Staff Edit: Leave Melanie’s Bill as is

A Massachusetts House of Representatives committee has now deleted a large chunk of clauses from a bill that would impose stricter punishments on drunk drivers. The bill, referred to as Melanie’s Bill, named after a 13-year-old girl who was struck and killed by a repeat drunken driver in 2003, would increase penalties for drunk drivers and close loopholes that allow repeat offenders to circumvent criminal charges, according to The Boston Globe.

Among the deleted sections is one that would require jail time for drivers caught without a drivers’ license after already being suspended for drunk driving. Another deleted section would have allowed prosecutors to charge anyone caught driving under the influence with a child in the car with child endangerment.

It is hard to imagine the reasoning behind deleting such common-sense legislation. The only group that might oppose such legislation – besides drunk drivers – would be defense attorneys, and it seems difficult to imagine why legislators would be opposed to measures that seem to harm no one and could only help. The committee did not comment on the bill’s changes. It should explain to the people why the changes were made.

The deleted sections would not have allowed for unfair punishment to repeat offenders, unless one inconceivably believes drunk drivers are not deserving of such punishment after repeatedly endangering other people’s lives and failing to learn their lesson the first time.

In Massachusetts, drunk drivers kill almost half of all people who die in traffic accidents each year, according to the organization Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

Offenders should receive stricter punishment for endangering themselves and the lives of others, and several sections of Melanie’s Bill, such as increasing the maximum prison sentence from five years to 20 years, deserve support in Congress. Legislators should have no reason to eliminate other sections that are necessary for the public good.