Editorial: A drinking age endorsement

Over the past few weeks, these pages have seen a flurry of debate over the Minimum Legal Drinking Age (MLDA) of 21. This week alone, three separate pieces in the opinions section deal with the topic, and each of the last four weeks have included at least one op-ed submission targeting this contentious debate. In honor of the lively discussion, we have decided to endorse the goal of lowering the MLDA, particularly in Vermont, with a sincere effort made toward increased alcohol education.

We do not presume to propose a plan for how best to go about this ambitious action, but rather support more open and creative thinking on the topic — the ultimate goal being an MLDA that is pragmatic, safe and enforceable. The status quo is extraordinarily hard to enforce on college campuses, and statistics imply that the amount of dangerous binge drinking has skyrocketed in recent years.  This was a fact confirmed by the two alcohol experts that kick-started the debate that has been raging, and the fervor caused by last weekend’s visit of the Addison County liquor investigator demonstrates the difficulty college campuses face in enforcing MLDA-21. Simply lowering the drinking age to counteract these developments, however, has its own perils, particularly because expanding access to a substance in an effort to curb its use is a dubious proposition at best.

Instead of black and white propositions, we support further discussion that targets a solution that passes both the statistical and common sense tests. In his Notes from the Desk, Ian Trombulak ’12 proposes one such interesting idea, but the discussion should not stop there. Different ideas for alcohol education, different degrees of a “drinking license,” different ages at which you can legally consume vs. legally buy alcohol — all of these should be placed on a table and be subject to the scrutiny of experts, parents, legislators and kids.

In recent years, Middlebury has made headlines for being the home base of President Emeritus John McCardell’s Choose Responsibility platform. While we hesitate to endorse his plan completely, we believe that his approach to the MLDA is correct, and support the idea behind his actions. Underage drinking is always a difficult topic, and on our pedestrian-dominated campus it is far too easy to marginalize the effects alcohol can have on a young brain when coupled with an automobile, but a logical debate on the benefits of lowering the MLDA can only lead to a new and improved status quo.