Good afternoon Chairman Driver and members of the Law Enforcement Committee. It is my pleasure to be here in Austin and talk about the National Transportation Safety Board's recommendations for addressing sobriety checkpoints.

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency charged by Congress to investigate transportation accidents, determine their probable cause, and make recommendations to prevent their recurrence. The recommendations that arise from our investigations and safety studies are our most important product. The Safety Board has neither regulatory authority nor grant funds. In our 35-year history, organizations and government bodies have adopted more than 80 percent of our recommendations.

The Alcohol-Highway Safety Problem

The Safety Board has recognized for many years that traffic crashes are one of this nation's most serious transportation safety problems. More than 90 percent of all transportation related deaths each year result from highway crashes. Approximately 41 percent of the highway deaths nationwide are alcohol-related. Unfortunately over the last five years, the proportion of alcohol-related fatalities has not been improving and increased last year. The trend for the last five years has been in the wrong direction.

In 2001, impaired driving resulted in 17,448 alcohol-related fatalities nationwide, with hard core drinking drivers involved in almost 40 percent of these deaths. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates the cost of each fatality is over $977,000; thus alcohol-related fatal crashes cost society over $17 billion each year. We believe this to be a very conservative estimate. While the affected individual covers some of these costs, overall, those not directly involved in crashes pay for nearly three-quarters of all crash costs, primarily through insurance premiums, government paid health care costs, taxes, and travel delay. Clearly, much needs to be done to reduce this ongoing tragedy.

Here in Texas, 3,724 people died in traffic crashes in 2001, more than in any other state, except California (3,956). However, California has about 22 million licensed drivers, in comparison to the 13 million in Texas. Further, 1,789, or 48 percent, of those deaths were alcohol-related. That is well above the national average of 41 percent. Indeed, only in 8 states is the rate of alcohol involvement in traffic deaths is higher than in Texas.

Sobriety Checkpoints Provide General Deterrence

Sobriety checkpoints have long been recognized as a key component of an effective impaired driving enforcement program. Indeed, the Safety Board first recommended that Texas and other states institute the use of sobriety checkpoints nearly 20 years ago, in 1984.

If drunk driving is to be reduced significantly in the short term, motorists must be convinced that there is a strong likelihood that they will be arrested and penalized if they drive impaired. Many impaired drivers persist in their behavior because they have a perception of low risk of arrest and penalty. And, unfortunately, this perception is based in reality. The odds of being arrested for driving while impaired range from one in 200 to one in 2,000. The national average is only about one in 770. Stated another way, an intoxicated driver can drive from New York to Los Angeles and half way back without being arrested.

State and local programs that focus principally on those relatively few drunk drivers who have been apprehended, as opposed to programs designed to deter the vast majority of offenders who are never caught, are not likely to achieve significant results. Significant short term reductions in alcohol-related deaths and injuries are more likely to be brought about through programs designed to deter drunk drivers still on the road than those which seek to stop an individual, convicted, drunk driver from repeating his or her crime. A comprehensive program is needed that does both - a program that effectively arrests and penalizes all apprehended offenders (and provides treatment for those who need it), but also deters potential offenders because of the increased perceived likelihood of arrest and penalty.

There are two distinct types of deterrence. General deterrence is the effect of threatened arrest and punishment upon the total driving population. It influences all potential violators to refrain from prohibited acts, in this case, driving after drinking. Specific deterrence refers to efforts to prevent single offenders from driving drunk again, for example, through alcohol rehabilitation programs.

Well publicized sobriety checkpoints are a key component of general deterrence because they increase the perception among drivers who potentially would drive while impaired that they will be caught. Since every motorist is potentially subject to being stopped, sobriety checkpoints preclude drunk drivers from assuming that they can avoid detection merely by driving cautiously.

The effectiveness of sobriety checkpoints was documented in Tennessee's "Checkpoint Tennessee" program of the 1990's. Sobriety checkpoints were conducted throughout Tennessee for a year. These were accompanied by extensive television, radio and print media coverage, both before and after the checkpoints.

The program was followed by a scientific analysis to determine the lasting effect of the program on traffic deaths, which did find a statistically significant effect. There was a 20.4 percent reduction over the projected number of impaired driving fatal crashes that would have occurred without the checkpoint program. That translates into a reduction of 9 fatal crashes each month in Tennessee. The effect was still present 21 months later. To ensure that the effect was related to Checkpoint Tennessee, and not to a general trend, data from five surrounding states also were analyzed. Those states showed no significant reduction in impaired driving deaths during the project time period. Further, public opinion surveys conducted throughout the project indicated that over 90 percent of drivers supported the program.

One of the reasons sobriety checkpoints may have a strong deterrent effect is that they afford police the opportunity to contact greater numbers of motorists than during typical patrols, and demonstrate their jurisdiction's commitment to reducing drunk driving. Even through roving police patrols may produce more arrests, checkpoints do generate significant numbers of DWI arrests. More importantly, highly publicized checkpoints work better than roving patrols in reducing alcohol related crashes, injuries, and deaths.

Sobriety checkpoints are in widespread use throughout the nation. Currently, 39 states and the District of Columbia authorize the use of sobriety checkpoints. This includes all of Texas' neighboring states, except Louisiana.

Some have questioned the Constitutionality of sobriety checkpoints. However, the Supreme Court upheld their use in 1990 (Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz), on the grounds that preventing alcohol related crashes and deaths outweighs the "slight" intrusion on drivers who are stopped. The Court rejected arguments that checkpoints are a violation of the 4th Amendment. Additionally, at least 34 states have found checkpoints to be consistent with their state constitutions.

Conclusion

The bill before you, H.B. 226, authorizes, but does not require, law enforcement agencies to conduct sobriety checkpoints. Further, it includes a series of restrictions that will limit the intrusion on drivers, and protect against harassment. This is the single most effective and simple measure addressing alcohol impaired driving that you can adopt this year. It will have a nearly immediate effect on the toll of drunk driving crashes, injuries and deaths in Texas.

The extremely high number of alcohol-related fatalities in Texas makes it clear that, despite the best efforts of many, the DWI control system in Texas is not working effectively to reduce these preventable tragedies. We urge you to take action on this and other life-saving measures pending before the Texas Legislature this year. We are joined in this effort by the Century Council, funded by the nation's leading distillers, and by Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Both organizations are our partners in the National Hard Core Drinking Driver Coalition.

Thank you for allowing the Safety Board to testify about legislation that you can enact to save lives on streets and highways in Texas. I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.