Legislature(1999 - 2000)
03/09/2000 01:06 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 9, 2000
1:06 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Andrew Halcro, Chairman
Representative Beverly Masek
Representative Bill Hudson
Representative John Cowdery
Representative Allen Kemplen
Representative Albert Kookesh
Representative Vic Kohring
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 283
"An Act requiring a person under 16 years of age to wear a helmet
when riding a bicycle; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 282
"An Act requiring a person under 16 years of age to wear a helmet
when operating or riding on an off-road vehicle; and providing for
an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 283
SHORT TITLE: BICYCLE HELMET LAW
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
1/12/00 1906 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
1/12/00 1906 (H) TRA, JUD, FIN
1/12/00 1906 (H) REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION
3/09/00 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 282
SHORT TITLE: OFF-ROAD VEHICLE HELMET LAW
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
1/12/00 1906 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
1/12/00 1906 (H) TRA, JUD, FIN
1/12/00 1906 (H) REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION
3/09/00 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
CHRIS KNIGHT, Staff
to Representative Allen Kemplen
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 112
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 283 on behalf of sponsor.
JANE FELLMAN, Co-Coordinator
Kenai Peninsula SAFE KIDS Coalition
250 Hospital Place
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283.
STEVE O'CONNOR, Assistant Chief
Central Emergency Services
Central Kenai Peninsula Fire & EMS Providers
231 South Binkley
Soldotna, Alaska 99669-8084
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283.
DAN COFFEY, President
Alaskan Bikers Advocating Training & Education
Valdez Chapter
(Address not provided)
Valdez, Alaska 99686
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283 and HB 282.
ELIZABETH RIPLEY, Director
Community Health & Planning
Valley Hospital
515 East Dahlia Avenue
Palmer, Alaska 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283.
MARTHA MOORE, Trauma Registry Coordinator
Community Health & Emergency Medical Services
Division of Public Health
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110616
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0616
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283 and HB 282.
DENNIS P. HARRIS, Cyclist
PO Box 21219
Juneau, Alaska 99802-1219
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 283.
JOAN W. DIAMOND
5700 Rabbit Creek Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99516
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283.
RONNI SULLIVAN, Executive Director
Southern Region
Emergency Medical Services Council, Inc.
6130 Tuttle Place
Anchorage, Alaska 99507-2041
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283.
BOYD McFAIL, Legislative Affairs Coordinator
Alaskan Bikers Advocating Training & Education
Anchorage Chapter
(Address not provided)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283 and HB 282.
JUDY MURPHY, Cyclist
4121 Birch Lane
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283.
SHARRON LOBAUGH, Representative
Juneau Safe Kids Coalition
PO Box 110616
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0616
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 283 and HB 282.
SCOTT HAMANN, Representative
Alaskan Bikers Advocating Training & Education
Kenai Chapter
PO Box 934
Kenai, Alaska 99611
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 282.
DEBRA M. RUSSELL, Ph.D., CRC, CBIS; and
Director, Brain Injury Association of Alaska
1251 Muldoon Road, Suite 102
Anchorage, Alaska 99504
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 282.
KEVIN HAND, Staff
to House Transportation Standing Committee
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 418
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented information from discussions with
retailers in relation to mandatory use of a helmet and/or waiver.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 00-18, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN ANDREW HALCRO called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:06 p.m. Members present at the
call to order were Representatives Halcro, Masek, Cowdery, Kemplen,
Kookesh and Kohring. Representative Hudson arrived as the meeting
was in progress.
HB 283 - BICYCLE HELMET LAW
CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced the first order of business as House Bill
283, "An Act requiring a person under 16 years of age to wear a
helmet when riding a bicycle; and providing for an effective date."
Number 0108
CHRIS KNIGHT, Staff to Representative Allen Kemplen, Alaska State
Legislature, came before the committee to present the bill on
behalf of the sponsor. Requiring children under the age of 16 to
wear a helmet while operating a bicycle, he said, reduces the risk
of traumatic brain injuries. Sixteen other states have enacted
similar legislation. Studies at the University of Washington have
shown that states with mandatory bicycle helmet laws reduce the
rate for head injuries. Currently, Alaska leads the nation in the
number of brain injuries per capita. He further cited that bicycle
crashes are the third leading cause of serious accidental injuries
for Alaskans under the age of 16; in which, 52 percent suffer a
traumatic brain injury resulting in a substantial cost to the
state. The average cost, he cited, for children with brain
injuries is about $12,000 per admission. Who covers those costs?
He answered, The state and federal governments. He cited that
about 40 percent of the children hospitalized with bicycle related
injuries are either uninsured or bill Medicaid for their hospital
care. He pointed out that this legislation does not mandate the
use of a helmet for adults. This legislation is for children only,
as they often lack the judgement necessary to make logical
decisions. Currently, the Anchorage and Juneau police departments
conduct educational programs and give out helmets. This
legislation, therefore, would encourage and incite further helmet
use. He also pointed out that the Alaska Highway Safety Planning
Agency [Department of Public Safety] offers free grants from the
federal government for safety organizations to conduct public
information campaigns on safety and the use of helmets.
Number 0377
JANE FELLMAN, Co-Coordinator, Kenai Peninsula SAFE KIDS Coalition,
testified via teleconference from Kenai. The use of bicycle
helmets, she said, reduces the risk of head injuries by 85 percent,
and brain injuries by 88 percent. Bicycle safety is a public
health issue, not just an individual problem. Statistics show that
the treatment of serious head injuries can be extremely expensive,
and that there is a significant cost savings with the consistent
and correct use of a helmet. She said, "If someone is killed and
injured in a crash, many others bear the emotional suffering as
well as the cost(s)."
MS. FELLMAN continued. Severe and fatal injuries are not just
limited to children. Adults who wear helmets set an example. It
only takes one mistake, she said, by a cyclist or motorist for
injury or death. Bicycle safety cannot compensate for non-careful
drivers or poor cycling environments; but a helmet improves a
person's chance of escaping injury and death, especially since
there are more cars on the road today.
MS. FELLMAN continued. Education is the best way to get a person
to wear a helmet, but that alone is rarely enough to get a person
to change a behavior. Research has shown that education and
legislation together are the best methods of increasing the use of
a helmet. She said, "Education informs but does not empower
parents to enforce the use of helmets. 'It's the law,' is a great
excuse for an explanation for the use of helmets. Kids who would
otherwise bow to peer pressure for not wearing helmets now have a
reason, a compelling one, to wear one."
Number 0627
CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Ms. Fellman where she feels government should
draw the line between what is safe and what is not safe for an
individual. In other words: If the state mandates the use of a
bicycle helmet, should it also mandate the use of shin guards for
skateboarders and elbow guards for rollerbladers? He called it a
slippery slope.
MS. FELLMAN replied, as a child advocate, she believes that the
state should watch out for its children. The state should not draw
a line when it comes to promoting educational issues, especially as
they relate to head injuries, for they are life-threatening.
Number 0750
STEVE O'CONNOR, Assistant Chief, Central Emergency Services,
Central Kenai Peninsula Fire & EMS Providers, testified via
teleconference from Kenai. During his career, he has probably been
to three or four hundred accidents involving bicycles, ATVs and
off-road vehicles. He has seen firsthand the difference that
helmets make. Head injuries are life-threatening, and helmets make
a significant difference between life, functioning as a productive
adult and death. It's a real tragedy, he said, to see a child
sustain a significant head injury and end up being totally
dependent upon a personal caretaker for the rest of that child's
life. He encouraged the committee members to support the bill.
Number 0885
DAN COFFEY, President, Alaskan Bikers Advocating Training &
Education [ABATE], Valdez Chapter, testified via teleconference
from Valdez. He is requesting that the committee members not pass
HB 283 out of committee. It's the right of every parent to decide
how to raise their children, not the state's. Passing this
legislation into law would take that right away.
MR. COFFEY continued. He has traveled and lived in Bush Alaska for
many years. This legislation, he said, is not good for the entire
state, for many communities do not have paved roads. If this is a
urban-rural issue then it should be treated and handled as such.
He's not in favor of turning parents and children into criminals
for choosing not to wear a helmet.
Number 1072
REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN KEMPLEN asked Mr. Coffey whether he supports
requiring the use of seat belts while in an automobile.
MR. COFFEY replied, no, not as a state requirement.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked Mr. Coffey whether he supports
requiring the use of a safety seat for babies while in an
automobile.
MR. COFFEY replied, yes, but that requirement is impossible since
there are many areas of the state that do not have roads.
Number 1126
ELIZABETH RIPLEY, Director, Community Health & Planning, Valley
Hospital, testified via teleconference from Mat-Su. She is also
chairman of the Mat-Su Valley SAFE KIDS Coalition, a national
organization founded by C. Everett Koop for the purposes of
reducing injuries in children - the number one cause of death for
children ages 1 to 14 nationwide.
MS. RIPLEY continued. Alaska, she said, has the highest rate of
childhood injuries per capita. The third leading cause of injury
in the Mat-Su Valley for both children and adults is from ATV and
bicycle accidents. According to a survey conducted by Valley
Hospital, 29 percent of the parents require their children to
always wear a bicycle helmet; 20 percent never require their
children to wear a bicycle helmet; 43 percent always require their
children to wear an ATV helmet; and 5 percent never require their
children to wear an ATV helmet. The remainder of the population
sometimes require their children to wear an ATV or bicycle helmet.
The survey was conducted in five different communities. Wasilla
was the worst, which directly correlates with the rate of bicycle
and ATV accidents. According to a report by the National SAFE KIDS
Campaign, safety devices such as smoke alarms, car seats and bike
helmets have contributed to a 46 percent decline over the last two
decades among children under the age of 14. This is largely due to
the result of widespread education, better engineering and landmark
safety legislation.
MS. RIPLEY continued. Unintended injuries, she said,
disproportionately affect poor children. She noted that the Valley
Hospital and the Mat-Su Valley SAFE KIDS Coalition hold numerous
bike rodeos every year, and distribute hundreds of free helmets to
those in need. Please pass this legislation, she said, and make
parents and care givers accountable for children to wear helmets.
Number 1372
MARTHA MOORE, Trauma Registry Coordinator, Community Health &
Emergency Medical Services, Division of Public Health, Department
of Health & Social Services, came before the committee to testify.
Children are disproportionately involved in bicycle crashes, she
said, due to immaturity, a lack of necessary skills and
coordination. Younger children have a larger head in comparison to
the rest of their bodies, which makes them top-heavy. It's
critical, therefore, that they wear a helmet.
MS. MOORE continued. There are other laws in the state that
protect children. She cited the mandatory use of safety belts for
children under the age of 16; and the mandatory use of float
jackets for children under the age of 13 as examples. It's not
unreasonable, therefore, to require the use of helmets as well.
MS. MOORE continued. This really is an issue of increasing the use
of helmets rather than an issue of enforceability. Jurisdictions
she cited, where bicycle helmet laws have been enacted, have seen
an increase in the use of helmets, which has not relied heavily
upon enforcement.
Number 1469
MS. MOORE continued. It's important to keep in mind that helmets
do not prevent crashes. A total injury prevention program is
important, which would consist of the promotion of helmet use;
safety education; safety standards; and making helmets available,
affordable and acceptable. The Department of Health & Social
Services has been actively involved in these kinds of activities
and will continue to do so. A helmet law, therefore, is one more
"tool in the toolbox" in promoting the use of a helmet.
MS. MOORE continued. About 40 children are hospitalized in the
state each year due to injuries from a bicycle accident; in which,
one-third involves brain injuries. The cost of hospitalization for
those not wearing a helmet is about $13,000 per patient, which is
57 percent more than for those who wear a helmet. She has seen
hospital bills for well over a hundred thousand dollars. This
really is a cost issue for the state, not just a health issue.
Thank you.
Number 1554
REPRESENTATIVE BILL HUDSON asked Ms. Moore what the proper age is
to apply this type of mandate.
MS. MOORE replied, according to the facts, the rate of injuries due
to bicycle accidents is the highest for children ages 5 to 15. The
rate of death due to bicycle accidents is the highest for children
ages 10 to 14.
Number 1607
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked Ms. Moore whether there are any federal
efforts to impose helmet laws for bicycle riders.
MS. MOORE replied that she doesn't know.
Number 1625
CHAIRMAN HALCRO commented that children engage in a lot of
dangerous activities - rollerblading, skateboarding, skiing, et
cetera. He asked Ms. Moore where she thinks it's appropriate for
government to draw the line in terms of mandating the use of a
helmet for those types of activities.
MS. MOORE replied, as a research analyst, she feels that it's
irresponsible to ignore the evidence, especially when it shows
overwhelmingly that there is a problem.
Number 1694
DENNIS P. HARRIS, Cyclist, came before the committee to testify.
He does not own an automobile. He a bicycle for about 90 percent
of his transportation needs. He supports children wearing a
bicycle helmet, but he does not support mandatory helmet laws. He
supports mandatory helmet laws for motorized vehicles, however.
Instead, he believes in "Dad's Helmet Law." A mandatory helmet
law, he said, provides police with an excuse to harass poor parents
or parents who do not speak English. Dad's Helmet Law says, "If I
catch you riding without a helmet, the bike goes in the garage and
stays there." That type of law is the most effective.
MR. HARRIS continued. The state needs to treat the cause of
accidents. He suggested a program that includes bicycle safety
training in the first grade, and bicycle safety training as part of
the curriculum for middle school physical education teachers as
examples. There is a myth that bicycling is inherently dangerous,
when in fact it is safer than riding in an automobile per mile
traveled. But, when a child puts on a helmet, he/she can feel
invulnerable, which can be just as dangerous without proper
training. In Australia, legislation was passed to make helmet use
mandatory and the number of injuries did not go down but instead
the number of miles cycled went down, which is a risk this country
cannot take due to diseases related to inactivity.
Number 2046
REPRESENTATIVE ALBERT KOOKESH asked Mr. Harris how schools can
afford bicycle training classes when some can't afford foreign
language programs, for example.
MR. HARRIS replied most schools have a physical education class of
some sort.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH said he knows some schools that don't even
have that.
MR. HARRIS replied most schools have health education classes.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH replied that bicycle training certainly
won't be on the assessment test. He said,
I think, if people had to pick between teaching somebody
about the human vertebrae and a bicycle class because one
or the other is going to be on the test, which one do you
think it will be?
MR. HARRIS replied Representative Kookesh is probably right. He
can see problems with enforcement, and he doesn't see the need for
this type of mandate in towns such as Angoon. He can see the need
in urban areas, however. He also feels that this could be handled
outside the school systems.
Number 2097
CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Mr. Harris whether parents should be
responsible for education, since he believes that parents should be
responsible for punishment.
MR. HARRIS replied yes.
Number 2140
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON said he sees so many families wearing bicycle
helmets today.
MR. HARRIS pointed out that is because bicycle shops and insurance
companies have discovered a problem with liability. As a result,
many bicycle shops require a person to buy a helmet along with
their bicycle. Another reason is because several thousand helmets
have been given away in Juneau in the last few years under the
federal grant mentioned earlier.
Number 2257
JOAN W. DIAMOND testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She
is speaking today as a mother and as a public health worker.
Studies indicate that the cumulative effect of subtle blows to the
head have serious long-term effects such as, learning problems in
school and other behavioral related problems. In teens and adults
subtle blows to the head can result in violent behavior and
incarceration. She supports this legislation for those reasons.
MS. DIAMOND continued. Not all parents, she said, are created
equal. Not all parents have the ability or interest in making sure
that protective devices, such as helmets, are available and used.
This legislation, therefore, creates an equal field for all
children. Thank you.
Number 2343
RONNI SULLIVAN, Executive Director, Southern Region, Emergency
Medical Services Council, Inc., testified via teleconference from
Anchorage. She works with emergency medical providers throughout
Southcentral Alaska. The emergency medical industry, she said, is
in agreement with helmet legislation, for they are the ones who
respond to bicycle accidents involving children.
MS. SULLIVAN continued. This is clearly a public health issue.
She said, "We know the cause. We know what intervention will work,
and we know what needs to be done." She encouraged the committee
members to help protect the children of the state and support the
legislation. Thank you.
Number 2403
BOYD McFAIL, Legislative Affairs Coordinator, Alaskan Bikers
Advocating Training & Education [ABATE], Anchorage Chapter,
testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He has dealt with
children with head injuries, and it is tragic to see. However, a
mandatory helmet law is not the way to go about this. He said,
"You train your children how to ride your bicycle. You train your
children or inform your children to wear a helmet, or you just
insist that your children wear a helmet, is the way it should be
done." A mandate, on the other hand, questions a parent's
responsibility and enforcement. It's the lazy parents, he said,
who are doing a disservice to their children. They are the ones
who should be targeted, but that is an educational issue. He said,
"We believe you should educate, not legislate."
MR. McFAIL continued. There are too many questions regarding the
cost to the state, especially since it is experiencing trouble with
its budget. An ill-fitting helmet is as harmful as not wearing
one, which translates to numerous helmets over the course of a
child's life. He asked, How many helmets will the state give?
This is a question that must be answered because he can't see where
the state would have the resources to...
TAPE 00-18, SIDE B
Number 0001
MR. McFAIL continued. He feels strongly that the state is taking
more and more authority away from parents rather than letting them
raise their children into good citizens. For that reason, he can't
support the legislation.
Number 0043
JUDY MURPHY, Cyclist, came before the committee to testify. When
she put her toddler on the back of her bicycle in 1972, she wanted
something to protect her head. She found a lightweight mountain
climbing helmet; there was no such thing as a child bicycle helmet
at the time. In fact, there wasn't a hard-shell adult bicycle
helmet at the time either. In 1981, when her family became
interested in cycling, they all bought helmets and wore them.
Since that time, she has been very busy with the Juneau Safe Kids
Coalition, a local program that encourages safety, which includes
the use of bicycle helmets. However, she does not favor a law
mandating the use of a helmet.
MS. MURPHY continued. Helmets, she said, are overrated in terms of
increasing safety. Proponents claim that the 43 percent decrease
in fatalities between 1988 and 1998 is the result of helmets and
passage of mandatory helmet laws. This is now true, however. A
decrease is due to a variety of factors, only one of which is
helmets. She cited an increase in the enforcement of drunk driving
laws, better facilities, wider roads, bike lanes, and multi-use
paths as examples. There has also been a decrease in cycling for
children because parents are fearful that they might get hurt.
There has also been better education of motorist and cyclists. All
of these things, she said, have had an effect. As a matter of
fact, that 43-percent figure is matched with a 46 percent decrease
in child pedestrian fatalities. She asked, "Have you seen any
pedestrians wearing helmets lately?"
MS. MURPHY continued. This legislation uses a standard for helmets
that expired five years ago. She cited that since March 10, 1999
all helmets manufactured and imported for sale in the U.S. have to
meet federal safety standards set by the Consumer Product Safety
Commission. This bill does not mention that standard; it
references a standard by the American National Standards Institute,
which was declared obsolete in February of 1995.
MS. MURPHY continued. A provision requiring a bicycle operator
should apply to all with no exceptions based on age or experience,
otherwise getting rid of the helmet becomes a right of passage.
She said, "Kids could hardly wait to turn 16 and destroy the
thing." Also, the economic loss caused by the death or serious
injury of an adult far exceeds that of the loss of a child. Yet if
the law was written to include adults, it would probably be
rejected.
MS. MURPHY continued. A bill should provide an incentive to use
protective equipment. A fine or penalty, for example, should be
revocable upon proof of acquisition of this type of equipment.
This bill does include such a provision. As a result, it won't
protect cyclists who consistently wear a helmet but happen to
forget it one time. She said, "If you forget to do up your seat
belt, you can simply do it up when you realize it and it's safe.
But if you forget your helmet, there's nothing you could do. It
makes you subject to harassment and the inconvenience of proving to
other people that you have a helmet."
MS. MURPHY continued. A bill should address the issue of making
helmets available to all cyclists. As a comparison, all cars are
equipped with seat belts. She said, "If you pass a helmet bill,
then you have to get helmets out to people, and poor people may not
be able to afford them." Although there are free and discounted
helmet programs, there may not be enough for all those who need
one. In addition, there is no guarantee that the organizations
demanding passage of this legislation will continue to provide
funding for free helmets. On the other hand, if these
organizations provide the helmets and the appropriate education,
there will be a high voluntary use.
MS. MURPHY continued. A model bill should be the basis of any
legislation, yet this bill allows municipalities to adopt standards
that are as strict or more stringent, which could be confusing. In
other words, what might be all right in one community might not be
all right in another. How will one decide what to do?
MS. MURPHY continued. This legislation requires a cyclist to wear
a helmet "of good fit that is fastened securely upon a person's
head with a strap," yet there is no provision on how to teach the
placement of a helmet properly. Helmet studies in New Zealand and
Oregon have found that 70 percent of helmets are improperly worn,
which can fail to provide protection and even cause an accident.
MS. MURPHY continued. If a helmet law is passed, police may
concentrate on harassing cyclists who do not wear a helmet, rather
than cyclists who break traffic laws. She said, "We already have
plenty of laws in place that if followed will increase cyclist
safety. Unfortunately, our police are often so poorly educated on
bicycle safety they harass cyclists who are riding safely and
legally and ignore cyclists breaking the law. If the law is not
enforced ... it becomes meaningless. Who cares?"
MS. MURPHY continued. This legislation should include a provision
to the effect that failure to use a helmet shall not be admissible
as evidence of negligence in a court of law. Who caused an
accident and the avoidance of injury are different questions. If
a helmet law does not have such a provision, a driver who runs a
stop light and injures an un-helmeted cyclist can avoid having to
pay anything towards medical expenses or other damages. It could
be argued that it was the cyclist's fault for not wearing a helmet,
which is unjust.
MS. MURPHY continued. The most important part of this issue is
education. A helmet program should be part of a comprehensive
education program in the schools. She said, "It does very little
good to put helmets on cyclists without teaching them to ride
safely." The greatest danger that a child on a bicycle faces is
faulty education provided by incompetent adult cyclists. She said,
"Unfortunately, every adult who has ridden a bicycle a mile thinks
he's an expert on bike safety. This includes adults who can't fix
a tire, can't shift their multi-speed bike, have never read a
bicycle accident study, and do not even know on which side of the
road to ride."
MS. MURPHY continued. American bicycle education, she said, has
long been based on a myth, in that the chief cause of car-bike
collisions is fast motorists overtaking slow cyclists. Yet for
over 25 years it has been known that overtaking accidents are a
small portion of car-bike collisions. More recently, researchers
from the University of North Carolina have found that a mere 8.6
percent of car-bike collisions - in a sample of 3,000 from 8 states
- involved a motorist overtaking a cyclist. Basing education on a
faulty theory can actually increase the dangers to cyclists. The
state of Texas has instituted a super cyclist program funded
primarily with federal dollars. The first phase consists of
certifying skilled cyclists as instructors. The second phase
consists of those instructors instructing physical education
teachers. The final phase consists of those teachers teaching
children to ride safely. Once the program is in action, she said,
the cost of maintenance is minimal.
MS. MURPHY continued. In conclusion, "We want children to be safer
while riding their bikes. What we should be advocating is good
bicycle education. Providing helmets and instruction in how and
why to use them is a far more positive way to encourage use of
helmets than bludgeoning cyclists with a helmet law." She
encouraged the committee members to either make many changes to the
legislation or "forget it."
Number 0458
CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated children under the age of 16 engage in a
variety of dangerous exercises - snowboarding, skateboarding, et
cetera. He asked Ms. Murphy where government should draw the line
so that responsibility is on the parent and so the state is not
dictating to every child that they have to wear a helmet while
engaging in dangerous activities.
MS. MURPHY replied it's the responsibility of the parents, not the
state, for all of those activities.
Number 0521
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked Ms. Murphy who she thinks should pay
for the costs associated with brain injuries.
MS. MURPHY replied everybody pays through insurance and other
"things." The best insurance is prevention. She has seen all too
often a child proceed to do something foolish after putting a
helmet on, which is often encouraged, as people tend to glorify
those who were wearing a helmet when they crashed and it saved
their life, but ignore those who are riding safely.
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH asked Ms. Murphy who she thinks should pay
for the costs associated with education.
MS. MURPHY replied there are federal dollars available. The state
of Texas, she cited, is primarily using federal dollars for the
program that she mentioned earlier.
Number 0573
CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Ms. Murphy whether she could support
requiring the purchase of a helmet with a bicycle or some kind of
a "sign-off" form, thereby protecting retailers and putting
responsibility into the hands of parents. Previous testimony has
indicated that some bicycle shops are worried about liability.
MS. MURPHY replied that she couldn't support a requirement like
that. She certainly couldn't support a requirement of a one-to-one
relationship between a bicycle and a helmet. She said, "I own six
bikes and only have one head."
CHAIRMAN HALCRO replied that would be the reason for a
waiver/sign-off form.
MS. MURPHY expressed that, she thinks, it's a personal and parental
responsibility to decide if one should wear a helmet or not.
Number 0646
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked Ms. Murphy to comment on the children
who don't have two parents or responsible parents. In other words:
What should be done with them when they injure their brain?
MS. MURPHY replied, "If free helmets are available, they'll be
going for them."
Number 0701
SHARRON LOBAUGH, Representative, Juneau Safe Kids Coalition, came
before the committee to testify. She is retired from the state as
an injury prevention specialist. She supports the previous
testifiers and their comments, for they are experts and the facts
that they mentioned are true. The Alaska Trauma Registry, as
mentioned earlier, provides data for all injuries and circumstances
thereof around the state. Juneau happens to be, she said, the
heart of bicycle-injury-country for youngsters, which might be
because of better weather, but nevertheless it's still a problem.
MS. LOBAUGH continued. The question of when the state should limit
and/or restrict deserves a brief history of public health. She
cited that children are now dying from injuries, whereas twenty
years ago children were dying from infections, measles, polio and
other diseases of that nature. It was public health that invented
prevention methods for those types of diseases in the form of
vaccinations. The SAFE KIDS coalition is only about 10 years old,
but it continues to grow every year with more and more interest
from cyclists, police officers, school children, parents, and
public health professionals, as more understand that injuries are
the primary killer of children.
MS. LOBAUGH continued. What should be done? According to Johns
Hopkins University, the three strategies for injury prevention are
engineering, education and environment. Education consists of
public announcements and the such. Engineering consists of seat
belts, air bags and the such. Environment consists of removing
that which can cause an accident. She cited the removal of a rug
to prevent a slip as an example. The most effective of the three
is engineering. She understands, however, that the state can't put
people "in a bubble" to protect them, but it only takes little
falls or soft injuries that can accumulate over time into
behavioral and learning problems. It has been know, she cited,
that a fall from 3 inches onto a hard surface can cause serious
brain damage. It doesn't take very much at all.
Number 1109
MS. LOBAUGH continued. She doesn't think a universal helmet law
would pass, for it is unreasonable. But the state has a public
health and public policy obligation to protect children, for they
are more vulnerable; they are less skilled and tipsy. She thinks
that as soon as a child climbs onto a bicycle it's appropriate to
require a helmet.
Number 1177
MS. LOBAUGH continued. In Juneau, police officers spend a week in
the schools educating students on bicycle safety. It's called
positive policing.
Number 1226
CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Mr. Lobaugh how parents can afford to pay the
fine called for in the bill, especially given the statistic of 40
percent mentioned earlier for those uninsured.
MS. LOBAUGH replied the bill can be amended to include proof of
applying the amount of the fine towards the purchase of a helmet,
which also might act as an incentive. Furthermore, the 40-percent
statistic includes the limitations placed on insurance. For
example, when insurance runs out a person falls under public
domain. She said, "When you're talking about being hit and having
spinal involvement, brain involvement, paraplegic kind of things,
you're running astronomical medical bills." That statistic doesn't
necessarily mean that these individuals are on Medicaid.
Number 1376
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON asked Ms. Lobaugh how the state can be sure
that this legislation won't place a higher standard for some areas,
for it would apply to small villages that don't even have a lot of
vehicular traffic.
MS. LOBAUGH replied she has observed a lot of bicycles and ATVs in
rural areas that don't necessarily use a road, especially in the
winter, which may result in greater risks. Moreover, the bill
refers to public highways, roadways, vehicular ways, bicycle paths
or other public rights-of-ways. She's not sure, therefore, that
this would apply to every village because of the definition of
public right-of-way.
Number 1616
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated he's not suggesting that this
shouldn't apply to everybody; he's just inquiring as to whether or
not this could be accommodated across the state.
Number 1639
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH stated Angoon is considered an off-road
system. They are not considered part of the Public Highway System;
they are not connected to the major highways of the state, which
affects licensing and insurance as well.
MS. LOBAUGH stated the data for the rural areas shows a high rate
of injuries. For example, the Northwest Arctic region shows a rate
of 254 brain injuries per 100,000; and the North Slop region shows
a rate of 234 brain injuries per 100,000. The Anchorage region, on
the other hand, shows a rate of 69 brain injuries per 100,000.
REPRESENTATIVE HUDSON stated that the sponsor needs to specify the
implications in the bill. They are not clear.
MR. KNIGHT pointed out that the legislation, as currently written,
would apply to all areas of the state. The sponsor wants to focus
on the entire state because the highest incidences of brain
injuries occur outside the urban areas.
MR. KNIGHT continued. Contrary to earlier testimony, he said, this
legislation would not make anybody a criminal. He also pointed out
that the National Helmet Program through grants and such offer
helmets for a reasonable price. He cited $5.95 and $6.75 as
examples. The sponsor expects that municipalities, boroughs and
regional corporations would apply for such grants. The funds are
available.
Number 1870
CHAIRMAN HALCRO closed the meeting to public testimony.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced that he does not plan to move the bill
out of committee, and asked for discussion amongst the committee
members.
Number 1903
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN expressed that the legislation needs to
reflect the new standard that was mentioned earlier rather than the
one that expired five years ago.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Representative Kemplen to consider a
provision for a "fix-it" ticket, as discussed earlier. He's
concerned about the financial implications for low-income families,
especially given the 40-percent figure mentioned by Ms. Moore in
her testimony. Someone should have the ability to show that the
problem has been fixed, similar to what is done for broken tail
lights and burned out head lights.
MR. KNIGHT pointed out that there is already such a provision in
the bill [Section 3, paragraph (1)]. It reads as follows:
... a court may waive the fine imposed under this
paragraph upon presentation of evidence that the violator
has purchased or procured a bicycle helmet and
demonstrates the intention of using the helmet as
required by law ...
CHAIRMAN HALCRO pointed out that the language reads "may" waive.
He suggested that the sponsor look at making it more definite.
Number 2008
CHAIRMAN HALCRO held the bill in committee.
HB 282 - OFF-ROAD VEHICLE HELMET LAW
CHAIRMAN HALCRO announced the next order of business as House Bill
282, "An Act requiring a person under 16 years of age to wear a
helmet when operating or riding on an off-road vehicle; and
providing for an effective date."
CHAIRMAN HALCRO opened the meeting to public testimony.
Number 2055
SCOTT HAMANN, Representative, Alaskan Bikers Advocating Training &
Education [ABATE], Kenai Chapter, testified via teleconference from
Kenai. ABATE is very concerned about the safety and welfare of
children. However, this legislation is inherently flawed for
several reasons.
MR. HAMANN continued. First, mandatory use of a helmet is
controversial. Look at air bags. The government has forced air
bags into cars and children are killed because of them in certain
types of crashes. The same is true for helmets. A helmet can add
extra stress to a victim's neck due to forces of inertia. ABATE
believes that individuals should be able to choose what is and what
is not proper safety gear. ABATE also believes, and will always
believe, that it is not the role of government to protect people
from themselves.
MR. HAMANN continued. Second, the law would be virtually
unenforceable, for law enforcement does not have the resources.
ABATE believes that it would be a gross mismanagement of the
people's tax dollars to have law enforcement officers running down
children for not wearing a helmet when there are far more serious
crimes going unpunished.
MR. HAMANN continued. Third, the best way to encourage safe and
responsible behavior is to educate. If the state was really
serious about safety, it should be running radio and television
advertisements on safe and responsible behavior, instead of
focusing on legislation that turns individuals into criminals.
Mandatory helmet laws, he said, never solve the problem(s). Drug
laws are a prime example of that. He said, "Educate. Don't
legislate."
MR. HAMANN continued. Finally, the cost to society is an issue
that is so far out there because the biggest killer in the country
is heart disease brought on by obesity. He said, "I got to tell
you. I'm a fat man. I like putting extra butter and sour cream on
my potato. I really don't need government sticking their nose into
my business; telling me that I'm costing society a bunch of money."
He urged the committee members to keep the bill in committee.
Number 2290
MARTHA MOORE, Trauma Registry Coordinator, Community Health &
Emergency Medical Services, Division of Public Health, Department
of Health & Social Services, came before the committee to testify.
Research shows that the use of a helmet can reduce the risk of
death among ATV operators by approximately 42 percent, and can
reduce the likelihood of a head injury in a non-fatal accident by
approximately 64 percent. The injury rate is more than double for
children compared to those over the age of 35, primarily due to
immaturity, a lack of skills, and poor decisions. ATVs and
snowmobiles are heavy and fast and at times unstable, and can be
difficult for a small person to control.
MS. MOORE continued. There is a motorcycle helmet law for children
under the age of 18, which is similar to this legislation. A total
injury prevention program includes the promotion of helmet use;
education of safety standards; and making helmets available,
affordable and acceptable.
TAPE 00-19, SIDE A
Number 0001
MS. MOORE continued. She referred to a program in Kotzebue called
"Helmet in the Arctic;" in which, a variety of techniques to
promote the use of helmets were used. She cited media, education,
role modeling, discounts for helmets, and local option laws as
examples. At the end of the program, the use of helmets increased
20 percent among young people.
MS. MOORE continued. In Alaska, she cited that about 50 children
a year are hospitalized because of ATV or snowmobile accidents.
The hospital costs range around $9,000 to $10,000 per hospital
stay, of which, about 1 out of 5 bill Medicaid or are uninsured.
Number 0118
MS. MOORE continued. Because of the abundant use of off-road
vehicles in rural areas and villages, Alaska Natives are at a
greater risk than non-Natives for these types of injuries. In
1991, she cited that Alaska Native children billed Medicaid less
than 10 percent of the time, while today they bill Medicaid almost
40 percent of the time, which illustrates that this is not only a
health issue but a cost issue for the state.
Number 0185
CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Mr. Knight whether he contacted any retailers
while researching this issue.
MR. KNIGHT replied yes. He called around to see the average cost
for helmets.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Mr. Knight whether he asked retailers about
any type of safety training that they provide.
MR. KNIGHT replied no. He asked whether they sold helmets. The
reply was sometimes. In other words, sometimes they suggested to
a customer to buy a helmet and sometimes they did not.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO commented that his staff called various retailers
in Anchorage and they discovered one that does not allow a customer
who has bought an ATV to leave the store until the completion of a
training/safety video.
Number 0274
MS. MOORE pointed out that, according to the Alaska Trauma
Registry, children who are injured are between the ages of five and
eight. She said, "Whatever happens between that retailer and by
the time snowmobiles or that ATV gets into the village and who
actually uses it, I think, is pretty much different stories."
Number 0328
DAN COFFEY, President, Alaskan Bikers Advocating Training &
Education [ABATE], Valdez Chapter, testified via teleconference
from Valdez. Parents should be controlling the ATVs and 4-wheelers
that their children are riding. He has traveled and lived in Bush
Alaska for many years. He said, "If you can imagine living in a
village with no running water or sewer, then trying to make your
14-year-old put on a helmet to take that honey bucket to the
lagoon, I think you're going to have problems."
MR. COFFEY continued. This legislation calls for a helmet to meet
standards of the United States Department of Transportation, which
can cost up to $100, and they don't last forever. A family with
many children, therefore, would find it hard to meet the deadline
of July 1. A family would also find it hard to keep up with their
children as they grow. As indicated by ealier testimony, one size
does not fit all, and it can be more dangerous to use a helmet that
does not fit than to use no helmet at all. Thank you.
Number 0439
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH asked Mr. Coffey why ATV or snowmobile
operators are held in a different light; the state requires
motorcycle drivers to be licensed.
MR. COFFEY replied that 4-wheelers and snowmobiles can be the
family car, especially in northern Alaska where the winters are
extremely cold. He said, "I know that my beaver hat is sure a lot
warmer than a helmet that was made in Southern California."
Number 0519
REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH asked Mr. Coffey why he doesn't see a
bicycle as any different than an ATV or snowmobile. He is trying
to determine why he is opposed to both pieces of legislation [HB
282 and HB 283]; they deal with different types of vehicles.
MR. COFFEY replied that both pieces of legislation call for a
mandatory helmet law.
Number 0562
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked Mr. Coffey whether he is aware of the
fact that Nome, Bethel and the North Slope Borough have already
passed similar ordinances requiring the use of helmets for these
types of vehicles.
MR. COFFEY replied yes. In fact, Valdez has also passed an
ordinance requiring the mandatory use of a helmet for ATVs. But,
he said, if it's a local issue then it should be treated at the
local level.
Number 0640
BOYD McFAIL, Legislative Affairs Coordinator, Alaskan Bikers
Advocating Training & Education [ABATE], Anchorage Chapter,
testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He pointed out that
manufactures will not guarantee protection for a helmet that has
been dropped from a height of 3 feet. In addition, the last
DOT-approved helmet was manufacture in the U.S. in the 1970s. They
are now all being manufactured offshore because of liability laws.
He can't see how the state can advocate that a helmet will protect
an individual when manufacturers won't even build them in the U.S.
He also can't see why the state is insisting that helmets are the
fix-all for this problem, especially since death can occur while
wearing a helmet.
MR. McFAIL continued. ABATE is looking at establishing a training
curriculum for the use of off-road vehicles. ABATE believes that
education and proper training will eliminate the cause of
accidents. He's not saying that there isn't a need for safety
gear; he's just saying that it's more important to prevent an
accident rather than to prevent an injury. It's a lot easier to
prevent an injury by preventing an accident, and the only way to
prevent an accident is to educate the person operating the vehicle.
MR. McFAIL continued. He believes that this will put a heavy
burden on the outlying areas of the state where ATV and snowmobiles
are the primary modes of transportation.
MR. McFAIL continued. He's thinks that this is an issue of
usurping a parent's role in raising their children. Thank you.
Number 1160
DEBRA M. RUSSELL, Ph.D., CRC, CBIS; and Director, Brain Injury
Association of Alaska, testified via teleconference from Anchorage.
She will discuss brain injuries in general, for it doesn't matter
whether the injury is from a bicycle or snowmobile. These types of
laws, she said, are not for the average person; they are for those
who make the wrong decisions, which equate to about 5 percent to 10
percent of the population. The state and communities end up
incurring the costs. According to a study from 1996 to 1998, about
2,000 individuals died from brain injuries in the state. Alaska is
the number one state, per capita, for brain injuries. The simple
act of putting on a helmet, she said, saves a lot of lives and
misery for everybody.
DR. RUSSELL continued. The association, she cited, distributed
1,200 multi-sport helmets last year in conjunction with the Alaska
State Troopers and the Alaska Native Medical Center, and that's
still not enough. She cited that 12 percent of those in an
accident, no matter how strong the helmet, will die due to trauma
associated with speed and impact. But the average person who wears
a helmet will have a better quality of life or experience no damage
at all. It's the responsibility of the state to protect the few
children who do not have the support they need from their families.
She also believes in requiring a helmet for adults, but children
should be protected first. It's a lifetime of misery, she said,
for the survivor and the entire family. The average person with a
brain injury will have deficits and trauma for the rest of their
life, if they survive. The state, however, doesn't have the
necessary support systems for these individuals, which is why it's
all the more important for the state to look at wearing helmets as
a prevention.
Number 1484
CHAIRMAN HALCRO asked Dr. Russell whether there has been any
research done on those involved in a bicycle accident who weren't
wearing a helmet but owned one.
DR. RUSSELL replied no. She has seen, however, a child put a
helmet on then turn the corner and take it off because it's not
cool, which is why a law is needed. A child will probably follow
the law.
Number 1550
CHAIRMAN HALCRO stated that he sees children today wearing helmets
more than ever. It seems that the awareness level has increased,
which relates to earlier testimony indicating that public health
has changed from fighting diseases to fighting injuries.
DR. RUSSELL replied that the average, responsible parent provides
helmets for their children, but unfortunately there are still
hundreds of children who die from brain injuries from not wearing
a helmet. She works with hundreds of children who have behavioral
and educational problems as the result of brain injuries. There is
a high rate of individuals with brain injuries in the criminal
system. This is a long-term problem for the state, when all an
individual needs to do is put on a helmet. There are a lot of
programs that can provide a helmet. She said, "If we save one
child. One child. Can you put a price on that? You can't."
Number 1751
SHARRON LOBAUGH, Representative, Juneau Safe Kids Coalition, came
before the committee to testify. She cited that, according to the
Fatal Accident Reporting System for 1998, of those who were killed
by incidents involving ATVs and snowmobiles in the state, 60 were
not wearing a helmet, 9 were wearing a helmet, and 8 were unknown,
for a total of 77. She encouraged the committee members to
consider the previous testimony in relation to education,
especially since the long-term recovery costs, as Dr. Russell
indicated, can equate to $100,000 to $200,000 per year in Medicaid
money. That is, she said, the real impact of this issue, along
with the societal costs associated with the cumulative effects of
the non-serious types of brain injuries. It's not like curing a
broken bone.
MS. LOBAUGH continued. She referred to the study mentioned earlier
in Kotzebue and noted that the most effective way to encourage the
use of a helmet was to decrease the cost, which also increased the
percentage of youth riders by 50 percent for snowmobiles. There
was no increase for ATV riders, however. A big step in helping
towards that, she said, would be to make the use of a helmet
mandatory.
Number 1974
KEVIN HAND, Staff to House Transportation Standing Committee,
Alaska State Legislature, came before the committee to discuss his
conversations with retailers in Anchorage. In discussions with
retailers who sell ATVs and snowmobiles, he said, they generally
support mandating the sale of a helmet or signing a type of waiver
with the sale of a new ATV. They generally support such a concept
because of technological advances; in which, young people do not
have the body mass to safely operate engines of 700, 800 and 900
cc. He said, "I'm sure if anybody has ridden a snowmobile,
especially a larger one, and gone at a pretty good clip and tried
to turn very sharply. If your weight isn't shifted that thing's
going to roll on you, no question about it."
MR. HAND continued. In a discussion with a Honda dealer in
Anchorage, he indicated that a lot of parents want to buy a 300 cc
3-wheeler for their 9-year-old son. The dealer will often ask the
parents, "Would you let your 9-year-old operate your car?" The
parents, of course, reply no. The dealer then points out that
their child would be safer driving a car with safety features than
a powerful snowmobile down a trail. It sounds absurd to parents,
he said, but it is a truth.
MR. HAND continued. The Honda dealer also indicated that many of
the deaths related to the use of off-road vehicles are the result
of alcohol, and some are related to a person falling off of their
vehicle into a body of water and drowning, which is a different
twist on the statistics. Mr. Hand also noted that the Honda dealer
supports the use of a helmet, and at one time gave a helmet away
with the purchase of an off-road vehicle, but he found that to be
economically unfeasible.
MR. HAND continued. The dealers that he spoke with support a
helmet law for younger riders because of recklessness and the
inability to control such powerful machines, and for liability
reasons. He cited that the Polaris dealer in Anchorage mandates
that a person watch a safety video before "walking off the lot"
with their new 4-wheeler. He also cited that Honda of North
America sends a safety video to the address-of-record. The dealers
that he spoke with also support a signature with a waiver
indicating that the person understands the risks involved. In
general, the dealers were in support of these concepts from a
liability standpoint for both the manufactures and the sellers.
Number 2181
MS. LOBAUGH commented that Alaska led the fight to ban 3-wheelers
about 10 years ago with the Consumer Product Safety Commission,
primarily because of instability. As part of that ruling, the
commission required dealers to sell their products with safety
information. She also pointed out that, according to consumer
product regulations, a dealer cannot sell a 3-wheeler to those
under the age of 16, and that the commission conducts spot-checks
on a regular basis. The ban, however, was recalled last year,
which means that in the near future 3-wheelers will be sold again
in the state. It is necessary, therefore, that dealers know of the
hazards and encourage safety.
Number 2300
CHAIRMAN HALCRO closed the meeting to public testimony.
CHAIRMAN HALCRO held the bill in committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, Chairman
Halcro adjourned the House Transportation Committee meeting at 3:24
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|