BILL TARGETS DRUG-IMPAIRED DRIVERS

The car weaves back and forth across the yellow line, drawing the
attention of a police officer, who flips on his flashing blue lights and
pulls the driver over.

The driver is given a field sobriety test - walk, turn on one leg, stand
- recommended by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The driver shows some unsteadiness, giving the officer probable cause to
administer a breathalyzer test. The test is given, and the driver
registers a zero. The possible reason? He is under the influence of
drugs, not alcohol.

Under Tennessee law, the officer is stymied because another test cannot
be administered.

State Rep. Mae Beavers, a consistent if sometimes lonely battler to keep
impaired drivers off the road, wants to change that.

The Mt. Juliet Republican is sponsoring legislation that would allow
multiple tests to determine the alcohol or drug content of a driver's
blood.

A driver who refused the tests would lose his license under the
implied-consent law.

The bill was voted out of the House DUI subcommittee last week and
referred to the House Judiciary Committee, where it is scheduled for
action Wednesday.

According to Beavers, a study at Vanderbilt University Medical Center
showed that 46% of traffic accident victims treated had drugs other than
alcohol in their systems.

Metro police Officer Robert F. Conley spoke on behalf of Beavers'
legislation during a meeting of the DUI subcommittee last week.

''Probably this is the most important piece of DUI legislation that we
have pending this year. We are discovering an increasing number of
drug-impaired drivers on our streets. The way our laws are set up now,
if we have somebody who is drug-impaired, if we run any kind of test at
all for alcohol and we get a zero result, we are just out.''

That leaves police trying to prosecute a case with no chemical test,
which is extraordinarily difficult, he said.

Then there is the problem of drinking, drugging and driving.

''Maybe they have taken a handful of Valium and had one beer. They may
be so screwed up they can't sit in a chair, but the alcohol level isn't
consistent with the degree of impairment. There is nothing else we can
do,'' Conley said.

No new law covering driving while drugged is needed because the standard
DUI law covers driving under the influence of anything.

If a drug-impaired driver has a wreck in which a passenger is killed,
that driver is literally getting away with murder, Conley said.

The second test would be of the blood or urine. Samples would be sent to
the toxicology lab at the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation for
analysis.

The bill as written would allow the second test to be for alcohol or
drugs, but Conley said he would not object if the second test was
restricted to drugs only.

The Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association has cast a wary eye on the
legislation.

The association is opposed to two tests for alcohol. Lebanon attorney
William Farmer, legislative chairman of the group, said a second test
only for drugs might pass constitutional muster, but he would prefer to
get an opinion from the state attorney general.

''That is good they are doing that, but they need to have a detailed due
process procedure once you go to that second test.''

Another major problem is that most police officers lack the training to
recognize whether drivers they stop are high on drugs, but the
International Association of Chiefs of Police and the NHTSA have
programs to train police officers in drug recognition, with the federal
government picking up the tab.

NHTSA estimates 10%-22% of DUI drivers are under the influence of a drug
other than alcohol or a drug in combination with alcohol.

Los Angeles started its drug recognition program after law enforcement
officers began to realize that a significant percentage of the people
they were stopping were impaired by drugs other than alcohol.

''If we get the law changed, there is no doubt we will get the grant
money to start training our officers to recognize drug-impaired drivers
and keep people off the street,'' Conley said.

The Drug Evaluation and Classification Program requires nine days of
classroom training and up to six months of field training, Conley said.

Similar programs are in use in 34 states, the District of Columbia,
Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia.

Beavers worries that the projected cost of the legislation may make it
difficult to pass in this time of tight budgets.

The cost of the tests and analyses would be included in the court costs
of the offender.

If indigent defendants weren't able to pick up the tab or the defendant
was not convicted, state and local governments would pay for tests and
analyses, with the needed pool of money for each estimated at less than
$100,000 annually.