(Last updated June 2026)
- The general drinking and purchase age should be lowered to 18, and not a day later. And yesterday is not soon enough!
- For the first few years of the new drinking age of 18, the purchase age for kegs, cases, liquor handles, and other large bulk quantities of alcohol should remain at 21 (or perhaps 20 or 19), and no more than one off-premise alcohol transaction of any kind per store per day for those under that age. That should alleviate any fear of increased high school keggers. (And it could of course be done via local option and for longer, rather than by state law.)
- For the first three to five years of the new drinking age of 18, the age limit for the zero tolerance law for DUI should nonetheless remain as it is now, at 21. That should alleviate any (real or imagined) fears of increased DUI and associated casualties among 18-20 year olds. Even better would be making it apply for the first X number of years of licensed driving regardless of age.
- DUI laws should be further tightened for all ages and enforcement should be significantly increased. Penalties should be steeply graduated based on BAC and number of offenses (see chart below).
- Any person of ANY age who is convicted of DUI, drunk violence, drunk vandalism, drunk rioting, or repeated drunk and disorderly conduct should be blacklisted and banned from purchasing alcohol (or even entering a bar) for a year or until they turn 21, whatever is longer. (Optionally, states could add furnishing alcohol to minors to the list of covered offenses.) And their ID would have to read “Do not serve alcohol under penalty of law” in big red letters. The Northern Territory of Australia, as well as Western Australia, currently has something similar, called the Banned Drinker Register. (This can also be paired with something like South Dakota's 24/7 Sobriety Program.) In addition, problem drinkers can also have themselves voluntarily added to the blacklist (call it "86 Me", if you want) for a fixed period of time, much like problem gamblers are currently allowed to do.
- Alcohol education should be increased for all students at all levels. Some successful models to follow can be found here and here. And let's not forget British anthropologist Kate Fox's brilliant idea for flipping the script.
- Alcohol taxes should be raised and equalized to the inflation-adjusted 1991 spirits level ($33 per proof-gallon) for all alcoholic beverages, proportional to alcohol content. Small producers should have a somewhat reduced rate. Ideally, use at least a large portion of the funds for treatment for alcohol use disorder, like Finland does. This would ideally be combined with a minimum price floor and/or a ban on retailers selling alcohol below cost.
- Strictly enforce the new drinking age of 18, with the greatest focus on vendors. Any person who appears to be under 25 should have to show ID to purchase alcohol or tobacco, and anyone who appears to be under 18 should have to show two forms of ID. If there must be penalties for underage drinking/possession, it should be a modest civil fine ($200 or less) with no criminal record, and perhaps an alcohol education course as well.
- Social host liability laws, both civil and criminal, should be abolished or at least greatly reduced, as they most likely do more harm than good.
- Whether there should even be a true drinking age at all (as opposed to merely a purchase age) is a matter of debate. But if there should be one, it should NOT be any higher than 18, and it should NOT be illegal for people under 18 to drink at home under direct parental supervision (within reason).
NOTE 1: Items #2, #3, and #5 we are NOT wedded to, and would be fine with or without. In fact, Negotiation 101 dictates that one should never, ever start out with a compromised position, because one will inevitably have to compromise further just to get one's foot in the door at all, at least at first. And quite frankly, even if only item #1 was on the table as a standalone measure, we would still vote "HELL YEAH!"
NOTE 2: While NOT part of our preferred proposal, we would be willing to grudgingly accept either or both of the following compromises to get it passed, provided they last no more than the first few years:
- To alleviate fears of high school drinking, the purchase age (but NOT drinking age) for off-premise consumption may be set at 19 (except 18 with a college or military ID, or proof of a high school diploma or GED), while the on-premise purchase age would be 18, and the general drinking and furnishing age would still be 18 everywhere that adults are currently allowed to drink, both on- and off-premise. Simple, elegant, and surgical. This can be done at the state level, or ideally via "local option" explicitly allowed by the state. One could call it the "No Trickle-Down Law".
- "25 Mile Rule": To alleviate fears of "blood borders", for on-premise service in any bar or restaurant within 25 miles from the border of a neighboring state with a higher drinking age, no out-of-state IDs will be accepted for anyone from that state for anyone under that age, except 1) students within a college town (or a 5 mile radius from campus) showing valid college ID, 2) overnight guests being served in a hotel where they are staying.
- "The Final Countdown" method, as well like to call it, of lowering the drinking age, especially for the on-premise purchase age at bars and restaurants. Each day, drop the drinking age by a month (20 years and 11 months, 20 years and 10 months, and so on, until 18 years and 0 months). That will take....36 days to complete. And would make it far less chaotic, of course. (Hat tip to this guy in Facebook who suggested it sometime back in the early 2010s).
- Keep it at 21 (or 20) for off-premise sales of hard liquor (or anything over, say, 15% or 20% alcohol) at first to increase the odds of passing. Many states did that in the past, and some countries like Finland (off-premise) and Norway (on and off-premise) do that today.
| BAC Threshold | First offense | Subsequent offenses within 10 years |
| 0.02-0.08 (under 21 or novice driver, administrative only) | $250 fine ($500 if over 0.05) 30 day suspension (90 day if over 0.05) 3 day impoundment | $500 fine 6 month suspension (2nd), 1 year revocation or until 21 (3rd or 2nd over 0.05) 7 day impoundment Ignition interlock 1 year or until 21 |
| 0.05-0.08 (administrative only) | $500 fine 3 day suspension 3 day impoundment | $750 fine (2nd), $1000 (3rd) 30 day suspension (2nd), 1 year revocation (3rd) 7 day impoundment (2nd), 30 day impoundment (3rd) Ignition interlock 1+ year |
| 0.08-0.10 (criminal) | $1000 fine Minimum 1 year revocation (or until 21, whatever is longer) Mandatory 30 days in jail, up to 6 months Ignition interlock 5+ years after re-license | $2500 fine License revoked for at least 10 years (forever for 3rd offense) Mandatory 1+ year in jail (possible felony) Possible vehicle forfeiture upon conviction |
| 0.10-0.15 (criminal) | $5000 fine Minimum 5 year revocation Mandatory 6 months jail, up to 1 year Ignition interlock forever | $7500 fine License revoked forever Mandatory 5 years prison (felony) Vehicle forfeiture upon conviction |
| 0.15+ (felony) | $10,000 fine Minimum 10 year revocation Mandatory 1 year in prison, up to 5 years Ignition interlock forever Possible vehicle forfeiture upon conviction | $20,000 fine License revoked forever Mandatory 5+ years prison (felony) Vehicle forfeiture upon conviction |
In addition to (and independently of) criminal penalties, those who blow above 0.08 or refuse the test should be given the following immediate administrative penalties upon arrest:
Test failure, first offense: 90 day suspension, 7 day impoundment
Test failure, second offense in 5 years: 1 year suspension, 30 day impoundment
Test refusal, any offense: 1 year suspension, 30 day impoundment
Conditional licenses should only be given for grave reasons, be highly restricted, and require ignition interlocks.
All offenses would require completion of an alcohol education program and alcohol abuse screening, paid for by the offender.
Driving with a BAC above 0.08% with kids under 16 in the car should be an automatic felony, and treated like 0.15%+.
For the Zero Tolerance BAC limit, ideally the duration would be based entirely on how long one has had a driver's license, like it is in most other countries that have such a law. That said, in an abundance of caution, given the current political climate, we are fine with it being, say, the first two or three years of licensed driving OR age 21, whichever is longer. And ideally it would be set at 0.02% to reduce the risk of false positives, but we would be fine with setting it 0.00% for effect, provided that anything below the limit of quantitation (LOQ) of the testing device used is treated as zero (or anything below 0.02% on a handheld device unless it automatically subtracts 0.02 from the reading).
Differences from Choose Responsibility's proposal:
Unlike Choose Responsibility, Twenty-One Debunked does NOT support requiring 18-20 year olds to get a special "drinking license". We feel that it is not only impractical, but ageist as well. However, many in the movement may be concerned that our proposal does not do enough to address alcohol education for newly-legal drinkers. Thus, we greatly support a massive increase in the amount of honest alcohol education, starting MUCH earlier than age 18.
Additional Ideas
Twenty-One Debunked also believes that we ought to legalize cannabis (weed) for anyone 18 and older, period. Not only would that end up correcting the mistake of another failed and ignoble social experiment, but it would also provide young adults with a safer alternative to alcohol, though keep in mind that Twenty-One Debunked does not actually encourage the use of either substance, or any other drug for that matter.
Differences from Choose Responsibility's proposal:
Unlike Choose Responsibility, Twenty-One Debunked does NOT support requiring 18-20 year olds to get a special "drinking license". We feel that it is not only impractical, but ageist as well. However, many in the movement may be concerned that our proposal does not do enough to address alcohol education for newly-legal drinkers. Thus, we greatly support a massive increase in the amount of honest alcohol education, starting MUCH earlier than age 18.
Additional Ideas
Twenty-One Debunked also believes that we ought to legalize cannabis (weed) for anyone 18 and older, period. Not only would that end up correcting the mistake of another failed and ignoble social experiment, but it would also provide young adults with a safer alternative to alcohol, though keep in mind that Twenty-One Debunked does not actually encourage the use of either substance, or any other drug for that matter.
AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST
In any bill to lower the legal drinking age, be sure to include some flavor of the following separate section somewhere, to make an end run around the federal highway funding coercion law:
Section XYZ -- Compliance with Federal Law
- Notwithstanding any other provision of State law, and pursuant to and in compliance with 23 U.S. Code § 158 as interpreted in 23 C.F.R. § 1208.3, the purchase or public possession of any alcoholic beverage, as defined therein, by any person who is less than twenty-one (21) years of age, shall be and remain unlawful in the State of [XXX] for as long as 23 U.S. Code § 158 remains in effect.
- Any person who is more than eighteen (18) years of age but less than twenty-one (21) years of age, who is found to violate subsection (1) of this section, shall be administratively fined not more than five (5) dollars.
- Nothing in this section shall apply to any acts or omissions other than the purchase and public possession of alcoholic beverages, as defined in 23 U.S. Code § 158 and 23 C.F.R. § 1208.3, by a person less than twenty-one (21) years of age.
- This section shall be null and void if 23 U.S. Code § 158 is ever repealed, declared unconstitutional by a court of law, or otherwise rendered nugatory.
This is to take advantage of a massive loophole in the National Minimum Drinking Age Act, in that, despite its name, it only prohibits "purchase" and "public possession", and does not explicitly require states to impose penalties or enforcement. All of the following can thus technically be perfectly legal:
- Selling alcohol to a person under 21
- Delivering alcohol to a person under 21
- Furnishing alcohol to a person under 21
- Consuming alcohol by a person under 21
- Possessing alcohol in a private residence or other private property (not open to the public) by a person under 21
- "Internal possession" (positive BAC) by a person under 21
- Entering a bar or club by a person under 21
- Hosting a private drinking party for people under 21
- Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera....
While only the "purchasing" side of the transaction (not the selling side, thus making it unenforceable), and "public possession" (see 23 C.F.R. § 1208.3) would be technically illegal, but with trivial penalties not even worth enforcing (i.e. a small administrative fine that is less than a typical cover charge at a bar or club, and less than the price of a six-pack of beer), to make it essentially toothless while still remaining at least minimally compliant enough to receive full federal highway funding.
(Note that Louisiana had already famously done some flavor of this before, particularly the selling loophole, from 1987-1995.)
Hey, if the feds can pass a law that arguably follows the letter of the Constitution but not the spirit of the Constitution, then we can pass a law that technically follows the letter of that federal law but not the spirit of that law. Turnabout is fair play.
So what are we waiting for?
