For Immediate Release: May 28, 2003
Contact: Lark Park
Phone: (916) 319-2021
AB 45 passed out of the Assembly Appropriations Committee last Wednesday on a vote of 19 to 6. Earlier this year, the bill passed out of the Assembly Transportation Committee on a vote of 14 to 5, with 1 abstention.
Simitian is gaining momentum in his effort to make California the second State in the nation to have a hands-free cell phone law on the books. (New York passed a similar law in 2001.) More than 20 state legislators are co-authoring AB 45. The bill also has significant support from law enforcement, Global 500 businesses, and healthcare providers. If AB 45 passes out of the full Assembly on Thursday, it will go to the Senate next.
For more information, see Frequently Asked Questions below.
AB 45 requires cell phone users to use hands-free technology while driving in California.
1. Why do we need this law?
AB 45 will save lives. Two years ago, the estimates were around 600 deaths per year nationwide, caused by cell phone-distracted driving. As cell phone costs decrease and cell phone use increases, recent studies have put the number at 2,600 deaths per year. That’s the death rate. The numbers are much larger when it comes to injuries and property damage. The problem will only get worse, unless we act now.
2. What other countries or states have laws limiting cell phone use while driving?
More than 20 countries around the world have adopted laws restricting cell phone use while driving. New York has a ban on hand-held cell phones, which was signed by Republican Governor George Pataki in 2001. More than 22 states are considering laws this year, as well as several cities and counties across the nation.
3. What studies are out there?
At least two dozen studies have been conducted during the last two decades. Recent studies include the California Highway Patrol report and the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis study. While the various studies show numerical and proportional differences in risk, all studies conclude that cell phone use while driving poses a substantial and deadly risk. That, coupled with the fact that studies have a natural bias toward underreporting incidences of cell phone related collision, as well as the increase in cell phone use, makes it imperative to move safety forward.
4. Who supports this law?
AB 45 has support from the following organizations:
The Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, Spike Helmick, has also indicated his personal support of AB 45. More than 20 members of the State Legislature are co-authoring the bill.
5. Who opposes this law?
Sprint PCS, Nextel, T-Mobile, AT&T Wireless, and Cingular Wireless are opposing or have opposed the bill in its current form.
6. What do you think AB 45 will achieve?
It will save hundreds of lives in California each year, not to mention the tens of thousands of injuries and accidents resulting from automobile collisions. We hope it will lead to safer driving behavior overall, as well as spur technological innovation in the area of safety and personal technology devices.
7. What about other driving distractions?
There are obviously many driving distractions. Just because we can’t address them all doesn’t mean we shouldn’t address one—especially the biggest one. The CHP found that cell phones caused more distracted-driving accidents than kids, pets, smoking, eating, and personal hygiene combined.
The use of a hand-held cell phone is the worst of both worlds—a highly distracting activity coupled with an inability to control the vehicle in a moment of emergency.
8. Why is the fine structure what it is?
The fine of $20 for the first offense and $50 for subsequent offenses follows the fine structure for safety belt laws.
9. How many times has a similar bill been introduced, and why will it pass now?
AB 45 is the third time this bill has been introduced. In both prior attempts, the bill fell one vote short of passing out of the Assembly Transportation Committee. Since the first time the bill was introduced, there has been a growing mountain of evidence that driving while talking on a hand-held cell phone poses a risk to driving safety. It’s only a matter of time before people say this is unsafe behavior that can and should be changed. That time is now.
10. When would such a law take effect?
Though the law would be in effect on January 1, 2004, the proposed implementation date is January 1, 2005, to allow drivers one year to prepare for the change in law.
11. Would there be any exemptions?
Yes. Anyone who is calling law enforcement, a healthcare provider, the fire department, or any other emergency services agency, with regard to an emergency, will be exempt.
12. Is there a personal reason for passing this law?
Only that I think it’s a safe and sensible law that can and will save lives. I hear from constituents all the time that we need this law.
13. Is the State the best level at which such a law should exist?
Many cities and counties have looked and are looking at regulating cell phone use within their local jurisdictions. Local ordinances have the potential to create a patchwork quilt of local legislation throughout the State. A uniform state law is better. The longer we wait the more likely local jurisdictions will adopt a variety of local ordinances varying city by city and mile by mile.
14. Does the public support the law?
Overwhelmingly. Survey research repeatedly shows public support for a hands-free law in the 60% to 80% support range.
###