A few years ago, when state officials were looking to finalize $126 million in safety upgrades for U.S. 12 between Middleton and Sauk City, Dane County Coroner John Stanley decided to look at what caused fatal crashes on the road in the previous five years.

"We found out that virtually every one of them, with the exception of just a couple, were alcohol-related," he said. "So was it a bad road, or was it because we have so many drunks on it? They were blaming the highway, but in reality it was probably more the alcohol issue than the highway."

Stanley's review of Highway 12 crashes didn't figure into the debate over the controversial improvement project, which in 2005 widened the two-lane stretch of road to four lanes. But it might have gotten more of an airing if discussed today.

Once seemingly off-limits, Wisconsin's drunken-driving problem is now on the front burner. The state's multibillion-dollar budget deficit still tops this session's to-do list for lawmakers, but a growing number from both parties are also weighing in with proposals to stiffen drunken-driving laws.

These lawmakers represent a level of bipartisanship rarely seen in recent years, and they want get-tough approaches that in the past haven't seen the light of day in either house of the Legislature -- where, in the past decade, an average of nearly one legislator a year has been cited for drunken driving. On tap are measures to legalize sobriety checkpoints -- 38 states already do -- and make first-offense drunken driving a misdemeanor crime (Wisconsin is the only state that doesn't). Another measure would widen the use of ignition interlock devices, which require drivers to blow a sober breath into a tube before they can start their cars.

All the measures cost money. The Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau has estimated the state would need to shell out about $8.3 million annually in court and prosecution costs if first-offense drunken driving were charged as a misdemeanor crime. Another proposal to stiffen charges for third and fourth offenses from misdemeanors to felonies would cost upward of $100 million a year for prison time, according to the fiscal bureau.

Some lawmakers say the costs, at a time of economic hardship, are too high. Others say cutting down on drunken driving would save the state money in the long run. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, using data from the National Safety Council, has estimated that drunken-driving crashes in 2007 alone cost Wisconsin $747 million in health care and insurance costs, loss of work and property damage -- not to mention the loss of life.

A potential funding source for some of the measures is the state's beer tax, which hasn't been raised since 1969 and ranks third-lowest in the nation. Rep. Terese Berceau, D-Madison, is proposing an increase to the state's beer tax from $2 to $10 per barrel, which would bring in an additional $39 million to help the state pay for its drinking problems. The cost to beer drinkers would amount to just 3 cents a bottle, yet the measure has few fans.

Lawmakers, nevertheless, are feeling pressure like never before to pass drunken-driving legislation, and they will have to find ways to fund it.

"I do think it's an issue we're hearing about now simply because of some of the accidents that have occurred in the last year, and the news media really focusing on this very closely," said Rep. Tony Staskunas, D-West Allis. "I think the Legislature has gotten a lot more serious about it, and that's why I think there's going to be a flurry of activity on drunk driving this time around."

Rep. Garey Bies, R-Sister Bay, whose former career as a Door County deputy spanned 30 years, said his first-hand experiences with the bloody consequences of drunken driving have prompted him in the past to propose making first-time offenses a crime. Given recent well-publicized drunken-driving-related fatalities, and the arrest of a prominent lawmaker for drunken driving in December, Bies expects the proposal to get serious consideration this time around.

"I think with the things the public's been seeing, I'm hoping they're going to demand we get tough with these people," he said. "Everything else we've tried, with drinking as a heritage in this state, just isn't working to keep these people off the roads."

Despite the momentum to change the way the state deals with drunken driving, get-tough proponents are up against a pervasive and well-documented drinking culture, which some argue has fostered a permissive attitude toward drunken drivers.

Wisconsin consistently leads the nation in binge-drinking surveys conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services estimates that 26.4 percent of Badger State drivers drove under the influence in 2006, more than any other state and far outpacing the national rate of 15.1 percent.

Wisconsin also tops the list of states in which alcohol is a factor in fatal crashes -- 40.2 percent of the time. And contrary to national trends, most of these crashes are caused by first-time offenders.

"Nationwide, it's the exact opposite," said Staskunas, who sits on Gov. Jim Doyle's Council on Highway Safety subcommittee on impaired driving. "Repeat drunk drivers are the ones who cause the most accidents and cause the most fatalities. Here in Wisconsin, we're sort of an anomaly. It's the first-timers who are causing the crashes and causing the fatalities."

Staskunas said it is estimated that drunken drivers in Wisconsin drive impaired an average of 70 times before being caught.

"And that's an average," he said. "I'm sure a lot of them have driven a lot more than 70 times before they got caught."

At the same time, the state's penalties and enforcement efforts are among the nation's most lax.

First-time offenders are handed fines and license suspensions, and many are ordered to take alcohol assessments. But they are given a civil citation, not a criminal charge.

The state doesn't allow sobriety checkpoints, where officers stop vehicles and assess a driver's fitness to drive, even though the U.S. Supreme Court has said they pass constitutional muster.

And at $1.2 million, Wisconsin ranks below many other states in the amount it spends on enforcement of drunken-driving laws. Missouri, with a population only slightly higher than Wisconsin, spends more than four times as much.

The push to do something about drunken driving is coming from several official quarters. Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk has written a long list of recommendations to Gov. Jim Doyle as part of her initiative to combat alcohol abuse in the county. That list includes limited sobriety checkpoints, lowering the legal blood-alcohol limit for repeat drunken drivers, criminalizing first-time drunken-driving offenses, and making third and fourth offenses felonies, among other measures.

The governor's own Council on Highway Safety is expected to recommend checkpoints, the criminalization of first-time offenses and the implementation of more drunken-driving patrols, according to Kari Kinnard, executive director of the Wisconsin chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving and a key member of the panel.

"There really is growing support on both sides," said Kinnard, who co-chairs the Council on Highway Safety subcommittee on impaired driving. "It's not even a party issue any longer."

The new push to get tough with drunken drivers also resonates with many law enforcement officers, who typically are the first to witness the aftermath of alcohol-related crashes.

Oregon Police Chief Doug Pettit, legislative chair of the Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association, said his group is awaiting solid proposals before weighing in but offered that there is evidence that sobriety checkpoints "would make the roadways safer." He also said penalties for drunken driving "have a direct impact on gaining compliance" -- an argument, perhaps, for stiffening the penalties for first-time offenders.

Major Dan Lonsdorf, director of transportation safety for the Wisconsin State Patrol, said the Department of Transportation is also awaiting solid legislation. But he said sobriety checkpoints have appeared a successful deterrent in other states.

And he said tougher penalties would send a strong signal to drivers that the state is no longer tolerant of drunken driving.

"They don't fear getting caught," Lonsdorf said. "They don't fear the consequences."

The most convincing sign that the effort to deal with the state's drunk driving problem is gaining traction is the push to make first-time offenses a crime.

The argument to go after first-time drunken drivers got a tragic boost last week, when 23-year-old Daniel D. Schaefer of Fond du Lac, traveling the wrong way on U.S. 45 near Appleton, collided with an oncoming car, killing a 14-year-old girl. It was Schaefer's first drunken-driving offense.

But some think criminalization is going too far. And some of the most powerful opponents have either racked up a drunken-driving offense of their own or are close to somebody who has.

Doyle, whose son, Gus Doyle, was busted in 2006, thinks the current penalties are plenty "stiff," according to his aide, Lee Sensenbrenner. And Sensenbrenner said requiring first offenders who test above a 0.1 percent blood alcohol level to undergo an alcohol assessment gives offenders a chance to clean up their act.

"When someone's arrested for their first drunk driving offense, they've got a chance to take some measure of their life, to take a look at how they use alcohol and see if they need to make some changes," said Sensenbrenner.

But, he added, "I'm not saying the governor's ruling out" criminalization of first-time offenses.

Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker, who was convicted of a 2005 drunken driving offense, is strongly opposed to criminalization.

"He's been down that road, so I imagine he sees it from another perspective," said Bies.

Decker's office didn't return a phone call, but he recently told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that his drunken-driving ticket has no bearing on his stance.

The experience of having a loved one who has been convicted of drunken driving can be a powerful factor in shaping views about what penalties offenders should face.

Stanley, the Dane County coroner, is a good candidate for backing get-tough laws, having had to personally tell families that a loved one is not coming home because of a drunken driver. But he's also witnessed a relative who, after his first arrest for drunken driving, "straightened up his act."

So Stanley's torn. "We should have a mandatory first-offense penalty that's more serious," he said. On the other hand, he added, many people benefit from treatment and safety classes, and don't drive drunk again. "I would hate to see them go to jail and be put in the criminal justice system because of a mistake."

The influential Tavern League of Wisconsin, with 5,200 dues-paying members, has opposed stiffer laws for first-time offenders but has been open to going after repeaters. Decker has been a key ally of the league; his 2005 drunken-driving arrest came after a Tavern League event.

Decker, who has the power to block legislation he doesn't like from ever getting to the Senate floor, opposes other measures as well.

He is not in favor of making third and fourth offenses felonies, unless all the offenses are committed within a specific time frame, such as 10 years. He also opposes sobriety checkpoints and is against a beer tax increase.

Kinnard, who continually takes the temperature in both houses as a lobbyist for MADD, said if there is a hurdle to passing meaningful drunken driving laws, it's the Senate.

"Sen. Decker has been very vocal regarding his resistance to moving forward to proven, effective life-saving measures," Kinnard said. "I think the only thing he's really been in support of is concentrating on repeat offenders. And quite frankly, historically all Wisconsin has done is concentrate on repeat offenders. Obviously, that is not as effective as it should be, because we continue to lose way too many lives."

---

On the Horizon

Here's what Wisconsin state lawmakers are expected to introduce this session to curb drunken driving:

Rep. Garey Bies, R-Sister Bay: a proposal that would criminalize first offenses and would require a five-day jail term.

Rep. Peggy Krusick, D-Milwaukee, and Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills: compromise bills in each house that would criminalize first-timers only if they commit a second offense within a given amount of time, possibly between 18 months and three years.

Rep. Joel Kleefisch, R-Oconomowoc: a proposal to make third and fourth offenses a felony.

Rep. Tony Staskunas, D-West Allis: a proposal to make ignition interlocks mandatory for first-time drunken drivers with a blood alcohol level of 0.16 or higher and for all repeat offenders.

Rep. Josh Zepnick, D-Milwaukee: a bill that that would both increase penalties for all drunken drivers and expand the use of ignition interlock devices.

Gov. Jim Doyle is also expected to come out in favor of sobriety checkpoints, which are currently illegal in the state.

Copyright ©2009, Capital Newspapers. All rights reserved.