tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post2360029530248947568..comments2024-02-16T09:00:32.845-06:00Comments on FromDC2Iowa: UI Held Hostage Day 495 - Worst of All Possible ChoicesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-77695327580001481942007-05-31T19:23:00.000-05:002007-05-31T19:23:00.000-05:00From 1920 to 1933 the public consumption of alcoho...From 1920 to 1933 the public consumption of alcohol was prohibited and after 1934 the minimum age to drink alcohol (MADA) was 21. From 1970 to 1975 29 states set the MADA to 18, 19 or 20. In 1894 Congress passed the Uniform Drinking Age Act which told the states they should set the MADA to 21 or lose federal road tax revenue. <BR/><BR/>Around 1970-2 the Iowa MADA was 18 and then two years later was changed to 19 because 18 year old high school students were providing alcohol to younger classmates. So from about 1975 to 1984-5 the Iowa MADA was 19. <BR/><BR/>From 1985 to date there has been massive noncompliance with this law by a substantial fraction of the 18 to 20 age group. When the UI is in session we have 12% of the Iowans in that age group in Johnson County and we have about 14% of the arrests for liquor law violations which are dominated by PAULA citations.<BR/><BR/>Because of the high concentration of 18 to 20 year olds here it is very obvious that they are telling the legislature that they can take their stupid law and shove it.<BR/><BR/>You rule with the consent of the governed and in this case you don't have their consent.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-30369554523862558872007-05-31T18:16:00.000-05:002007-05-31T18:16:00.000-05:00Ah what a wonderful example of moral relativism – ...Ah what a wonderful example of moral relativism – “hey kids, you’re right, if you can’t get your way downtown then threaten to trash the neighborhoods with lots of drunken parties!!” <BR/><BR/>Of course that ignores the fact that the legal ramifications of irresponsible behavior at a house party are borne by the leaseholders and not, as is now often the case downtown, by the bar owner and their insurance company. Yes, there would be more house parties to begin with but then the legal realities would sink in. IOW folks would be held responsible for their behavior. Radical idea that.<BR/><BR/>It is simply a false choice to propose that the only option to the status quo is prohibition. What do students learn in the current situation? It is a sleazy lesson in hypocrisy, expediency and amorality. Everybody knows that students will drink in any case. The question is how this community structures the moral and legal education of our young adults.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-69837096729183281652007-05-31T16:15:00.000-05:002007-05-31T16:15:00.000-05:00Going to 21 only is a bad idea.Guess what? The kid...Going to 21 only is a bad idea.<BR/><BR/>Guess what? The kids won't stop drinking. You will just push them into smaller partying groups in apartments and home made speakeasies. Better to have it in the open. The 18 drinking age has some merit, but is virtually impossible as long as the State of Iowa wants federal highway dollars.<BR/><BR/>Kids having been binge drinking at the UI for YEARS, and all these self righteous "Do as I say, not as I did" Baby Boomers need to realize that prohibition did not work in the 1920's and won't today.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-69219189792411171702007-05-31T14:36:00.000-05:002007-05-31T14:36:00.000-05:00I think the CR Gazette came close to stating the m...I think the CR Gazette came close to stating the most important issue in their editorial about the "21 referendum". Four of the seven council members said when they ran for election that they would not support a 21 only ordinance. When it the split was 3-3-1 Connie Champion had a little leverage over the bar owners because she was the deciding vote. That is no longer the case and the bar owners can ignore the city council. <BR/><BR/>Will the voters put up with that?<BR/><BR/>In the past 20 years 30,000 persons were arrested and jailed for public intoxication in Johnson County so it is reasonable to expect that in 2008 1,500 will be jailed on the same charge no matter how the 21 vote turns out. That will also be true for OWI arrests but in that case the number jailed per year will be about 1,000. If the police chief has money to pay overtime so officers can do bar checks I doubt there will be much difference in the number of persons cited for PAULA. <BR/><BR/>We have no idea how many private drinking parties there are per year and no realistic chance of determining that rate in future years so any claims about the increae/decrease in private drinking parties cannot be verified. In other words I think the benefits of 21 only as a mechanism for controlling underage drinking are so small they will be lost in the noise in the measurements.<BR/><BR/>If the 21 only referendum passes I think that the large downtown bars will manage to stay in business (with a continuation of the search for the false ID that can fool the police) but I am not very optimistic about the future of the small bars downtown. I don't think the bars outside of the downtown have much to be concerned about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-6183839447958652962007-05-31T14:01:00.000-05:002007-05-31T14:01:00.000-05:00Yes, Iowa City has set up a naughty game that make...Yes, Iowa City has set up a naughty game that makes underage binge drinking exciting, fun and very expensive for most undergraduates. Meanwhile bar profits and city coffers are padded very nicely, thank you. I also agree with you that lowering the drinking age to 18 might serve to dampen the adolescent thrills and stifle some of the shameless hypocrisy and pandering that surrounds the issue. <BR/><BR/>But part of the problem now is that the 19 law serves to attract a minority who has drinking as the top priority when they choose a college because there are few other Midwestern universities that allow students under 21 into the bars. So Iowa has become a party school and that minority has undue influence on the character and reputation of the school as well as being an influence on other students and local youth.<BR/><BR/>If 18 became a national law then I would support it but if only Iowa lowered the drinking age then we would just reinforce the notion that Iowa is a party school. Either way, it's not going to happen. I don’t like the idea of 21-only but unless someone comes up with a way to put an end to Iowa’s reputation as a party school then I may have to support it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-64364314819395211742007-05-31T13:55:00.000-05:002007-05-31T13:55:00.000-05:00Regarding moon stations and what to do there, I se...Regarding moon stations and what to do there, I seem to recall that in Clive Cussler's novel Cyclops, we discovered that the United States had already secretly built a moonbase. Of course, the moonbase employees were happy to get off the Moon, after, of course, fighting off some enemy force.<BR/><BR/>Yeah, Cussler's books started off somewhat believable, but after Deep Six (which came before Cyclops), they veered off into James Bond type-fantasyland.TYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06319389045016069839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-64176754662960554452007-05-31T13:54:00.000-05:002007-05-31T13:54:00.000-05:00Re: drinking age. I agree that lowering the drink...Re: drinking age. I agree that lowering the drinking age to 18 is the best solution. Demystifying the whole culture of drinking will go a long way toward eliminating a lot of the alcohol abuse a lot of young people partake in. But if memory serves me correctly, the state cannot lower the drinking age unless it wants to lose its federal highway funding. I seem to remember that the federal government imposed the condition that a state must have a 21 drinking age to receive road funds, and that's why all states (I believe) are now 21. Am I mistaken here? It's hard to imagine the state being able to deal with no federal road funds.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1789666953988294482007-05-31T13:24:00.000-05:002007-05-31T13:24:00.000-05:00Jim Van Allen used to say "There is no such thing ...Jim Van Allen used to say "There is no such thing as an inexpensive space program." When you live at the bottom of a gravitational well it costs a lot to get out of it and when you return four things can happen and<BR/>three of them are bad.<BR/><BR/>The last time NASA proposed a $400 billion program Congress laughed and that was the end of that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com