Do drug per se laws work? A critique of “Per Se Drugged Driving Laws and Traffic Fatalities” by Anderson, D.M., Rees, D.I.

Yes, they can “Failing to find an impact is not the same as finding that there is no impact, especially with a study that lacks controls or sensitivity to isolate the impact of other factors.” “Traffic deaths declined by 25% from There is no consensus as to why this occurred. This demonstrates how difficult it is to track the impact of a single policy during this time period.” Jeff Michael, EdD, Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development, NHTSA,

Why did Anderson/Rees find no impact of drug per se laws? There is no evidence that drug per se laws, in and of themselves, are effective in reducing drugged driving fatalities because: High variability in state drug per se laws Poor implementation of drugged driving laws

Law Variability Anderson/Rees averaged results together, which is statistically indefensible StatesDrugged Driving Law Arizona, Georgia, UtahZero Tolerance, all controlled substances and their metabolites, taken illegally Illinois, Iowa, Rhode Island, California (SB13-289) Zero Tolerance, all controlled substances. All but Rhode Island restrict illegal use only. North Carolina, South DakotaZero Tolerance, all controlled substances and their metabolites in minors. NC permits medical use. Delaware, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Zero Tolerance, Schedule I, and some or all of schedule II or III drugs taken illegally MichiganZero Tolerance, Schedule I MinnesotaZero Tolerance, Schedule I except marijuana or II taken illegally, Nevada, OhioDefined levels of several drugs, including marijuana, at 2 ng/ml THC VirginiaDefined levels of several drugs, THC not included Washington5 ng/ml THC per se, except zero THC permitted in minors Montana5 ng THC per se Colorado5 ng permissible inference

Incomplete Implementation AlcoholDrugs On-site testing*YesNo Officers trained to detect>7,000~185 SFST effectiveYesVariable Effective educationYesNo Social awarenessYesNo *PBT is fast, cheap, and does not raise Fourth Amendment questions.

Per Se Laws Can Work Alcohol – 48% fewer deaths from – Increasingly strict alcohol per se laws – Better enforcement tools, education, social standards less accepting of DUI, better highway design, better car design. – Impossible to sort out the impact of alcohol per se alone Drugs – 15% more deaths from 2005 – 2008 – Few strict drug per se laws – Poor enforcement tools, education, social standards accepting of drugs and driving, better highway design, better car design

Two Models That Work Alcohol – We know per se laws are effective, but we can’t sort out how much of the improvement in fatalities is due to per se laws Drugs – commercial drivers and others – Zero tolerance – Pre-employment screening – Random drug testing

Conclusions Per Se laws alone cannot solve the problem Per Se laws are likely a prerequisite to solving the problem, as shown by – Success in reducing alcohol-caused fatalities – Success in reducing commercial driving collisions “Bad science” like the Anderson/Rees report does not serve the public’s interest