Talk:National Minimum Drinking Age Act

message: It would be nice to have a citation for the dubious-sounding stat about a mojority of teenagers supporting the drinking age.
:I agree.ch 16:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's kind of obvious, just ask anyone.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.45.47.174 (talk) 23:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations needed

message: :Does the act cover alcoholic solids, or only beverages? SteveSims (talk) 02:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Only applies to beverages?

message: If anybody has the voting record for this act then post it in the article, even if only as an external link. SteveSims (talk) 20:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Congressional voting record

message: In deleting some of the proponents' dubious claims, we seem to have left this article slanted entirely in the opposition's favor. This article needs a less negative intro, data about why the law was passed, and a section in support of the law to balance out the general negativity given off by this article. Feel free to remove the Template:NPOV if/when this article becomes a little less one-sided. —LinkTiger (talk) 05:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... not really sure what deletion you're talking about.  From what I can tell above, though, it looks like whatever might have been dubious and unsourced was simply removed, which is in line with our policy of verifiability.  Unsourced statements, as a general rule of thumb, shouldn't linger in an encyclopedia.  A fairly old revision of this article seems to closely resemble the current version— only with unsourced statements (and possible biography of living persons policy issues) removed.  You're more than welcome to propose and/or make changes to the article if there's something you feel should be added— we simply ask that ideally those changes mesh with our current our policies and guidelines.  As for now, I'm going to simply assume that the issues that spurred the addition of the tag have been resolved, so I will remove the NPOV tag unless there is consensus that there is a further need for it. --slakr\ talk / 21:39, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is entirely POV

message: I clicked on link to reference number 8, the site says the article no longer exists.  I saw no way to edit the list.  I also briefly searched on the internet for another source for this "mainfesto" but could only find links back to the original broken link.Jeff (talk) 17:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference 8 no longer exists

message: The article would be much improved by a discussion of the reasons for its adoption.
  Drinking ages were previously established and then lowered before being raised by this act.  Why?
  There must have been some rationale for such wavering, so it would seem a valid topic for this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.68.66.152 (talk) 14:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs history

message: If a state were to choose a drinking age of, say, 23 instead of 21, would that be okay, or would that state be subject to the 10% reduction in highway funds? Shades97 (talk) 01:53, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Higher Drinking Age allowed? 

message: I suspect this section may be original research.  I have removed the material from this section that either incorrectly summarized what was stated in the reference, or is obviously irrelevant as the cited findings were subsequent to the passage of the Act. That means that nothing is left but a bunch of references to the same article, The Minimum Legal Drinking Age and Public Health from the Journal of Economic Perspectives.  Someone should get a copy of this journal and verify that it supports the information in this article.Crypticfirefly (talk) 05:22, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relevant statistics 

message: The scientific research section is clearly written by some biased source, most likely a soccer mom who's son died after drinking at prom. I suggest removing the section unless someone can replace the junk currently there with unbiased facts.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.245.105.58 (talk) 03:27, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  MADD mom edited... 

message: The sentence:
QUOTE:
Despite its name, this act did not outlaw the consumption of alcoholic beverages by those under 21 years of age, just its purchase. However, Alabama, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Vermont, and the District of Columbia extended the law into an outright ban.
UNQUOTE
The sentence ends in "outright ban" as if the distinction is made to a "partial ban". The distinction is actually between "an outright ban on purchase" and "an outright ban on consumption".
The sentence:
QUOTE:
Despite its name, this act did not outlaw the consumption of alcoholic beverages by those under 21 years of age, just its purchase.
UNQUOTE
is just wrong. This Federal law does not set the drinking age in any state. States can still set a minimum age less than 21 for the consumption, sale, purchase, and/or possession of alcoholic beverages. Should they do so, this Federal law will deprive them of some highway money that otherwise (had some age been pegged at 21) would have come from Federal sources. That's all that this law does. This Federal law does not peg any minimum age concerning alcohol. I don't know about things like Guam and The District Of Columbia, but if you're in one of the 50 STATES, minimum ages related to alcohol in your location are a matter of State Law (although it may be permissible for State Law to further delegate pegging those minimum ages to smaller divisions within the state).2604:2000:C682:2D00:BCCE:4BD3:375D:D2DF (talk) 15:18, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems