If things are getting too dull in the General Assembly, we can always count on state Sen Tom Wyss to propose something new to get people arguing:
"If you're talking about the age group between 16 and 20, the greatest single cause of death in that age group is auto crashes," said Indiana State Senator Tom Wyss. "Regardless if the numbers are one or 100, it's a tremendous tragedy to lose someone at that age just because they didn't have the driving skills necessary."
That's why Wyss plans to introduce a bill that would change the driving age from 16 to 17, mandate drivers education for new drivers, and make sure teens have at least 50 hours of driving practice.
Actually, the idea isn't that new. Increasing the driving age is a trend across the country, and there is some evidence that it's a good idea:
New findings from brain researchers at the National Institutes of Health explain for the first time why efforts to protect the youngest drivers usually fail. The weak link: what's called "the executive branch" of the teen brain — the part that weighs risks, makes judgments and controls impulsive behavior.
Scientists at the NIH campus in Bethesda, Md., have found that this vital area develops through the teenage years and isn't fully mature until age 25. One 16-year-old's brain might be more developed than another 18-year-old's, just as a younger teen might be taller than an older one. But evidence is mounting that a 16-year-old's brain is generally far less developed than those of teens just a little older.
I was a terrible driver at 16, and most adults, I think, would make the same admission. This is one of those cases where we don't want our kids to do something we fought tooth and nail to do when we were kids. Call us hypocritcal. I can just imagine the editorials to come in the high school newspapers.
