martybegan
Diamond Member
- Apr 5, 2010
- 83,093
- 34,385
- 2,300
That is really lame, there is a place for government, this happens to be one of them, we have a big enough problem with 21+ drinking drivers, there's no need to add millions of 18+ to the mix. Actually I should say millions of 16+ because the ones 18 will provide alcohol to their younger friends, just like 21 year olds do now.
However it should be up to the states. The constitution gives them regulation over alcohol via the 21st amendment. The highway funds end around is unconstitutional, despite what the SC said.
I disagree. States don't have a Constitutional right to receive highway funds.
They have a constitutional right to set alcohol laws. The feds should be able to say how the money will be spent when they give it to a state, they should not be able to add an unrelated topic to the requirements to receive funding.
How would gun control people like it if the feds tied federal highway money to removing restrictions on long rifles or concealed carry contained in state laws?