About 140 presidents and other high-ranking officials of colleges and universities have signed a call for “an informed and dispassionate public debate over the effects of the 21-year-old drinking age.”

They call it the Amethyst Initiative, named for a gemstone that the ancient Greeks thought would ward off drunkenness.

A 1984 federal law penalizes states that set their drinking ages below 21 by denying them highway funds. But the college presidents say 21 is not working.

A binge-drinking culture has developed, they say. Alcohol education with abstinence as the only legal option has not had “constructive” effects on students’ behavior.

“Adults under 21 are deemed capable of voting, signing contracts, serving on juries and enlisting in the military, but are told they are not mature enough to have a beer,” according to the Amethyst Initiative’s Web site. “By choosing to use fake IDs, students make ethical compromises that erode respect for the law.”

Mothers Against Drunk Driving, for one, is not impressed. But MADD’s CEO, Chuck Hurley, had a response that any college president should find hard to dispute.

“We welcome an honest discussion, and that begins with a clear discussion of the science,” Mr. Hurley said.

It appears that the college presidents have a gut feeling, based on anecdotal evidence, that the 21-year-old drinking age should be changed. But colleges exalt research — documented, unbiased facts — and such facts should be the basis for any decision. Let’s have some research.