AFTER THE president had the country debating what "sexual relations" means and, more absurdly, what "is" is, some lawmakers in Annapolis are belittling the public with similar games.

Maryland roads won't be any safer because the House Judiciary Committee got sidetracked on defining what "drunken" is.

The state's chief toxicologist testified that a blood-alcohol level of 0.08 is scientifically proven to erode the ability to operate a motor vehicle.

The chief of the state police and other agencies concurred that raising the standard for driving while intoxicated from 0.10 to 0.08 would save two dozen lives a year.

Yet a dozen members of the House committee remained unpersuaded. Dr. Barry Levine must have felt like Columbus trying to explain a round world to Del. Dana Lee Dembrow, who insisted that he knew better than the toxicology expert the fine points of impairment vs. intoxication.

Unfortunately for Maryland, a drunken driving law that fits the crime has slipped into Annapolis' Twilight Zone again this year. The proposal might have stood a chance before the General Assembly, but can't get there because it didn't survive a vote late Friday by the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Del. Joseph F. Vallario Jr. of Prince George's County.

Maryland, as a result, loses $2.5 million in highway aid the federal government had offered in the hope of coaxing a national 0.08 standard.

A solution: Next year, have the state police set up the simulated driving course it uses to educate the media. Have male committee members consume four beers in an hour, women three -- typical to reach 0.08 -- and have them negotiate a test track. If they hit a stationary pylon (just imagine a vehicle or pedestrian) they'll better understand what "drunken" and "fatal" mean.

Pub Date: 3/23/99