Senators to introduce legislation banning texting while driving
By Donald Melanson 
posted July 29th 2009 11:51AM
posted July 29th 2009 11:51AM
It's already been banned by a number of states and the District of Columbia, but a group of Democratic senators led by New York's Charles Schumer are now set to introduce legislation that would ban texting while driving throughout the United States. That, as you may be aware if you've been watching the news this past week, follows a study from the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, which found that truck drivers that texted while driving were 23 times more likely to get into an accident than non-texters -- to say nothing of several calls for a ban from major safety groups over the years. While complete details on the proposed bill are still a bit light, it would apparently withhold 25% of the annual federal highway funding from states that did not comply with the ban, and would reportedly be modeled on the way the national drunken driving ban was introduced.[Via Phone Scoop]
so dumb... and yet obvious... text traps? pulled over for texting? I can't really see either happening.
can we pass more meaningful legislation??
First of all, I'm pretty sure its a secondary offense
Second, its a lot more dangerous than talking on the phone while driving. I completely agree with this bill.
Texting while driving is almost like driving BLIND.
You have more reflex and control driving drunk than while driving texting - AND THAT IS A PROVEN FACT.
I agree with this bill.
Cause if any texting asshole rear ends my S63 with some piece of shit cheapo car, I'm getting out of the car with intent to kill.
I agree with this bill, except that it should be at the discretion of states to pass it.
I live in the UK, and using a mobile phone for either a call or to text is illegal. The fine is around £1,000 , and the charge is "driving with undue care and attention", which increases the cost of your motor insurance by about 33%. The Police are very strict on the regulation, and have a zero tolerance attitude. I can honestly say that it used to be quite common to see people driving whilst using a phone, but now it is very rare.
It seems strange to us now that it was ever allowed.
How many lives has it saved ? Hard to say, but you would have to guess hundreds each year.
Do we miss driving and calling/texting ? Not at all.
I sometimes wonder if we would have been better off if federal government had to actually follow the Constitution... sigh.
Now we have overpowered Presidents and Congressmen deciding the fate of our entire country instead of the States as intended.
eff these democratically elected officials. We should be more like this...
Viva La Libertarian Revolucion!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0
Also lets get rid of DUIs, its my right to drive drunk and crash into a soccer moms minivan full of 12 kids.
/sarcasm
hold on, are some of you implying that this is a bad measure? that the drunk driving ban was also unconstitutional and therefore should have been left to the discretion of the states? i'm guessing you guys have never known anyone killed by a drunk driver.
imagine if driving while intoxicated was legal in some states. then imagine someone you care about being killed by a drunk driver and it being completely legal because said state hasn't outlawed it. you'd probably have a change of heart. imagine if the same thing happened except they were killed by someone too busy texting their significant other about tonight's plans rather than looking at the road. tell me you wouldn't hate them at all. tell me you'd honestly forgive them. when you're drunk, you're at least looking at the road, no matter how badly you see it. when you're texting, 5 seconds of typing away on a highway can mean not looking at the road AT ALL for the length of a football field. the way i see it, it's even more dangerous than drunk driving and it's something that has to be mandated on a federal level.
Damn Washington.
LET THE STATES DECIDE WHAT LAWS THEY WANT.
@Quantumphysics you can stop texting by putting your phone down. You can't immediately stop being drunk.
If you guys read the summary you'd see they absolutely are leaving it up to the states. Just in kind of a blackmaily kind of way.
"hold on, are some of you implying that this is a bad measure? that the drunk driving ban was also unconstitutional and therefore should have been left to the discretion of the states? i'm guessing you guys have never known anyone killed by a drunk driver."
That's not the point.
The constitution says clearly that if that document does not give the feds the power to do (X), it is the EXCLUSIVE domain of the states, and the people to do (X).
Can you find in the constitution where congress shall have the ability to impose laws banning the ability to text while in operation of motorized vehicles? Because I sure as hell cant.
Let the states figure out if this is what they need.
like don't be morally bankrupt while in office.
If you guys will RTFA, you'll see that states will still have the ultimate decision. And the feds will withhold federal highway funds as the stick (or carrot, depending on your point of view). Which is entirely their right.
Regardless, this must be made law. Period.
Yeah, because this legislation is completely meaningless. People should just be allowed to drive and text all they want. I also think drinking and driving is acceptable, as well as sleeping and driving.
@philandshazroe: I'm glad the USA is not completely like the UK yet. We aren't completely taxed and fined to death for sneezing in the wrong direction, but it's coming.
http://www.synthstuff.com/mt/archives/orwell-watchfuleyes.jpg
"If you guys will RTFA, you'll see that states will still have the ultimate decision. And the feds will withhold federal highway funds as the stick (or carrot, depending on your point of view). Which is entirely their right."
Then the states should tell them to take their goddamn highway funds and shove it.
This is what happens when the states abdicated their 10th amendment sovereignty, and frankly their original power to appoint senators. They get asshole feds trying to blackmail them with our own money.
More of them need to do what states like Texas and Alaska have done and reassert their sovereignty, and they need to do it now!
"Regardless, this must be made law. Period."
Period? The hell it does.
This is a state issue, and they are free to deiced what is best for them in this regard.
The feds need to keep their nose out of it. PERIOD.
@toleraen
"If you guys read the summary you'd see they absolutely are leaving it up to the states. Just in kind of a blackmaily kind of way."
I read the summary, and that's exactly the problem. The states are being threatened into doing what the Feds want. Here's an example: What if the government decided that "M" rated video games were "bad", and they decided to add $200 tax to each "M" rated game. They aren't explicitly saying that you *can't* play "M" rated games, but now that Gears of War 3 is going to cost $260, who will buy it?
Same thing is happening in this case. The Feds aren't saying that the states *must* pass laws to ban texting, but 25% of the annual federal highway funding is a lot. Which of the states would be able to buy their freedom?
"Then the states should tell them to take their goddamn highway funds and shove it." - Looks_Around_You
Good idea, particularly since state budgets are currently cratering. Much like your roads soon will be without federal funds.
Hope you drive a monster truck...
Americans and their holy constitution. It's a piece of text put out by mortals centuries ago.
@ Look_Around_You
Did you forget to read this part of the Constitution?
"[The Congress shall have power] To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes"
Roads are part of interstate commerce. Therefore, Congress has the power to regulate them. See United States v. Lopez.
@joshua:
It also happens to be the legally binding charter for our federal government -- when congress acts outside the powers it grants them, they have exactly the same legitimacy as the Mafia, although they conduct themselves rather less respectably. This is a contrast to the constitutions of some other nations, which are positioned not as 0th-order law themselves, but as guidelines for the national parliament to establish law.
As to how long ago it was written, that doesn't matter -- it may be amended to override _any_ provision in it which proves to be a problem, or to address any new issues that were not addressed in the original. This is also evidence we don't treat it as "holy", because there are _no_ inviolate provisions.
The problem we have is that it's easier to pass federal laws contrary to the constitution and simply ignore it than to amend it to grant that authority permanently, so that's what politicians do.
@ Look_Around_You
"Did you forget to read this part of the Constitution?
"[The Congress shall have power] To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes"
Roads are part of interstate commerce. Therefore, Congress has the power to regulate them. See United States v. Lopez."
And care to explain when did local roads become federally owned? Now lets read the posting together, slowly...
"...are now set to introduce legislation that would ban texting while driving throughout the United States. "
NOT on the federal highways, but on every street, avenue, alley, back road, parkway, interstate, dirt and tar street from Pt. Barrow to Key West.
This has nothing to do with regulating commerce. How is texting shipping goods interstate?
lol when did everyone here become experts on the constitution.
i love how people are jumping on the 'omg big government' bandwagon, you are a TOOL if you think texting while driving is safe. we all do it, and yes you can throw your phone down if you see something, but chances are by the time you see the breaklights after looking up from your phone its too late and you better have good breaks.
i am for this legislation ... because honestly its good for the overall community ... if you cant handle not texting for 5 minutes ... than that sounds like a personal problem.
Good luck enforcing the law.
"No officer, I wasn't texting. I was (Insert Other Activity)!"
-Emailing
-Surfing the interwebs
-Trying to find my favorite song
-Attempting to plug in GPS directions
-etc.
It's an obvious money laundering buero crap... they pass the bill, which costs $$$, then they make those signs, $$$, then they enforce it and charge you, $$$, and some more charges and fees here and there, $$$.
We get tons of these in EU...
"lol when did everyone here become experts on the constitution."
You become an expert in the constitution when you f'ing read it.
"i love how people are jumping on the 'omg big government' bandwagon, you are a TOOL if you think texting while driving is safe. we all do it, and yes you can throw your phone down if you see something, but chances are by the time you see the breaklights after looking up from your phone its too late and you better have good breaks.
i am for this legislation ... because honestly its good for the overall community ... if you cant handle not texting for 5 minutes ... than that sounds like a personal problem."
Are you even able of follow what the hell we are talking about?
@philandshazroe: I also live in the UK, and you're not entirely correct. Driving without due care and attention certainly covers texting while driving, but there's a specific offence of using a mobile device while driving, which is usually handled by means of a fixed penalty fine of £60 and three points on your driving licence (non-UK people, once you accumulate 12 points on your licence you get an automatic driving ban, so that's much more of an inducement than the fine).
I also don't know which part of the UK you live in, but I wish I did live there - where I live, I see people using a mobile while driving quite frequently. But then, if people don't stop speeding on roads with speed cameras, why should we expect them to want to preserve their licence any other way? It's probably got a lot to do with how there aren't many police out and about on the roads - certainly not enough for the volume of traffic. When there is, those phones tend to disappear pretty sharp...
We need an amendment that says Congress can't force (bribe, incent, etc.) the states to pass a law which Congress could not pass.
so you guys would rather that the states choose whether or not drunk driving is illegal as well.
I work for the lobbiest that got this bill passed
I feel special
It's all the more special because you can't spell "lobbyist", even though you say you work for one.
o well, just because I can't spell doesn't mean I don't work for one.
Look up Patricia Lynch
Makes me VERY confident in the stuff you and your employers are pushing forward to know that people working for them can't even write properly. Yes, I am the spell police.
What's more frightening is the thought that people who disregard language are in control of those who use it.
well I'm only an intern, give me a break
Wow, you work for a lobbyist? Thats only one rung above lawyer on the evil professions scale.
It's okay, we know what you mean about feeling special.
The spell police is currently enforcing a ban on all summoning magic, and using your wand while operating a vehicle is strictly prohibited.
Then can you ask him why he felt it was worth pulling a stupid PR stunt like this just to make him look like he's actually accomplishing something in office, while the states already have plenty of laws to cover doing unsafe things while driving? To say nothing of the ridiculousness of the Feds interfering in matters that should be handled by the states, or the fact that more laws don't make people better citizens...
So ridiculous.
Then sorry, but I hope you leave the country permanently.
The Federal government has no Constitutional authority on this matter. They should not be doing this legislation, completely independent of my feelings on the actual issue.
If you want to ban texting while driving, do so at the state level. To do it at the Federal issue is ridiculous, unconstitutional, and unAmerican. Get real.
How about we add a "putting on your make-up" while driving ban... could have used that this morning...
Sure.
As long as getting a BJ while driving doesn't ever get brought up for discussion.
Or reading a book while driving, or eating a bowl of cereal while driving.
It's going to be hard as hell to legislate, but I can tell you it's incredibly annoying to get stuck behind a determined texting moron while the light goes from green to red.
As long as I can still have my bagel and OJ while driving.
Why cant we just have a Dangerous driving ban? make sure you have two hands on the wheel and two eyes on the road, no texting no phone calls, no make up, no dogs in the front seat, no shaving, no checking out girls (or guys if so inclined), no rubber necking, no reading billboards, no watching fireworks when driving by disneyland, no drinking coffee or any other liquids, no picking noses, no adjusting clothes oh and no sex
@ Tony,
Besides driving with their high beams and turn signal on, swinging over the painted line during a 2 lane simultaneous left turn, stopping in Yield areas no matter what, and driving 5 MPH under the speed limit in the left lane on the freeway, then having the nerve to actually get pissed at the drivers who are FORCED to swing around them, what else would Oklahomans do while they drive?
@Tony Two hands isn't exactly safe at all times. I think having two hands on the wheel limits your ability to serve away from something efficiently. Think about, seriously think about it.
Swerve***
Common sense surely. This is just a dangerous as being pissed.