Source: alcoholfacts.org
Author: David J. Hanson, Ph.D

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) was founded in 1980 by Candy Lightner, whose daughter was tragically killed by a drunk driver who was a repeat offender. The goal of MADD was to reduce drunk driving traffic fatalities and the organization has been highly effecive in raising public disapproval of drunk driving. The proportion of traffic fatalities that are alcohol-related has dropped dramatically, in part because of MADD's good efforts. For more, visit Drinking and Driving.

The Drunk Driving Problem

The problem of drunk driving has now largely been reduced to a "hard core of alcoholics who do not respond to public appeal," according to MADD.
1. Most drivers who have had something to drink have low blood alcohol concentration (BAC) and few are involved in fatal accidents or crashes.

1a. On the other hand, while only a few drivers have BAC's higher than .15, many of those drivers have fatal crashes.

2. For example, almost half of fatally injured drunk drivers have a BAC of .20 (which is over twice the legal limit in most states) or higher.

More…

3. The biggest problem in reducing drunk driving fatalities now consists of the hard core of alcoholic drivers who repeatedly drive with BAC's of .15 or higher. But MADD has now decided to go after social drinkers and to eleminate driving after drinking any amount of alcohol beverage. This change appears to reflect the influence of a growing prohibitionist movement within MADD.

3a. The founding president of MADD, Candy Lightner, left in disgust from the organization that she herself created because of its change in goals. "It has become far more neo-prohibitionist than I ever wanted or envisioned," she says. "I didn't start MADD to deal with alcohol. I started MADD to deal with the issue of drunk driving."

4. Ms. Lightner has apparently put her finger on the problem when she says that if MADD really wants to save lives, it will go after the real problem drivers.

4a.Vengeance

Mothers Against Drunk Driving is fueled by anger and grief. In fact, its original name was Mothers Against Drunk Drivers.

5. As a leading researcher on drunk driving has observed, MADD is focused on the demand for justice or vengeance on the group that took the lives of friends and children. This warrants harsh punishment, whether or not deterrence is achieved. It also leads to rejection or a lack of enthusiasm for policies that promise to save lives of crash victims without regard for the cause of an accident.

6. A case in point.

Research suggests that using a cell phone while driving may cause more traffic fatalities than driving drunk. But when a MADD official was asked how traffic fatality statistics involving cell phone use compared to those involving drunk drivers, he tellingly replied "I have absolutely no idea, nor do I care."

7. The issue for MADD is no longer preventing auto accidents but preventing drinking. Prohibitionist Goal

Drunk driving has been defined in the U.S. as driving at the .10 BAC level, but is being re-defined down to .08. At least five states have attempted to lower that definition of drunk driving to .05. Doris Aiken, the founder of MADD's sister organization, Remove Intoxicated Drivers (RID), wants to lower the level to .04. Exploiting the tragedies of September 11, the RID leader charges that "Drunken drivers are the terrorists of the road." There is now a move in Vermont to define drunk driving at the .02 BAC level. What's the ultimate goal? MADD's Tina Pasco asserts that "The only safe amount when you are mixing drinking and driving is zero — double zero. No alcohol."

8. No one should drive after drinking, but defining drunk driving as driving after using mouth wash is counterproductive and impractical and a waste of limited resources. Zero tolerance isn't working in schools.

9. and it won't work on the highways. For more, visit Zero Tolerance.

Most alcohol-related traffic deaths occur when other important causal factors are present, such as using a cell phone, fatigue, drug use, inexperience in driving, road rage, speeding, poorly lit roads, and failure to use safety belts.

10. And, of course, most traffic fatalities don't involve any alcohol at all. If MADD really wanted to reduce traffic fatalities, it would also care about these major causes of traffic deaths — but it clearly doesn't. MADD is no longer a safety-promotion organization but an anti-alcohol organization.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving stigmatizes light or moderate alcohol consumption, even when it isn't associated with either being underage or driving. For example:


MADD sells a graphic showing two empty glasses of alcohol surrounded by the words assault, drowning, burns, rape and suicide.
MADD sells a graphic that equates beer with heroin by depicting a beer bottle as a drug syringe.
MADD sells a television ad insisting that "if you think there's a difference" between heroin and alcohol, "you're dead wrong."
10a. Mothers Against Drunk Driving has clearly become not simply anti-drunk driving or even anti-impaired driving, but anti-alcohol. Junk Science Unfortunately, Mothers Against Drunk Driving often uses junk science to promote its agenda.

For example, a very brief three-page study by MADD vice president Ralph Hingson asserts that a national definition of drunk driving set at .08 would save 500-600 lives per year. Although the U.S. Department of transporation has been unable to establish such a conclusion after 15 years of careful research, and although the General Accounting Office issued a report to Congress insisting that the Hingson claim is "unfounded," MADD continues to quote the unsubstantiated estimate as scientific fact.

11. And the MADD vice president continues to churn out junk science reports used by the organization and other anti-alcohol groups.

12. A MADD ad campaign against underage drinking included purported "facts" linking alcohol to weight gain, rape and sexually transmitted diseases that weren't based on good evidence, according to the Wall Street Journal.Reduction of consumption leaders James Mosher and Robert Reynolds criticized MADD's misuse of statistics. After reviewing MADD's ads, Reynolds informed MADD that "this is really sloppy, inadequate and embarrassing…. It imperils the integrity" of MADD and other groups in the field.

MADD's assertion that underage drinkers are 50 times more likely to use cocaine than abstainers made James Mosher "cringe," according to the Wall Street Journal. Mosher stressed that there is no research "that shows there's a cause and effect and that's being implied" by MADD.

12a. When pioneering researcher Dr. Laurence Ross reported that increasing the severity of punishments for drunk driving has only a short-term impact on drunk driving, MADD turned on him with a vengeance usually reserved for drunk drivers themselves. It even accused Dr.Ross, an independent scholar with proven integrity, of being the drunk driver's best friend.

13. Actually, Dr. Ross is a strong foe of drunk driving who began studying the problem long before the existence of MADD. He has identified research-based evidence of what policies are most effective in reducing drunk driving.

14. Unfortunately for him, they are not always consistent with MADD's ideological and emotional agenda.

Lack of Integrity

The Center for Consumer Freedom has pointed out that Mothers Against Drunk Driving …will sell out its principles to keep its coffers full. One noteworthy case was the 2000 battle over two California ballot initiatives (Propositions 30 and 31) that sought to permit an automobile accident victim to sue the at-fault driver's insurance company if legal claims weren't paid promptly. Considering that victims of drunk drivers stood to gain an important legal tool, most Californians expected MADD to lead the charge in favor of these new measures. However, MADD aligned itself with a group of out-of-state insurance companies, which collectively ran a $1 million-per-week advertising campaign against the proposiotions. MADD defended its position at the time by arguing that drunk drivers themselves, if convicted only of lesser charges, could sue insurance companies under the proposed law. Even after California's Attorney General disagreed, ruling that Propositions 30 and 31 could never give drunk drivers new rights, MADD never budged from its contradictory position. The organizations motive? Greed, plain and simple.

MADD's 1999- 2000 annual report acknowledges Allstate Insurance Company for a gift in the "$250,000 and above" category. Nationwide Mutual Insurance gave over $100,000 for its share of the political cover.

15. MADD also has "cozy" relationships with its other major donors, including DaimlerChrysler, General Motors and Nissan. Actually, they're more investors than donors. GM is a good example.

"GM and MADD have formed a mutually profitable relationship: in return for GM's inancial support, MADD stays conveniently silent on traffic safety issues outside of 'impaired driving.'

GM, meanwhile, is vociferous in its opposition to any drinking before driving, buying itself immunity from MADD's potential criticism for encouraging speeding."

15a. Speeding is a factor in about 31 percent of all fatal crashes involving almost 14,000 fatalities each year and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that speed-related crashes cost over $40 billion each year in the U.S.

General Motors very aggressively promotes speeding as a pleasurable activity in order to sell its cars.

15b. What does MADD say about speeding? Nothing. As the Executive Director of Ohio MADD said, "Speeding isn't our thing."

15c. General Motors produces three of what Consumer Reports calls the "Four Deadliest Cars of All Time"

However, by giving millions of dollars to MADD, the auto giant appears to have bought silence on the subject of improving vehicular safety features.

15d. MADD-GM Timeline

1991 General Motors becomes a corporate sponsor of MADD1992 General Motors commissions a Gallup Poll to test public opinion on roadblocks.

1995 General Motors donates $110,000 to MADD

1996 to 1998 GM General Counsel Charles Babcock serves as MADD's national chairman

1998 Babcock argues against drunk driving sensors for cars. MADD is silent.

1999 GM announces a five-year, $2.5 million "corporate partnership" with MADD, and gave $500,000 to MADD to kick it off.

2000 GM co-sponsors one of MADD's campaign and underwrites MADD's magazine, DRIVEN

2000 GM blocks an amendment to a highway bill that would have imposed criminal penalties on car-company executives who authorized faulty vehicles or equipment. MADD is silent.

2001 Former GM Vice Chairman Harry Pearce is appointed to MADD's National Advisory Board

2001 to 2002 GM donates $542,180 to MADD, and GM-subsidiary Chevrolet donates $120,000

2003 GM increases fatality risks with more distracting onboard telematics and infotainment devices in its cars. MADD is silent.

2003 GM introduces the new Cadillac 16 concept car, which features a 1,000 horsepower engine. MADD is silent."

15e. Coincidence? You decide

When a MADD leader was asked about how traffic fatality statistics involving cell phone use compared to those involving drunk drivers, he tellingly replied "I have absolutely no idea, nor do I care." On CNN's Crossfire, the President-elect of MADD refused to discuss cell phones and the traffic fatalities they cause. She said "We're not here to talk about cell phones. We're here to talk about alcohol." Following more questions about how cell phones impair driving, the MADD leader snapped "I'm not going to talk about cell phones." Similarly, a MADD lobbyist was quoted on the program as saying "I don't care about deaths from cell phones."

15f. Perhaps MADD's callous lack of concern for deaths caused by cell phone results from the fact that the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) gave free wireless phones to MADD chapters throughout the country along with free airtime. As the President of MADD exclaimed, "This is a tremendous shot in the arm for our organization."

15g. Just another coincidence? Perhaps. Another top donor to MADD is Takata, a manufacturer of seatbelts.

MADD uncharacteristically but very aggressively promotes the use of seatbelts.

This might only be yet another in a long string of coincidences. But realistically….well, draw your own conclusion.

When deciding if these are only coincidences, consider MADD's pitches to potential "donors."

"What MADD Can Do For You Aligning with MADD gives your company added credibility and increased power by:

Increasing store traffic and sales volume
Connecting with customers on emotional and logical levels to provide incremental value to the consumer and sales lift to your company
Increasing partner distribution channels
Increasing shelf space and point-of-sale display space with key retailers
Winning national marketing and media awards
Increasing consumer and media awareness during key time periods
Giving national promotions "local legs" through MADD's network of chapters
Mentioning your company during interviews in national media
Attracting national and regional media attention during sponsor-driven media events
Delivering targeted media campaigns with other MADD partners
Call MADD's marketing department at 469-420-4518 to discuss how MADD can help your company meet its marketing and public relations goals."

15h. The organization brags that "during 2000, MADD delivered more than 102 million media impressions and exposure to over 500 legislators to DaimlerChrysler."

15i. As a former chapter President observed, MADD is big business. For more on MADD's problems with integrity, visit MADD Flunks the Truth Test.Greed

Non-profit organizations typically permit their chapters to keep most of the money they raise. For example, Remove Intoxicated Drivers (RID) chapters get to keep 90% of all funds they raise.

But MADD claims ownership of every penny raised by all its many chapters. Thus, after raising $129,000 locally and turning it all over as MADD demands, the Las Vegas chapter received a check from the national office for $1.29 as its share.

16. MADD's "focus is on greed," said the chapter President, who reported "I've never seen such bloodsuckers!"

16a. How is "greed" spelled? Perhaps its "MADD."

But Mothers Against Drunk Driving is always hungry for more money. Although the organization's net worth exceeds $25 million dollars, MADD has paid telemarketers huge fees to raise tens of millions of dollars per year from hard-working Americans.

MADD has spent almost two out of every three dollars raised on fund-raising, forcing the American Institute of Philanthropy (AIP) to downgrade its evaluation of the organization to a "D." MADD has spent twice as much on fundraising as the AIP finds acceptable.

16b. It would appear that raising money has become an end in itself at the MADD bureaucracy, with high salaries ranging close to $200,000.00 per year, numerous employees, and huge retirement funds.

16c. Salaries/benefits for some at this "volunteer" organization are estimated at:

17. Dean Wilkerson $311, 919.00

Bobby Heard $189,489.00

Janice Bloom $154,248.00

Kyle Ward $152,619.00

Within a period of two decades, Mothers Against Drunk Driving has degenerated from a public service organization devoted to reducing traffic fatalities into an anti-alcohol bureaucracy largely focused on raising ever more money for itself.