N.Y. governor: Toughen texting law

New York Gov. David Paterson wants to “take the handcuffs off” when it comes to texting and driving.

He’s proposed legislation in the Senate that would upgrade enforcement of the state’s 2008 texting law from “secondary” to “primary.” That means law officers can stop and cite text-messaging drivers for that reason alone.

“This bill will take the handcuffs off our law enforcement officers and make our highways safer by allowing officers to observe a violation and immediately issue a summons,” Paterson said in a statement on SB 222 Wednesday.

The state reports that about 200 tickets have been written since last November, when New York’s texting while driving law took effect.

Secondary enforcement — usually the result of a fallback position adopted by legislators seeking distracted driving laws — has come under increasing fire from safety groups. In Washington state, the Senate has OK’d a plan to hike its texting while driving law from secondary to primary enforcement.

New York counties and cities have continued to adopt local texting bans because of the secondary provision at the state level. “New York State’s law doesn’t have any teeth,” an Erie County lawmaker said as he pushed through a regional texting plan.

Assembly Transportation Committee Chairman David Gantt, D-Rochester, who long resisted efforts to get a text messaging law in place, said he would review the legislation.

New York was a leader in cell-phone restrictions on drivers, passing its widely copied hands-free law in 2001. Text-messaging legislation gained enough momentum to get past Gantt after an upstate crash killed five teens.

The fine for text messaging and driving in New York state is $150.

Simitian: Hike Calif. distracted driving fines

Seeking “a more significant deterrent,” California State Sen. Joe Simitian has filed legislation that would more than double fines on the trio of distracted driving laws that he created in recent years.

Simitian defended the laws’ effectiveness last week — reacting to a widely publicized study that shows cell phone bans don’t work.

On Monday, he announced the filing of California Senate Bill 1475.

“I’ve heard repeatedly that the current fines are too modest,” Simitian told the Mercury News. “They wouldn’t be anymore.”

The state senator’s latest distracted driving legislation would:

• Increase fines for using handheld cell phones while driving to $50 (first offense) and $100. Current fines are $20/$50.
• Boost the penalty for text messaging while driving in California to $100 (each offense). Current fines are $20/$50.
• Mandate a drivers license point for each offense, often leading to an increase in auto insurance rates.
• Bicyclists would be included in the cell phone and texting prohibitions.

Simitian, D-Palo Alto, said compliance with California’s distracted driving laws has been good, but “there’s room for improvement.” The real cost of moving violation tickets in California can be up to four times the amount of the fine.

The measure also would route $10 of the fines to state education programs regarding the risks of cell phoning and text messaging while driving. (Read the full text of SB 1475.)

Simitian’s press release on SB 1475 renewed his defense of California’s ban on drivers’ use of handheld cell phones, citing Highway Patrol figures for 2008 and 2009.

“A lot of folks are sitting down to dinner with their families every day, who might otherwise not have made it,” he said last week.

A recent study released by an insurance industry trade group suggested there was no meaningful improvement in accidents in California (and New York) after the ban on handheld cell phones, even though the raw numbers clearly indicated a drop. It cited similar downward trends in neighboring states.

Simitian and the U.S. Department of Transportation blasted the study.

Simitian defends California cell phone ban

California state Sen. Joe Simitian has heard enough about cell phone bans not working.

Simitian came out in defense of his ban on drivers’ use of handheld cell phones, armed with California Highway Patrol data. “A lot of folks are sitting down to dinner with their families every day, who might otherwise not have made it,” he said.

CHP numbers show a 20 percent reduction in fatalities and collisions in the six months following implementation of that California cell phone ban. The bill was signed into law in 2006 and went into effect on July. 1, 2008.

Simitian said 2009 was equally successful, based on preliminary numbers: “That translates to at least 700 fewer fatalities and 75,000 to 100,000 fewer collisions each year.”

He said CHP numbers also showed “an immediate drop” of 40 percent to 50 percent in accidents blamed on cell phone use.

A widely cited (and criticized) insurance industry study found “no notable change was apparent coincident with enactment of the state’s hand-held cellphone ban.” Researchers from the Highway Loss Data Institute looked at data from insurance collision claims of vehicles under 3 years old and did not include accidents in which claims were not submitted.

Simitian has called the release of the study’s findings “largely a nonevent” due to the limits of its data. The publicity generated by the HLDI study most likely inspired Simitian’s release of the CHP figures.

California’s number of cell phone subscriptions and the number of drivers have increased significantly over the period, his July 17 press release stated, making the data “doubly compelling.”

“We’ve been able to reduce the number of deaths and crashes even as we’ve seen more drivers and more cell phones out on the highway.”

Simitian also authored the 2008 legislation that banned text messaging while driving on California’s roads and highways.

Report: Urban areas best served by bans

Bans on handheld phones do work, and they work best in urban areas, according to a new study of traffic fatalities and injuries.

A University of Illinois team looked at New York state in the years before and after its 2001 ban on handheld cell phones.

All 62 counties in New York recorded lower motor vehicle injury rates after the ban, while 46 posted lower traffic fatalities — 10 of them at statistically significant levels.

When looking at three major population centers — the Bronx, New York and Queens — the personal injury decrease was more notable than in less populated counties.

“Hand-held cell phone bans are very valuable in high-density urban areas, but less so in lower-density rural areas,” said computer science professor Sheldon Jacobson. “But that doesn’t mean they have no impact in rural areas. It just means that such legislation is less likely to have an impact on driver accident rates.”

The Illinois study comes on the heels of an insurance-industry report that concluded handheld cell phone bans had little value. That study looked at collision claims following New York’s ban and found reductions, but dismissed them as part of a downward trend also found in neighboring states.

That widely publicized study by the Highway Loss Data Institute did not account for vehicles over 3 years old and did not include cell phone-related accidents in which claims were not filed. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration called the study “irresponsible.”

Jacobson, who relied on publicly available data on fatalities and injuries per numbers of licensed drivers, said availability of insurance industry data on property damage would improve the reliability of his results.

Still, “All the evidence suggests handheld cell phone bans while driving are a good thing, and this is more evidence to that effect,” he said. “But it doesn’t establish it definitively. There’s still more work to be done.”

Washington votes to toughen texting law

The state of Washington already said no to text messaging while driving. Now it’s shouting.

The state Senate voted Feb. 5 to toughen Washington’s law against texting and the use of handheld cell phones by targeting violators with primary (full) enforcement.

Update: The House agreed with most of the bill, but rejected its call for primary enforcement for adult cell phone violations. The House vote came on March 3. The Senate then rejected those changes on March 6. The House and Senate versions must be reconciled before any legislation goes to the governor.

The 2008 bans were limited to secondary enforcement, meaning law officers needed another reason to stop and cite violators.

Meanwhile, Kentucky’s House voted to outlaw texting for all drivers and use of cell phones by teenagers (HB 43). Massachusetts’ House approved a ban on texing and use of handheld cell phones while driving. The Massachusetts bill also prohibits drivers under 18 from all mobile phone use.

Washington was among the first six states to outlaw text messaging while driving. The new plan OK’d by the Senate also would prohibit drivers with instruction permits or intermediate licenses from using cell phones or text messaging.

State Sen. Tracey Eide (pictured), D-Federal Way, who sponsored the 2008 law and the new legislation, called distracted driving “an epidemic” and “critical public-safety issue.”

“We need to strengthen our laws,” the senator said.

Secondary enforcement is a common way of watering down legislation designed to stopping texting and cell phoning while behind the wheel. It’s been used across the nation for compromise bills and for amendments tacked onto stronger bills.

State Rep. Reuven Carlyle, D-Seattle, sponsor of the companion bill, HB 2635, told lawmakers that the 2008 ban “is flouted because it’s a secondary offense.”

Several states are considering plans to toughen and modernize their earlier distracted driving laws.

Continuing reports that hands-free cell phone attachments don’t improve traffic safety have led to some initial consideration of total cell phone bans. No states ban the use of all cell phones while driving; political resistance fueled by the wireless industry would be significant.

After a crash and ‘epiphany,’ Ky. rep votes yes

Last week, State Rep. Keith Hall of Kentucky turned thumbs down on a plan to ban text messaging while driving. He voted against HB 43 in the House Transportation Committee.

The measure succeeded, though, and went before the full House on Feb. 4. This time, Hall voted yes with the zeal of a recent convert.

“I’ve had a change of heart,” he told the House.

That’s because the night before the vote, his wife reportedly reached for her ringing cell phone and plowed into another vehicle.

“I heard the sirens go off, and my cell phone rang and they said, ‘Your wife has just had a serious traffic accident,’ he told fellow legislators during debate.

“That’ll give you an epiphany,” he said. “That’ll give you a wake-up call.”

Kentucky’s distracted driving bill HB 43, which also prevents teens from using cell phones while driving, cleared the chamber in an 80-16 vote.

People frustrated with legislative resistance to cell phone and texting legislation sometimes wonder if distracted driving has to affect lawmakers personally before they’ll vote yes.

Sometimes, yes.