Debating the drinking age in NJ and elsewhere

By Jeff Johnson Jr.

Last week, a group of university presidents calling themselves the Amethyst Initiative publicly called for a debate on whether the 21-year-old drinking age actually does more harm than good.

Among the initiative's signatories are the presidents of two New Jersey universities: Drew University President Robert Weisbuch and Montclair State University President Susan A. Cole.

This is an unusual topic for Jerseyhacker, since it's actually a national debate. But, since drinking laws are set on a state level and the presidents of two New Jersey institutions of higher education have spoken out on the matter, it's certainly relevant—and I have a suggestion that might work in more than one state.

First of all, what is the Amethyst Initiative's position?

In a statement posted in its website, the organization links the minimum age 21 drinking age, which all states instituted in 1984 after the U.S. Congress threatened to take away some of their federal highway funds, to "a culture of dangerous, clandestine 'binge-drinking'—often conducted off-campus."

Certainly, anyone who has attended college since these laws took effect across the nation can find a lot of logic in this assertion. Back when I was an undergraduate at Ohio University—which is to say, back when most of my college classmates and I openly flouted the state of Ohio's minimum drinking age—I would have been wholeheartedly behind the group's position.

Today, I still agree with the Amethyst Initiative's linking of the drinking age to irresponsible drinking.

But the group's defensiveness towards what it calls "vicious attacks from MADD"—Mothers Against Drunk Drivers—frankly displays the type of late-adolescent insecurity typical of college students who refuse to admit their drinking problems.

MADD has a good point here, and to dismiss its right to passionately pursue its stated social mission is to be insensitive to the thousands of families who have witnessed first hand the consequences of drunken driving.

There's a very good reason why the federal government linked its demands that states raise their minimum drinking age to driving laws: A national discussion of responsible drinking cannot be separated from a national discussion of responsible driving.

Nevertheless, the initiative also has a point that this is an issue that the country should debate. It isn't right to be telling people between the ages of 18 and 21 that, as the cry went back in Athens, Ohio, they are "old enough to die for their country, but not old enough to drink a beer in it."

But simply lowering the drinking age overnight isn't going to work. The laws have been in place for too long and have fundamentally affected the culture of the entire nation. Simply changing the laws would inevitably mean that too many young people—and innocent bystanders of all ages—would learn the lesson of responsibility through life-and-death events on the road, where nearly every death is preventable.

So, here's my proposed solution for New Jersey and other states.

We adopt a dual licensing system for persons under the age of 21: One for driving, and one for possessing, purchasing, and consuming alcohol. It would work like this:

As is the case now, beginning at age 21, a valid driver's license or U.S. passport demonstrates that a person is old enough to buy, have, or drink alcohol.

Beginning at age 16, as is the case in most states now, a person may start the process of getting a driver's license.

Between the ages of 18 and 21, one needs a separate license for both. And here's where the changes start.

New Jersey and many other states have already moved to a system of "graduated licensing" for drivers under age 18. Making this system even stricter would help compensate for the fact that teen drivers may have access to alcohol through older friends and siblings.

At the same time that licensed alcohol purchases are implemented for 18-year-olds, persons under the age of 18 lose the right to drive without a legal guardian in the front passenger seat. And I don't just mean a licensed driver, I mean a legal guardian—a parent or other person deemed by the state to be legally responsible for a minor's actions.

This is close to what already exists in New Jersey, anyway, so here, this isn't a big change.

Drivers under the age of 18 obviously aren't going to like this, but the can't vote anyway, and, by the way, there are already too many drivers on the road. (Sorry if that sounds callous, kids. I shouldn't have had a driver's license until age 18, either.)

Meanwhile, responsible, law-abiding persons age 18 to 20 have the right to obtain two licenses: One is a full, unrestricted driver's license, and the other allows the holder to purchase and possess alcohol in limited quantities and to consume it responsibly.

In this vision, it is not easy for 18-to 20-year-olds to obtain these licenses. All drivers and alcohol license holders are required to take a Red Cross first aid course (many European countries already require this of all licensed drivers, regardless of age), must take an eight-hour course on the effects of alcohol abuse, and must pass a rigorous test at the conclusion of that course. No easier standards are set for individuals who "need a car to get to work." If you need a car to get to work, you'd better grow up enough to meet the standards necessary to have one.

Furthermore, holding these licenses are a privilege, not a right. An 18- to 20-year-old's alcohol license may be revoked for public drunkenness. Driving under the influence of alcohol or providing booze to an unlicensed person under the age of 21 results in the loss of both licenses—the under-21 alcohol license permanently, the driving license until at least age 21, longer for a severe offense.

Just to show that we're serious about involving 18- to 20-year-olds in the debate, this proposal should be put to a referendum open only to young people before it is even proposed in state legislatures: The options are accept the status quo or support the proposal of this compromise legislation.

Champions of a lower drinking age frequently point to Europe as an example of a place where people younger than age 21 drink responsibly. This is unfortunately not a valid comparison and, in fact, some European countries are actually considering stricter rules about alcohol to address irresponsible drinking. (See this 2007 article from Deutsche Welle, a German news service.) The U.S. drinking laws are stricter because our driving laws are more liberal. If you want to change the drinking culture in America, you have to change the driving culture, too.

The Amethyst Initiative's website calls for a "dispassionate public debate over the effects of the 21 year-old drinking age." Though I agree that the debate needs to happen, the choice of the adjective "dispassionate" is an unrealistic and unfair expectation. This is serious business, and anyone interested in this debate must be willing to tolerate the valid emotions that will come from all sides.

Index of topics

Last updated: August 8, 2008

This index may not include the most recent posts. Return to the main page to see the newest stuff.

A

Abiding Presence Lutheran Church
about Jerseyhacker
audiobooks

B

bicycling
bike to work
bubclave
Bureau of Homeowner Protection
bureaucracy

C

car registration
condominium associations

D

disclaimer
Dustin Farnum

F

Fair Housing Act
Family Leave and Medical Act
Family Leave Law

H

home buying
homeowners' associations
Homestead Tax Relief

J

Jersey Guys

L

Lawrence Hopewell Trail
libraries
listennj.com

M

mission

N

Neal Stephenson
New Jersey 101.5
New Jersey blogs
New Jersey Democratic State Committee
New Jersey Law Blog
New Jersey media
New Jersey Republican State Committee
Nielson Media Designated Market Area
NJ Map Guy (See also Dustin Farnum)

P

posting guidelines
primary election
Princeton Township
property taxes

R

real estate
roads

S

Snow Crash (See also Neal Stephenson)
solar energy
Solar Renewable Energy Certificates

T

Twin River

V

vehicle registration

Riding a bike to work in NJ—scary thought

Photos by Jeff Johnson Jr.

For most New Jersey drivers, getting to work means driving on roads that were never intended for bicycle traffic. If it isn't a busy, limited access highway like U.S. Route 1, seen here from Meadow Road in West Windsor Township ...

... then it's probably a narrow, two-lane rural road like Keefe Road in Lawrence Township. Though Keefe looks tame in this photo, taken outside of peak travel hours, rush-hour traffic barrels along the road with little regard for the 35-mph speed limit. With little or no shoulder space, roads like these are not likely to attract inexperienced cyclists looking to commute to work safely.


By Jeff Johnson Jr.

Given that I live just under four miles from my workplace, biking to work would seem to be a viable antidote to high gasoline prices, an easy way to help the environment, and good for my health.

Indeed, all of those arguments ring loud and clear in my head every time I get behind the wheel these days, and especially during my daily commute—until I have to pass a cyclist by the side of the road.

And every time I do, I see my kids' faces flash before my eyes.

Like many (possibly most) New Jersey commuters, I drive on roads that were built with one purpose in mind: Motor vehicle traffic. Without exception, whether I'm on my way to work or to the store, these are either limited-access highways or two-lane rural roads with no shoulder and certainly no bike lane.

Nevertheless, I haven't given up hope yet. But, clearly, finding a safe route will take some time and research. Here's my experience so far:

• The Greater Mercer Transportation Management Association, a non-profit agency in my county, has produced a nice Mercer County bike map rating the suitability of area roads for bicycle traffic.


• One New Jersey bicyclist, Dustin J. Farnum Jr., has created an amazing map of bike routes state-wide—apparently as a hobby; it's "a labor of love", he told me. (I was so impressed with this work that I asked Justin to do a Q&A. It appears as a companion post to this one.)


• My township and a neighboring township are building a loop bicycle trail, the Lawrence-Hopewell Trail, that will eventually connect several neighborhoods and area employers.

In his Q&A, Dustin wasn't terribly enthused about these types of segregated-traffic bike trails. Indeed, given that the Lawrence Hopewell Trail is to be a 20-mile loop, its usefulness for commuting will be limited. But it's a start.

If there were separate trails like this that provided a more direct route, I'd take them, even if it meant a one, two, or possibly as far as three-mile detour off of my usual driving route. But ten (assuming where I want to go is on the complete far end of the loop, which it is) is a bit much.

In all seriousness, though, I'd even be willing to take the risk on the roads—if I didn't have other people in my life who depend on my health and safety.

The 'NJ Map Guy'—Q&A

By Jeff Johnson Jr.

While doing a little research for my main post about (thinking about) riding to work in New Jersey, I stumbled across this bicycle map website put together by New Jersey bicyclist Dustin J. Farnum Jr.

Dustin, who describes himself on the website as the "NJ Map Guy," has explored a good portion of the state by bike and has kept mileage records of his routes since 1976. He describes his favorite places to ride as "scenic farmland" around areas in New Jersey's Hunterdon, Salem, and Cumberland counties. His site includes some photos he's taken on his rides.

Thinking Dustin might be able to provide some insight for people thinking about commuting on two wheels instead of four, I asked him for his thoughts on biking New Jersey's roads:

Q: If there are people out there who are thinking about commuting to work by bike, what do they need to watch for on their route? How do they know whether this is safe?

A: Common sense should be enough. Just look to the side of the road and ask this question. Would you ride there, now? If not, is there another route you could take? For most people, the morning commute with the traffic is intimidating.

Q: What can policymakers do to make our roads safer for multiple modes of transportation?

A: We must share the road. Driver education is the single most important thing that will make the roads safer. The best thing our government can do for cyclists is to make our presence known.

Enforce the speed laws and cell phone laws. Distracted drivers traveling 30 mph faster than you, two feet from you on a road with no shoulder while you're on a bicycle wearing shorts (no protection) is scary.

Road design is an important factor in the ride ability. Roads must be wide enough to accommodate multiple forms of transportation.

I've always said that spending money on bike trails for the purpose of taking commuters off the roads is a waste of money. I think we would get more bang-for-the-buck if we put up signs that alert motorists that they must share the rode with cyclists. But don't stop there. Put some teeth in it with stiff fines for law breakers. The answer is not to take the cyclist off the road, but accommodate the cyclist by making a safer road. Bike paths should be for kids so they can become cycling adults.

Q: You mentioned that you don't ride your bike to work in NJ. Why not?

A: I do, occasionally, but I don't do it on a regular schedule. Time is a big factor. Working 45-50 hours a week leaves little time for all else.

Q: You also mentioned that you have begun using an 80 mpg motorcycle to get to work. How's that working out?

A: It works great. I think it's a good alternative to my 29-mpg car. It would make a better alternative to a 10-mpg SUV. How many times do you see a commuter using a large SUV, but not carrying anything but lunch? Think of your car's mpg as a bus ticket. What ever the price per mile it gets, that is the price of your ticket. I just got tired of paying that much for the ticket and did something about it. I don't use the motorcycle every day. If it's going to rain, I use the car. The motorcycle is a great alternative on nice days. When it does rain, I do errands that require the car. I've had it for two months, and I have noticed a big drop in taking the car to the gas station for fill ups.

Q: What inspired you to create the New Jersey Bike Map? Where'd you get your information?

A: The base data is from the United States Geological Survey's DLG files. The files contain lines that are the roads and rivers. All the roads and all the rivers. No names are included. You can't imagine the hours it took to get it to where it is today.

I used to use county maps like everyone else. I found them hard to use due to the size. Unfolding the map in the wind then trying to fold back up is difficult. On some rides, I needed 2 or 3 county maps. I originally made the map so I could remember where interesting things are and where all the good roads are. Taking notes of road names and town names. First using just one color, then using more colors for different road types. Locating points of interests, then parks, schools shopping centers and town centers. Later I thought that including bike paths would bring more people to the website, which it did. The map grew and developed into what it is today. I don't know where it's going to go next.

Q: Any idea how many visits your site gets?

A: Just over 7000 people visit njbikemap.com every month, downloading over 12,000 maps during the summer months. Since 2002, there are over 800,000 maps downloaded.

Buying a home in New Jersey—Q&A

by Jeff Johnson Jr.

I lived in four other states before coming to New Jersey, and I had to go and make my first home buying experience here in the Garden State.

Fortunately, it's been a relatively happy experience, and I always suspected it was a unique experience, as well. To see if I was right, I got back in touch with the buyers' agent who helped my wife and I buy our home.

It turns out I was both right and wrong: New Jersey is unique to the extent that every real estate market is unique, says Violetta Adamidou, a licensed Realtor and a Sales Associate at Gloria Nilson GMAC Real Estate in Princeton.

With the national housing market in the business news daily, I thought it would be relevant to get a local expert's perspective on New Jersey's situation. When we bought our home in Central New Jersey nearly two years ago, we found Violetta to be trustworthy, responsive, and focused on our needs, so I couldn't think of a better person to interview for this Q&A.

(For the record, this is NOT a paid post; I have volunteered my time and questions, and Violetta has volunteered her time and answers.)

Here's what Violetta had to say:

Q: Is there anything unique about buying a home in New Jersey—anything that a buyer might not encounter in any or at least most other states?

A: This is a great question, one that already understands that markets are different everywhere. But they are not simply different because of large regions or even states. They are different by smaller regions: such as towns and townships. New Jersey, because it is densely populated and because it has so many different areas with their radically different schools systems and services, provides unique opportunities if buyers are willing to travel a bit. Many buyers will find it useful to have an agent who is licensed in PA and NJ but it is also helpful to have an agent who knows the pros and cons to buying in Pennington versus Princeton or Rocky Hill versus Montgomery. It is useful to have a perspective on each of the surrounding areas in order to make an informed decision.

Additionally our proximity to New York City and the city of Philadelphia is a major contributing factor to the differences within the state and its various counties.

Q: Everyone I know in New Jersey has hired a lawyer when they bought a house. Is this required? If not, why do it?

A: Is it required? Is it mandatory? Is it necessary? Good points and here is the reality in brief terms.

Our region and all of North Jersey does have attorneys involved in the transaction from the moment the contract is fully executed to closing. South Jersey brokers and buyers do not employ attorneys to close the transaction. They do use title companies to facilitate the process.

This is a major reflexion on the point made above: New York does use attorneys for Real Estate Contracts, Pennsylvania uses title companies. So depending on where one is purchasing a property, an attorney may or may nor be required.

Does a buyer have to use an attorney? Not necessarily. However, it does feel, if not necessary, at least preferable to have one representing the buyers interest. This is exactly where we are as a region or county.

A good agent can sometimes help even the lawyer through difficult contracts. Sometimes an extra voice, extra perspective can be very useful.

It is team work, provided all members know the rules of engagement and keep a clear focus in mind.

Q: How's New Jersey holding up compared to other places in the housing downturn at the moment?

A: Every location is different and it would be dangerous to generalize for an entire state. It is safer to say that certain areas, like Princeton, West Windsor, Lambertville and more have done quite well or doing better than others.

Overall we as a state we are in better position than specific states such as Florida, Ohio, etc., for obvious major reasons.

Q: What's attractive about living in NJ? People in other states make fun of it, but it seems OK to me. What do you think?

A: Many people are shocked at the beauty of central New Jersey, and once people get a taste of that beauty (and proximity to NYC and Philadelphia) they believe they have the best of two worlds.

The ones who make fun of it are only basing their limited opinion on driving through the state on the turnpike by the refineries ... apparently this is not how a state should be evaluated!

Q: Have you ever had an experience buying or selling a property here that made you think "only in New Jersey?"

A: I think the answer to your first question may provide an answer to this question as well. Buyers have such opportunities in New Jersey, and buyers can begin thinking they want one town and begin considering another town or they can be very oriented to NYC but discover the beauties of Philly or they can believe Princeton will provide lots of culture but then also fall in love with the nature preserves and historic buildings of surrounding towns and townships. "Only in New Jersey" could you find such opportunities and surprises.

Q: Any general advice for anyone thinking of buying or selling a home these days?

A: Don't get lost in the extreme pronouncements in the news. People are still buying and selling, and you can make an informed decision based on the specifics of each property. If there is one house that is listing for a fraction of what it listed for a year ago, is it definitely the better deal over a house that just came on the market and is priced to sell. A lot of people think they are getting tremendous deals when they go to Outlet stores, but this is not always true. You must look at the house in the greater picture and with a greater history of the market and not get seduced by the "great" deals out there. Preserve the emotional excitement but have it informed by a strong market analysis and a clear understanding of the pros and cons of the area, the property, and the price. A good agent can help you navigate through the hype.


Violetta Adamidou's profile page is available at http://www.glorianilson.com/violettaadamido.

Blogging can liberate New Jersey media

by Jeff Johnson Jr.

There are exactly two things I like about New Jersey 101.5 FM. The rest of the station's offerings don't thrill me—and they make me thankful for blogs.

I like the cheesy 70s and 80s pop music that the station plays on the weekends, with special (if implicit) focus given to New Jersey artists. (Ever heard that song "Brandy (You're a Fine Girl)" by the 1970s Jersey band Looking Glass?)

Only slightly more than that, I like the unrelenting focus that WKXW, as New Jersey 101.5 is officially designated, places on the Garden State. Its slogan—"Not New York, not Philadelphia, our own radio station!"—makes the station's target audience clear.

In fact, in its traffic reports, heard every fifteen minutes around the clock, the station doesn't even utter the names of those two out-of-state cities whose metropolitan areas encompass much of New Jersey. New York City is referred to as "across the Hudson", Philadelphia as "across the Delaware," and road directions described as "leaving" or "entering" the Garden State.

What I don't like is the chatter that New Jersey 101.5 plays around the clock from Monday until Friday evening. And that's a lot of programming to not like.

Sometimes the chatter is downright offensive (as when the Jersey Guys, the station's afternoon shock-jock team, fostered hate against Hispanic immigrants), but mostly, it's just plain boring (as when night host Michele Pilenza talks about New Jerseyans and their kinky sex. This ex-Californian yawns.)

New Jersey 101.5 is an artifact of two things: (1) the way old media defines "markets," and (2) the demographic anomoly that is New Jersey.

In broadcasting, "markets" are designated as geographic areas where everyone can receive the same television or radio signals. Nielson Media, the organization that is responsible for what most of us know as "the ratings," ranks these markets according to a formula that basically shows how many listeners or viewers are likely to hear a broadcaster's message.

Obviously, this rating is partially a function of population, though if one market's viewers are found to watch more TV or radio than an adjacent market's, it could potentially affect those market rankings. (Maybe that's how, according to the list, the market of Lima, Ohio, jumped 11 spots from '07 to '08? 'Cause, if I had to live in Lima, Ohio, I'd probably watch more and more TV all the time ...)

It should come as no surprise that the main purpose of these market rankings is to estimate the potential size of target audiences for advertisers. The operative word here is estimate. I'll get back to that.

It also probably seems logical that these geographic areas usually center around a major population center. Hence, New York City is DMA (Designated Market Area) No. 1, and Los Angeles is DMA No. 2.

It's the "major population center" part that leaves room in the media landscape for a successful niche broadcaster like New Jersey 101.5.

As of the 2000 census, 8.4 million people lived in New Jersey, ranking it 11th in population. Meanwhile, the state ranks 47th in size. This easily makes the state the most densly populated in the U.S., but with no clear center.

New Jersey as a state is not on Nielson Media's list—and neither is any place in New Jersey.

Meanwhile, right at New Jersey's borders is not only New York City, but also Philadelphia—DMA No. 4.

That doesn't mean that New Jersey issues don't get covered in the media. Obviously, New York City's and Philadelphia's radio signals don't fall out of the air and sink into the Hudson and Delaware rivers. A lot of people in the Garden State receive these signals, so the Philadelphia broadcast media tend to cover South Jersey and the New York City media tend to cover North Jersey.

But I, at least, have always been somewhat disappointed with the lack of attention these outlets give to state government issues that affect everyone from Cape May to High Point, such as the state budget and the (almost literally) baroque bureacratic designs that drives up costs in ways that taxpayers in other states would have revolted over years ago. New Jersey 101.5 is perhaps the only media outlet that really does make a point of addressing these issues, but I can't stomach the station's populist jabber for more than the fifteen minutes it takes to hear the traffic report on the rare occassions when I drive on the Turnpike.

New Jersey 101.5 exists because it aims toward an audience that is, on the one hand, potentially very large. On the other hand, though, there is very little comparable data on this audience—certainly not enough for traditional media outlets to be willing to take the risk on setting up a large-scale operation here. If you've ever listened to New Jersey 101.5, one thing you can say about that station is that its owners are willing to take risks. These risks pay off in terms of advertising revenue, at least for one station.

If you're like me and you're more conservative about the tone of news (and I mean conservative in terms of prefering blandness, not in terms of political views), then you're probably not interested in the kinds of risks New Jersey 101.5 takes.

Print media's audience may not be constrained by the natural boundary of airwave range, but is slave to the fairly textbook dynamics of cost associated with the time, fuel, and materials necessary to carry their message over a great distance.

The Trenton Times and the Newark Star Ledger, arguably the most state-focused daily newspapers in New Jersey, share a web presence with several other New Jersey publications at nj.com and at least try to address these Garden State needs—but they seem to be having a hard time figuring out their identity. (Witness what dennisl, a user at Blue Jersey, calls "this travesty of the graphic arts.")

Blogging throws a wrench in the plans of the traditional media marketing models by making geography relevant only to the degree that it frames common interests.

Blue Jersey keeps a blogroll of 44 Jersey-centered blogs (inner sidebar column, scroll down, underneath their "recent comments" sidebar), most of which are generally updated regularly. I don't find all of them interesting, but I find it copelling that there are so many and that they cover such diverse topics. Several—including Blue Jersey—fund themselves in part with advertising.

Old media should take note of this, because it doesn't follow the old model.

Web advertising, of course, caters to a much more fragmented audience than broadcast or print advertising does. But one crucial difference is that you can track web advertising's effectiveness very easily.

Remember what I mentioned earlier about the purpose of Nielson Media's market rankings—to help estimate the potential size of target audiences for advertisements. There's no way you can no for sure how many people are actually tuned in on a given day to hear a radio advertisement.

A web advertisement on a blog may reach a smaller audience than a broadcast message on New Jersey 101.5—but anyone who knows enough to set up a blog also has the know-how to track the exact size and behavior of that small audience down to the type of web browser most visitors used to access the site. I talked about one of these tools, Google Analytics, briefly in my Facebook blog recently. Columbus, Ohio, blogger Leigh Householder has a post on the science of measuring web visits on her blog Advergirl.

Blogging could be liberating for New Jersey media because it enables New Jerseyans to develop an identity that transcends Sopranos references and tough-guy clichés.

And we can always download our cheesy Jersey Shore pop songs from the Internet, if we still miss them.

Update on property tax relief program

by Jeff Johnson Jr.

Here's an update on my earlier post on the Homestead Property Tax Relief program.

Applications for people who are not over 65 have been going out this first two weeks in July. Those who are over 65 should have received the application in May. That's for homeowners. For tenants, the application came with your state tax forms.

The filing deadline is August 15, 2008, for your 2007 Homestead Property Tax Relief, which is actually based on the amount of property tax that your home was assessed in 2006.

You got that?

The same filing deadline now apparently applies to all homeowners, young or old, disabled or not. Don't ask me whether the tenant deadline has moved. I can't figure that out.

My application had an ominous notice on it that "the state budget may affect rebate eligibility and amounts for 2007." So, kind of like the social security payroll tax that's withheld from my paycheck every two weeks, I'm not holding my breath that I'll ever see that money again.

Once again, the state plays the property tax shell game with its residents, giving them the psychological feeling of getting something when they're not only getting nothing, but in fact probably losing money on the deal to pay for the bureaucracy that has been in place to make state residents feel like they're getting something for the bureaucracy that they pay for.

You got that?