Seniors Molly Dillon and Aliza Fishbein testified this past Wednesday in front of the Md. Senate and House Judiciary Committees in Annapolis in support of a bill that would require the installation of ignition interlock devices (IIDs) in vehicles for all convicted DUI offenders.
IIDs, in-car breathalyzers, prevent the car engine from starting if the driver’s breath-alcohol concentration (BAC) is above a certain percentage, usually 0.02 or 0.04 percent.
Currently there are thirteen states that require all first time convicted DUI offenders to use IIDs. However, Md., one of seven states to see an increase in drunk driving fatalities over the last ten years, has yet to pass such a law.
“Md. chooses the alcohol-related fatalities it has,” Fishbein said. “It’s completely changeable.”
Fishbein’s and Dillon’s testimonies were largely focused on the passing of Hopkins student Miriam Frankl, who on Oct. 16th, 2009 was hit on the corner of East University Parkway and St. Paul Street by Thomas Meighan Jr., a serial drunk driver with eight previous drinking-and-driving convictions.
“Although I had practiced my testimony many times, it was still extremely emotional,” Dillon said of the experience.
“I think [people] were all touched by Miriam’s story and I feel like I got the message across of what an amazing person we lost and how much of a tragedy it really is.”
“We’ve been asked to testify
about what we’ve lost with Miriam’s death, to really put a human face on this issue. It’s hard to believe that delegates could say no to a drunk driving bill, but somehow with numbers and bill after bill after bill it can get fuzzy and lost,” Fishbein stated.
Approximately four Hopkins students joined Fishbein and Dillon in Annapolis this Wednesday to show their support. Transportation was provided by Dean of Students Susan Boswell for the trip.
“It’s hard to ask students to miss their classes. But I think people get that there aren’t a lot of things more powerful you can do with your Wednesday,” Dillon said.
“Getting a dramatic number of students to come and show their support . . . really will help influence whether or not this bill passes,” Fishbein added. “All of us have our spirits up. We’re energized and ready to go.”
Last year similar bills were introduced in both the House and the Senate. While it passed unanimously through the Senate, it did not in the House Judiciary Committee after Chairman Joseph Vallario Jr. refused to bring it up for a vote. According to Dillon, the House Judiciary Committee will once again be the biggest hurdle for this year’s bill.
“It’s a circumstance of politics — the worst kind of politics,” Dillon said. “[Governor Martin O’Malley] said that if [the bill] gets to his desk he’ll sign it, and there’s a very good chance there are votes for it if it were to get to the House floor. The bill could pass, but [Vallario] won’t let it get there.”
“It’s a personal interest of [Vallario] and many others not to let it pass,” Fishbein agreed.
Vallario did not allow a vote on last year’s bill, claiming that a BAC of 0.08 percent, the legal definition of DUI impairment, was too low to merit the use of IIDs. Instead, he argued, IIDs should be installed for those convicted with a BAC level of 0.15 percent or higher.
This, however, is little comfort for Fishbein and Dillon, who believe that an IID in Meighan’s car could have prevented the tragic collision that fatally injured Frankl two years ago.
“If [Meighan] had been subject to a mandatory ignition interlock, his first offense may have been his last offense, and Miriam might still be here today,” Dillon said.
“[Meighan] was on a rampage, drunk, through the city,” Fishbein said. “He had the cops called on him . . . but the police didn’t get to him in time. Nothing will work as well as the ignition interlock to stop that kind of driving. It will literally stop them from starting the engine of the car . . . That’s what it’s all about: can you start the car if you’re drunk.”
This is the second year that Hopkins students testified in support of an IID bill. Natalie Draisin, Class of 2010, testified last year after becoming involved with Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) following Frankl’s passing. When Draisin graduated last year, Fishbein and Dillon took over the project.
“Getting involved with MADD, while I think it’s an admirable thing, is something we never thought we’d get into. It’s almost sort of sad that we have to be involved. But it’s important,” Fishbein said.
Both Fishbein and Dillon remain optimistic that out of their tragedy, they can create positive change.
“Miriam’s is just one story, but I think it’s a very heartfelt one,” Fishbein said. “We have to be hopeful [the bill will pass]. We’re going to try our hardest.”
