At The Volokh Conspiracy, Philip Cook argues lowering the drinking age would lead to increased abuse, but we should do it anyway (HT: Sully). His main piece of evidence is an increase in highway fatalities back when some states lowered their drinking ages, plus a vague gesture towards “other indications of increased abuse.” Without a proper citation I can’t really assess the argument, but here’s what I’ve seen living on/near a college campus for 40 months:

The drinking age has created a demand for two things: fake IDs and “parties.” A passable fake ID costs $50, but you risk getting it taken away if you get caught with it, which means hassle and another $50. The other option is the “party”: more specifically the “kegger” or “house party,” or most descriptively the “keg party,” though those terms rarely get used. A party is where the leaders of a frat or other group of 21+ friends living together buy a bunch of kegs, announce the event, ask for “donations” in exchange for a 12-ounce plastic cup. Since alcohol is cheaper by the keg than the glass, a group of seniors can make their rent money charging only $5 per cup. If you’re a typical binge drinker, drinking 6-10 drinks per night, and drinks at a bar are $2-$3, then the costs are $5/night to go to parties and $12-$30/night, plus cost of fake ID, to go to bars. Thus, parties are more popular than bars. I suspect many people who go to house parties couldn’t afford to drink as much as they do if they went to bars, meaning that the drinking age law could be increasing alcohol consumption.

Aside from cost, drinking games exist only at parties. Sample drinking game: beer pong. Set up is six half-filled cups of beer per person, you go back and forth trying to throw ping pong balls in each other’s cups, and when one goes in you drink the cup. I’ve avoided (as best I can remember) ever playing more than two rounds of beer pong in a night, but some people will play until they loose or whatever, which means drinking a lot of beer. Again, drinking age encourages drinking.

The most interesting point: whenever I’ve gone to bars (or the local “lounge”–high-class bar), plenty of people drive there, especially if the bar’s away from campus (and the entertainment is better if you go away from campus). But parties are always near campus, near enough that driving becomes pointless because there’s never place to park near a college campus. So: it’s really obvious why the drinking age might reduce drunk driving, but this needn’t be a reflection of less drinking overall: it could just be people walking to the places where they drink.