Reps. Les Gara and Bill Thomas on Jan. 6 filed the bipartisan legislation House Bill 255, which would remove any doubt that texting and driving is illegal in Alaska.

The ambiguous wording of Alaska’s 2008 prohibition on texting & driving came back to haunt legislators when a magistrate in tiny Kenai ruled that the state needed to be more precise with the distracted driving law. The magistrate noted correctly that its wording never actually refers to “text messaging.”

Instead, Alaska Statute Section 28.35.161 created “the crime of driving with a screen device operating” under which cell phone users are exempt for purposes of “verbal communication.”

Magistrate Jennifer Wells dismissed a texting & driving case in December 2011, saying: “If the Alaska legislature wanted to prohibit texting, then it should have, and could have, clearly said so.” The state of Alaska is appealing Wells’ decision.

Magistrates in Fairbanks received instructions from a supervising judge not to enforce the law as well.

Rep. Gara, D-Anchorage, said Jan. 4: “Rather than wait for appeals, we want to send a clear message to the public, now, that texting, and typing on personal and computer devices can cause death and serious injury. The current uncertainty in the law sends a weak safety message to the public.”

Separately, Gara told the Alaska Dispatch: “We think the current law is OK, we agree with the judges that have been enforcing it. There’s a good faith disagreement among the judges (that would be resolved by clear wording).”

Several legislators from both parties will be signing on sponsors, said Gara and Thomas, R-Haines. Rep. Max Gruenberg, D-Anchorage, and at least one other House Republican will be prime sponsors, they said.

Several distracted driving bills are pending in the Alaska 2011-2012 legislative session, but they’re given little chance of succeeding. The Gara-Thomas legislation is deliberately distanced from those bills — some include cell phone provisions — to ensure quick passage, the sponsors said.

(originally posted Jan. 5 and updated with the bill filing Jan. 6)

View the Alaska distracted driving news page.

You may have heard that Oak Park, Ill., is considering a ban on eating while driving. Yes, that and sipping on drinks and putting on makeup and … texting and cell phone use.

“This isn’t government overreach; this is the government protecting people,” said Oak Park village trustee Colette Lueck, who floated the idea in the middle of debate over texting and handheld cell phones.

Actually, that would be government overreach.

Lueck, apparently, is dead serious. And the media has lapped up the story about banning eating while driving.

Critics of electronic distracted driving legislation — those addressing use of wireless communications devices — often cite “putting on make-up” or “eating while driving” as candidates for governmental sanctions. One guy brought up nose-picking.

These critics by and large are not serious. They argue against electronic distracted driving restrictions by summoning up specious dangers.

Last March, this blog reported the following exchange in Maryland’s distracted driving debate, after state Sen. Allan Kittleman playfully proposed a law against eating and while driving.

“You can’t tell me it is more safe to hold some French fries and a Big Mac and Coke than it is to look down and read some text messages,” Kittleman said to the sponsor of an anti-texting bill.

Sen. James Brochin, responded, dryly: “Eating is not a cerebral event. You just do it.”

What’s the harm in a larger debate?

Electronic distracted driving laws send a clear message about clear and present dangers brought on by a technological sea change. Diluting society’s directive that text messaging and operating mobile phones are potentially deadly behaviors can only add to the sickening body count. Young, inexperienced drivers don’t deal well with ambiguity and gray areas.

Newspapers nationwide are not printing obituaries for victims of drivers lost in enjoyment of their Slurpees. Safety experts do not come to high schools to demonstrate to students that they are impaired when changing radio stations. Putting on make-up has never been researched as a dangerous addictive habit.

Well-meaning legislators should focus on electronic distracted driving and leave the everyday inattentive behaviors to police and safety educators.

The current national debate needs to be about texting & talking while behind the wheel. Period.

As with driving, focus is everything.

In Florida, the chairwoman of the House Finance and Tax Council says the primary bill that would ban texting and driving is “intellectually dishonest.” She refuses to allow a vote on its merits.

Rep. Ellyn Bogdanoff, R-Fort Lauderdale, says HB 41 is “not stalled. It’s dead.” (HB 41 is the companion to SB 448, which is moving ahead in the Senate.)

Bogdanoff’s beef seems to be that the bill ban behaviors that she says are already covered under state careless driving laws. Like many opponents of distracted driving legislation, she lays on the smoke by calling for a bill that covers less dangerous activities like putting on makeup — a bill that could never pass.

“Never mind the fact that more than a dozen bills on the topic were offered during this session, or that Gov. Charlie Crist was poised to sign a texting ban,” the Sunshine State News wrote in blasting Bogdanoff.

Bogdanoff, pictured at left, is an attorney. She admits to texting behind the wheel and notes that we are a “multitasking society now.” You can email Bogdanoff at ellyn.bogdanoff@myfloridahouse.gov

Rep. Doug Holder, R-Sarasota, a coauthor of the bill, told the St. Petersburg Times: “What can you do when someone just locks down and says, ‘I am not going to move forward,’ which she clearly has done?”

“What happened in Florida is just appalling to me,” said Jennifer Smith, the president of the survivors advocacy group FocusDriven.

It gets worse.

In Alabama, hopes for a text messaging while driving ban were crushed when a band of lawyers serving in the Senate insisted on inserting language that favors plaintiffs in crashes linked to texting.

Sen. Roger Bedford, D-Russellville, was the ringleader — an attorney, of course. He is a key player on the Senate Judiciary Committee and had support of its chairman — another attorney.

An insurance company objected to the lawyers’ provision, which presumed negligence on the part of a text-messaging driver in a crash. (More lawsuits meaning more attorney fees.) The collision of these self-servers brought the distracted driving plan to a halt as time ran out on the legislative session.

The bill, HB 35, had easily won approval in the state House and had broad support in the Alabama Legislature.

Days after the bill died, the Huntsville Times editorialized: “Opponents of this ban should be ashamed of themselves for killing this life-saving bill. … Bedford, Alfa (the insurance group) and whoever else torpedoed the text ban law are wrong. … (Their) excuses, frankly, don’t make sense.”

Feel like dropping Bedford an email? — senbedford@aol.com

Rep. Jim McClendon, R-Springville, says he’ll be back with the legislation in 2011.

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.

Enforcement of the Nevada bans is primary, meaning drivers can be stopped and cited for that reason alone. Cell phone use is allowed only if a hands-free accessory is employed throughout the call.

Here is the exact wording of the new bans:

• Drivers cannot: “Manually type or enter text into a cellular telephone or other handheld wireless communications device, or send or read data using any such device to access or search the Internet or to engage in non-voice communications with another person, including, without limitation, texting, electronic messaging and instant messaging.”
• Drivers cannot: “Use a cellular telephone or other handheld wireless communications device to engage in voice communications with another person, unless the device is used with an accessory which allows the person to communicate without using his or her hands, other than to activate, deactivate or initiate a feature or function on the device.”

Key provisions:

• First offenses are not considered moving violations.
• Laws do not apply to GPS systems “affixed to the vehicle.”
• Previous infractions do not affect new fines after seven years. Example: A repeat violator would be considered a first offender if seven years have passed since the original conviction.
• Licensed two-way radio use is permissible if the unit is not hand held, except for the microphone.

Nevada was the 34th state to ban texting while driving.

Current prohibitions:

• All drivers are barred from using handheld cell phones.
• Text messaging and related activities prohibited for all drivers.

Distracted driving notes (2012):
The Henderson Police Department reports it handed out 351 citations for using handheld devices during the ban’s first month.

The Nevada DOT says there are more than 3,500 distraction-related crashes in the state every year, with more than 60 deaths reported in the past five years. Its advice for avoiding cell phone tickets? “Before driving, secure your cellphone in a place such as the glove box where you will not be able or tempted to access it while driving.”

2011 legislation:
SB 140: Would outlaw text messaging and using handheld cell phones while driving in Nevada. Would prevent cities and counties from creating similar laws. Original bill’s fines: $250 (first offense), then $500, then $1,000 plus license suspension of six months. Fines doubled in highway work zones. Warnings until Jan. 1, 2012. Amended and approved by the Senate Transportation Committee on March 17. Amendments approved by voice vote in Senate on April 22. Amended bill’s fines: $50/$100/$250. No license suspensions. Approved by the Senate in a 12-9 vote on April 26. OK’d by the Assembly in a 24-7 vote on May 30. The Senate’s final approval (a voice vote) came June 4 and the measure was then approved by the governor. A warning period began Oct. 1 and the prohibitions went into full effect Jan. 1, 2012. (Breeden)

AB 151: Would ban text messaging and use of handheld cell phones while driving in Nevada. Fines: $50 (first offense), $100 (second) and $250 (third). If a death or “substantial body harm” results from violation, prison term of 1-6 years with fines of $2,000-$5,000. Would end local traffic regulation of texting and cell phones. Warnings until Dec. 31, 2011. Amended (to add handheld cell phones to original bill’s texting ban) and approved by the Assembly Committee on Transportation in a 12-3 vote on March 29. Latest legislative action: Rereferred to Committee on Ways and Means on April 19. See SB 140, above. (Atkinson)

Senate Bill 76: Seeks to ban text messaging and use of handheld cell phones. Hands-free accessories OK for cell phones. GPS allowed. Also targets Internet use and any “non-verbal” communication. Dead as of April 16. (Public Safety Dept. via Senate Transporation Committee)

SB 145: Would prohibit drivers under the age of 18 from texting and using cell phones. Penalties to be determined by juvenile court, which would be directed to treat violations in school zones more seriously. Dead as of April 16. (Manendo)

AB 173: Would prohibit texting and the use of handheld cell phones by all Nevada drivers. If a death or “substantial body harm” results from violation, prison term of 1-6 years with fines of $2,000-$5,000. Dead as of April 16. (Munford)

2011 distracted driving notes:
The bill behind Nevada’s handheld electronic device law, SB 140, was approved by Gov. Brian Sandoval, who had made it clear that he would support a statewide ban on text messaging while driving. The Assembly’s final vote came May 30, 2011, and the Senate signed off June 4.

Sen. Shirley Breeden was the bill’s author. Her texting bill of 2010 failed to get out of committee, but, undaunted, she added handheld cell phones to 2011 plan. “We’re going to go for the whole enchilada in this thing,” Breeden said of the addition of cell phones to the 2011 legislation.

The Senate watered down Breeden’s texting & talking ban on April 26, lowering fines to match the Assembly’s version in order to get a distracted driving bill through.

In 2010, Breeden, D-Henderson saw her no-texting bill die in committee. This year she succeeded in getting the measure through the Legislature — as the new chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee — and onto the law books.

The Assembly Transportation Committee heard arguments pro and con on Senate Bill 140. The Office of Traffic Safety, which supports the bill, told the May 12 hearing that the number of accidents blamed on distracted driving had decreased from 2008 to 2009. Assemblyman Scott Hammond, R-Clark, said he feared that accidents would occur because drivers would be further distracted by trying to hide their phones. The panel also heard from families who lost loved ones to distracted drivers. No action was taken during the hearing.

Senate Minority Leader Mike McGinness of Fallon was the only Republican to vote in favor of Senate Bill 140.

Sen. Mike Schneider, D-Las Vegas, said the lowered fines inserted into SB 140 were necessary to move the distracted driving bill out of committee. (The full Senate later approved the lowered fines.)

Assemblyman Harvey Munford, D-Las Vegas, asked that Assemblymen Kelvin Atkinson amend his AB 151 to add a ban on handheld cell phone use to its texting prohibitions. The change was made in late March 2011, as Atkinson’s bill advanced from the Transportation Committee.

Munford says of his own AB 173, which would ban use of handheld cell phones and text messaging devices while behind the wheel: “This was constituent-driven. I was contacted by one family who lost a loved one and it was proven that the person was using a cell phone,” he told the Reno Gazette-Journal.

The Nevada Department of Public Safety is behind SB 76 (BDR 43-461), which would prohibit texting. In November 2010, the state Transportation Department banned its employees from distracted driving.

Nevada’s No Phone Zone campaign kicked off in November 2010.

Richard and Jenifer Watkins of Las Vegas were among the victims who spoke at the Second Distracted Driving Summit in September 2010. They suffered severe injuries when hit by a cell phoning driver in 2004.

Distracted driving has been cited as the No. 1 cause of fatal traffic accidents in Nevada. At least 63 deaths have been caused by distracted drivers in the past five years, officials say.

2009 legislation (dead):
SB 136: Would prohibit text messaging while driving on Nevada’s roads. OK’d by the full Senate vote on April 8, 2009, but died in committee in the Assembly. The wording was resurrected in the Senate on the final day of the legislative session and folded into an unrelated motorcycle bill, SB 309.

2009 legislation notes:
New state Sen. Shirley Breeden, D-Henderson, authored the 2009 texting bill. “I’m not going to give up the fight,” she said after SB 136 was smothered by an Assembly committee. (Update: Breeden is now the transportation committee chairman.)

The text messaging legislation received strong support from law officers in an Assembly hearing on April 23. The fine would be $75 but no points.

“This legislation is not just for children,” she said. “It is for all of us.” Numerous states are banning texting and cell phoning for teenage drivers, and opposition has emerged to the bills because they do not cover adults. Young drivers complain that they are being singled out. Teenagers, by far, are the largest consumers of text messaging services.

The Nevada Senate’s Energy, Infrastructure and Transportation Committee amended and approved the anti-texting and driving bill SB 136 on March 27, 2009.

Breeden’s bill was first considered in the Senate Energy, Infrastructure and Transportation Committee on Feb. 18. The usual enforcement questions were raised. Committee chairman Sen. Mike Schneider, D-Las Vegas, said: “If California can pass (a texting bill) with 36 or 37 million people over there, somehow their law enforcement is working with this new law, so you know, we need to make the same statement.”

A spokesman for the state Office of Traffic Safety said it may not take a position on Breeden’s plan to outlaw text messaging by drivers, or on similar legislation to prohibit the use of cell phones not connected to hands-free devices.

The 2007 legislative session saw only one bill regarding drivers and cell phones: a plan to ban drivers under 18 from using the wireless devices.

Nevada’s regular legislative session began Feb. 2, 2009, and ended June 1.

Sen. Dennis Nolan, R-Las Vegas, the chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee, said of cell phone driving legislation: “Knowing our Legislature, it will have a tough time. Nevadans are independent and like their liberties.”

In 2003 Nevada prohibited local governments from regulating cell phones in automobiles.

Just before approving the teen cell phone bill, the Senate gave a standing ovation to the activist parents of a Sault teen who was killed while driving distracted. SB 756 is known as Kelsey’s Law as a result of their lobbying.

An Ann Arbor mother of four died March 27 after she flipped her auto while driving and texting, police said.

96 percent of Michigan drivers acknowledge that texting and driving is dangerous behavior, but as many as 17 percent say they read texts while behind the wheel. The survey of 600 drivers by the Office of Highway Safety Planning found 56 percent of them used their cell phones while driving, even though 80 percent acknowledged the practice is dangerous, and a third of them said it was as bad as drunken driving. “The (need) to be constantly connected and available seems to trump traffic safety,” OHSP director Michael Prince said.

Current prohibitions:

• Text messaging outlawed for all drivers. Fines $100 (first offense) and then $200.

• In Detroit, drivers making cell phone calls must use hands-free devices.

2012 distracted driving notes (2011):
State police said in February 2012 that 1,149 drivers have been ticketed under the texting & driving law that went into effect July 1, 2010.

“It’s safe to say probationary drivers should be totally focusing on the road and not on their cellphone conversations,” said state Sen. Howard Walker, author of SB 756. The distracted driving bill was approved by the Senate on March 15 and is now in the House.

At least one opponent of SB 756 wants to see a tougher cell phone law instead. Sen. Gretchen Whitmer, D-East Lansing, voted against the bill because it did not apply to all drivers.

Members of the Senate Energy and Technology Committee signaled Feb. 21 that they preferred primary enforcement for the teen cell phone ban envisioned by SB 756. They followed through Feb. 28 by amending the bill for primary status. Committee chairman Sen. Mike Nofs, R-Battle Creek, proposed the amendment. Sen. Coleman Young, D-Detroit, decided not to vote on the legislation as a result.

Bonnie Raffaele, who lost her teenage daughter Kelsey in a cell phone-related crash, testified in favor of Senate Bill 756 at a hearing Feb. 21. Sen. Howard Walker’s plan would ban cell phone use by Michigan’s youngest drivers. “I ask you today to please help me save the kids and keep someone else from suffering like we have,” she said to the Energy and Technology Committee. Senators reportedly assured her the legislation would clear the Senate (and it did).

“Now we need to get to work on members of the House,” Raffaele said after the March 15 Senate vote.

House Speaker Jase Bolger, R-Marshall, reportedly wants to see how the state’s text messaging law plays out before deciding on cell phone prohibitions.

Michigan State Police’s Commercial Vehicle Enforcement division treated the first 90 days under the federal handheld cell phone law as a warning/education period. The commercial vehicle regulations went into effect Jan. 3, 2012.

Over the past decade, more than 9,000 traffic accidents in Michigan involved cell phone use, according to the Booth Michigan newspaper chain.

2011-2012 distracted driving legislation:
Senate Bill 756: Would prohibit teens with a restricted (level 1 or 2 graduated) driver’s license from using a cell phone while behind the wheel. As introduced, bill calls for secondary enforcement but it has been amended to primary. Approved unanimously by the Transportation Committee on Jan. 25, 2012. Amended and approved by the Senate Energy and Technology Committee in a unanimous vote of Feb. 28. Legislation now calls for primary enforcement and allows for voice-activated operation. Via substitute S-3. Latest legislative action: Approved by the Senate in a 28-10 vote taken March 15. Aka “Kelsey’s Law.” (Walker)

House Bill 4208: Would establish graduated penalties for causing an accident while driving and viewing a TV screen or similar electronic device. Exempts screens related to vehicle use such as dashboard operation systems. HB 4209 (tied to 4208) makes killing a person while using an electronic device such as a TV a class C felony. In injury case, class E felony. No legislative activity on these bills in over a year. (Geiss)

2011 distracted driving notes:
The prosecutor in Lapeer County is calling on legislators to toughen the laws against causing a death while text messaging. Prosecutor Byron Konschuh cites the case of Jerry Joseph, who pleaded guilty to a moving violation causing death (and driving without insurance). Joseph ran a stop sign in Attica Township and killed a 78-year-old woman. He faced only two years in jail. The actual sentence was for 30 days in jail and a $5,000 fine. “We feel the punishment (for texting and killing) should be similar to operating under the influence causing death, which carries a 15-year maximum in prison,” Konschuh said.

It was estimated there were 881 cell phone-related accidents in 2010, with five people killed and almost 300 people injured.

Distracted driving notes (2010):
Gov. Jennifer Granholm signed the no-texting-while driving bills into law on a “No Phone Zone” special on “The Oprah Winfrey Show.”

State Rep. Richard LeBlanc was pushing for his teenage driver restrictions to be adopted before the end of 2010. LeBlanc, D-Westland, filed HB 4493 back in March 2009. Its primary concern is limiting to one the number of non-family members that teenagers with restricted licenses are allowed to transport, but it includes a provision that cell phones are banned for young drivers with Level 2 licenses.

2010 legislation:
HB 4394: Would outlaw text messaging by all motorists. Fines $100 then $200. The texting bill was approved by the House on Dec. 8, 2009, and transmitted to the Senate (Transportation Committee, Dec. 9). The Senate approved the bill on March 25 (a 28-10 vote) but upgraded it to primary enforcement. The House agreed to the change on April 20 (a 74-33 vote), but a minor companion bill had to pass before it was sent to the governor, which happened on April 28. The bill was signed on April 30, along with two other texting-related measures, HB 4370 and SB 468. Latest action: The law took effect July 1, 2010. (Gonzales)

HB 4370: Companion bill to HB 4394 (above). Specifies that no points would be added to a driver license for a violation of the text messaging prohibition. Signed into law by the governor on April 30, along with two other texting-related measures, HB 4394 and SB 468. (Polidori)

SB 468: Specifies that violations of the text messaging ban are not to be recorded on the driver’s master record. (This bill originally made handheld cell phone use illegal for all drivers and was approved in the Senate, but was converted to the master record exemption in the House.) Signed by the governor on April 30 as part of the text messaging package (see HB 4370 and HB 4394, above.) (Kahn)

(more 2010 legislation)

SB 402: Would prohibit all drivers from text messaging. Use of cell phones legal if a hands-free device is employed. Secondary enforcement, meaning a law officer cannot stop or cite a driver for this reason alone. Approved by the Senate Transportation Committee on Dec. 8, 2009, and then by the full Senate on Jan. 26, 2010. (Read the Senate version.) Sent to the House (Thomas)

HB 4369: Would outlaw talking on a handheld cell phone while driving. Also would prohibit text messaging and instant messaging on cell phones. Fine of $100. (See SB 417). Inactive in committee.

SB 417: Seeks to ban use of a handheld cell phone while driving on Michigan’s roads. Includes text messaging and instant messaging on cell phones. Maximum fine would be $100. Inactive.

SB 467: Would prohibit school bus drivers from using cell phones while the vehicle is in motion or students are loading. No activity on this bill.

2010 distracted driving notes:
Gov. Granholm said of the texting law: “By signing this law and making texting while driving a primary offense, we are giving Michigan’s law enforcement officers the tools necessary to identify and stop this dangerous behavior before it results in a crash causing injury or death.” She said she would support further efforts to ban drivers’ use of handheld cell phones.

The city of Troy followed up on the tougher state texting law by outlawing drivers’ use of handheld cell phones and declaring the entry of phone numbers a texting violation. Troy’s ordinance also addresses other forms of driver distraction: “eating, writing, performing personal hygiene/grooming, physical interaction with pets, passengers or unsecured cargo.” The law applies if the driver does not have at least one hand on the wheel with “a controlled grip.” Fines $200 for text messaging and $75 for talking on a handheld cell phone. No points. Troy’s police remain in “education mode” about the law as of early November, Lt. David Livingston told HandsFreeInfo. Enforcement won’t begin until Jan. 1, 2011, due to “vendor issues.”

Police Capt. Gerry Scherlink found himself defending Troy’s distracted driving fines in early November, in the wake of charges that the city was ticketing to raise money: “The Troy Police Department utilizes problem solving in its approach to traffic safety. Traffic enforcement for the mere sake of issuing tickets for the so-called generation of revenue is not practiced by this department.” About 100 warnings have been issued since early October 2010.

State Rep. Lee Gonzales, D-Flint, sponsor of the original HS 4394, pushed the House to approve the Senate version of his bill, which happened on April 20. The Senate version of the texting ban called for primary enforcement; the House wanted secondary enforcement. Sen. Jud Gilbert, R-Algonac, pushed through the upgraded enforcement. The bill became law April 30.

Senate Floor Leader Samuel “Buzz” Thomas saw his SB 402 clear the full Senate on Jan. 26, 2010. The vote was 31-6. This is his second legislative attempt to end text messaging while driving.

(text continued)

“It seems like every month we read about another fatality — or near fatality — because someone was texting while driving,” said Thomas, D-Detroit. “This is ridiculous and it really needs to end.”

An amendment seeking to upgrade SB 402 enforcement to primary failed.

HB 4369 originally called for fines of $100 for cell phoning behind the wheel to $500 for texting. SB 467 and 468 came with $100 fines.

Ann Arbor’s proposed ban on handheld cell phone use and text messaging while driving passed its first reading on Feb. 17, 2010, but the matter was placed on hold a month later, pending another City Council vote. It also prohibits looking at electronic maps and GPS devices. The fine would be $125/$300 i fan accident results. Councilman Stephen Rapundalo, D-2nd Ward, is the sponsor. The mayor told the council not to wait on state legislation — “look at what happened with smoking.”

Supporters of the House text messaging bills include the State Police, AAA Michigan, Ford Motor Company and Verizon Wireless.

A school bus drivers association opposes SB 467, saying that the transit cell phone law as written could rule out use of future technologies that help drivers do their jobs. “We’re concerned about a blanket prohibition on data transfer,” said Paul Wegmeyer, chairman of the legislative committee for the Michigan Association for Pupil Transportation.

The Saginaw News editorialized in favor of State Rep. Gino Polidori’s cell phone and texting bill HB 4369:

Even if the Democrat-controlled House OKs it, the Republican-controlled Senate hasn’t given a similar bill so much as a committee hearing. That will change when the accident numbers pile up, when the deaths accumulate, when it starts to get personal. It’s just too bad we may have to waste so much time — and lives — until then.

Previous legislation:
HB 5117: The House voted to prohibit text messaging by drivers in a 68-32 vote on Dec. 4. The law would have prohibited drivers from reading, writing or sending text messages using wireless devices, including cellular phones. It did not advance in the Senate during the special session.

HB 5117 was introduced by Rep. Steve Bieda, D-Warren.

Also on Dec. 4, the House shot down HB 4982, which would require drivers making cell phone calls to use hands-free devices. Rep. Gino Polidori, D-Dearborn, said he would revive his legislation for the next legislative session. “The state has seat-belt laws to protect drivers, and we prohibit drunken driving to eliminate threats to other drivers and innocent bystanders. A cell phone restriction would serve both purposes,” Polidori has said.