Did Something I Do Actually Have an Impact on Public Policy?

(Photo: Smabs Sputzer)

I have spent the last 20+ years of my life doing academic research and popular writing on economics.  I’ve been lucky, and my work has gotten a lot of exposure.  I certainly have had a lot of fun along the way.

But, I think I can honestly say that no government has ever changed a law or a public policy as a result of my work.  Sometimes politicians cite my research in pushing an agenda but having talked to these politicians, it is clear they had the agenda first, and then they went looking for research – any research – that would support their position.  When I’ve taken unpopular stances (like saying children’s car seats don’t work well), there has never been even a sliver of political movement on the issue.

Finally, however, I think I may be on the verge of my first policy victory.

Bethel, Alaska, population 6,100, is thinking of criminalizing drunk walking.

Those of you who read SuperFreakonomics might remember that we lay bare the perils of drunk walking early in that book.  By our estimates, on a per mile basis walking drunk is far more dangerous than driving drunk.

The most common reaction to our finding, oddly, has been laughter, even though we are deadly serious.

The good people of Bethel, however, appear to have heard the call to action.  If the proposal passes, anyone caught walking drunk will face a $200 fine.

And that, my friends, is something to celebrate.  So break out a bottle of champagne on behalf of the Freakonomics team.  Unless, of course, you live in Bethel and are traveling by foot.

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

 

COMMENTS: 24

View All Comments »
  1. Kerry Waller says:

    Is this really a good thing? At least injuries from drunk walking are to one’s self, not to others. Won’t this lead to more people getting into a car after drinking (at least on the margin)? Those injuries are not always to one’s self…

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 4
    • Chad says:

      I am sure there are plenty of injuries to motorists who swerve to avoid drunk pedestrians. Also, if you were a motorist who hits a drunk pedestrian, that could easily lead to emotional injury.

      Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
    • J1 says:

      It’s not a good thing. There are already laws against drunk walking, namely laws against public intoxication. It’s one thing to make the dangers of drunk walking known, another entirely to pass more laws making what’s already illegal double secret probationary illegal or whatever Steven is pushing. More busybody crap to “protect us from ourselves” should be smacked down hard, not celebrated. I’ll (mostly) stay off my drunk driving soapbox and note that it’s already illegal too; the problem there is that we don’t treat drunk drivers as the violent, dangerous criminals they are.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
  2. LukeVan says:

    Take a look at the public intoxication fines in Hoboken NJ, it’s now up to $2,000.

    Of course I don’t think it came from your research, it came from St. Paddy’s Day debauchery.

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
  3. Matt says:

    This reminds me of an anecdote from when they first banned drink driving in Ireland. While discussing the regulations in the local pub, my grandfather was presented with an interesting objection to the new law:

    “Well, sure, last week I drank a lot, I could hardly walk. How am I supposed to get home if I can’t drive?”

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
  4. Mikemenn says:

    Looking at Google Map of Bethel, Alaska, it looks like the only road in or out of the town go to the airport or the river port. All driving in town will be just that, in town. I wonder how many deaths/injuries they’ve had in the past 10 years due to drunk walking.

    Now get New York to do this and there probably won’t be enough jails to hold the daily criminals.

    Will be an interesting test case if it passes.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  5. Seminymous Coward says:

    Wow, they apparently have 75 24-7 taxicabs in Bethel, according to a city council member; there goes that objection.

    All the same, I’m still not clear on how this is different from a public drunkenness law. Does the sidewalk not count as “on city streets or ice roads” or something? If the sidewalk doesn’t count, do crosswalks? If drunk walking on the sidewalk is illegal, too, then how do you get from the bar to your cab legally?

    It’s hard to find decent news coverage of this, much less a link to the text of the proposed law. I can’t even find it in the city council’s minutes, which are, admirably, online.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
  6. Dale says:

    More detailed story: http://kyuk.org/city-of-bethel-considers-tweaking-decency-laws/

    The (real) money quote: “Right now, state statues do outlaw public intoxication and other decency laws, but since the [Bethel Municipal Code] has not been updated to reflect that, the state gets the money from the fines.”

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
    • tung bo says:

      I also admire the rule against “public excretion”. I hope the city council didn’t work up a sweat creafting these rules – it might be illegal!

      Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  7. Dan McKeon says:

    my guess is this will be a case study of the law of unintended consequences if it passes…

    Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
  8. Will says:

    From your calculations in SuperFreakonomics, you said that 1 in 140 miles driven is driven drunk and assumed the same held for walking. This is a fundamentally wrong assumption. For any number of reasons, including that walking drunk is not illegal, people probably spend a much larger proportion of their time walking drunk. This difference is probably enough to wipe out the effect. Second, there are much fewer externalities to walking drunk.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0