400 people died in drunk driving crashes during 2009 due in part to a lack o strong legislation. Pennsylvania could better protect

children by enhancing penalties or those who drive drunk with a child passenger in the vehicle and could also experience a greater reduction i

ignition interlocks were required or all convicted drunk drivers.

PENNSYLVANIA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H

The Erin Swezey Act, enacted in 2011, requires interlocks or rst-time oenders with a BAC o .15 or greater and those with a BAC o .08

to .14 who wish to drive during a six-month revocation period. The new law marks s ignicant progress, and MADD looks orward to the day

when lawmakers expand the law to require interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers.

OKLAHOMA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

3

3

1

24

H

3



Rhode Island is one o the states that trails the rest o the nation in liesaving legislation. MADD urges legislators to expand the state’s tool-

box in the ght to stop drunk driving. Rhode Island should legalize sobriety checkpoints and encourage no-reusal enorcement activities. Thestate also lacks a sure and swit consequence or drunk driving, as there is no ALR and convicted drunk drivers are not required to use ignition

interlocks.

RHODE ISLAND

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H

South Dakota recently allowed the use o ignition interlocks as part o the Sobriety 24/7 program. However, the interlock law is limited to re-

peat oenders and rst-time oenders with a blood alcohol concentration o .17 or greater. MADD asks lawmakers to require interlocks or all

convicted drunk drivers. The state could also better protect children rom drunk drivers by enacting a child endangerment law and other strong

legislation.

SOUTH DAKOTA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H

Tennessee has made signicant strides in reducing drunk driving with the passage o interlocks or high-BAC and repeat oenders, but more

action is necessary. MADD recommends expanding the use o ignition interlocks to all convicted drunk drivers and utilizing ALR to help deter

drunk driving, a measure that has been proposed to the legislature.

TENNESSEE

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H

South Carolina has a high percentage o drunk driving-related deaths, and enorcement eorts are the only thing keeping the state’s drunk

driving death totals rom reaching even higher numbers. MADD urges South Carolina to pass legislation requiring ignition interlocks or all

convicted drunk drivers.

SOUTH CAROLINA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H3

1

1

2

25



Texas has the most drunk driving deaths year ater year. Lawmakers should give law enorcement the constitutionally protected option o

utilizing sobriety checkpoints to stop drunk driving, as MADD has advocated or more than 20 years. In addition, Texas should require inter-locks or all convicted drunk drivers.

TEXAS

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

Vermont became the 48th state to enact an ignition interlock law in 2010 and is trailing the rest o the nation in other areas as well. Vermont

should now expand its interlock law to include all convicted drunk drivers and make the punishment t the crime o driving drunk with a child

passenger in a vehicle.

VERMONT

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H

For our straight years, legislation requiring ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers passed the Virginia House o Delegates only to

be stopped or signicantly weakened in the Senate. Virginia’s strong law enorcement eorts and current limited use o interlocks or certain

drunk driving oenders has helped save lives, but MADD urges the Senate to take action on more meaningul interlock legislation.

VIRGINIA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H H

Utah is a leader in eliminating drunk driving, but even one death is one too many. Utah is also a leader in the ght against underage drinking

with one o the nation’s only statewide anti-underage drinking ad campaigns. They should similarly coordinate anti-drunk driving eorts by

appointing a DUI coordinator to make sure all aspects o government are working eciently and eectively to end drunk driving.

UTAH

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

2

4

26

5HH

3



Washington has the most comprehensive ignition interlock law in the nation but could take additional steps to help save more lives. The state

needs a better child endangerment law, legalization o sobriety checkpoints and utilization o no-reusal activities to urther crack down ondrunk driving.

WASHINGTON

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

Wisconsin recently improved its drunk driving law, but more progress is still necessary. A rst oense is currently not considered a criminal

oense and may result in nothing more than a trac ticket, making Wisconsin the only state in the nation that does not consider all drunk driv-

ing as a crime. As a result, the state’s rates are usually very high. Wisconsin should inact legislation that allows or sobriety checkpoints and

requires ignition interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers.

WISCONSIN

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H

Wyoming is limited in what it can do to stop drunk driving, since sobriety checkpoints are illegal and ignition interlocks are not required or all

convicted drunk drivers. Both o these issues could be addressed through swit legislative action.

WYOMING

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H

West Virginia requires ignition interlocks or rst-time drunk driving oenders with a BAC o .15 or greater. Unortunately, the law is also used

as a way to avoid a drunk driving conviction. MADD urges lawmakers to require interlocks or all convicted drunk drivers without exception.

WEST VIRGINIA

INTERLOCKS FOR ALL


DRUNK DRIVERS

SOBRIETY

CHECKPOINTS

ALR CHILD

ENDANGERMENT

NO REFUSAL

H H H3

3

3

2

27



OUR ROAD AHEAD

On the th anniversary o MADD’s Campaign to Eliminate DrunkDriving, we celebrate the achievements o the past ve years while

looking ahead to greater triumphs in the uture as we move closer

to our goal o a nation without drunk driving.

A nation where taxpayers save $132 billion in needless costs. A nation where loved ones are no longer injured or killed by

other people’s carelessness. A nation where we honor drunk driving victims, like Alisa Withers,by turning cars into the cure for drunk driving.

This is MADD’s charge to the nation. We invite your support.

28



HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH





SPONSORED BY

madd state report 2011

Documents