02/17/2004 01:30 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 17, 2004
1:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jim Holm, Chair
Representative Beverly Masek
Representative Dan Ogg
Representative Nick Stepovich
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Vic Kohring
Representative Mary Kapsner
Representative Albert Kookesh
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 392
"An Act relating to motor vehicle safety belt violations."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 387
"An Act relating to fines for offenses committed within school
zones."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 438
"An Act relating to motorists moving over or slowing down for
emergency vehicles."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 392
SHORT TITLE: SEAT BELT VIOLATION AS PRIMARY OFFENSE
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) HEINZE
01/20/04 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/20/04 (H) TRA, JUD
02/17/04 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE CHERYLL HEINZE
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 392 as sponsor.
JON BITTNER, Staff
to Representative Cheryl Heinze
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 392, answered
questions.
ALLEN STOREY, Lieutenant
Central Office
Division of Alaska State Troopers
Department of Public Safety (DPS)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During testimony on HB 392, provided
information and answered questions.
DON SMITH, Administrator
Alaska Highway Safety Office (AHSO)
Division of Statewide Planning
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 392.
KEVIN E. QUINLAN, Chief
Safety Advocacy Division
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
Washington, D.C.
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 392, provided
pertinent information.
MARTHA MOORE, Coordinator
Alaska Trauma Registry
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Related the department's support of HB 392.
JOAN DIAMOND
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified to the need for Alaska to have a
seat belt law.
ROB KAUFFMAN
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information with regard to the
Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center study as well
as general information related to the State of Washington's
experience with a law such as that proposed in HB 392.
JANE FELLMAN, Coordinator
Kenai Peninsula Safe Kids Coalition
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support for HB 392.
SCOTT HAMANN
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 392.
WALT MONEGAN, Chief
Anchorage Police Department
Municipality of Anchorage
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 392, related his
thoughts as a member of law enforcement.
JENNIFER RUDINGER, Executive Director
Alaska Civil Liberties Union (AkCLU)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 392.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 04-4, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR JIM HOLM called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. Representatives Holm,
Masek, and Ogg were present at the call to order.
Representative Stepovich arrived as the meeting was in progress.
Representative Gatto was also in attendance.
HB 392-SEAT BELT VIOLATION AS PRIMARY OFFENSE
CHAIR HOLM announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 392, "An Act relating to motor vehicle safety
belt violations."
The committee took a brief at-ease.
Number 0110
REPRESENTATIVE CHERYLL HEINZE, Alaska State Legislature,
speaking as the sponsor, explained that HB 392 does not add
another law because it is already against the law [not to wear a
seat belt while riding in a motor vehicle]; instead the bill
would make it a primary [offense] for failure to wear a seat
belt. This would mean that a police officer can stop a
[vehicle] if an [occupant] is not wearing a seat belt. She
offered the scenario of a senator from Alaska who was visiting
Washington State and wore a seat belt, when normally she
wouldn't, because it was required by law. She suggested that
the law works. She talked about a 16-year-old boy being killed
because he wasn't wearing a seat belt. If this law is passed,
[the legislature] may be a part of saving a life. She remarked,
"It could be no greater gift that I could give back to the
people of Alaska then to save a life." She explained that 37
Alaskans died [in accidents] last year while unrestrained, and
statistics suggest that half of those people [could have been
saved by wearing a seat belt]. She remarked, "What if we could
save one, and what if it were or had been the 16-year-old boy;
... that's why I'm here; that's why I'm asking for your help;
and that's why I firmly believe that we must not walk away from
this responsibility."
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked if an officer can take other
actions when stopping a vehicle for a seat belt violation.
Number 0425
JON BITTNER, Staff to Representative Cheryl Heinze, Alaska State
Legislature, responded that he believed so, but he wasn't
certain. He deferred the question to the department.
Number 0556
ALLEN STOREY, Lieutenant, Central Office, Division of Alaska
State Troopers, Department of Public Safety (DPS), related that
this legislation would give DPS the ability to take enforcement
action for a seat belt offense the same as other traffic
offenses. He said if an officer observes a person making an
illegal turn or rolling through a stop sign, the officer would
contact the person based on his or her observation of the
offense. He said if an officer observed a person driving
without a seat belt, the officer could make contact with the
person and determine whether a citation or a verbal warning is
appropriate. Lieutenant Storey said currently, an officer has
to wait and observe the vehicle committing another infraction
before making contact to talk about a seat belt violation.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked about stopping a vehicle for
other purposes and then discussing the seat belt violation.
LIEUTENANT STOREY pointed out that there are many good people
who, for a variety of reasons, don't wear a seat belt, and
aren't driving in a manner that currently allows [law
enforcement] to make contact to discuss wearing a seat belt. He
noted that there has been some discussion indicating this will
give law enforcement the ability to check seat belts, which is
not true. A violation would have to be observed, and therefore
the occupants of a [moving vehicle] would have to be observed
unrestrained, at which point the officer could make contact and
decide what enforcement action to take, he explained.
Number 0720
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked if it is possible to determine, with
certainty, that a seat belt is not being used.
LIEUTENANT STOREY replied no. He said if there is any doubt in
the officer's mind, contact would not be made. However, of
primary concern to law enforcement are blatant violations in
which children or adults are out of position as a result of
improper restraint. "I'm sure you ... frequently see children
hopping around ... and moving around in the seats; those are the
kinds of situations that we have concerns about," he remarked.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked if it would be possible to ascertain
that a seat belt would have prevented a fatality.
LIEUTENANT STOREY deferred to the legislative liaison for DPS.
From the perspective of law enforcement, Lieutenant Storey said
the first thing he looks for at a serious injury accident is
whether seat belts were utilized or not. If no seat belts were
worn in a serious accident, there is a much higher probability
of serious physical injuries or fatalities, and therefore the
investigation proceeds in that light. The primary concern of
law enforcement officers at accident scenes is whether seat
belts were worn or not because that provides them knowledge
regarding whether it's going to be a serious injury accident.
Number 0857
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE asked if drunk drivers are noticed more
when not wearing a seat belt.
LIEUTENANT STOREY answered that it's certainly one of the things
that help develop a reasonable suspicion and then probable
cause. He explained that a person who may be under the
influence of alcohol is impaired and may very likely choose not
to use a seat belt or simply overlook it.
Number 0962
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked what currently prevents an
officer who witnesses gross negligence, such as an unrestrained
child, from stopping the vehicle.
LIEUTENANT STOREY said in situations involving unrestrained
children, the officer would make contact and "ask them to do the
right thing and get everybody secured." If a driver or
passenger is not wearing a seat belt, it is likely that the
children are also not restrained. He highlighted that children
learn from their parents, and therefore [law enforcement] would
like to be able to make contact and have those kinds of
discussions when the driver or passenger isn't wearing a seat
belt.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked if a vehicle can be stopped if
that situation is observed.
LIEUTENANT STOREY replied yes.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH expressed concern about "guess work."
LIEUTENANT STOREY clarified that he'd like to call it
professional instincts. The troopers won't stop people for seat
belt violations unless there is a clear observation that there's
a seat belt violation occurring. "We have good discretion on
whether we want to cite that person or simply have a discussion
with them about the use of the seat belt and the importance of
it. That's typical officer discretion on traffic contact," he
related.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH remarked, "We trust that you guys will
handle it right as we trust people to wear seat belts."
LIEUTENANT STOREY replied, "I appreciate your trust."
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE asked how much seat belt usage would go up
if this were put into law and the public was aware of it.
LIEUTENANT STOREY related that during his involvement in a
couple of holiday enforcement efforts when it's widely known
that enforcement of seat belts is a priority with law
enforcement, the use of seat belts typically increased to
between 10 and 20 percent during those periods of interest.
However, without continued emphasis, it tends to taper back off
again. Lieutenant Storey further related that the Alaska
Highway Safety Office statistics show that the current law
caused seat belt usage to increase, although it still needs to
be improved. "We're still not at the levels we should be," he
remarked.
CHAIR HOLM mentioned profiling, and said he somewhat shared
Representative Stepovich's concern that "we don't automatically
consider somebody as a law breaker just by chance."
Number 1185
DON SMITH, Administrator, Alaska Highway Safety Office (AHSO),
Division of Program Development, Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities, provided the following testimony:
I've only been in this job since November 1, of last
year, if you'd have asked me this question six months
ago or eight months ago, I probably would've thrown
out my libertarian, conservative views that I don't
want government telling me what to do .... You've
heard that, I'm sure, from lots of people, but after
I've had an opportunity for almost four months to look
at some of the statistics, the reports, the
information that we generate every month. ... I've
come to the conclusion that we definitely need to have
a primary seat belt law.
MR. SMITH said he thought that passing this law would probably
increase seat belt usage in Alaska by at least 11 percentage
points, which would put it in a range of 90 percent usage. If
this law were on the books, it could save 6 - 10 lives next
year. Mr. Smith informed the committee that seat belt usage
increased during the past year due to the "Click It or Ticket"
ads, which emphasized the need to buckle up. [The ad campaign]
has raised the rate of usage during the past year by about 13
points. Mr. Smith suggested that approximately 40 percent of
people involved in traffic accidents in Alaska were not wearing
seat belts and 95 people lost their lives in 2003. He said
[putting this bill into law] would definitely save some lives,
and furthermore the chance of receiving [a citation] will make
some people be more careful.
MR. SMITH pointed out that those accidents with unrestrained
people cost millions of dollars for which all of society pays.
Therefore, he emphasized the importance of wearing a seat belt,
which is an easy thing to do, doesn't really cause all that much
trouble for the public, and saves lives. In conclusion, he
strongly urged the committee to pass the bill.
Number 1415
KEVIN E. QUINLAN, Chief, Safety Advocacy Division, National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), informed the committee that
the bill packet contained his written testimony and a brochure
entitled, "NTSB Most Wanted." He explained that the NTSB is an
independent federal transportation and accident investigation
agency that [investigates] highway crashes on a selective basis,
because it can't investigate all crashes. Since the states have
primacy in highway crashes, the NTSB works closely with the
states. The NTSB investigates but does not regulate because it
has no regulatory authority. More importantly, the [NTSB] does
not tell states what to do, rather it asks the states to do the
right thing based on its investigations. He noted that the NTSB
is known for its scientific integrity and objectivity.
MR. QUINLAN explained that 90 percent of all transportation
fatalities occur on highways and seat belts are the number one
defense against motor vehicle injuries and fatalities.
Furthermore, seat belts prevent ejections, 30 percent of
ejections occur when the individual isn't wearing a seat belt.
Moreover, approximately 73 percent of ejections result in death.
In Alaska there are a lot of light trucks and SUVs [sport-
utility vehicles], which are not constructed with crumple zones
as cars are, and when those vehicles roll it tends to be
catastrophic. Mr. Quinlan related that it's been estimated that
a 90 percent nationwide usage rate would result in at least
5,000 fewer deaths and 130,000 fewer injuries. He said it is
kind of an anomaly because seat belt use decreases with crash
severity. Nearly 600 vehicle occupants died in Alaska from 1994
through 2002, of which 64 percent were unrestrained. Although
recent figures suggest [the percent of untrestrained occupants
who died] has decreased to 58 percent, it certainly isn't
enough.
Number 1579
MR. QUINLAN, in response to Representative Gatto, related that
seat belts are between 45 and 75 percent effective in reducing
fatalities. He explained that the 45 percent relates to cars
and drivers, but does not include back seat passengers. The 75
percent relates to pickup trucks, which have different belt
systems and may not have crush protection. Therefore, it is
more important for those driving SUVs and pickup trucks to wear
a seat belt. He remarked, "Based on that multi-year comparison,
if you take a very conservative 50 percent, you could have saved
140 lives." If this law is passed, he said seat belt use will
increase among the highest risk drivers, which are teenagers who
want to keep their driver's licenses and don't want to get an
offense. He said [teenager's] current usage rate is between 30
and 40 percent, and most teenagers killed in crashes are not
wearing seat belts. [This law] will also affect those drivers
who have [been drinking] because those people do not want to
give a police officer probable cause to stop them and find that
they've been drinking. He suggested that seat belt use among
older drivers will increase [with the passage of this law]
because those drivers tend to be law abiding citizens.
MR. QUINLAN remarked:
In 2002, there were 37 fatalities in Alaska, so just
for 2002, if you take the 50 percent, that's 18 lives,
and using national numbers - now, I know your ...
societal costs are higher in Alaska, [and] your
medical costs are somewhat higher, but I don't have
access to those numbers - so we use the federal
numbers, and the federal numbers are $977,000 for
every fatality and $1.1 million for every serious
injury. That means, just on fatalities alone, that
you would save $18 million dollars in one year ....
MR. QUINLAN suggested that [$18 million savings] is a
significant amount of money, especially in a tight budget
situation. He mentioned the Alaska Injury Prevention Center
report on safety belt use, which he characterized as a very good
report, although the numbers are a little conservative because
the report doesn't include fatalities in which the person dies
at that roadside, only those admitted to the hospital. The
report provides a measure of the injury costs, which he thought
was fairly important. Mr. Quinlan highlighted that Washington
State adopted primary safety belt legislation a few years ago
and now has a 95 percent usage rate. He related that Harborview
Medical Center, a trauma center in Seattle, estimated that it
would save $55 million in one year from injury crashes alone,
not including fatalities.
MR. QUINLAN said the law, in other states, has increased seat
belt usage by 15 percentage points, and should increase seat
belt usage in Alaska to 90-95 percent. The aforementioned is
accomplished with public information and periodic enforcement in
an effort to remind people to be responsible. The greatest
savings in medical costs occur when [seat belt] usage reaches 90
percent, he noted. He pointed out that 20 states and a district
now have primary safety belt laws, and several other states are
considering it because it really does work. He said the
brochure indicates that primary seat belt legislation is on the
NTSB's list of "Most Wanted" safety recommendations. Noting
that the state has primacy in this area, which is important, he
said it would be inappropriate and probably ineffective to
regulate from Washington, D.C.
CHAIR HOLM said that hasn't stopped the federal government very
much.
MR. QUINLAN said the NTSB does not do that. The NTSB strongly
supports the adoption of HB 392 because it is the most effective
action that can be taken to reduce highway fatalities and
injuries every year. The gains will be permanent and it's the
right thing to do, he opined.
Number 1907
REPRESENTATIVE OGG asked why the greatest cost savings occur
when seat belt usage is at the 90 percent or above level.
MR. QUINLAN replied that it's because teen drivers and impaired
drivers are the highest risk individuals. He mentioned the
curve of crash risk for all drivers, which illustrates the
aforementioned. He explained that [the use of seat belts]
produces more of an effect, reducing fatalities, with the higher
risk groups.
REPRESENTATIVE OGG asked, "You won't get to those people until
you start getting 90 percent compliance?"
MR. QUINLAN clarified, "As you get to the 90 percent, you're
getting more and more benefit." He acknowledged that at each
step along the way there will be benefit, although more benefit
will result as the 90 percent is reached because virtually
everyone will be buckled up.
REPRESENTATIVE OGG inquired as to why there is no discussion
with regard to safety belts on school buses.
MR. QUINLAN offered to provide the committee with a report that
NTSB did no this topic. He pointed out that there is a
fundamental difference with the structure of school buses and
cars, specifically the seats. The seats in cars aren't meant to
compartmentalize the rider as they are in school buses. Mr.
Quinlan said that it would be preferable to design school buses
such that the bus seats would compartmentalize the rider and
belt the rider. He explained that in school bus crashes in
which there are two-point belts, the body jack-knifes forward
causing the head of the child to hit the bar on the seat in
front of the child. Mr. Quinlan further explained that there
are certain situations in which school buses with belts actually
cause injuries. The fundamental answer is that school bus seats
need to be redesigned to accommodate seat belts, which would be
the most effective option. In further response to
Representative Ogg, Mr. Quinlan confirmed that with the present
configuration of school buses, it's safer not to have seat belts
than to have them.
Number 2085
CHAIR HOLM interjected that it's also true that it's not
particularly in the best interest of a truck driver to be
anchored to a seat. He also mentioned that it would be
preferable to lay down when hitting a moose rather than staying
upright [as the seat belt would keep one crashing into a moose].
MR. QUINLAN noted that he read an article about Honda designing
passenger cars to be more forgiving to pedestrians while
preserving the integrity of the passenger compartment of the
vehicle. In further response to Chair Holm, Mr. Quinlan
recalled that Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulation (FMCSR)
23.391 already requires that truck drivers use seat belts. Many
states have adopted FMCSR in whole or substantial part, and
therefore he guessed that Alaska probably has adopted those.
CHAIR HOLM highlighted that Alaska consists of urban road
systems as well as many small rural road systems or no road
systems. He questioned the [appropriateness] of having a seat
belt law in a location without [much traffic]. He recalled
growing up in Alaska and traveling on the tractor or in the back
of a pickup truck. Chair Holm questioned translating [federal]
policy in a state as broad as Alaska.
MR. QUINLAN clarified that this policy isn't out of Washington,
D.C., but rather has been developed by the states. Mr. Quinlan
suggested that the second largest state, Texas, has a primary
safety belt law and its usage rate is in the high 80 percent.
He further suggested that the seat belt law would be more
important in rural areas because the roads are less forgiving.
Number 2264
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH agreed that it's dangerous to drive
without wearing a seat belt. However, he inquired as to the
statistics that would specify that an individual not wearing his
or her seat belt would endanger others on the road.
MR. QUINLAN said that those not wearing seat belts impact
others. He noted his interpretation of Section 1.1 of the
constitution to specify a responsibility as well as right with
regard to wearing a seat belt.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH highlighted that the constitution also
includes the right to privacy, which is the issue of most
concern for him.
MR. QUINLAN specified that this legislation would set minimum
standards statewide.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO posed a situation in which a 16 year old
drives into a bridge abutment, whether that individual wore a
seat belt is irrelevant. Although the statement that seat belts
save lives is made, he said he has never seen the data because
it's virtually impossible to obtain data specifying that a life
would've been saved by a seat belt. However, he acknowledged
that when one has been ejected and the vehicle rolls over the
individual, it's clear [that life would've been saved by a seat
belt].
TAPE 04-4, SIDE B
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO questioned the data related to those
individuals who [due to wearing a seat belt] stayed in the
vehicle as it rolled, but would've been saved had they been
ejected early on. Representative Gatto expressed concern with
regard to making a law based on suspicious and somewhat
fragmented data.
Number 2363
MR. QUINLAN opined that the state does have the data because
there are accident reconstructionists who can determine whether
accidents were survivable had seat belts been worn. Mr. Quinlan
related his understanding that Representative Gatto was asking
for specific cases and an aggregation of those, which he didn't
have. However, he predicted that the representative from the
injury prevention center would probably be able to relate cases
that weren't survivable when seat belts were worn and when they
weren't worn. Mr. Quinlan stated that it is known that crashes
at very high speeds are relatively rare and seat belts are very
effective [in crashes] at speeds up to 45 or 50 miles per hour
(mph).
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH surmised then that the statistics that
Mr. Quinlan provided are based on people protecting themselves.
MR. QUINLAN replied yes, and added that [wearing seat belts]
saves money.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH expressed his desire to see statistics
that illustrate that when one buckles up, it protects other
lives.
MR. QUINLAN posed a situation in which one is traveling down a
curvy road in excess of the speed limit. [If that individual
isn't buckled in], he or she will move around within the vehicle
and have less control than otherwise. He was sure the engineers
could quantify the aforementioned.
Number 2197
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH reiterated his concern with regard to
the right to privacy.
MR. QUINLAN related his understanding that the right to privacy
on a public road is limited. Mr. Quinlan highlighted that
parents who don't buckle up are less likely to buckle up their
children, and therefore this legislation would be beneficial in
that realm as well. In further response to Representative
Stepovich, Mr. Quinlan confirmed that children up to age four
must be restrained. He noted the difficulty the police officer
has in determining the age of the child from a distance. Only
in the most egregious cases would the police officer stop a car
because the police officer must have probable cause.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH recalled from prior testimony that the
same difficulties in relation to whether the individual is
wearing a seat belt would occur under this legislation.
MR. QUINLAN pointed out that it's easy to determine whether
someone is wearing a seat belt with automobiles, unless the
automobile was built before 1975 when the three-point [seat
belt] was required. However, it's difficult to determine [if an
individual is wearing a seat belt] in pickup trucks because they
have a longer lead-in to having the three-point [seat belts].
CHAIR HOLM surmised the question to be: "Wherein does
government take a stand and say you have a privilege and these
are the things you have to do to maintain that privilege."
Driving is seen as a privilege rather than a right. However, he
acknowledged the validity of Representatives Gatto and
Stepovich's line of questioning regarding where does society
step in on matters such as these.
MR. QUINLAN interjected that the government sets the minimum.
Number 2029
MARTHA MOORE, Coordinator, Alaska Trauma Registry, Department of
Health and Social Services (DHSS), related the department's
support of HB 392. She then paraphrased from the following
written testimony [original punctuation provided]:
There were about 43,000 (42,931) Alaskans involved in
a car, truck or bus crash in 2001 according to the
Department of Transportation's Traffic Accidents
Report. (In about 3/4 of these crashes we know seat
belt usage.) The unbelted occupants were 19 times
more likely to die than those restrained in safety
belts, and 12 times more likely to sustain a major
injury. Eighty-four percent (84%) of the belted
occupants in crashes walked away uninjured, compared
with only 60% of the unbelted occupants.
A very revealing statistic from the 1998 Traffic
Accident Report, which is the most recent published
report that talks about ejections from the vehicle
during a crash, is that there were 20 crash victims
who were ejected from the vehicle that year, and 19 of
them died.
The Alaska Trauma Registry records all hospitalized
injuries. In the last decade there were about 3,500
(3315) Alaskans were admitted to a hospital due to a
car crash injury. Over half of these victims were not
restrained at the time of the crash and they were
almost twice as likely to sustain a serious head
injury and one and a half times more likely to be
discharged with a permanent disability, than the
restrained crash victims.
Among the 1,765 patients who where were not
restrained:
· there were 90 fatalities
· 606 traumatic brain injuries
· 274 permanent disabilities
· 148 were discharged from the hospital to a
rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility.
The trauma registry also records hospital costs
associated with injury. The data show that the cost
of hospitalization alone for an unbelted person
injured in a motor vehicle crash is on average about
$22,000 per patient, compared with $17,000 for someone
who used a seat belt and harness. The trauma registry
also shows that about 22% of the unbelted victims were
uninsured and 31% billed a government program for
their hospital care (including 172 billing Medicaid).
So for over 50%, the cost of hospitalization is passed
directly on to the public.
MS. MOORE, on the last point, highlighted that she is speaking
to only the cost of hospitalization, and noted that a head
injury often requires a lifetime of care.
Number 1845
REPRESENTATIVE OGG inquired as to the percentage of belted
victims who were uninsured.
MS. MOORE related that of the 1,270 belted victims, 196 were
uninsured. Therefore, she estimated that to amount to about
one-sixth of the [belted victims were uninsured].
Number 1768
JOAN DIAMOND informed the committee that although she works in
public health for the City of Anchorage, she is speaking on her
own behalf today. Ms. Diamond pointed out that HB 392 is a
policy with strong cost-cutting features. The big deal with
regard to injuries is related to head injuries. It's difficult
to repair brain damage, which results in the need for nursing
home stays and long term care rehabilitation. She informed the
committee that about one in three of those [with head injuries]
bill the government program for hospitalization and
rehabilitation costs. Therefore, it's difficult to
conceptualize how much Medicaid would pay for that percentage of
[victims] who are unbelted.
MS. DIAMOND related that she wears her seat belt and requires
every passenger in her automobile to do the same. However, not
everyone does. Ms. Diamond noted that it has been 12 years
since she first testified with regard to the need for a seat
belt law, and now she feels it's time for Alaska to do so.
Number 1645
ROB KAUFFMAN informed the committee that he has conducted
federal crash injury research studies for approximately 15
years. He noted that he is currently involved in the Crash
Injury Research and Engineering Network (CIREN), which started
in late 1996. Mr. Kauffman explained that he would try to bring
an understanding with regard to how a body manages the force in
a crash. For example, at a speed of 30-35 mph, one hitting a
light pole is equivalent to jumping from a three-story building.
The seat belt actually displaces the force over a larger surface
area of the body and it also provides the individual time to
manage the force safely. Therefore, such a crash could be one
which someone could survive when wearing a seat belt. However,
when one is not wearing a seat belt in such a crash, the body
moves forward and the steering column will drive into the chest
with almost 4-5 inches of compression into the sternum.
MR. KAUFFMAN turned to an earlier question regarding the safety
others experience when an individual wears his or her seat belt.
He related that the Harborview Injury Prevention and Research
Center recently released a study regarding car occupant death
according to the restraint use of other occupants. The study
found that if an individual in the front seat is belted in a
frontal crash and someone not wearing a seat belt is behind that
front seat occupant, that front seat occupant has a increased
risk of injury. He explained that the front seat occupant is
loading on the seat belt with his or her body, meanwhile an
unrestrained occupant in the rear seat is hitting the seat back,
which places more force on the front seat occupant and the seat
belt. The study found that almost one in six deaths could've
been prevented if the other occupant, either next to or behind
the restrained individual, in the car was restrained.
MR. KAUFFMAN returned to a minor residential crash at 30 mph.
If everyone is restrained, the individuals should be able to
exchange information and walk [away from] the scene. However,
when folks aren't belted in a minor crash, the result is
moderate to severe injuries requiring basic and advanced life
support services to arrive at the scene. All this costs money
and taps into emergency service resources. Mr. Kauffman opined
that seat belt use would basically eliminate the moderate/minor
injuries, and reduce the severe injuries to injuries that are
more survivable and treatable.
MR. KAUFFMAN turned to the notion that if one has an airbag, it
will protect the individual [even without wearing a seat belt].
However, that's not the case because an unbelted individual will
"submarine" under the airbag, which will then hit the individual
in the face and head. The aforementioned has resulted in severe
neck and head fatalities. Mr. Kauffman specified that an airbag
is supplemental to a seat belt, and therefore it's even more
important for those with an airbag in the vehicle to wear their
seat belt.
Number 1327
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked then if Mr. Kauffman would suggest
that there be an interconnection between airbags and seat belts
so that nonuse of the seat belt would deactivate the airbag.
MR. KAUFFMAN informed the committee that there are vehicles with
a dual stage airbag, which has two different inflation rates.
However, he didn't believe the airbag should be turned off
completely for an unrestrained occupant because airbags were
designed to protect unrestrained occupants. Therefore, by
leaving the airbag, there would be some reduction in head and
chest injuries.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH commented that Mr. Kauffman's
information is valuable. Representative Stepovich turned to the
State of Washington's experience and remarked that the law can't
be the only thing changing the statistics. Therefore, he
requested that Mr. Kauffman elaborate on the other changes, such
as education, that has changed the behavior.
MR. KAUFFMAN opined that education definitely influences
behavior. If one reviews the deaths by age, the result is a
"bath tub curve". The beginning of that curve is the 16-21 year
olds and the end of the curve is the elderly who can't handle
surviving a crash. Therefore, the [State of Washington]
targeted 16-25 year olds and went to high schools to educate
these drivers with regard to seat belts. Furthermore, the
[State of Washington] used the "Click It or Ticket" campaign and
a seat belt video that shows the damage a body sustains in a
crash. In further response to Representative Stepovich, Mr.
Kauffman informed the committee that when outreach is done, he
tries to focus on a singular theme of seat belts.
Number 1070
JANE FELLMAN, Coordinator, Kenai Peninsula Safe Kids Coalition,
informed the committee that she has been an emergency room
critical car nurse for 30 years. On behalf of the Kenai
Peninsula Safe Kids Coalition, she related support for HB 392.
Ms. Fellman said that she has experienced very positive response
when helping people buckle up children properly. She opined
that making failure to wear a seat belt a primary offense is a
step forward in saving lives and money. Ms. Fellman highlighted
points that the sponsor made with regard to the fact that those
parents who don't buckle up are less likely to buckle up their
children. She also highlighted Mr. Kauffman's testimony that
those who don't buckle up are a "deadly missile" to others in
the vehicle.
MS. FELLMAN informed the committee that she has participated in
observation stations in which she observed youth driving into
school in the mornings. She agreed with the statements that
sometimes one can't tell whether the youth is buckled in or not.
She explained that during her observations, if it couldn't be
determined whether the youth was wearing his or her seat belt,
that youth wasn't counted. Still, the percentage came out to be
60-65 percent use. She noted that [Kenai Peninsula Safe Kids
Coalition] does education programs with the parents and the
youth. In closing, she reiterated that this legislation would
be a step forward in making everyone safer.
MS. FELLMAN, in response to Chair Holm, clarified that she works
in the emergency department at Central Peninsula General
Hospital and she is the coordinator of the Kenai Peninsula Safe
Kids Coalition. She said that she didn't have the exact numbers
of accident victims who would've been helped had they been
restrained by a seat belt, but deferred to Ms. Moore. However,
she commented that the trauma and the emotional and physical
pain is definitely worse when the individual isn't restrained by
a seat belt.
Number 0843
SCOTT HAMANN announced his opposition to HB 392 for many
reasons, including his personal liberty. Mr. Hamann remarked
that he found it interesting that Mr. Quinlan said that the
federal government doesn't have the right to tell Alaska what to
do. With regard to the comments that this legislation would
save money, Mr. Hamann pointed out that on the Kenai Peninsula
there have been a flurry of major burglaries. However, Captain
Tom Bowman, Commander of E Detachment, Alaska State Troopers,
has said that he doesn't have enough time, manpower, or money to
investigate these crimes. Furthermore, he recalled reading a
newspaper article that reported that over half of the rapes in
Anchorage aren't being investigated. Mr. Hamann said, "I gotta
tell you that I think it's an absolute travesty of justice that
major crimes are going uninvestigated, and we're talking about
adding a minor offense that's going to force our officers to run
around and write tickets for." Therefore, he suggested that
when law enforcement can come forward without a major backlog of
major burglaries, assaults, rapes, and murders, seat belt use
could be discussed at that time.
Number 0725
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH inquired as to Mr. Hamann's
affiliation.
MR. HAMANN informed the committee that he is the president of
ABATE of Alaska, a motorcycle group, but noted that today he is
representing himself.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH inquired as to why motorcyclists don't
have to buckle up.
MR. HAMANN mentioned that there are several motorcycles, which
have airbag suits, which would inflate as a course of
protection.
CHAIR HOLM noted that on February 7th the U.S. Senate tabled a
floor amendment, which would've sanctioned any state not
enacting a primary seat belt enforcement law. It was a close
vote.
Number 0569
WALT MONEGAN, Chief, Anchorage Police Department, Municipality
of Anchorage, acknowledged the concern with regard to privacy
and said that law enforcement won't be targeting specific
things. However, the department is utilizing a "flavor of the
week" concept in which law enforcement attempts to heighten the
awareness and compliance because traffic enforcement is really
about gaining compliance. Mr. Monegan explained that law
enforcement will be able to tell whether folks are wearing seat
belts in newer vehicles due to the shoulder harness, and
therefore police won't be able to tell whether folks in older
vehicles with only a lap belt are wearing the seat belt. He
said that law enforcement won't make investigatory stops for the
latter because they are too busy for that. He mentioned that
since the early 1980s, the Anchorage Police Department has had a
policy that its officers on duty wear seat belts.
MR. MONEGAN turned to the matter of education, and related that
education has more of an impact if it has a foundation in law.
All the school resource officers in the Anchorage high schools
are talking about kids being safe when they drive. He noted
that he drives an unmarked police car, but he has experienced
folks recognizing him or the car and putting on their seat belt.
As mentioned earlier, the costs [of not wearing a seat belt] are
more than merely monetary. Mr. Monegan characterized this
legislation as another tool to help gain compliance.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH agreed that "we" need to make sure that
folks wear their seat belts. However, he questioned whether it
has to be the law.
MR. MONEGAN pointed out that the law already exists in that
failure to wear a seat belt is a secondary violation, which
increased compliance. Law enforcement can stop folks and write
them a citation when a child isn't restrained. Mr. Monegan
characterized the proposed law as a uniform and resounding
statement that seat belts are safe and must be used. The law
carries more weight and children pickup on that. Making failure
to wear a seat belt a primary offense would bring a heightened
awareness. He related that when the high school resource
officers did a campaign about seat belts and children, there was
about a 79 percent increase in the use of seat belts for
children. In fact, Mr. Monegan said he believes that the state
was recognized as one of the most improved with regard to [seat
belt use for children]. The aforementioned needs to be
accomplished with adults.
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH opined that it isn't necessary to
enforce it [as a primary offense] if the other avenues, such as
education, are utilized.
TAPE 04-5, SIDE A
REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH expressed concern that this law would
be used as an ulterior motive to stop people.
Number 0031
MR. MONEGAN recalled Representative Stepovich's comments with
regard to profiling. He noted that profiling is against policy,
unless there is a specific case with a specific car and suspect.
When there is a specific case with a specific car and suspect,
it's incident profiling rather than random profiling or racial
profiling. He acknowledged that having a strong, unified
message doesn't necessarily open the door. Furthermore, there
is more to this than the victim because the other uninjured
driver would feel miserable as well.
Number 0196
JENNIFER RUDINGER, Executive Director, Alaska Civil Liberties
Union (AkCLU), informed the committee that AkCLU is a nonprofit,
nonpartisan organization with approximately 1,800 members and
supporters throughout Alaska dedicated to preserving
individuals' civil liberties. Ms. Rudinger said that the
decision whether or not to make the seat belt law a primary
offense is a policy decision for the legislature. However, if
the legislature decides to make it a primary offense, there must
be safeguards built into the law to prevent the law from
becoming a pretext for searches that would otherwise be
unlawful. She noted that AkCLU sent the committee a written
statement and an amendment.
CHAIR HOLM, in response to Ms. Rudinger, announced that the
legislation won't be moved from the committee today.
MS. RUDINGER explained that the amendment would place a
safeguard in the law ensuring that just the state will have
primary seat belt enforcement power and that police won't be
able to use seat belt violations as a pretext for pulling folks
over for other reasons and then seek consent from the driver to
search his or her car. She expressed hope that the sponsor of
HB 392 would support the amendment because the only reason not
to accept the amendment is that one wants to give the police a
pretext to stop and search cars when they otherwise wouldn't
have a legitimate reason to do so. The amendment proposed by
AkCLU would insert the following language:
No law enforcement officer shall use AS 28.05.095 as
the basis for stopping a motor vehicle for other
reasons, and no operator of a motor vehicle shall be
requested to consent to a search by a law enforcement
officer of his or her motor vehicle which is stopped
solely for a violation of AS 28.05.095. Any evidence
obtained as a result of a search prohibited by this
subsection shall be inadmissible in any judicial
proceeding. A person may not be placed under arrest
solely for a violation of AS 28.05.095. Nothing
herein shall be construed to preclude a search based
upon any legally sufficient cause to believe that a
search will uncover contraband or evidence of a crime.
MS. RUDINGER explained that the first sentence of the amendment
specifies that this law is only for stopping people for seat
belt violations. If the impetus for this legislation is, in
fact, safety and ensuring people buckle up, then that should be
the only reason the law is enacted and enforced. The second
sentence of the amendment takes any incentive by law enforcement
to force people to consent to searches by specifying that any
evidence obtained in such a search would be inadmissible in any
judicial proceeding. The third sentence specifies that folks
shouldn't be arrested solely for violating the seat belt law.
The fourth sentence specifies that if law enforcement, upon
stopping someone for a seat belt violation, finds probable cause
for another crime, law enforcement should be able to investigate
such a situation and obtain evidence.
Number 0628
CHAIR HOLM, upon determining no one else wished to testify,
announced that public testimony was closed.
Number 0663
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE turned to the presence of airbags in
automobiles, and informed the committee that airbags only work
in frontal crashes whereas seat belts work in all types of
crashes. With regard to concerns that law enforcement are
already busy and this legislation would have them "run around
and give tickets," she said that isn't the point of the
legislation. Furthermore, many felons are identified during
traffic stops. With regard to Ambler, Representative Heinze
informed the committee that a 13-year-old girl was killed there
last year.
REPRESENTATIVE HEINZE found it interesting that commercial and
private aircraft are required to have seat belts, and failure to
do so is an $1,100 fine. Representative Heinze acknowledged
that Alaskans are fiercely independent folks, but she pointed
out that Alaskans aren't stupid. She related that a primary
seat belt law would've saved the lives of 37 people last year.
Education by itself isn't enough. The law is necessary to
change the behavior, while education compliments the law. She
stressed, "No state has achieved 90 percent usage without a
primary seat belt law."
[HB 392 was held over.]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:18
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|