The legal drinking age in America is legislated by states rather than the federal government. In most states, the legal drinking age is 21. Similarly, the legal driving age is legislated at the state-level, somewhere around 15, 16, 17 in most states. Regardless then of plus or minus a few years on both (accounting for slight variation among states), American legislators appear to uniformly endorse the notion that the responsibility of driving is more appropriately bestowed at a younger age than is the responsibility of drinking alcohol.

I wonder, if this should be re-considered. By holding legal drinking as a higher competency responsibility (as illustrated by the 3-5 year gap), are we sending the wrong message to our youth?

Consider the alternative; young people get their first legal tastes of alcohol in most other countries at 18, in some as young as 16. As such, many experts believe that by removing those extra 3-5 years of legal drinking, the allure and emphasis of alcohol are diminished and the personal learning of how to handle and make responsible drinking decisions happens earlier, building that perspective on drinking which promotes safer drinking earlier in life.

Consider the non-alcoholic drinkers you know. They probably drank as a recreational activity in college, made all the more fun because it was - as of approximately junior year for most - brand new as a legal activity; one could go into a bar, choose to spend their own money, and become inebriated.

Then after college, in grad school or in those early career years, each year, again for most, brought new perspective on drinking. It seems to lose its luster, less of a thrill, more of a choice and more a component of socializing than a social activity in and of itself as we move towards our 30’s.

So one question I am asking: if states lowered the legal drinking age from 21 to 18 or thereabouts, could we expedite the personal drinking education process for our young adults? Would we gain the perspective on responsible drinking we desperately need to live productive, fruitful and happy lives at a younger age? And finally, would we de-mystify - in part - the allure of drinking, by not holding it back and in some respects glorifying it? It’s worth mentioning that we allow advertising of alcohol which doesn’t help with his glorification condition.

Now, let's switch over to driving. I was legally permitted to start driving at 15, with restrictions, 16 without (Florida). I make the same arguments here that I made above - that allowing kids to learn how to drive at a younger age under certain circumstances is good, because it increases their exposure (under somewhat controlled circumstances, e.g. daytime, with adult, certain roads...) which can expedite their learning process and de-mystify driving. Don't tell anyone but as a toddler my mom let me steer the car in our driveway. Really, it was no big deal, and that’s the point.

Now it’s time to tie this all together :
Allow kids to drink and learn about the effects of alcohol and drinking responsibility before they learn how to drive. By keeping the reverse condition in our states, we establish a scenario of failure for our young adults, where kids have to learn about alcohol and how it affects them WHILE they are early drivers. If we gave them a year or two to sort through the issues that alcohol raises before we put them in the driver’s seat, we are establishing a healthier sequence of learning and responsibility which is more aligned with the consequences, both personal (I get drunk) vs. global (I have a car accident which can hurt other people), of both activities.

Skills: Dancing, Singing, Drawing