Recent studies show strong laws and stringent enforcement do not, by themselves, effective countermeasures against drinking drivers. Also, in numerous instances, the police, prosecutor, and the courts have either been unwilling or unable to handle drunk drivers to the full extent of the law. In contrast, the Administrative Adjudication of Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) cases would decriminalize most traffic infractions. These infractions would be handled by means of simplified and informal judicial, quasi-judicial, or para-judicial procedures. Already in actual use in some jurisdictions, the Administrative Adjudication of drivers convicted of DWI as a first offense would greatly increase the arrests and convictions of drunken drivers. Also, through repeated arrests, the authorities would obtain evidence of serious drinking problems. With this simple identification process, the courts will be able to categorize the defendants' drinking problems and refer them to the proper treatment or education program accordingly. Also, by conversion of the first DWI offense to an administrative adjudicatory process, time requirements imposed on police in making a DWI arrest and appearing at the trial would be greatly reduced, thereby insuring an increase in arrests for DWI. Dangers to an administrative adjudication system include recent Supreme Court decisions providing for conversion of a fine to a jail term upon nonpayment of a fine, and provision of a right to counsel in any criminal trial when faced with imprisonment. Thirty-four references are provided.