Back ban on texting while driving
Aproposal
to ban texting while driving made its way out of a Texas House committee Tuesday, with only one vote in opposition. A vote in the full House awaits. The bill enjoys broad, bipartisan support and while its fate this session remains to be seen, there is reason to expect lawmakers will pass the ban, just as they passed a similar prohibition two years ago.
And like two years ago, there’s reason to expect Gov. Rick Perry will veto the bill again, calling it “government micromanagement” as he does so.
“Texting while driving is reckless and irresponsible,” Perry wrote legislators to explain his veto of their 2011 bill, but passing a law prohibiting the practice “is a government effort to micromanage the behavior of adults.”
“The keys to dissuading drivers of all ages from texting while driving are information and education,” Perry wrote. Second verse, same as the first: “Gov. Perry continues to believe texting while driving is reckless and irresponsible,” spokeswoman Lucy Nashed told the American-Statesman’s Ben Wear last week, following a hearing by the House Transportation Committee in which family members whose relatives have been killed in texting-related accidents gave emotional voice to a texting ban. “The key to dissuading drivers from texting while driving is information and education, not government micromanagement.” Such a peculiar argument. No one’s going to challenge the governor about the importance of information and education concerning the dangers of distracted driving, but Perry’s micromanagement argument would be amusing if the subject weren’t so tragic. By discouraging or encouraging one action or another, laws manage behavior, even micromanage behavior. We’re not the only ones to wonder: What, by Perry’s stan- dard, makes laws prohibiting drunken driving or requiring drivers to wear seat belts legitimate while a law prohibiting texting while driving is “micromanagement”?
At any rate, here we are again, and this time we encourage Perry to put aside his objections. Republican state Rep. Tom Craddick of Midland, the former speaker of the Texas House, is pushing the bill that would ban texting while driving. Texas currently bans the use of mobile devices by drivers younger than 18 — a measure Perry signed, by the way. Craddick’s bill extends the ban to all drivers.
If the bill becomes law, drivers caught sending or reading a “textbased communication” on a cellphone, tablet or other hand-held electronic device could be fined up to $100. The fine for a second offense could go as high as $200.
So far, 39 states have banned texting while driving. Twenty-five Texas cities also have passed local texting bans. Austin led the way statewide, passing its texting ordinance in 2009.
Even as we support the ban, we take note of doubts about how effective bans on texting while driving are. A study released in September 2010 by the Highway Loss Data Institute, which analyzes insurance loss statistics, compared insurance claims in four states before and after each had passed a texting-while-driving ban. The insti- tute found a slight increase in collision claims after texting bans were passed.
Why? The institute theorized that drivers were still texting but were doing so more stealthily to avoid being caught. By moving their phones low and out of sight they were taking their eyes off the road for a few seconds longer than they would if texting in sight. A lot of distance can be covered in a few seconds when driving.
The study is intriguing, but limited and by no means the only word on the subject. What is indisputable, as studies by the federal government and others have concluded, is texting dramatically increases the risk of an accident. Hundreds die each year in crashes involving distracted drivers. There are distractions that don’t involve texting, but texting is a significant and particularly dangerous one.
Enforcement of a texting ban will be difficult, but enforcement of many laws is difficult. Beyond enforcement, the simple existence of a texting ban, like the state’s seat belt law, will deter many drivers. Over time, the law’s deterrent effect might grow, will become second nature to most drivers and accomplish more than education alone.
The tragedies texting causes are avoidable. If a texting-while-driving ban makes it to his desk, Perry should sign it, and make his stand against government micromanagement elsewhere.