The measure, however, did not succeed without controversy. The Senate heavily amended the original House proposal, limiting most enforcement to secondary status. The House went along, and House Bill 99 was sent to Gov. John Kasich, who indicated he would sign it.

The law goes into effect 90 days after Kasich’s approval. A warning period will begin at that time, with ticketing on hold for six months. The fine is $150.

Ohio most likely will take its place as the 39th state to ban texting while driving.

The Senate’s other major change to the legislation was a full ban on use of handheld electronic communications devices by drivers under the age of 18. Enforcement for teens does carry primary enforcement, with fines up to $300 and possible loss of license.

The secondary enforcement provision for adults means that police need another reason to stop and cite violators, such as weaving or speeding. Police will have to make an on-site determination if a driver appears to be under the age of 18 before making a stop.

State Reps. Rex Damschroder, R-Sandusky County, and Nancy Garland, D-New Albany, spearheaded the legislation.

Ohio’s General Assembly almost certainly has not concluded its debates over distracted driving. Similar laws passed in other states typically inspire bills calling for primary enforcement. And the new measure does not address cell phone use by adults, unless they are using the device to text.

The new law allows for stricter local laws. Cleveland, Toledo, Columbus, Delaware, Belpre, Berea and Zanesville are among the many Ohio cities that already banned texting & driving.

Cleveland is considering a ban on use of handheld cell phones by drivers.

The county that includes Cleveland (Cuyahoga) has been particularly hard hit by distracted driving accidents.

Gov. Robert Bentley signed off on the distracted driving legislation May 8. The law was a long time coming.

The bill’s author is state Rep. Jim McClendon, left, one of the nation’s most persistent lawmakers when it comes to distracted driving.

McClendon, R-Springville, saw his distracted driving legislation rejected or ignored at least six times. In 2011 and 2012, McClendon’s texting and driving bills cleared the House only to die in the Senate.

This year, the Senate played ball. A compromise deal was stuck April 26, with House Bill 2 winning unanimous approval in both houses of the Legislature.

For a state that was hesitant to pass a texting law, it gave its new law some teeth. The Alabama texting ban will receive primary enforcement. Fines are relatively low — $25 (first offense) then $50 and $75 — but convictions bring two points against the driver’s license.

Alabama becomes the 38th state to ban texting while driving. Drivers age 18 and above are allowed to use cell phones in the state, but teenagers are not.

McClendon said he understood the delay in getting a texting law: Alabama is a state big on its personal liberties, he said, not New York or California — and needed some time to come around.

State Rep. Alvin Holmes, D-Montgomery, was one of the lawmakers who opposed text messaging legislation in the past but voted for McClendon’s plan this year. “I saw a young lady come that close to death with an 18-wheeler because of texting,” he said after the key House vote.

It wasn’t certain that Gov. Bentley was going to sign the distracted driving bill when it emerged from the Legislature. He clearly was on board at the signing:

“It doesn’t take a lot of common sense to know that you can’t text and drive at the same time,” Bentley said. “I believe this will save lives.”

DOT chief Roy La Hood chimed in: “With Governor Bentley’s signature, now more than three-quarters of all states outlaw one of the riskiest behaviors behind the wheel — texting and driving.

“Alabama roads and motorists will be safer as a result of this law,” La Hood said.

Those who don’t probably have frequent talks with their parents about safety.

That’s the takeaway from a phone survey of 652 teens taken by Harris Interactive.

Almost six in 10 teenagers with driver’s licenses surveyed admitted to texting & driving.

The idea that texting behind the wheel is the new drunken driving didn’t find much support with the kids.

Of the 14- to 17-year-olds who have a license or plan to get one (almost all of the teens), 63 percent strongly agree they will get into an accident if they regularly text and drive. But they’re far more fearful of drinking and driving, with 83 percent agreeing that they’re likely to get into a crash if they regularly drink and drive.

35 percent of the teens said they probably would be killed if they persisted in texting and driving, compared with 57 percent who felt that way about drunken driving.

State Farm insurance, which backed the survey, said the numbers hadn’t changed much since its similar study in 2010. Media attention and education efforts regarding distracted driving have increased significantly in that two-year period.

More than 8 in 10 of the teens who said they didn’t text and drive reported that they talk with their parents about safe driving. Of the teens who said they do drive and text, more than 6 in 10 said they had those talks.

The study found that parent-teen interaction about safety declined significantly once the teens received their driver’s licenses, however. Teens with learners permits were twice as likely as those with full licenses to report safety talks with their parents.

The phone survey was conducted in early February. Of the 652 teens, 280 had some kind of license and 362 were about to do so.

Meanwhile, a Pew study of texting behaviors found that three-quarters of 12- to 17-year-olds text on cell phones, with the median number of messages put at 60 a day.

For older girls, the number was 100 messages a day. Use by older boys is on the way up, researchers said.

The study addressed overall text messaging behaviors, not distracted driving.

Only a third of the teens said they used land lines (traditional phones). 39 percent said they engaged in voice calling daily, compared with the 63 percent who text.

Related research:

• Teens, texting at night a deadly combo
• Adults match teenagers in texting and driving
• Distracted, dangerous and doing it anyway

Gov. Butch Otter signed the Legislature’s distracted driving measure April 5. The distracted driving law will receive primary enforcement — police can stop and cite offenders for that reason alone — but offenses are not moving violations. Also, there are no points assessed against the driver’s license.

The fine for texting & driving in Idaho will be $85.

Idaho became the 37th state to outlaw text messaging while driving, following West Virginia by only two days.

West Virginia also banned use of handheld cell phones while driving, but in Idaho a similar plan (from the Senate) was ignored during the legislative session, which officially ended March 29.

A few legislators pointed out that the new law did not adequately cover current technologies.

The successful Senate Bill 1274 focused on texting alone — reading, writing, transmitting — without mention of the many potentially distracted computer functions offered by smartphones such as the iPhone.

House sponsor Rep. Judy Ellsworth, R-Boise, replied during debate: “I do know that teenagers know what texting is, and I believe that this bill will send that message to them.”

Idaho’s Legislature had rejected all distracted driving legislation until now — with infringements on personal liberties often cited — but lawmakers acknowledged that public sentiment has changed.

The death of an 18-year-old Caldwell woman early in the year weighed on the debate. She was texting extensively before rear-ending a semi-trailer truck, and also receiving Facebook communications, police reported. Taylor Sauer’s parents became distracted driving activists.

A AAA Idaho survey of state voters found 87 percent in support of a statewide ban on texting while driving.

Also in 2012, state Sen. Les Bock proposed a prohibition on use of handheld cell phones by all drivers, but that bill failed to advance.

Read the Idaho distracted driving news page.

Drivers will be barred from all cell phone conversations, including those conducted via hands-free and voice-activated accessories. The law takes effect June 1 and the fine is $25.

The town provided “some real leadership” on the distracted driving issue, the head of the National Transportation Safety Board said in response.

The Chapel Hill law isn’t as groundbreaking as it may appear, however.

The new law presents two significant loopholes for those who can’t go without driving and talking: Enforcement is secondary, meaning police will need another reason to stop and cite violators. And the ordinance has an unusual provision allow cell phone calls to immediate family members.

“This isn’t really banning talking on cell phones, it’s banning talking on a cell phone if you’ve done something noticeably bad with your vehicle,” council member Ed Harrison pointed out before the 5-4 vote taken March 26.

Another council member, Donna Bell, said the ordinance did not go far enough, calling it “a first step … a conversation that needs to be continued.” The town police chief recommended the secondary-enforcement limits.

Evanston, Ill., is considering a total ban on cell phone use while driving with primary enforcement. The Chicago suburb’s plan, if approved by the City Council in April, would be the nation’s most restrictive distracted driving law.

Still, NTSB chairwoman Deborah Hersman hailed the decision during a meeting in Washington. “It demonstrates some real leadership. If we don’t do something, it’s going to be too late.” The NTSB issued a controversial call for total cell phone bans late last year.

On March 12, the Chapel Hill council deadlocked on what the mayor called the “driving while yakking ordinance.” The council member with the deciding vote was absent at the time.

There are concerns that the ordinance could run afoul of state laws, and the town earlier received an opinion from the state attorney general’s office that its move would be improper. Local distracted driving laws increasingly are facing court challenges.

Chapel Hill’s move no doubt will be noted in Detroit. Council member Laurin Easthom noted that the ordinance covers high-tech dashboards that offer hands-free and voice-activated cell phone calling. (Easthom voted against the law.) Exemptions for the new-breed of wireless, Internet-connected dashboards are becoming common in states’ distracted driving legislation.

Both Bell and Harrison said they would have preferred action by North Carolina lawmakers. “I’m sorry to say we have a decade or so before the state takes this up in any meaningful way,” Harrison said.

Bell said she hoped the Chapel Hill move would inspire state lawmakers: “If they take on the example of little Chapel Hill I would be perfectly happy with that.”

North Carolina already bans all cell phone use by teen drivers and school bus drivers. (The teen law also permits conversations with parents.) Texting also is prohibited while driving.

Chapel Hill has a large student population due to the presence of the University of North Carolina. The town ordinance cites “the large numbers of pedestrians walking and running and the large numbers of cyclists riding along and across the public streets.”

Harrison, a cycling hobbyist, said in his experience the roadway dangers came not from drivers putting on makeup or eating, but from those using cell phones.

The governor’s advocacy proved to be the key to breaking the state’s long deadlock over distracted driving, with the Legislature approving his plan to outlaw text messaging and the use of handheld cell phones for those operating motor vehicles.

(Update: Tombin signed the West Virginia distracted driving legislation into law on April 3. This article originally posted March 10, 2012.)

As time expired on the legislative session late March 10, the House and Senate reached a compromise on their dueling versions of Tomblin’s bill. The Mountain State’s distracted driving law takes effect July 1.

West Virginia becomes the 36th state to ban texting & driving, once Tomblin signs his own legislation. (View the West Virginia distracted driving news page.)

Fines are $100 (first offense), then $200, then $300. Three points will be assessed against driver’s license on third and subsequent violations.

The House and Senate rewrites of Tomblin’s bill differed primarily on the matter of enforcement. The House wanted primary enforcement for both texting & handheld cell phone use, in order to help police carry out the law. The Senate version, however, had texting as a primary offense and handheld cell phone use as a secondary one.

In the end, they compromised by delaying primary enforcement of the cell phone law for a year.

And so police in West Virginia can stop and cite drivers who text as of this July 1. Handheld cell phone users cannot be stopped solely for that violation until July 1, 2013, but they can be cited in connection with other offenses, such as speeding or crossing center lines.

Legislators have gone back and forth on a handheld cell phone ban since at least 2008.

Tomblin, pictured, first proposed the plan that became Senate Bill 211 in his State of the State address in January. His measure called for secondary enforcement of both offenses, but his office signaled support for tougher enforcement throughout the legislative process.

“The texting part really takes your eyes off the road,” Tomblin told the Charleston Gazette. “That was more important, but I’m fine with what they worked out.”

A late amendment requires the state Department of Transportation to post advisory signs on highways at the state’s borders.

Outlawed activities include using smartphones to access the Internet and to play games.

In the two years following the July 2008 adoption of the distracted driving law, handheld cell phone driver deaths decreased 47 percent, the Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC) at the University of California, Berkeley, found.

Similar reductions occurred in the number of injuries, as well as deaths associated with cell phone use with hands-free accessories, SafeTREC said. Overall, California traffic deaths fell 22 percent in the two-year period, compared with the two years before the handheld cell phone law took effect.

“These results suggest that the law banning handheld cell phone use while driving had a positive impact on reducing traffic fatalities and injuries,” said David Ragland, director of SafeTREC.

A few widely publicized studies have questioned the effectiveness of cell phone bans. The Highway Loss Data Institute reported in early 2010 that auto insurance collision claims remained about the same in California and a few other states after they adopted bans on the use of handheld cell phones. (The study only reported on newer vehicles and did not include accidents in which no claims were made.)

The California DMV says there were 460,487 handheld cell phone convictions in 2011, up 22 percent compared with 2010 (361,260 convictions) and up 52 percent from 2009 (301,833).

“Highly visible and publicized enforcement, along with the cooperation of the motoring public to reduce distractions behind the wheel, has played a significant role in the reduction in collisions,” said California Highway Patrol Commissioner Joe Farrow.

Read the California Office of Traffic Safety news release on handheld cell phone death statistics (PDF). OTS funds SafeTREC distracted driving research and educational initiatives. OTS, created by the Legislature, exists mainly to funnel federal highway safety grants to state and local programs.

The electronic distraction guidelines include a call to automakers to block text messaging, Internet browsing and social-media use while the vehicle is not stopped and parked. There is also a 2-second limit on driver activity that requires taking their eyes off the road.

Drivers would not be able to manually enter the standard 10-digit phone numbers. GPS address entry would not be allowed while the vehicle is in motion.

The DOT took its time with the driver distraction guidelines, courting automakers and watching their competitive development of dashboard electronics over the past several years. The guidelines will be the first from the government.

Automakers have been closely watched participants at the annual Consumer Electronics Show as they unveiled Internet-based technologies that operate via the dashboard and vehicle controls. They promote elements such as tie-ins with the Facebook social media service.

“These guidelines are a major step forward in identifying real solutions to tackle the issue of distracted driving for drivers of all ages,” DOT chief Ray La Hood said of the highly anticipated directive from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The DOT said the advisory was “the first in a series of guidance documents” regarding “sources of distraction that require use of the hands and/or diversion of the eyes from the primary task of driving.”

The guidelines are directed at “light” vehicles such as passenger cars, minivans and SUVs. Interstate truckers and some other commercial drivers are subject to new government regulations regarding electronic distractions.

Here are the general distracted driving guidelines for automakers, as issued by the DOT:

• Reduce complexity and task length required by the device;
• Limit device operation to one hand only (leaving the other hand to remain on the steering wheel to control the vehicle);
• Limit individual off-road glances required for device operation to no more than two seconds in duration;
• Limit unnecessary visual information in the driver’s field of view;
• Limit the amount of manual inputs required for device operation.

One interesting item is a 30-character limit (not including punctuation marks) on visually presented text. This would affect most existing satellite radio receivers.

NHTSA chief David Strickland noted that some automakers already were in tune with the electronic distraction issue, others “that have no strategy at all.” BMW, for instance, has collaborated with the DOT on distraction campaigns.

Acknowledging the consumer demand for 24/7 wireless infotainment — “the tools and conveniences expected by today’s American drivers” — Strickland vowed “real-world guidance to automakers.”

The NHTSA is considering a similar action regarding “aftermarket and portable personal electronic devices such as navigation systems, smart phones, electronic tablets and pads, and other mobile communications devices.” Use of most of these devices by drivers are widely regulated.

Also on the radar are “voice-activated controls to further minimize distraction in factory-installed, aftermarket, and portable devices.”

The proposed guidelines have been published in the public register and are subject to a 60-day comment period that will include public hearings in Washington, Chicago and Los Angeles.

Overall, law enforcement officers wrote almost 120,000 electronic distracted driving tickets in the seven months from July 12, 2011, to Feb. 7, 2012.

Text messaging violations saw the most significant increase, to 7,495 tickets. A new state law made text messaging subject to primary enforcement, while a DMV policy added a third point against the driver’s license of electronic distracted driving violators.

The bulk of the citations since July — 111,262 — were for handheld cell phone use (and to a minor extent other non-texting uses of wireless devices). That infraction already was subject to primary enforcement.

“These tickets should send a resounding message to all drivers: Keep your eyes on the road and your hands on the wheel,” said Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who pushed through the state’s tougher distracted driving rules last summer.

New York’s distracted driving law rewrite (resulting from bills S5643 and A8106) did not increase penalties for violators — just increased the chances of their being pulled over and cited. The fine for violations remains at $150.

The state promoted the hike in texting tickets, which made sense but wasn’t an apples-to-apples comparison. (The numbers were worked up in connection with a distracted driving hearing in Albany earlier this week.)

In the 6 1/2 months before the new New York rules took effect, 2,691 tickets were issued for texting vs. the 7,495 tickets in the seven months after the get-tough actions. For the full year 2010, 3,248 tickets were issued.

Handheld cell phone ticketing appeared to be down, although the state did not compare those figures. The 111,262-ticket mark since July 2011 is not on track to top the 332,000 citations of 2010.

In New York City, 69,211 cell phone tickets were handed out since July 12. Text messaging tickets totaled 3,509. The most tickets were written in Manhattan and Brooklyn.

Of the counties, Suffolk had the biggest share of cell phone tickets since July (5,355) while Erie had the most texting tickets (662).

A week after that federal ban on handheld cell phone use went into effect, the trucking industry seems to have the issue in its rear-view mirror. But some truckers still want to know why professional drivers are being singled out.

“I am so tired of hearing, ‘The feds can’t do anything with four-wheelers,’” one pro wrote in an industry forum. “If they’re gonna travel the same roads I do, they can follow the same laws.”

Lyndon Finney, editor of the industry publication the Trucker, told Hands Free Info: “Truckers are concerned, of course, about the use of cell phones by passenger vehicle drivers since data show that about 75 percent of truck-related accidents are caused by the action of the passenger vehicle driver.”

Another forum complaint went: “There needs to be a ban on everyone to ensure fair and equal treatment and application of the law. Come on, lawsuits.”

And: “This is the stuff shutdowns are made of.”

Cell phone use by the public remains legal in most of the U.S., but nine states have banned handheld use. In California, for instance, a motorist who was a first offender would be fined $20 (plus fees). Interstate commercial truck drivers now face fines of up to $2,750 for each offense. “(That) puts me in bankruptcy,” one trucker said.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, which made the trucking rule, does not have officers out writing tickets, so enforcement will be dependent on state and local authorities, who may or may not have local laws against cell phone use. A few states such as Missouri gave notice that they would be enforcing the federal trucking law.

The ruling does not apply to all commercial drivers. The regulation targets drivers of large commercial vehicles involved in interstate commerce, and those hauling dangerous materials. A small-business delivery vehicle, for example, wouldn’t be included. (Read the commercial trucking cell phone rules.)

“When drivers of large trucks, buses and hazardous materials take their eyes off the road for even a few seconds, the outcome can be deadly,” said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. He said he hopes the rule will result in drivers being “laser-focused on safety at all times while behind the wheel.” 

For most of the industry, though, it was business as usual when the federal rule went into effect with the new year.

The American Trucking Association, for instance, supports the federal action.

“The trucking industry in general favors the ban on use of hand-held cell phones while the truck is in motion, and probably is divided equally on the issue of a ban of the use of hands-free devices,” industry journalist Finney said.

Many large commercial companies already have policies against cell phone use by their drivers, including UPS and Wal-Mart.

“It’s a regulation, in an industry full of regulations,” one trucker shrugged.

Driver Ray Nickels of Marshfield, Mo., said: “Were an altogether different species. It’s just something we have to learn to live with. We will be treated differently than anybody else because we are professionals and we are under a microscope all the time because we are the biggest ones out there. When something goes wrong, we are usually the ones there whether we did anything or not, we are the ones who get seen.”

Some drivers brought up the use of CB radios, which have not been restricted: “The CB is way more distracting/annoying than a cell phone,” one pro wrote.

Another trucker noted: “Plenty of accidents have been caused by drivers using the CB. There is no ‘record’ of use during an accident so any feel-good legislation simply doesn’t have the same bang for the buck as cell phone laws do.”

The hands-free question will be moot soon enough, Finney predicted: “There is little doubt that the day is not too far away that in-dash electronic technology will become common and allow a driver to make and receive voice-activated cell phone calls without taking his or her hands off the steering wheel.”

Safety seemed to be the bottom line for some of the pros:

“Talking on a cell phone while driving is nothing but a distraction,” said Charles Isaacs of
South Carolina. “I don’t do it. I tried it and I couldn’t do it. I couldn’t keep my mind focused on what I was doing. I don’t see how other people do it.”

Another pro wrote during a forum debate: “IMO, this should have been addressed a long time ago. We are the professionals and should know better.”

And: “I don’t care if you are driving a CMV (commercial motor vehicle), a car, a bike, a horse & buggy — if you feel the need to talk while you’re driving get a hands-free device.”