This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Politics & Government

Motorists Could Pay a Price for 'Distracted Driving'

Pa. House panel considers whether ban should be primary or secondary offense for law enforcement.

Pennsylvania drivers better put down that cell phone, stop eating that hamburger and quit adjusting the radio dial.

Lawmakers on the House Transportation Committee on April 27 debated a proposal sponsored by Rep. Chris Ross, R-Chester, that would fine drivers for “distracted driving.” No vote was taken, but the measure may be debated again later.

H.B. 896 defines distracted driving as careless driving while the driver is using a radio, recording or playback device, telephone device, citizens band radio, television, computer “and any other device.” It also includes grooming, eating food and reading any electronic or printed material, including cell phone texts.

Find out what's happening in Hellertown-Lower Sauconwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

“There have been a number of very distracting situations where people have been hurt, injured, killed by folks that are not paying attention while they’re driving,” said Ross. “That becomes an immediately dangerous situation. … This is a common problem, and it’s really a subject I know the General Assembly has talked about extensively.”

The legislation provides penalties for distracted driving after drivers already pulled over by a police officer for “careless driving,” such as running a stop sign, weaving in traffic or driving too slowly in a regular speed zone.

Find out what's happening in Hellertown-Lower Sauconwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

The measure calls for a $250 fine if the distracted driving causes “serious bodily harm” to another, and a $500 fine if it results in death. Violations without incident would result in a $50 fine.

The issue is a hot topic across the nation. A representative from the National Conference of State Legislatures testified that 143 bills dealing with distracted driving are now before 33 state legislatures.

Ross’ proposal garnered diversity of attention, with automobile club AAA and phone company Sprint Nextel appearing to testify before lawmakers. The Pennsylvania State Police and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, known as PennDOT, did not appear but submitted written testimony.

State Rep. Katharine Watson, R-Bucks, one of 32 co-sponsors of H.B. 896, also has introduced legislation of her own, H.B. 9, to further regulate teen driving in Pennsylvania. Under that proposed legislation, drivers with only a learning drivers’ permit would not be allowed to have more than one passenger under the age of 18.

“I like the idea of pulling things out individually and having the Legislature vote piece by piece,” said Watson. “I would suggest we would do texting individually. Chris’ bill gets to the concept of the various distractions (and that) would work.”

State Rep. Kate Harper, R-Montgomery, questioned the initial cause that would allow a police officer to pull over a driver.

“Driving distracted is dangerous and yet every day people do it, particularly in the southeast (part of Pennsylvania) where the traffic is very bad,” said Harper. “Do you think it would be easier on the public if we just pick things like don’t text while driving or don’t use any cell phone?”

Ross argued that “the minute you take your eyes off the road you will have problems with your driving” and said a so-called secondary law of distracted driving would make for a better “public relations campaign.”

“It gives you a hook for the campaign,” he said. “That’s what I’m really looking at.”

PennDOT in written testimony expressed doubts about the language of the legislation, arguing distracted driving would remain a “difficult challenge for law enforcement officers.”

“The distracted driving penalty is a secondary offense, meaning a driver must be convicted of careless driving in order for the additional penalty to apply. A conviction under the proposed amendment would not constitute a moving violation and would not be eligible for additional violation and would not be eligible for additional fees and court costs by the judiciary,” PennDOT said in its statement.

PennDOT called the proposal a “step forward” but argued a “primary law,” which would allow officers to issue citations for specific activities without a primary cause of careless driving, would “make a more significant impact on saving lives in Pennsylvania.”

The top cop with the state police agreed.

“I cannot stress enough the importance of making enforcement of such violations a primary offense,” Commissioner Frank Noonan said in written testimony. "Primary offense provisions allow troopers to conduct proactive patrol activities and stop motorists before they crash and injure others."

Ross, however, said his legislation would help police officers avoid charges of profiling, in case they pulled over a driver who was not actually driving distracted.

Both Sprint Nextel and AAA proposed educating the public on the dangers of distracted driving, but did not specifically come out against Ross’ legislation.

“If you are driving your vehicle, you are already multitasking,” read the AAA testimony. “The bottom line is that drivers are responsible for keeping their eyes on the road and their minds on the task of driving.” 

Although the committee did not vote on the proposal on April 27, committee Chairman Rick Geist, R-Blair, argued for a chance to question representatives from PennDOT and the state police. Geist also indicated strong support for the legislation.

HB 896 House Transportation Hearing

Darwyyn Deyo is a journalist with PA Independent.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?