Beverage group is wrong to argue against ignition locks
Mike McLaughlin // The Washington Post (Letters to the Editor)March 9, 2010
In arguing against Maryland's proposed law that would require first-time drunk-driving offenders to use ignition interlocks, the American Beverage Institute worries that the law would inhibit people from having a second drink when dining out or attending sporting events ["Md., Va. consider ignition breathalyzers for first offense," Metro, March 2]. ABI managing director Sarah Longwell said, "We don't think that they should be punished to the same degree as somebody who has 10 drinks and then drives."
Ten drinks? I don't know what physiology-blood-chemistry equations the ABI uses. But I've seen people impaired after three drinks, tipsy at four and blotto after five. It seems cruelly obvious from that statement that the ABI values selling liquor over saving lives.
Ignition interlocks are not punishment; they are protection -- for the offender as well as every one of us when we're on the road.
Mike McLaughlin, Laurel
Richard Berman has been a regular front man for business and industry in campaigns against consumer safety and environmental groups. Through his public affairs firm, Berman and Company, Berman has fought unions, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, PETA and other watchdog groups in their efforts to raise awareness about obesity, the minimum wage, the dangers of smoking, mad cow disease, drunk driving, and other causes. Berman runs at least 15 industry-funded front groups and projects, such as the Center for Union Facts and holds 16 "positions" in those organizations.
Each year, Berman, using his front groups to spread misinformation, spends millions of dollars distracting the public with misleading ads.
As a result of his largesse, in 2006, Richard Berman used $2,000,000 in cash to buy this $3.3 million house.
