Casinos waver from hard line on lower blood-alcohol limit

In what would be a major change from its long-standing position, the Nevada Resort Association is considering dropping its fight against efforts by Congress and the Nevada Legislature to crack down on drunken driving by lowering the blood-alcohol limit.

Earlier this week, NRA Washington lobbyist Wayne Mehl said the organization had dropped its opposition entirely to tougher drunken-driving laws at the federal level. But this morning, Mehl backed off that position, saying he had been instructed by NRA officials that the organization would reserve judgment on specific pieces of legislation until they are introduced.

The news that the NRA -- traditionally a strong opponent of tougher DUI laws -- is thinking about changing its position invigorated groups that oppose drunken driving.

"I think that would make a tremendous difference," Sandy Heverly, executive director of Stop DUI in Clark County, said.

"If it were to happen on the state level, I would see a 180-degree turnaround," Laurel Stadler, Nevada chapter director of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said.

The NRA is the trade association that represents Nevada's casinos before Congress and the Nevada Legislature.

Fearing that gamblers would visit casinos less often and not stay as long, the NRA has long fought attempts to lower the legal standard for drunken driving.

But Mehl said the organization had a change of heart during a debate over the issue last year.

"We backed off that last year," Mehl said. "We don't want to be perceived as part of the problem."

And at the statehouse level the NRA is considering a similar change, Reno-based lobbyist Harvey Whittemore said.

"That is a matter of some discussion with members of the industry," Whittemore said. "Clearly, it's correct to say some members of the industry are going to take a hard look at this."

Groups that oppose drunken driving, such as MADD and Stop DUI, have long pushed the Legislature and Congress to reduce the blood-alcohol level at which a driver is considered legally drunk from the current .10 percent to .08 percent. While many states have adopted the lower standard, Nevada repeatedly has rejected attempts to change the law.

Las Vegas Assemblyman Mark Manendo plans to introduce a bill lowering the blood-alcohol limit in this year's Legislature. However, he said a new law requiring the Legislature to finish its business in 120 days makes the bill's chances of passage "very slim."

Last month, President Clinton called for Congress to lower the limit nationwide. Last year, Congress considered and rejected a proposal that would have withheld federal highway funds from states that did not switch to the lower limit.

An NRA change of heart would increase the chances that a lower standard will be adopted, supporters say.

"That's good; I'm surprised," Manendo said. "Then we can come to the table and we can discuss .08."

But the proposal will still face opposition from alcohol and restaurant trade associations. Whittemore also represents the alcohol industry and said that industry will continue to fight attempts to lower the limit.

After Clinton's Dec. 26 radio address calling for the lower standard, Rick Berman, general counsel for the American Beverage Institute, attacked the plan in a statement.

"A lower drunk-driving threshold simply will not save lives," Berman said. "In fact, it will corrode the fight against drunk driving by shifting our national attention away from the root cause of the problem -- alcohol abusers. By its very definition, the .08 percent blood-alcohol content law targets and punishes responsible social drinkers."

A 120-pound woman who has two glasses of wine over two hours could be arrested for drunken driving under a .08 percent law, Berman said. Manendo disputes that argument, charging that an average male would have to have five drinks on an empty stomach in one hour to reach the .08 percent blood-alcohol level.

"That's not a social drinker, that's somebody with a problem," Manendo said.

Opponents also say a lower limit would cost the hospitality industry sales and jobs, an argument proponents say is contradicted by the gaming boom in other parts of the country and by the continued expansion of Nevada's resort industry after the state lowered the blood-alcohol limit from .15 percent to .10 percent in the early 1970s.

"I think that they've really exhausted the true opposition to the bill," Manendo said. "If I was convinced that this was going to harm our industry, I would take another look."

Still, time constraints make it unlikely his bill will pass this year, Manendo said. Though he has already asked the Legislature's legal office to draft the bill, the staff is guaranteeing each Assembly member only two drafted bills this year, he said. Because he submitted two higher-priority bills, it is questionable whether his blood-alcohol bill will even be drafted, let alone introduced, Manendo said.

The NRA isn't close to a final decision about its stance on the issue, Whittemore said.

"We need to see what the bill looks like," he said. "It depends on when the bill is introduced."

The NRA's board sets official association policy. The board is made up of chief executives and other senior officials from major resorts such as Caesars Palace, Circus Circus, Mirage Resorts and Station Casinos. When a bill is introduced, the board will then decide what stance the NRA will take, Whittemore said.

In interviews with several resort companies this week, it was clear that some cracks are appearing in the industry's long opposition to lowering the blood-alcohol limit.

"This company has no intention of fighting this legislation," Andrew Klebanow, spokesman for Santa Fe Gaming, said. "It will not hurt this business significantly."

Spokesmen for Station Casinos and Mirage Resorts declined comment.

Both Klebanow and Mehl noted that there are practical reasons to drop opposition to tougher drunken-driving laws, especially at a time when the gaming industry is coming under intense scrutiny nationwide.

"You're not going to win in this day and age trying to fight this kind of legislation," Klebanow said. "It's being a responsible citizen of the community to support this legislation."

"You have to sort of balance off the pluses and minuses, and we just came to the conclusion (last year) that this is not a battle that we wanted to fight any more," Mehl said.

archive