Rantz: More prison time for DUIs isn’t the answer

A proposed bill that would add extra teeth to drunk driving laws in Washington might sound good on the surface, but KIRO Radio’s Jason Rantz says it fails to recognize the real problem: Addiction.

House Bill 2280 would make a fifth DUI conviction within 10 years a Class B felony, rather than a Class C felony. The change would allow for double the maximum penalty, from up to 10 years and/or a $10,000 fine to 20 years and/or a $20,000 fine.

Related: Very troubling response to transgender bathroom issue

Rep. Brad Klippert’s bill passed unanimously through the House this week and moves on to the state Senate.

Rantz says the bill is “clearly coming from the right place” and that something major obviously needs to be done when someone has consistently put his or herself, and the public, in danger. But rather than more prison time for offenders, Rantz believes people need to start thinking about DUIs in a slightly different way.

He explains that while a 10-year prison sentence is meant to be a disincentive to drunk driving, there is something more complex going on. Instead of focusing on criminal offenses, the law should take a treatment-first approach.

“If you have that many DUIs, you have a drinking problem,” he said. “You are suffering from a disease called alcoholism. So how about we mandate treatment. Because, yes, you can charge someone $20,000, but they are an alcoholic. Assuming they can pay the $20,000 fine, that’s not all of the sudden going to cure them of their alcoholism. And the same thing, throwing them in jail, whether we’re talking about 10 days or 10 years, that doesn’t automatically treat alcoholism. You’re not an alcoholic because you don’t understand the consequences of your actions. You’re an alcoholic because you have an addiction. You are not thinking clearly. You have a dependency on something that changes the way you think.”

Treatment is an aspect of DUI convictions, with requirements that include a drug and alcohol evaluation and compliance with any and all treatment recommendations.

Rantz believes jail and prison penalties should still apply in these cases, but the focus needs to be on fixing the root of the problem rather than locking it behind bars.

“Rather than just constantly upping the jail penalties or the financial penalties, why don’t we simply say, ‘You’re an alcoholic, you need treatment, we’re going to get you this treatment and that’s how we will make sure, or, at least, cut down on the chances, of you doing this again,'” he said.

Sign up for breaking email alerts