PERHAPS IF THE ECONOMY were stronger, the state of South Carolina could afford to throw away millions of dollars in federal highway funds.

But even if we were rolling in cash, we couldn't afford to keep throwing away the lives of our fellow citizens who have the misfortune of getting in the way of drunken drivers; one recent study puts us first in the nation in the rate of people killed by drunken drivers.

Yet many in the Legislature, either angry at the federal government or else a bit too eager to please drunken drivers and their lawyers, are seriously considering thumbing their noses at both the cash and the lives. They must not be allowed to succeed.

This week, the House will take up a measure to bring South Carolina's drunken driving laws a bit closer to the national standard, and a bit closer to covering people whose disregard for safety threatens innocent drivers and passengers across our state.

The bill would decrease the threshold for illegal, drunken driving from 0.10 percent blood alcohol concentration to 0.08 blood alcohol concentration.

At least as significantly, the legislation also would strip drivers of their licenses on the spot, for at least 30 days, as soon as they register at 0.08 or refuse to submit to a blood-alcohol test. Current law lets them keep driving until conviction (and sometimes beyond) unless they register 0.15 percent. As a result, most people who are eventually convicted of drunken driving get to keep driving while they wait for their cases to come to trial.

The 0.08 standard is used in 34 states, and is the level the Congress has mandated if states want to continue to receive full highway funding. (South Carolina will lose $6 million if our law isn't changed this year, and the amount will rise to $25 million a year in 2007.)

It is not a difficult level to avoid. A 180-pound man would have to drink about five beers in an hour to reach 0.08; a 130-pound woman would have to drink just under three in an hour.

Nor is 0.08 an arbitrary level. Federal laboratory research has demonstrated that drivers' ability to brake, steer, change lanes and use good judgment drops by 60 percent to 70 percent when they reach a blood-alcohol level of 0.08 percent. Consider what a hard time many drivers have with those tasks when they're sober and you begin to get a feel for the severity of the problem.

The studies to date of the actual results in states that have adopted the relatively new 0.08 laws have consistently shown reductions in alcohol-death rates. That's not surprising when you realize that the 0.10 standard that most states originally adopted for drunken driving was actually a perversion of the level suggested by the original research: 0.08 percent.

Opponents of the 0.08 law will argue the real threats on our roads are those who test in the 0.15 percent range. That's like saying that because more people are murdered by acquaintances than by strangers, it should be legal to kill strangers. Opponents also talk a lot about the rights of adults to drink. They don't talk much about the rights of those of us who aren't drinking -- or who aren't driving while we're drunk -- not to be killed when we dare to get on our highways.