Legislature(2011 - 2012)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/13/2012 08:00 AM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB343 | |
| SB198 | |
| HB234 | |
| HB255 | |
| HB50 | |
| HB296 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 198 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 343 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 234 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 255 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 50 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 296 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 255-READING OR TYPING MESSAGE WHILE DRIVING
9:55:37 AM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of HB 255, "An Act
relating to screen devices in motor vehicles; prohibiting the
driver of a motor vehicle from reading or typing a text message
or other nonvoice message or communication on a cellular
telephone, computer, or personal data assistant while driving a
motor vehicle; and providing for an effective date." He asked
for a motion to bring the bill before the committee.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI motioned to bring HB 255 before the
committee.
9:56:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA, sponsor of HB 255, stated that in 2008
the Legislature passed a bill that was thought to prohibit
texting while driving. However, in the last year several judges
have said the bill wasn't written with enough specificity to
include texting. HB 255 fixes the problem by reinstating the ban
on texting, and extending it to include other nonvoice
communication devices that may come along as technology evolves.
The six co-sponsors believe it is important to have a texting
law on the books because texting while driving is more dangerous
than any other type of cellphone conduct. Information in the
packet shows that a driver who texts a 4.6 second message will
travel the length of a football field without paying attention
to the road. A car and driver study indicates that texting while
driving is more dangerous than drunk driving. According to the
National Conference of State Legislatures, a driver who is
texting is 20 times more likely to cause a crash or near
collision compared to times when that driver is not texting. The
AAA Foundation on Traffic Safety found that while one-third of
people text while they drive, ninety-four percent of the
respondents said they recognize that texting is dangerous. The
public recognizes this behavior is dangerous and supports
regulation, he said. He described two texting-related accidents;
one was in Fairbanks and the other in Anchorage.
A person who violates this law is guilty of a class A
misdemeanor, although drivers with a clean record have generally
been sentenced to community service or a fine rather than jail
time. However, a driver who was texting and driving drunk was
sentenced to the mandatory three days in jail for drunk driving.
Another person failed to appear in court two times and was
sentenced to one day in jail. The original bill provided that a
person who violates this law and causes injury to another person
is guilty of the next level of crime. The reasoning was that it
is close to premeditated for a driver to enter a car knowing he
or she will engage in dangerous behavior. HB 255 maintains that
sentencing scheme.
The original bill made an accommodation for personnel in
emergency vehicles to use display devices that are attached to
the dashboard. To accommodate the prevalence of wireless
devices, that provision was amended to clarify that police,
fire, or emergency medical personnel may use a screen device
that is attached or not "if the user reasonably believes the
information on the device is necessary to respond to a health,
safety, or criminal matter."
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said the only criticism he's heard is that
there are other behaviors that distract drivers like eating,
drinking coffee or yelling at the kids. He said he didn't know
how to write a law to say when it is and is not okay to do those
things, but he did know how to write a law that says you can't
text while driving. He noted that the founder of Mothers Against
Drunk Driving (MADD) has taken on texting and cellphones as her
new issue. He said it's not possible to address cellphone use
this session due to diverging opinions among legislators, but it
is possible to address texting because people can agree that it
is dangerous.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he's been asked why this isn't
prosecuted under the negligent driving or distracted driving
statutes, and the answer relates to the statistic that shows
that one-third of drivers text while driving. Those people will
be on the jury, which would make it very difficult to get the
unanimity needed for a conviction. If the jury instruction says,
"Was the person texting while driving?" the jury will have to
answer yes and the defendant will be convicted. He concluded
that a texting law is needed and most states already have one.
10:05:43 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI reviewed the language in Section 2, page 1,
line 14 through page 2, line 2, and observed that the new
language appears to include not only texting but also
communicating while a screen device is operating.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA clarified that was the name of the crime,
not the elements. The elements of the crime are on page 2, lines
3-11. Paragraph (1) is the existing statute and paragraph (2)
contains the new language. He noted that the word "computer" was
inserted because the Chair reported an incident of someone
typing on a laptop while driving.
CHAIR FRENCH recounted the incident and said, "I flipped my
lid."
REPRESENTATIVE GARA read the new language in paragraph (2).
(2) the person is reading or typing a text message or
other nonvoice message or communication on a cellular
telephone, personal data assistant, computer, or any
other similar means capable of providing a visual
display that is in the view of the driver in a normal
driving position while the vehicle is in motion and
while the person is driving.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if surfing the Internet while driving
would be a crime under this language.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said yes; to surf the Internet a person has
to push the keys and that is typing.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI continued to question whether the new
language would cover surfing the Internet.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA responded that the person is reading.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if reading applies to text messaging
only.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said reading applies to anything on the
computer or personal data device. "We don't want you reading
while you're driving," he said.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he wasn't disagreeing, but he didn't
necessarily interpret the language that way. "It'll be good to
get some language on the record about what we're outlawing
here," he said.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said reading is probably well covered in the
first section, which is current law, but it's also intended to
be covered in the new section. "It's just reading a text or
other nonvoice message or communication and that's what you're
doing when you're surfing the net."
10:09:19 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI posed a hypothetical situation of a driver
getting lost and typing an address into map quest.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said that would be fine, and added that the
original bill included a list of exceptions.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI again asked about typing in an address.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said it does not apply to equipment that
displays navigational or global positioning or maps. It would be
okay to type in an address on an iPhone.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked about looking up a name on a
cellphone.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said that's fine and even unlocking a
cellphone is acceptable. He directed attention to page 2, line
18. "It is not a crime if you're using your portable cellular
telephones or personal data assistants being used for voice
communication..." He opined that typing in the code and phone
number is for a voice communication, and all forms of cellphone
talking is exempt with the understanding that other bills
address that issue.
CHAIR FRENCH noted that Lieutenant Dial with the Department of
Public Safety and Doug Moody with the Public Defender Agency
were available to answer questions.
SENATOR PASKVAN warned that it may not be a crime to drive 60
miles an hour and look at a navigational or global positioning
device, but a person will be held responsible if he or she does
that and hurts someone. There's a clear distinction between it
not being a crime and the responsibility for reasonable and
acceptable conduct while driving, he stated.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA agreed that a person would still fall under
the negligent and reckless driving statutes for reckless use of
those exceptions.
CHAIR FRENCH confirmed that reckless driving is still a crime in
Alaska and noted that he was reviewing the elements of that
crime.
SENATOR PASKVAN observed that those were criminal statutes and
he was referring to civil liability. He emphasized that a person
will be held responsible if he or she kills someone while
driving. Taking your eyes off the road to look at map quest
because you're lost will not be an excuse. Some people think
it's acceptable to drive 60 miles an hour and hit someone, but
they're wrong. They will be held responsible.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA responded that the sponsors have that same
understanding. The bill does not exempt civil liability for
negligent conduct. If a person is negligent and hurts somebody,
the rule is "You broke it, you fix it."
10:13:30 AM
SENATOR COGHILL asked if the purpose of the phrase "any other
similar means" on page 2, line 9, is to accommodate future
technology.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said yes; today an iPhone is a personal data
assistant but the iPhone 5 may be called something different.
The intent is that if it's got a screen and a person can type on
it and read it, then it's a similar means.
SENATOR COGHILL observed that it's a visual distraction, and the
bill is trying to say that visual distractions, excluding the
exceptions, will generally be a primary crime.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said yes.
10:14:35 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if using Siri (Speech Interpretation
and Recognition Interface) would be a violation.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA replied it is not a crime to voice text, and
the Department of Law has given assurance that it will not
prosecute those cases where it isn't possible to tell whether
the voice text application was open, because that's not a crime
beyond a reasonable doubt. This will change as technology
advances, but that capability isn't available today.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a "normal driving position"
included turning to look at an iPhone that's located on the
passenger seat. "I would think that we would want that covered,
but it's just clarifying for the record," he said.
10:16:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that the terminology in paragraph
(2) prohibits texting or using other nonvoice messaging while
driving. It is intended to disallow the argument that the driver
had one eye on the road. Normal driving position means the
driver is driving and his or her full attention is on the road.
CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony. Finding no further
committee discussion, he asked the will of the committee.
10:18:32 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report CS for HB 255, version T,
from committee with individual recommendations and attached
fiscal note(s).
CHAIR FRENCH announced that without objection CSHB 255(JUD)
moved from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|