Government

NTSB Bill Banning Cell Phone Use By Drivers Looks Dead on Arrival

(The Blaze/AP)– Lawmakers in Missouri had the chance, after two buses packed with high school band members slammed into a freeway wreck caused by a teenager who was sending a flurry of text messages, to impose tougher limits on driver cellphone use. It got filibustered.NTSB Bill Banning Cell Phone Use By Drivers Looks Dead on Arrival

Federal transportation officials are citing that accident in pushing for states to enact an all-out ban on cellphone use by drivers, restricting the use even of hands-free devices. But spurring lawmakers to take up the cause may be difficult. Skeptical lawmakers give the proposal little chance at succeeding in state capitols around the country, and many aren’t planning on introducing ban bills.

The reason? While acknowledging growing safety concerns, lawmakers are wary of inconveniencing commuters and say a complete ban would be one of the deepest government intrusions yet into the daily lives of motorists who have woven their phones tightly into their daily routines. Others are worried a ban would be unenforceable. And the cellphone legislation in most states already took years to get approved.

“It’s a popular thing to pass another law,” said Bill Stouffer, a Missouri Republican and chairman of the state’s Senate Transportation Committee. “But anything that takes your eyes off the road is just as deadly as texting or talking on the cellphone. Where does it end? Why not ban map reading or eating while driving?”

The centerpiece of the NTSB’s proposal was an August 2010 wreck southwest of St. Louis in which a pickup truck slammed into the back of a semi cab that had slowed for road construction, and the buses then crashed into the wreckage. The pickup driver, Daniel Schatz, 19, and a bus passenger, Jessica Brinker, 15, died. Thirty-eight people, mostly students, were hurt.

Investigators said Schatz had sent and received 11 texts in 11 minutes just before the accident.

The NTSB’s recommendation far exceeds the patchwork, and largely unenforced, prohibitions many states now have. Thirty-five states and the District of Columbia ban texting while driving, while nine states and Washington, D.C., bar handheld cellphone use. Thirty states ban all cellphone use for beginning drivers. No state bans the use of hands-free devices for all drivers.

In Idaho – which has historically resisted federal mandates and is one of seven states without any sort of regulation on the use of cellphones by drivers – proposed bans have been rejected the last two legislative sessions after lawmakers questioned their enforceability and the need for new government dictates. South Dakota has a broader law discouraging “distracted driving” but lawmakers have steadily opposed specific bans on electronic devices.

“I was listening to all this heart-wrenching testimony against texting behind the wheel, and I got to thinking about all the calls I’d gone off to where someone was hurt in a car accident,” said South Dakota Republican Rep. Betty Olson, an emergency medical technician from Prairie City. “In just about all of them, they were distracted, so what they were doing was already against the law,” Olson said. “They wouldn’t be paying any more attention to a law banning texting.”

Driver inconvenience is also among the factors state lawmakers cite in their opposition. Others note that cellphones have benefits. In some parts of rural South Dakota, Olson said, a driver’s cellphone can be “a life saver.”

With enforcement of cellphone and texting laws already difficult, Stouffer said police will have an even harder time if hands-free devices are banned.

“How‘s an officer going to know if I’m singing my favorite song with the radio or talking on the phone?” he asked.

Even in Missouri, where the bus crash occurred, the lawmaker who tried to broaden the texting ban afterward believes a full-blown cellphone prohibition goes too far.

The state has barred drivers 21 and younger from texting while driving since 2009. Several lawmakers proposed legislation the next year to extend that to all drivers but failed, partly because of concerns over whether it could be enforced. After the bus accident, a similar attempt to broaden the ban was defeated by a filibuster. Democratic Sen. Ryan McKenna said he’ll likely try again for the texting ban, but not for the overall ban.

In California, which bars drivers from talking on handheld phones but permits hands-free devices, state Sen. Joe Simitian doubts states would oblige the NTSB with an absolute ban.

“I think the NTSB recommendations are dramatic and I think they are helpful in highlighting the risks associated with distracted driving,” Simitian said. “As a practical matter, an outright ban is a nonstarter” he said, noting it took five years to pass the state’s existing law, and citing expected opposition to an all-out prohibition.

In recent years, phone features have multiplied and so have the distractions. For commuters, texts, pop-song ringtones, emails and even video calls are but a few of the potential distractions competing for their attention behind the wheel.

As phone features multiply, so have accidents blamed on texting and wireless calling. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said there were 3,092 fatalities blamed on distracted driving last year, 408 of which involved cellphone use. It was the first year the administration broke out cellphones as a separate cause of distraction.

The wireless industry initially fought state legislation against cellphone use while driving, but has in recent years mainly emphasized personal responsibility and driver education over legislation. After the NTSB’s recommendation Tuesday, industry trade group CITA-The Wireless Association repeated its support for bans on texting while driving but added that larger prohibitions should be left to the states.

Even lawmakers who are willing to push for a complete ban concede that passage won’t come easy.

Alaska is considering such a move, said Anne Teigen, senior policy specialist for the National Conference of State Legislatures. That ban has supporters among some police agencies. In Minnesota, which passed a texting ban three years ago, Democratic state Rep. Frank Hornstein said that based on the NTSB recommendation, he will introduce legislation aimed at banning cellphone use by drivers.

Hornstein and Alaska state Rep. Max Gruenberg, a Democrat from Anchorage, noted that battles over road safety laws – such as tougher seat belt requirements or lower blood-alcohol content limits in drunk driving cases – often take years to pass. Hornstein also acknowledged that some residents would oppose a cellphone ban, believing they can police themselves.

“A lot of people will say, `I can do this fine, I’m a good driver. It’s other people,’” Hornstein said.

Comments (48)

1 2
  • Rob
    Posted on December 17, 2011 at 8:31am

    How about if you cause a death because of stupid behavior we kill you dead… put a little fear in the species of losers.

    Report Post »  
  • sbenard
    Posted on December 17, 2011 at 6:29am

    So the bill is DOA — just like the victims of such irresponsible behavior! Fitting!

    Report Post » sbenard  
  • Grace1798
    Posted on December 17, 2011 at 4:55am

    I saw accidents caused and people hurt for over a decade now by people on the cell phone and/or texting. I don’t even have texting. It is just too expensive for what you get from it. Waste of money imho. I don’t like making someone else rich, I like to get the money they are getting from stupid people. I took driver’s training and learned not to take my eyes off the road and I never do! But I have noticed a lot of drivers today do NOT use their turn signal and I have no clue where they are going. Some of them will go one way then suddenly dart another way …..if I were not watching all the time, I would have hit them! Idiots! I don’t like the gov deciding how we live our lives and need to be out of our lives forever! But there is truth about the cell phone being used while driving. I can talk on the phone without distracting my driving but texting is bad news. I rarely talk on the cell while driving but I have noticed many do. I have had to LAY ON MY HORN to avoid an accident many times with people on the cell phone not paying attention to what they are doing. IF you want government out of your business, replace them ALL with Conservatives. I am serious! SENATE and House and PRESIDENT!

    Report Post » Grace1798  
  • conservatype
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 11:40pm

    If you pass this legislation, then logically you should also ban talking, eating and even carrying passengers: all of which are a distraction…….

    Report Post »  
  • Rodney777
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 10:19pm

    NTSB Go Away

    Report Post » Rodney777  
  • heyjms
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 6:18pm

    So please email me if someone can explain it to me heyjms @ gmail.com so a teen driving a pickup was texting and slammed into the back of a big truck, then two school buses behind the teen crashed into the pickup??? So because he was texting the first bus didn’t notice the stopped truck too?? When I drive I look at the car ahead of me, down t he road ahead of the people in front of me, around me and behind me…. a pick up can’t block the view of a school bus??? how is this proof all phone usage needs to be banned??? Again, I don’t follow, anyone??

    Report Post » heyjms  
  • Miss Impala
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 6:10pm

    Continued from previous post: And you want to take away something that alleviates boredom, road hypnosis, and cuts your ties to your family and friends, therefore you sit and ruminate and steep until you finally shut down and can call the source of your consternation. Tell me Ms. Hersman, how does banning distracted driving going to work when it is contained with in the driver? What is next? Smoking? Eating and drinking? Passengers? Pets? Audiobook? Radio? CB’s, adjusting the temperature? Billboards? Wildlife? Guys driving by with no shirts on? Girls in short skirts driving by? Construction? Wrecks? Police that have pulled someone over? Beautiful scenery? People standing on the side of the road? I could keep going, but I think I have made my point.

    Just another example of the left overstepping their bounds.

    Unfortunately, as a truck driver the NTSB does have jurisdiction over commercial vehicles. Ray LaHood of the DOT has already been heard talking about a complete ban, but was waiting to hear on NTSB’s stand. Now he has the ammo. So whether or not states pass laws or not, they will try to pass this one over on the truck driver as the DOT does make regulations concerning trucks.

    Report Post »  
  • brntout
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 6:09pm

    What’s to stop cell phone manufacturers from installing a speed sensor that disables the electronics in all phones and or i-pad,i-pod et al? gov‘t don’t play by the rules.Nudge,nudge.

    Report Post »  
    • Miss Impala
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 6:18pm

      Onothing yet, the technology is already available. CR England has already been testing this. But It infringes on your passengers freedom of speech and those driving around you.

      Report Post »  
    • brntout
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 6:47pm

      My dad drove truck for 40 some odd years,and said the c.b. was the greatest thing invented to keep otr drivers from getting bored,spotting bear,and general good(sometimes bawdy) conversation.It was how they developed friendships.He never crashed because of keying the mike,but stupid drivers were the cause to include a asphalt roller driver steering right into his path cause of a mechanical failure in the steering box.Go figure.

      Report Post »  
  • Miss Impala
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 6:08pm

    As an over the road truck driver, I completely disagree with this ban. The cell phone has actually revolutionized trucking for the driver. Not only has it strengthen familial and community ties, but it keeps many of us awake and alert. I have a large circle of fellow drivers and friends that we all network with, this network ensures if someone is getting sleepy, there is always someone they can talk to. I have now lost count of the many times I have called 911 for suspicious activity, for wrecks, all the while assessing injuries and letting then know on the other end the details so they can dispatch the appropriate response.

    Personal responsibility is the key here. They already have laws that deal with someone who is driving erratic, careless, reckless, or distracted. THat means any activity that causes u to drive badly is punished. You must know your own personal limits. For example, when I am in traffic, I turn my radio down or I get off of the phone. I turn my cb on so to be prepared for situations I am coming up on or coming up behind me. Those are times when I know I want my full attention on things. But even if it is raining or snowing, I turn things down or off, so as to be better able to hear if I lose traction.

    But to ban the use of something that has changed the face of trucking is irresponsible and a waste of my tax dollars. I can drive sometimes 13 hours out of a 24 hour period. And you want to take away something that alleviates boredom, con

    Report Post »  
    • quiltgal
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 6:15pm

      Even truck drivers ought to know their limits. If your are driving while sleepy, you ought to get off the road.

      Report Post »  
    • brntout
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 7:00pm

      @ QUILTGAL They for the most part do.Their are some who cook their logs,but that was old school. With the advent of GPS they can’t fudge it anymore.

      Report Post »  
  • brian9711
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:20pm

    How about eating a whopper in 1 hand, a large fry in your lay and a super size cherry coke in your other hand? That’s more safe than talking on a hands free set?? I don’t hear the NTSB banning eating while driving?? Why not?? Lobbyists??

    Report Post »  
    • phillipwgirard
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:25pm

      @ BRIAN Remember the commercial? it takes 2 hands to handle a whopper? lol

      Report Post » phillipwgirard  
    • TXPilot
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:48pm

      Sorry everyone, but no matter how you try, you can’t legislate away all bad behavior, all you can do is get rid of our rights. As Ron White says: “you can’t fix stupid”……

      Report Post » TXPilot  
    • wigg
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 6:08pm

      No kidding. Where does “distracted” driving end?? If you are going to ban cell phones, then you need to have
      No eating
      no radio
      no SMOKING
      no driving with your knee putting on make-up.

      Heck, my kids are the most distracting thing in the car. We gonna ban them too???

      Report Post » wigg  
  • quiltgal
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:20pm

    Banning hands-on cellphone use in moving vehicles is one of our “too many laws” that I can agree with. Sorry, no one really “needs” to use a cell phone in a moving car. If you have an emergency, just pull over and call. A cell phone ban may be somewhat difficult to enforce, but if enough drivers are discouraged, it will save some lives. I’ve witnessed some pretty erratic driving involving drivers on cell phones.

    Report Post »  
  • TeaPartyPatriot
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:19pm

    The lunatic-left dolts really, really need BIG GOVERNMENT and its stooges in the lamestream socialist media to tell them what to wear, what to eat, what to think, what to drive, what to carry groceries in, what box to check in elections, what to drink, what to do every moment of every day….

    Otherwise, they would just endlessly spin around in circles until they collapsed into a hot steamy pile.

    People with BRAINS do not need the lunatic-left nanny state!

    Report Post » TeaPartyPatriot  
    • Jack of Hearts
      Posted on December 17, 2011 at 6:58am

      The people with brains don’t need it – agreed. But the families of the 408 people who died last year due to the actions of the brainless would probably agree that the morons who text while driving need someone to tell them not to do it. Anyone know what the penalties proposed for this are?

      Report Post » Jack of Hearts  
  • phillipwgirard
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:12pm

    I don‘t know if i’m against it or not, but what i would like to say is, everyday we wake up to a new ban on something. Clearly when these bans add up our freedoms or lack there of add up alongside. The Nazis began there socialist stand by a ban here a ban there, History is repeating itself in many ways, all i’m saying is we need to be weary of banning a little here and there, they add up. and though you may agree with some bans, look at the big picture before reacting.

    Report Post » phillipwgirard  
  • MarsBarsTru7
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:10pm

    This bill is bad but it doesn’t come close to the NDAA or the SOPA bills. Or even the Protect IP Addresses bill. The flurry of bills being passed that are contrary to our rights and our individual liberties is horrifying. How does one measure the amount of damage being done? Why is it being done? How is the GOP voting a majority in favor of these bills?

    Report Post »  
  • rafa2design
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:56pm

    Driving (in a moving vehicle) and being on the phone/texting were never intended to go together, just like driving and drinking alcohol. Both impair the driver and I don‘t think it’s wrong to ban. Can anyone tell me the positive things from texting/driving? I swear every time I see a slow car holding up traffic, I’ll pass and see that person on their cell phone. To hell with it.

    Report Post » rafa2design  
    • HMNSC
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:59pm

      Drinking and driving is illegal….are you telling me it still happens!? Surely that won’t be the case when we ban phones and driving….

      Report Post »  
    • brian9711
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:18pm

      Why has the NTSB never recommended banning driving while having a Whopper in 1 hand, a large fry in your lap and a super sized drink in your other hand?? Seems way more dangerous than driving while using a hands free cell phone? Maybe because the fast food industry lobby is Huge?? doesn’t seem right to me…..

      Report Post »  
    • NeverSurrender
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:19pm

      I thought driving too fast caused accidents. How could someone driving too slow also cause an accidents. Let’s just ban everything to do with a vehicle.

      Report Post »  
  • I.Gaspar
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:55pm

    They would rather we don’t drive. Period.
    The ultimate control. Public transportation only, with govt permission of course, and full TSA cavity searches at every transfer point.
    The ultimate wet dream for nanny state leftists.

    Report Post »  
  • Cat Ballou
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:49pm

    This issue shouldn’t even be a state problem……….it’s an insurance problem. You are involved in a wreck, & your insurance company can prove you were texting, they don’t pay. End of problem for the most part, except for a few people willing to take the chance.

    Report Post »  
    • NeverSurrender
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:23pm

      Once again someone who doesn’t understand what insurance is for (just like in the healthcare debate). Insurance pays for damges when drivers are drunk, when drivers aren’t looking at the road even when drivers are engaging in certain promiscuous activities. Insurance covers accidents whether the person covered is being stupid or not.

      What it doesn’t cover is someone who just got hurt, needs a doctor then calls the insurance company to get coverage.

      Report Post »  
  • HMNSC
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:42pm

    When will they learn that making something against the law doesn’t stop its practice? We already have a law against careless, negligent driving. No matter the cause. If a cop see’s someone driving erratically they can pull them over. We don’t need new laws every time something new comes up. If a cop is not around to see my careless negligent driving then he is not there to see me texting and driving. If I am capable of talking and driving at the same time so be it. Accidents happen and all the laws in the world will not stop people from being idiots. We can neither pass nor enforce laws against everything that can go wrong in the world. Bill O’Reilly recently recounted a story of an occupy protester running up to him yelling out his name. Bill stated that because it was against the law to defend himself then it should be illegal for someone to run up on someone in that manner. I couldn’t disagree more. We don’t need a law discouraging running towards someone and shouting, Rather we don’t need a law that keeps me from defending myself in that situation. Less law not more.

    Report Post »  
  • factcheck
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:35pm

    The 19 year old did not cause the buses to crash. If he had paid attention and stopped before hitting the truck, the inattentive, tailgating bus drivers would have nail him anyway. This is a crap story being used by the NSTB. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story, especially when the story furthers your agenda.

    Report Post »  
    • NeverSurrender
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 5:25pm

      Factchesk, FINALLY someone who knows something about liability. The bus driver killed the kid not the kid rear ending the semi. The kid was still alive after he rear ended the semi. He died when the bus driver crushed him between the bus and the semi because the bus driver was driving too close for conditions and had bad breaks.

      But like you said, no reason for facts or the law to get in the way of THIS administration taking control of something else!!!!!!

      Report Post »  
  • Thors Hammer
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:30pm

    Don’t allow them even a foothold over your speech! Think about it: if they can outlaw your talking on your cell (especially hands-free) what is next? You can‘t talk to the person sitting next to you because it could be ’distracting’? Your rights are being whittled away little by little. Be aware, and don’t let them do it.

    Report Post »  
  • R4M0N
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:24pm

    If talking on a cell phone is so dangerous, then these should be banned too:

    1.Talking to a driver. Period.
    2. Pressing any button in the car.
    3. Reading any information being provided by the myriad of gauges in the dash.

    What’s the difference? If taking your eyes off the road is dangerous, then it’s dangerous no matter the excuse. If talking on a cell phone even with a hands-free device is dangerous, then talking to anyone in any manner is dangerous since it’s essentially the same thing.

    This is not about safety. It’s about control and thinking they know better and we are too stupid to know how to live our lives.

    Report Post »  
    • undercover
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:40pm

      The difference is a person turning on their wipers or radio won’t sit at a green light for 2 minutes texting like the guy in front of me did. When I honked of course it was me who was being the jerk.

      Report Post »  
  • V-MAN MACE
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:23pm

    Yea!

    Go suck an egg, you Nanny State Nazis!

    Report Post » V-MAN MACE  
  • just happy
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:17pm

    Now if this attitude would just go viral like some of the stupid liberal stuff, we might resurrect COMMON SENSE!

    Report Post »  
  • lovenfl3
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:13pm

    The government has bigger issues to deal with. How about the debt? How about jobs? How about the American people strggling in this Obama economy? But what are they worried about? That’s right, they’re worried about cell phones. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdTJR_OYnNg

    Report Post » lovenfl3  
  • just happy
    Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:12pm

    Good!!!

    Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on December 16, 2011 at 4:24pm

      I agree .. .let the states decide what driving laws they want. This is overkill … we have laws against distracted driving and all sorts of others that already cover “bad” driving.

      Report Post »  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love