The Washington Traffic Safety Commission is floating sweeping measures to reduce impaired driving: re-establishing roadside sobriety checkpoints, decreasing the authorized blood alcohol focus from 0.08 to 0.05, increasing roadside drug testing and tightening ignition-interlock enforcement.
The issue is actual. Impaired driving is implicated in about half of Washington’s fatal crashes. The visitors fee estimates these steps might stop a dozen deaths and a whole bunch of accidents annually. However whereas the impulse is comprehensible, a number of of the concepts are unwise, constitutionally suspect and disproportionate to the size of the issue.
The fee factors out that impaired driving deaths rose from 267 in 2019 to 344 in 2024. That’s a 29% enhance, however in uncooked phrases, it means 77 extra deaths throughout a state of practically 8 million individuals, a distinction of lower than one in 100,000. Each loss of life is tragic, but it’s price remembering that Washington loses greater than 1,200 residents annually to opioid overdoses and over 1,300 to suicide. Impaired-driving deaths are roughly corresponding to the state’s murder toll. That calls for consideration, however not extraordinary measures that sweep up thousands and thousands of unimpaired drivers.
That is the place proportionality issues. Saving the primary 100 lives in a disaster carries huge worth. Saving the 344th via suspicionless stops and invasive testing affords far much less return. Public coverage is all the time about weighing advantages towards prices, together with the associated fee to civil liberties.
Sobriety checkpoints can scale back alcohol-involved crashes in some states. However in Washington, they’re unconstitutional. In Metropolis of Seattle v. Mesiani (1988), the Washington Supreme Courtroom dominated that suspicionless checkpoints violate Article I, Part 7 of the state Structure, which affords larger safety of privateness than federal regulation.
Even when they had been authorized, WTSC’s personal numbers are modest: maybe 12 lives saved for $6 million spent annually. On paper, that appears cost-effective. In observe, it means stopping tens of 1000’s of harmless drivers to catch a handful. That isn’t security, it’s security theater. It dangers public belief whereas yielding solely marginal positive aspects.
The fee additionally proposes dropping the BAC threshold to 0.05. Over 100 nations use that restrict, and impairment begins under 0.08. Utah, the one U.S. state to undertake 0.05, reported a 20% decline in deadly crashes after implementation.
However Utah shouldn’t be Washington. A majority of Utahns are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which prohibits ingesting. Its inhabitants is sparse and its tradition markedly extra abstinent. Seattle, Tacoma and Spokane usually are not Salt Lake Metropolis. Importing Utah’s regulation into Washington dangers penalizing reasonable social drinkers whereas delivering solely modest security positive aspects. If lawmakers pursue this step, it needs to be with lifelike expectations and clear public schooling, not as a cure-all.
Increasing roadside drug testing is one other thought WTSC proffers, however right here the authorized obstacles are even increased. Breath checks are allowed with out a warrant after arrest. Blood checks usually are not. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that warrantless blood draws are too invasive, and Washington’s Structure units an excellent stricter normal.
In observe, officers can already receive digital warrants shortly in instances of suspected drug impairment, significantly for hashish. That focused strategy is the suitable steadiness. Routine roadside blood attracts, as practiced in Germany for example, and instructed by the WTSC suggestions, are unconstitutional right here.
One WTSC thought deserves stronger emphasis: ignition-interlock gadgets. These stop a automobile from beginning if the motive force has been ingesting, and research present they scale back repeat offenses by 50% to 70% whereas put in. Washington already requires them for some offenders, however compliance is inconsistent. Require interlocks for all DUI offenders and guarantee compliance. Increasing use and monitoring would ship significant security positive aspects with out infringing on anybody’s rights.
One other confirmed instrument is high-visibility enforcement via saturation patrols. Focus assets in sizzling spots and pair them with sturdy deterrent messaging. Not like checkpoints, these are lawful, focused, and fewer intrusive. When paired with public messaging, they enhance the perceived danger of being caught. That notion is what deters conduct.
Additionally, spend money on prevention and alternate options. Strengthen therapy and diversion packages and broaden protected transportation choices via partnerships with bars, rideshare companies and transit.
This combine respects constitutional limits, balances prices with advantages and addresses root causes. Impaired driving is a major problem, however WTSC’s proposals danger overreach.
The smarter path is apparent: ignition interlocks, focused patrols and prevention. These steps save lives with out eroding liberty. Washington can and will make its roads safer. Nonetheless, it should achieve this properly, proportionally and according to its constitutional traditions.
