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.

Nah. “What I’ve been doing is kind of honking at somebody if I see him on a cellphone,” LaHood told WROP radio the other day.

He calls drivers who use cell phones or text “my biggest source of irritation.”

LaHood told the radio station it was his way of “taking personal responsibility” in the war against electronic distracted driving.

Never mind that vehicle horns should be reserved for alerting others to roadway danger, not telling off fellow drivers. Any traffic school graduate can tell you that.

May we suggest the one-finger salute, Mr. Secretary?

While the Legislature didn’t specifically address use of handheld electronics at stop lights, the First District Court of Appeal ruled Nov. 14 that the statute writers’ intent was to include vehicles on public roadways that are paused momentarily to obey traffic laws.

The judges cited “significant and numerous public safety hazards that likely would result” if they agreed with the defendant’s claim that the distracted driving laws did not apply to “fleeting” traffic stops.

Carl Nelson originally appealed his traffic court conviction in Contra Costa County Superior Court. Nelson, a lawyer, is expected to carry the case to the California Supreme Court.

Nelson, who was fined $103 for the 2009 incident, has said he hopes his appeals will provide clarity on the California distracted driving laws.

The three-judge panel, however, said matters were quite clear. “Defendant listened to his hand-held wireless telephone during a fleeting pause at a traffic light ‘while driving’ in Richmond and, therefore, violated section 23123, subdivision (a) (of the state traffic statutes).”

The California distracted driving law of 2007 reads: “A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and is used in that manner while driving.”

Nelson’s case was based, in part, on a DUI case in which the state Supreme Court made a distinction between the terms “drive” and “operate.” The First District Court of Appeal judges said that ruling did not address “fleeting stops made while driving” and that the Legislature was not addressing any issues raised in the DUI case (Mercer v. Department of Motor Vehicles).

The appeals court judges said a ruling in Nelson’s favor “would open the door to millions of people across our state repeatedly picking up their phones and devices to place phone calls and check voicemail (or text-based messages) every day while driving whenever they are paused momentarily in traffic.”

The ruling applies to the separate statute against text messaging and use of handheld electronic devices while driving, the judges wrote.

In 2011, the full Senate approved a plan to prohibit text messaging by all drivers in Mississippi, but the House didn’t agree. Senate Bill 2793 died in committee in the House on March 8.

Almost 20 bills were filed for the 2011 legislative session concerning drivers’ use of cell phones and text messaging. All but one “died in committee.” Critics call the House Judiciary Committee (A&B) a “graveyard” for distracted driving bills.

Current prohibitions:

• Text messaging prohibited for drivers with an intermediate license, a temporary learning permit or a temporary driving permit. Fines up to $500; if accident results, $1,000.
• Bus drivers barred from using a wireless communications device if a minor is on board.

Distracted driving legislation (2012):
SB 2121: Would ban texting while driving and use of handheld cell phones for all drivers. Drivers under the age of 18 would be prohibited from using cell phones of any kind. Fines up to $500; if accident results, $1,000. (Hudson)

SB 2122: Would outlaw text messaging while driving in Mississippi. Fines up to $500; if accident results, $1,000. (Butler)

SB 2240: Would outlaw text messaging. Appears identical to SB 2122. (Collins)

Distracted driving notes (2012):
Sen. Billy Hudson, R-Purvis, says of his state’s reluctance to adopt distracted driving safeguards for all drivers: “We’re usually last, and it looks like we’re going to be last again. … So, many other states have taken the lead.”

Sen. Nancy Collins, R-Tupelo, said she filed the texting & driving measure SB 2240 after being lobbied by a high school student.

The Mississippi Department of Public Safety says it has no record of a cell phone-related crash.

2011 distracted driving law:
SB 2472: “Nathan’s Law,” part of a broader bill that seeks to improve school bus safety. Would prohibit the use of handheld electronic devices while driving on school property when school is in session. Directs schools to post signs warning of ban. Passenger bus drivers would be barred from using a wireless communications device if a minor is on board. Fines: Up to $500 or $1,000 if an accident results. (See HB 551, below.) Approved by the Senate in a unanimous vote taken Jan. 14. Approved by the House on March 1. Sent to conference committee, which removed the Senate’s provision that drivers not use cell phones in school zones. The House and Senate gave final approval on March 28. Latest action: Signed by the governor on April 4. (McDaniel)

View 2011′s inactive (dead) legislation.

2011 distracted driving notes:
Only two lawmakers voted against the anti-texting plan SB 2793: Sens. Merle Flowers, R-Southaven, and Chris McDaniel, R-Ellisville. The measure was approved by the full Senate and transmitted to the House. “This bill is not a cell phone bill, but I feel like we must start somewhere,” said Sen. Billy Hudson, R-Hattiesburg, who saw his SB 2114 defeated in committee. The bill died in the House, anyway.

The school bus safety bill dubbed “Nathan’s Law” was signed into law by the governor. One of its provisions bans school bus drivers from using handheld communications devices while transporting a minor. The Senate’s approved SB 2472 prohibited the use of cell phones while driving through school zones, but that was contested by the House, as in 2010. The final version out of a conference committee removed the school zone element.

The name “Nathan’s Law” could lead to confusion in 2011. Nathan was a 5-year-old killed by a driver who failed to stop for a school bus. The family-backed legislation, SB 2472, restricts use of wireless communications devices on school property and by bus drivers. Rep. Ed Blackmon, D-Canton, has filed HB 551, which uses Nathan’s name but seeks only to regulate wireless communications device by bus drivers. Both bills address broader issues concerning school safety.

SB 2472 sponsor Sen. Chris McDaniel, R-Ellisville, calls Blackmon’s legislation “a so-called and unexpected version of Nathan’s Law” that weakens existing safety laws. The two bills essentially renew the Senate and House dispute of last year, which centered on the handheld device provisions. Read more about the Nathan’s Law controversy. (See 2010′s SB 2505, below.)

Mississippi leads the nation in number of teenage driving fatalities, one study shows.

Senate Bill 2793: Would outlaw text messaging by all drivers in Mississippi. Fines: up to $500 and $1,000 if an accident results. Latest action: Approved by the full Senate in a near-unanimous vote on Feb. 3 and sent to the House. Died in committee in the House on March 8. (Butler)

House Bill 551: Passenger bus drivers would be barred from using a wireless communications device if a minor is on board. Fines: Up to $500 or up to $1,000 if an accident results. Part of a broader bill addressing school bus safety. Also billed by sponsor as “Nathan’s Law.” Latest action: Approved by the House in a unanimous vote on Jan. 12. Assigned to Senate Judiciary panel, where the bill died on March 1. (Blackmon)

House Bill 52: Would outlaw text messaging and use of Internet while driving. Fines: Up to $100, $500 if accident occurs. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Broomfield)

HB 125: Would ban use of handheld cell phones while driving. Hands-free OK. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Mayo)

HB 324: An act that would restrict “regulation of inattentive driving and cellular phone usage” to the state. All existing local distracted driving laws would be nullified. The state apparently would have the option of approving local laws. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Denny)

HB 684: Would make use of handheld cell phones illegal while driving. Hands-free devices OK. Fine of $150 for first offense then $300 (if within three years of first offense), then $500 and possibility of jail time and community service. Latest action: Died in committee Feb. 1. (Clarke)

HB 685: Seeks to prohibit drivers from text messaging and otherwise using the Internet. Fines: Up to $500, $1,000 if an accident results. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Clarke)

HB 840: Would have applied text messaging ban to all drivers. Fine: $25. Died in committee Feb. 1.

HB 1191: Would have upped reckless driving penalties if a wireless communications device was the cause. Fines: $100/$750/$1,500 plus possibility of jail time on third and subsequent offenses. Died in committee Feb. 1. (McGee)

HB 1213: Sought to outlaw drivers’ use of cell phones unless a hands-free attachment were employed. FInes: $150 (first) then $300 and $500. Possibility of jail time and community service on third and subsequent offenses. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Espy)

HB 1226: Would have prohibited text messaging and related Internet activity by drivers. Unusual provision would have made enforcement secondary for first year and a half and then primary. Fines $100 or $500 if accident results. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Banks)

HB 1228: Would have outlawed use of handheld cell phones by drivers. Enforcement secondary for first year and a half and then primary. Fines $100 or $500 if accident results. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Banks)

HB 1229: Would have outlawed cell phoning and text messaging unless operation is hands-free. Enforcement secondary for 18 months and then primary. Fines $100 or $500 if accident results. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Banks)

HB 1316: Would have prohibited text messaging while driving. Fines $100 or $500 if accident results. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Evans)

SB 2033: Would bar drivers from text messaging on Mississippi roads and highways. Teen drivers under the age of 18 would be prohibited from using cell phones. Fines: Up to $500, $1,000 if an accident results. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Tollison)

SB 2114: Seeks to ban drivers’ use of handheld cell phones and texting. Hands-free cell phones OK. Teen drivers under the age of 18 would be barred from using all cell phones. Fines: Up to $100, $500 if accident occurs. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Hudson)

SB 2165: Would have banned text messaging by all motorists (see SB 2793, above). Fines: $500 or $1,000 if an accident results. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Butler)

SB 2648: Sought to ban text messaging by all drivers. Fines: $500 or $1,000 if an accident results. Died in committee Feb. 1. (Gollott)

2010 distracted driving notes:
State Sen. Kelvin Butler said that when the Legislature returns in January 2011, he’ll again propose a bill seeking to outlaw text messaging while driving in Mississippi. He was the driving force behind the state’s current law against texting while driving with a restricted license (below).

Butler, D-Magnolia, says he’s “currently soliciting the support of my Senate and House colleagues so we can unanimously adopt this (new text messaging) law.” The state senator said the plan will “give law enforcement the legal tools needed to ticket violators.” He’s also seeking input from the telecommunications industry.

Senate Judiciary Committee chief Gray Tollison, D-Oxford, supports a ban on all text messaging while driving. The Department of Public Safety will ask for broader restrictions as well.

A few legislators have expressed concerns about giving police new reasons to pull over motorists, given Mississippi’s past problems with racial profiling. SImilar fears have been voiced occasionally in other states.

Nathan’s Law was introduced by Sen. Chris McDaniel, R-Ellisville. After the House rejected his distracted-driving provisions on March 2, McDaniel held a news conference with supporters urging the bans be reinstated. Many of the supporters were wearing T-shirts of Nathan Key, the boy named in the bill who was killed while leaving a school bus. House committee chairman Ed Blackmon, D-Canton, said it would be too difficult for cell-phoning drivers to know that they were in a school zone. The bill died March 27.

Nathan’s Law stalemate: “There is absolutely no way we will agree with this watered down version,” Sen. Chris McDaniel, R-Ellisville, said March 24 as hopes for a compromise bill faded. He said Blackmon’s version in the House is “weaker than our current law” and seeks to remove jail terms from its penalties.

2010 session legislation (all dead):
Senate Bill 2505: “Nathan’s Law” seeks to increase school bus safety. As approved by the Senate, included a ban on handheld cell phone use by those driving through in a school crossing zone as well as a ban on school bus drivers’ use of wireless communications devices. These two distracted-driving elements were removed in the House Judiciary A Committee before the bill’s approval by the full House on March 2. A compromise committee began work on the bill March 18, with senators arguing for the hands-free cell phone element. Died in conference March 27. (McDaniel)

SB 2595: Would outlaw text messaging for all drivers using Mississippi roads and highways. Drivers under the age of 18 would be banned from any cell phone use. Fines up to $500; up to $1,000 if accident results. Approved by Senate Judiciary Committee on Feb. 2 and then by the full Senate on Feb. 12. Sent to the House Transportation Committee. “Died in committee.” (Tollison)

House Bill 973: Would ban text messaging while operating a vehicle. Drivers must use hands-free devices in order to use a cell phone. Fines up to $100/$500 if an accident results. Approved by the House Transportation Committee on Feb. 2, 2010. Died in committee Feb. 11. (Broomfield)

SB 2107: Would prohibit text messaging and use of handheld cell phones while driving on state roads and highways. Drivers under the age of 18 would be prohibited from all cell phone use, regardless of whether a hands-free accessory was employed. Fines up to $500 or $1,000 if an accident results from the violation. Also requires law officers to note cell phone use or texting while writing accident reports. Died in committee Feb. 2. (Hudson)

SB 2114: Same as SB 2107 (above). Dead as of Feb. 2. (Yancey)

SB 3051: Would have prohibited text messaging by all drivers. Handheld cell phone use by drivers over 18. All cell phone use by drivers under 18. Fines from $100 to $500, $1,000 if accident results. Dead as of Feb. 2. (Gollott)

2009 session legislation:
SB 2280 (signed into law): Will prohibit text messaging for drivers with learner’s permits or intermediate licenses. OK’d by House and Senate and signed by the governor on April 6. (Texting provisions are in an amendment.)

Violators of the text messaging law for inexperienced drivers will be fined up to $500 for each infraction and up to $1,000 if an accident occurs in connection with the texting.

Gov. Haley Barbour on why he signed the teen text messaging legislation: “Having an inexperienced driver take his or her attention from the road to send a text message is just an accident waiting to happen. Frankly, no one, regardless of their age or experience, should be texting and driving.”

Mississippi rates worst in the percentage of teenage driving fatalities, with a rate of 35 deaths per 100,000 population over the past decade, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports.

SB 2280 almost died in the Senate, losing by one vote on March 24, but it then was reconsidered and approved the next day.

SB 2332: Would have prohibited text messaging and use of handheld cell phones while driving. (Also SB 2060.) Died in committee Feb. 3, 2009.

SB 3020: Would have banned text messaging while driving. Died in committee Feb. 3, 2009.

HB 672: Would have prohibited text messaging and use of handheld cell phones while driving. Died in committee Feb. 3, 2009.

SB 2097: Would have outlawed use of wireless communications devices by drivers with provisional licenses as well as motorcyclists under the age of 19. Died in committee Feb. 3, 2009.

Cell phone legislation notes (2009 and before):
The Senate’s proposed ban on texting by young drivers survived a House vote seeking to remove it from SB 2280 on March 10, 2009. The text messaging bill survived another close Senate vote later in the month, but was approved. Sen. Kelvin Butler, D-Magnolia, is the sponsor of SB 2280.

Violators of the texting ban proposed by SB 2280 could be fined up to $500 for each infraction and up to $1,000 if the young driver is involved in an accident while texting.

Senate backers of the teen-texting bill said there was not enough support for a full ban on text messaging by all drivers, but one is possible next year.

State Senate Pro Tempore Billy Hewes, R-Gulfport, stumped for the text messaging amendment to SB 2280: “This legislation is a good first step. It is our role as leaders to step in where there is an absence of policy. … Texting while driving is just too dangerous for anyone at any age.” The state Department of Public Safety backs the texting-while-driving bill, as does the cell phone carrier Cellular South.

SB 2105, which died in committee in 2008, would have prohibited use of wireless devices by drivers with temporary permits or intermediate licenses. And banned use of wireless devices by motorcycle operators under the age of 18.

A bill to prohibit use of cell phones by drivers with a learner permit or intermediate license died in committee in 2007 (HB 217)

Current prohibitions:
No statewide limits on cell phones except for their use by driving students and drivers of state vehicles.

Local ordinances restrict driving while cell phoning and/or texting in Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Las Cruces, Gallup, Taos and Espanola.

Distracted driving notes (2011):
Las Cruces’ ban on handheld cell phone use while driving went into effect in February 2010. As of April 2011, almost 1,100 drivers received tickets for violations. The Las Cruces Sun-News pointed out in an editorial that the total number of distracted driving citations translated to fewer than three tickets a day: “That’s pretty dismal enforcement. … All you have to do is ride around town for a while and count the number of drivers you see who have phones glued to their ears.” Mayor Ken Miyagishima said he saw a reduction in cell phone use, however. “I knew when we put in the ordinance we weren’t going to have 100 percent compliance,” he told the Sun-News.

State Rep. Antonio Lujan tried again in 2011 with the distacted driving measure HB 197. “I have introduced this bill for a few years now because I find it to be an important public safety measure,” he said. “This will ultimately save lives.” The bill found success in the House but not in the Senate, where it died late in the session.

Lujan, D-Las Cruces, has been working for distracted driving legislation for at least five years, including last year’s kitchen-sink HB 10 (below), which was approved by the House and backed by the governor. This year he’s looking for success with a plan that’s limited to texting: “This is a simple, straightforward bill,” he says of HB 197.

“I haven’t given up on a bill to ban cell phones,” Lujan said after the House vote to approve his HB 197.

The original punishments for texting while driving in HB 197 were $25-$100 (first offense), $50-$1,000 (second). Possibility of jail time ranging from five days to six months. Possible license suspension.

2011 distracted driving legislation:
House Bill 197 (substitute): Seeks to ban text messaging while driving. Fine: $25. House Judiciary Committee created and approved this substitute bill that slashed the original bill’s fines. The substitute bill was approved by the House in a 58-7 vote on March 1 and sent to the Senate, where it was approved by the Judiciary Committee in a 6-0 vote on March 17. Current status: “Action postponed indefinitely,” meaning bill died in Senate. (Lujan)

2010 legislation (dead):
HB 10: Would ban handheld cell phone use by drivers, text messaging and similar wireless communications. Hands-free operation OK. Train operators banned from all cell phone use. School bus operators cannot use cell phones except for official business. Fines for drivers $25. Approved by the House in a 35-30 vote on Feb. 9, 2010 and sent to the Senate Public Affairs Committee. (Lujan, Garcia)

SB 89: Would outlaw text messaging while driving in New Mexico. Fines $50 then $100. Approved by the Judiciary Committee on Feb. 8. (Fischmann) (Also SB 188 by Lovejoy)

2010 legislation notes:
Gov. Bill Richardson has called distracted drivers “a menace to our streets.” (He left office in early 2010, replaced by Susana Martinez.)

Richardson backed HB 10, which would ban use of handheld wireless communications devices for all drivers. “We’ve all seen drivers swerving around the road while talking on the phone and texting, putting the safety and lives of New Mexicans in danger,” Richardson said Dec. 15.

Violators under HB 10 would have been fined $250 in the original bill, but that was cut to $25 in committee.

2009 legislation:
HB 301 would prohibit text messaging while operating a motor vehicle. Approved by the New Mexico House on Feb. 26 and sent to the Senate.

SB 341: Would ban reading, writing and sending text messages while driving. (Appears identical to HB 301.) Approved by the Senate on March 5 and sent to the House.

2009 legislation notes:
Rep. Lujan introduced HB 301, which would outlaw text messaging while operating a motor vehicle. The bill was approved in the House on a 35-24 vote but did not advance in the Senate. It called for a $100 fine per violation, high for the state. “(Texting while behind the wheel) seems to be much more hazardous and becoming more and more prevalent,” Lujan said.

Sen. Lynda Lovejoy, D-Crownpoint, authored the Senate version of the text messaging legislation. “I have young adult children, and I have a whole slew of nieces and nephews, and when I travel with them it is very frightening when they use their text messaging,” she said. The bill was approved in the Senate on a 22-15 vote.

Local cell phone/texting laws:

Bosque Farms’ city council and mayor are considering a draft ordinance that would outlaw text messaging and the use of handheld cell phones while driving. After changes penciled in on a Dec. 22, 2010, working session, a vote is expected in early 2011.

Las Cruces’ ban on text messaging and use of handheld cell phones hasn’t made much of an impact, apparently. The Sun-News reports the law “is being blatantly and flagrantly ignored.” The newspaper’s editorial writer asks, “Why isn’t this law being enforced? … Drivers all over the city are motoring around with cell phones firmly pressed against their ears.”

The Las Cruces distracted driving ordinance went into effect Feb. 4, 2010. The City Council approved the plan Dec. 7, 2009.

Espanola‘s ban on drivers’ use of handheld cell phones is in effect as of July 1, 2009. Police chief Julian Gonzales had this advice for citizens: “Stay off the phone, quit texting, drive your vehicle, pull over if you have to.”

The Gallup city council voted Dec. 11, 2008, to punish distracted driving resulting from text messaging, cell phones, applying make-up, etc.

Santa Fe’s local ban on use of hand-held cell phones while driving survived an attempted repeal on June 9, 2008. Councilors voted 6-2 to keep the ordinance, first enacted in 2001. The city is averaging 124 tickets a month, the Santa Fe New Mexican reported.

Councilor Rebecca Wurzburger wants to hike the fine from $100 to $500: “We should experiment with expanding this law, not retracting it,” she said. Other councilors said they would support extending the ban to all use of cell phones while driving, including those with hands-free devices.

Previous legislation:
The Legislature considered a ban on cell phone use without a hands-free device in 2006, but the legislation failed to clear committee.

Nebraska’s ban on texting while driving calls for only “secondary enforcement.” It took effect July 1, 2010.

The author of the current texting law, Sen. John Harms of Scottsbluff, says he’ll return with legislation that would make text messaging a primary offense. “I think in order to make (the texting law) truly effective that’s what’s going to have to happen,” he told the Columbus Telegram. No legislation was filed as of the session’s 2012 opening.

No distracted driving legislation was considered during the 2011 legislative session.

Current prohibitions:

• Text messaging outlawed for all drivers on Nebraska’s roads and highways. Fines $200-$500 plus 3 points against driver’s license.
• Drivers under the age of 18 with learner’s permits or other intermediate licenses are prohibited from using cell phones.

Read Nebraska’s text messaging statute.

Distracted driving legislation (2012):
Nebraska Legislative Bill 875: Would prohibit use of handheld communications devices while driving through school crossing zones and work/construction zones. Would apply primary enforcement to violations by drivers with learner’s permits or other intermediate licenses (teenagers). Fines (same as texting): $200 (first), then $300 and then $500 plus 3 points. (Howard)

2011 distracted driving notes:
The Nebraska Office of Highway Safety says 1,119 crashes related to cell phone use occurred between 2002 and 2010. Six people were killed and 484 were injured. About a third of those accidents involved teen drivers. More than 80 cell phone-related crashes were logged in the first half of 2011.

2010 distracted driving legislation:
Nebraska Legislative Bill 945: Would outlaw text messaging by all drivers. Secondary offense. Fines $200 for first offense; $300 for second; and $500 plus three points on the motorist’s license for subsequent violations. Approved by the Transportation and Telecommunications Committee on March 2 and then, finally, by the full Legislature on April 8 (38-2-9 vote). The measure was sent to Gov. Dave Heineman, who signed it into law on April 13. (Harms)

2010 Nebraska legislation notes:
State Sen. John Harms is the author of Legislative Bill 945. It is the senator’s follow-up to his successful campaign to ban teens from texting and using cell phones while behind the wheel. Heineman vetoed the previous distracted driving measure for teens, but was overridden.

March 16′s first-round vote on the 2010 texting bill was 27-19 — with only two “yes” votes to spare over what is needed for passage.

An earlier Associated Press survey of Nebraska state legislators found 22 of them in favor of a texting ban. Five were opposed. (Six were unsure and 16 did not respond.)

A man who lost his 16-year-old daughter in an accident linked to another teen’s distracted driving testified Feb. 9 in support of LB 945. “I’m sure you wouldn’t want to tell me (in case of a death), ‘I’m sorry, I was just making a very important call. I was just dialing,” Rob Reynolds said. The transportation committee approved the bill March 2.

Previous legislation notes:
The ban on young drivers’ use of cell phones was enacted despite the governor’s veto. The bill was LB 415.

Sen. Norm Wallman, Cortland, who opposed LB 415, said the law shouldn’t apply to just teenagers. He told the World Herald that he would support a bill prohibiting all drivers from using cell phones.

“I figured if we are going to restrict teenagers we should restrict us all,” he said. “I’m definitely against texting.”

“Technology is getting ahead of us,” said former state Sen. Jim Cudaback of Riverdale, who sponsored an unsuccessful 2006 bill to prohibit cell phone use while driving. “(Legislative bills) shouldn’t be reactive but proactive.

“Nebraska is conservative, so some senators may need to see a need for this law before they approve it,’” he said. He introduced a similar bill in 2001.

National Transportation Safety Board representative Kathryn Higgins testified before a Nebraska Legislature panel in 2006, urging limits on cell phone use by young drivers.