Add to MyNCSL

Environment, Energy and Transportation Program

Cell Phones and Highway Safety: 2002 State Legislative Update

Newer 2003 version

October 2002

PDF Version To view PDF files, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader installed.

By Matt Sundeen, Program Principal

State Action

Table 1 - State Crash Data on Mobile Phones and Driving

Table 2 - Existing State Laws Regarding Mobile Phone Use while Driving

Map 1 - States that Track Cell Phone Involvement in Crashes

Table 3 - 2002 State Legislation

Federal Action

Local Action

International Action

Driver Focus and Technology Report

Conclusion

The relationship between driver distraction and traffic safety remains a significant concern for lawmakers in the United States. Each year, more than 42,000 people are killed and more than 3 million people injured in more than 6 million crashes on the nation's roads. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that 20 percent to 30 percent of all motor vehicle crashes-or 1.2 million accidents-have driver distraction as a contributing cause.

Although many things can distract a driver, the lightning rod issue for state lawmakers has been the correlation between the use of in-vehicle technologies, specifically wireless phones, and traffic safety. Since 1999, every state has considered legislation regarding driver use of wireless phones. During that same time, Congress has heard extensive testimony on the topic and considered several cell phone bills. Several federal and state agencies have studied the effects of technology on drivers' attention, and an estimated 300 towns, cities and counties have considered ordinances on the use of cell phones while driving. A handful of local jurisdictions have passed restrictions on using mobile phones while driving.

The interest in mobile phones and traffic safety corresponds with the dramatic increase in the number of phones on the roads. The Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association (CTIA) reports that more than 137 million people now subscribe to wireless services in the United States, up from fewer than 60 million subscribers in 1998. A vast majority of wireless telephone subscribers-more than 130 million people-use portable devices that can be taken in and out of the vehicle.

The increase in the number of phones has come with an increase in the complexity of phone functions and greater potential for distraction. Modern phones allow people to check stock quotes, receive updates on sporting events and send digital pictures.

The inherent portability of the mobile phone means that people can and do use phones while driving. NHTSA estimates that 73 percent of subscribers use their phones while driving. Others have guessed that between 50 percent to 70 percent of all mobile phone use occurs in the car.

Mobile phones are not the only technology on the road. Auto manufacturers are placing a variety of information and entertainment devices in new vehicles. In many cars, drivers and passengers now can check e-mail, surf the Web, follow navigation systems and use a variety of devices that used to be available only with a fixed phone line. Experts estimate that such in-vehicle technologies will likely grow to a $30 billion to $50 billion industry by 2010.

With all these new devices in motor vehicles, lawmakers have taken a closer look at how they affect traffic safety. There is little consensus, however, over whether states should regulate wireless phones or any other technology in the car. Proponents of restrictions have argued that the cognitive distractions caused by phones and other in-vehicle devices make regulation necessary. New devices in the car, they say, dangerously distract drivers away from their primary responsibility. Unlike drinking a cup of coffee or using a radio or CD player, new technologies such as wireless phones and Web interfaces require the driver to cognitively interact with the device, thereby diminishing the driver's ability to focus on the task of driving. Restriction proponents argue that these technologies differ from the distraction caused by passengers in the vehicle because passengers are more aware of the driving situation and can alert drivers to potential dangers on the road. Proponents also have cited several high profile crashes as evidence of the need for regulation.

Opponents of restrictions have cited the value of wireless phones and other devices as a reason against singling out wireless phones for regulation. More than 137 million people use wireless phones. Unlike alcohol, for example, wireless phones provide benefits to a driver. People use their phones to conduct business and stay in touch with loved ones. According to CTIA, more than 156,000 emergency calls are placed daily on wireless phones. Moreover, opponents argue there is little evidence that wireless phones and other devices are any more distracting than other normal activities in the car such as eating, grooming or using the radio.

In fact, there are few hard crash statistics on the topic. Until recently, only a couple of states collected information regarding the involvement of mobile phones in motor vehicle crashes. As of 2002, only six states-California, Florida, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Tennessee-have published data on the number of crashes that cited phones or CB radios as a causal factor.

The existing state data seem to show that cell phones are a factor in less than 1 percent of motor vehicle crashes in all six states (see Table 1). Critics have argued, however, that the published data are not truly indicative of the problem. Compared with other factors in motor vehicle crashes such as alcohol or seatbelts, mobile phone use is more difficult to detect. Crash investigators often must rely on witnesses or self-reporting by drivers to determine whether a cell phone was in use at the time of the crash. As a consequence, some researchers have argued that existing crash data are flawed.

Table 1 - State Crash Data on Mobile Phones and Driving

	California	Minnesota	Florida	Oklahoma	Pennsylvania	Tennessee
Total Accidents	237,780	126,470	102,290	79,120	32,723	30,994
Phone/CB	341	174	140	107	139	48
Percentage	.14%	.14%	.13%	.13%	.42%	.15%

Source: Cingular 2002

Several studies have linked mobile phones and other in-vehicle technologies with greater driver impairment. A widely quoted 1997 study published by researchers at the University of Toronto in the New England Journal of Medicine found that drivers who used mobile phones while driving were four times more likely to crash than drivers who did not, a rate equivalent to the one for legally intoxicated drivers. A more recent study published by the University of Utah in 2001 found that mobile phone conversations created levels of distraction that were much higher than other activities such as listening to the radio or audio books.

Other studies have concluded that there is a less substantial correlation between wireless phones and motor vehicle crashes. A report published by the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center in 2001 ranked using or dialing a wireless phone eighth among factors that caused driver distraction related crashes. According to the study, using or dialing a wireless phone caused only 1.5 percent of crashes in North Carolina, ranking it lower than other normal in-vehicle activities such as adjusting the radio and eating or drinking.

State Action

Few states specifically regulate the use of wireless phones or other technologies while driving (see Table 2). New York passed the most restrictive state measure by prohibiting drivers from using hand-held phones while operating a motor vehicle. New Jersey prohibits drivers under 21 years of age who have only a learner's permit from using a wireless phone while driving. Arizona, Illinois, Massachusetts and Rhode Island forbid school bus drivers from using cellular telephones while operating a school bus except in emergency situations. Florida and Illinois limit the type of headset drivers can use with a wireless phone. California requires rental car companies to post written instructions on the safe use of a wireless phone in rental cars with embedded cell phone equipment. Massachusetts requires that all drivers keep at least one hand on the steering wheel while using a mobile phone.

Several states have preempted the regulation of wireless phone use by local jurisdictions. Florida, Mississippi, Oregon and Oklahoma all specifically prohibit local jurisdictions from enacting restrictions on mobile phones in motor vehicles. Additionally, the statewide hand-held ban in New York preempted similar bans passed in three New York counties.

Table 2 - Existing State Laws Regarding Mobile Phone Use while Driving

State	Provision	Stature or Rule	Penalties
Arizona	Administrative code prohibits school bus drivers from using a mobile phone while operating the school bus.	A.A.C. Title 17 Chapter 9, Art. 1 R17-9-104.	No penalty specified.
California	Requires that rental cars with embedded cell phone equipment contain written instructions on the safe use of the phone while driving.	California Vehicle Code 28090.	$100 maximum for first violation; $200 maximum for second violation; $250 for third and subsequent violations committed within one year.
Florida	Requires that drivers who use a head set with a mobile phone while driving must use a head set that provides sound through one ear and allows surrounding sound to be heard with the other ear. Requires annual accident reports on distracted drivers. Prohibits local jurisdictions from enacting restrictive ordinances.	FLS 316.304 2002 SB 358	$30 for each violation; non-moving violation. Not applicable.
Illinois	Permits single-sided headset or earpiece with a mobile phone while driving. Prohibits school bus drivers from using a mobile phone while driving except in emergency situations.	Public Act 92-0152 Public Act 92-730	No penalty. Petty offense punishable with $100 to $250 fine.
Massachusetts	Permits cellular phone use as long as it does not interfere with the operation of the vehicle and one hand remains on the steering wheel at all times. Prohibits any person from operating a moving school bus while using a mobile telephone.	GLA 90-13 GLA 90-7B	$35 maximum fine for first violation; $35 to $75 for second violation; $75 to $150 for third and subsequent violations committed within one year. No penalty specified.
Mississippi	Prohibits local jurisdictions from restricting mobile phone use while driving.	2002 HB 1551.	Not applicable.
New York	Prohibits drivers from talking on hand-held mobile telephones while operating a motor vehicle.	Veh. And Traffic Code s1225.	Not more than $100.
New Jersey	Prohibits drivers less than 21 years of age who have only a learner's permit from using a mobile phone while driving.	P.L. 2001 Chapter 420. Codified as N.J.R.S 39:3-13	$100 fine or 90 day permit suspension.
Oklahoma	Prohibits local jurisdictions from restricting cell phone use while driving.	2001 HB 1081.	Not applicable.
Oregon	Prohibits local jurisdictions from restricting cell phone use while driving.	2001 HB 2987	Not applicable.
Rhode Island	Prohibits the use of cell phones while driving by school bus drivers except in the case of emergency.	31-22-11.8	No penalty specified.

Source: NCSL 2002

States have also taken an active role in improving data collection. Seventeen states now require law enforcement officers to collect cell phone use data on crash report forms, up from just two states four years ago (see Map 1). Additionally, legislatures in six states-Delaware, Louisiana, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia-have passed measures to study the effects of wireless phones on traffic safety. In December 2001, the Pennsylvania Joint Commission released a thorough study of wireless phone safety in response to a mandate by the legislature.

Map 1 - States that Track Cell Phone Involvement in Crashes

California, Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah

Source: NCSL, 2002

In 2002, legislators in 31 states considered approximately 100 bills regarding distracted driving, down from 43 states that considered more than 140 bills in 2001. A common misconception is that all wireless phone legislation is to ban the use of phones in the car. In fact, in 2002, only five states considered outright prohibitions of all cell phones and other communications technology while driving. More common were proposals to restrict certain types of devices or to improve data collection. Twenty-four states considered legislation to prohibit the use of hand-held phones while driving. Eleven states considered measures to improve data collection or study the relationship between driver distractions and crashes. Five states considered legislation that would have increased penalties or negligence for drivers who crash while using a cell phone. Six states looked at prohibiting school bus drivers from using cell phones, while six states considered prohibiting young drivers from using cell phones. Five states considered measures that would have prohibited all driver distractions including, but not limited to, cell phones (see Table 3).

Table 3 - 2002 State Legislation

State	Description	Status as of October
Alabama	HB 527 - Prohibits the use of hand-held cellular telephones while driving.	Died in committee.
Alaska	HB 295 - Prohibits the use of hand-held cellular telephones while driving.	Died in committee.
Arizona	SB 1003 - Prohibits the use of hand-held cellular telephones while driving. Exceptions for emergency situations.	Died in committee.
California	AB 1783 - Broad distraction bill. Makes it an infraction to drive a motor vehicle in an unsafe manner that results from engaging in any distracting activity that interferes with the safe operation of the vehicle.	In Assembly Transportation Committee April 22, 2002. Not heard.
California	AB 1911 - Prohibits the use of a hand-held cellular telephone while operating a motor vehicle. Requires the California Highway Patrol to collect data about the involvement of cellular telephones in motor vehicle crashes.	Failed passage in Assembly Transportation Committee.
California	AB 911 - Prohibits drivers from using hand-held cellular telephones while operating motor vehicles.	Died pursuant to state Constitution.
Colorado	HB 1299 - Prohibits the use of hand-held cellular telephones while driving. Enforcement as a secondary offense.	Died in committee.
Delaware	HB 360 - Prohibits the use of hand-held cellular phones while driving. Calls for the Department of Public Safety to study the issue. Allows a 30-day phase-in period. Exceptions for emergency situations.	Died at end of session.
Delaware	HB 408 - Creates penalty for driver who is using a cell phone, PDA or computer immediately prior to or during a crash.	Died in committee.
Delaware	HB 526 - Prohibits drivers under the age of 18 who hold only a level 1 learner's permit from using a cellular telephone while driving. Exceptions for emergency situations.	Reported from House Telecommunications and Electric Deregulation Committee without recommendation June 11, 2002. Died at end of session.
Delaware	HCR 30 - Establishes a task force to study driver distractions including mobile telephone use.	Passed June 30, 2002.
Florida	HB 15 - Provides that a driver of a motor vehicle who commits a moving violation while engaged in a secondary activity that results in driver distraction to be penalized double the amount of the fine.	Died in committee.
Florida	HB 1367 - Prohibits a driver from using a hand-held cell phone while operating a motor vehicle within a school zone during reduced speed limit hours.	Died in committee.
Florida	SB 206 - Broad distraction bill. Provides for the doubling of fines against the driver of a motor vehicle for moving traffic violations if he is engaged in another activity that distracts him.	Died in committee.
Florida	SB 610 - Prohibits the driver from using a hand-held cell phone within a school zone during hours for reduced speed.	Died in committee.
Florida	HB 9 - Prohibits the use of a hand-held cellular phone while driving. Sets a fine of $50 as a nonmoving violation.	Withdrawn from further consideration.
Florida	HB 233 - Requires the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to collect data on motor vehicle accidents involving distracted driving. Requires the department to report data quarterly. Identical to SB 358.	Died in the House.
Florida	SB 358 - Requires the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to collect data about the involvement of distracted drivers in motor vehicle crashes. Prohibits local jurisdictions from passing restrictions. Identical to HB 233.	Enacted.
Georgia	SB 167 - Assesses points and fines against drivers whose use of a mobile phone results in an accident.	Died in committee.
Georgia	HB 1353 - Modifies safe driving provision in existing law by removing provisions that say using a radio, cb, radio or mobile telephone are not violations.	Died in committee.
Georgia	HB 1589 - Prohibits the use of mobile telephones while driving.	Died in committee.
Georgia	SB 440 - Amends the driving with due care provision in existing law and prohibits the use of hand-held phones while driving.	Died in committee.
Georgia	HB 1093 - Prohibits the use of hand-held mobile phones while operating a motor vehicle. Exceptions for emergency situations. Phase-in period. Requires a study and data collection.	Died in committee.
Georgia	SR 382 - Creates a committee to study cellular telephone use while driving and the correlation with traffic crashes.	Died in committee.
Georgia	HB 335 - Prohibits the use of hand-held cell phones while driving.	Died in committee.
Hawaii	SB 2173 - Prohibits drivers from using a hand-held mobile telephone while driving.	Died in committee.
Hawaii	SB 2372 - Prohibits drivers from using a hand-held mobile telephone while operating a motor vehicle. Provides exceptions for emergency situations. Requires cell phone vendors to provide buyers with written information on the cell phone traffic law and about hands-free options.	Died in committee.
Hawaii	HB 2405 - Prohibits hand-held cellular phone use while driving a motor vehicle. Requires the use of hands-free operation or speaker phone system while driving. Provides exceptions for emergency situations.	Died in committee.
Hawaii	HB 1741 - Prohibits the use of a mobile telephone while operating a moving school vehicle except in emergency situations. Defines emergency and mobile telephones.	Died in Senate.
Hawaii	HB 2108 - Prohibits the use of a hand-held cellular phone while driving. Maximum $200 fine.	Died in committee.
Illinois	SB 1773 - Prohibits drivers under age 18 who hold only a graduated license from using a cell phone while driving.	To Senate Rules Committee February 5, 2002.
Illinois	SB 1795 - Prohibits school bus drivers from using a cell phone while operating a school bus except during emergency situations.	Enacted as Public Law No. 92-730.
Indiana	SB 129 - Prohibits driver use of hand-held cellular phones. Creates exceptions for emergency situations.	Died in committee.
Iowa	HB 2026 - Creates a rebuttable presumption of negligence against drivers of motor vehicles involved in traffic crashes while using mobile telephones.	Died in committee.
Iowa	HB 64 - Increases penalties for drivers who are involved in crashes while using a cell phone. Creates emergency exceptions.	Died in committee.
Kentucky	HB 128 - Prohibits the operation of a motor vehicle while using a mobile phone while the vehicle is in motion. Presumption is made that the driver is making a call if the driver is holding a phone to the ear. Allows use of hands-free phones.	Died.
Kentucky	HB 71 - Prohibits the engagement of a hands-free cellular phone except in emergencies or by public officials in the course of duty. Engaging does not include the use of either hand to activate, deactivate or initiate a phone call. Establishes a fine of not more than $100 for an offense. Presumes that the holding of a phone to the ear is engaging in a phone call unless evidence shows otherwise.	Died.
Maryland	HB 31 - Prohibits the driver of a motor vehicle from using a hand-held telephone while the vehicle is in motion. Exceptions for emergency situations.	Died in committee.
Minnesota	HB 2677 - Prohibits the use of cellular telephones while driving.	Died in committee.
Minnesota	SB 2504 - Prohibits the driver from holding a cellular telephone while driving.	Died in committee.
Mississippi	HB 1009 - Preempts local jurisdictions from passing ordinances to regulate driver use of mobile telephones.	Died in committee.
Mississippi	HB 1193 - Prohibits the use of cellular telephones while driving.	Died in committee.
Mississippi	HB 1551 - Prohibits local ordinances regarding cell phone use while driving.	Enacted after governor's veto overriden by House and Senate, March 2002.
Mississippi	SB 2915 - Prohibits local regulation of cell phone use while driving.	Died in committee.
Mississippi	HB 818 - Establishes that a driver who is using a cell phone is guilty of a misdemeanor offense if the cell phone is found to have contributed to an accident.	Died in committee.
Missouri	HB 1763 - Prohibits the use of a hand-held phone while driving. Provides exceptions for emergency situations.	Died in committee.
Nebraska	LB 42 - Creates a rebuttable presumption of negligence if a driver was using a mobile phone at the time of the crash.	Postponed indefinitely April 19, 2002.
New Jersey	AB 2355 - Prohibits the use of a hand-held cell phone while operating a motor vehicle as a primary offense. Imposes fines for first offense ranging from $100 to $200. Fines for subsequent offenses range from $250 to $1,000. Exceptions created for emergency situations. Companion to SB 1283.	To Assembly Transportation Committee October 3, 2002.
New Jersey	SB 1283 - Prohibits the use of hand-held cellular telephones while operating a motor vehicle as a primary offense. Imposes fines for first offense ranging from $100 to $200. Fines for subsequent offenses range from $250 to $1,000. Exceptions created for emergency situations. Companion to AB 2355.	Introduced May 13, 2002. From Senate Law and Public Safety and Veterans' Affairs Committee October 17, 2002.
New Jersey	SB 1251 - Prohibits the use of cell phones while operating a school bus.	From Senate Law and Public Safety and Veterans' Affairs Committee October 2002.
New Jersey	SB 1487 - Preempts local regulation of cell phone use in motor vehicles for 18 months. Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to compile information regarding the involvement of cell phones in traffic crashes.	To the Senate Law and Public Safety and Veterans' Affairs Committee May 2002.
New Jersey	AB 1531 - Prohibits drivers from using hand-held phones while operating motor vehicles. Exceptions for emergency situations.	To Assembly Transportation Committee October 2002.
New Jersey	AB 3241 - Prohibits holder of driver examination permit from using any interactive wireless device while operating a motor vehicle. Creates emergency exceptions.	Enacted January 2002.
New Jersey	AB 391 - Requires driver distractions to be noted in traffic accident reports. Officer must note whether a driver was distracted and the type of distraction. Distractions include wireless phones, pagers, CD players, radios, fax machines, food, grooming and unattended pets.	Passed Assembly June 2002. To Senate Law, Public Safety and Veterans Committee June 2002.
New Jersey	AB 445 - Prohibits the use of a cell phone while driving a school bus.	Passed Assembly June 2002. To Senate.
New Jersey	AB 664 - Prohibits the use of a cell phone while driving.	To Assembly Transportation Committee January 2002.
New Jersey	SB 338 - Prohibits the use of a cell phone while operating a motor vehicle. Makes use a secondary offense. Requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to collect information about cell phone use in crash reports.	From Senate Economic Growth, Agriculture and Tourism Committee October 2002.
New Jersey	AJR 37 - Establishes a task force to study driver distraction and highway safety and make recommendations.	Substituted by SJR 21 in January 2002.
New Jersey	AB 2798 - Clarifies that distracted drivers may be charged with reckless, careless or unsafe driving. Distracted driving behavior includes, but is not limited to, the use of communications technology such as wireless telephones, pagers, facsimile machines, locator devices, AM/FM radios, compact disc players, audio cassette players, video players, citizens band radios, and dispatch devices; engaging in personal grooming; consuming food or beverages; reading; or tending to unsecured pets.	Referred to Assembly Transportation Committee September 2002.
New Jersey	SJR 21 - Establishes the Driver Distraction and Highway Safety Task Force to study driver distractions and make recommendations.	Passed January 2002.
New York	AB 4339 - Prohibits any person operating a school bus on a public highway from using a cellular or wireless phone when passengers are on the bus.	To Transportation Committee January 2002.
New York	SB 5321 - Prohibits school bus drivers from using a mobile telephone while driving except in emergency situations.	Died in committee.
New York	AB 3898 - Creates a criminal offense for drivers who cause accidents that result in serious physical injury or death while talking on a cell phone while driving. The offense carries identical penalties as those established for drivers who cause accidents leading to serious injury or death while driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.	In Assembly Codes Committee May 2002.
New York	AB 9386 - Prohibits drivers from dialing a mobile telephone while operating a motor vehicle.	Amended in the Assembly Transportation Committee January 2002.
New York	AB 9649 - Prohibits the use of a hands-free mobile telephone by an operator of a motor vehicle under the age of 18.	In Assembly Transportation Committee January 2002.
New York	AB 9650 - Prohibits the use of a hands-free mobile telephone by an operator of a motor vehicle under the age of 21.	To Assembly Transportation Committee January 2002.
New York	SB 2072 - Prohibits use of a hand-held phone while driving. Establishes affirmative defenses where driving while using a mobile phone is not a violation.	Enacting clause stricken January 2002.
New York	AB 1838 - Requires law enforcement officers to track cell phone involvement in motor vehicle crashes.	Enacting clause stricken February 2002.
New York	AB 4320 - Requires warning labels on cell phones regarding the dangers of driving.	In Assembly Consumer Affairs and Protection Committee May 2002.
Oklahoma	HB 2104 - Prohibits the non-emergency use of cellular phones by drivers under 18 years old.	Died in committee.
Pennsylvania	HB 2388 - Prohibits school bus drivers from using a cell phone while operating a school bus.	In House Transportation Committee.
Pennsylvania	HB 1997 - Restricts drivers from using cellular telephones while operating a motor vehicle.	In Transportation Committee.
Pennsylvania	HB 2562 - Prohibits the use of a hand-held mobile phone while driving. Creates emergency exceptions.	To House Transportation Committee April 2002.
Pennsylvania	HB 2666 - Prohibits distracted or careless driving caused by use of a grooming device, food, drink, book or printed materials, telephone, computer, television or other devices. Imposes a $50 fine for violations.	To House Transportation Committee May 2002.
Pennsylvania	HB 2550 - Prohibits the use of a cell phone while driving in a school zone.	To House Transportation Committee April 2002.
Pennsylvania	HB 2828 - Prohibits drivers with only learner's permits from using a mobile phone while driving.	Introduced September 5, 2002. To Transportation Committee.
Pennsylvania	SB 1474 - Prohibits drivers from using hand-held mobile phones while operating a motor vehicle.	Failed passage in Transportation Committee June 2002.
Rhode Island	HB 8178 - Prohibits drivers from engaging in activities unrelated to actual driving. Prohibits inattentive driving. Imposes a $50 fine for violations	Died in committee.
Rhode Island	HB 6922 - Prohibits driver use of hand-held mobile telephones.	Died in committee.
Rhode Island	HB 6924 - Prohibits school bus drivers use of a cellular telephone. Exceptions for emergency situations.	Enacted as Public Law No. 146.
Rhode Island	SB 2164 - Prohibits school bus drivers from using a cell phone. Exceptions for emergency situations.	Enacted as Public Law No. 251.
South Carolina	SB 1074 - Prohibits drivers under 18 from operating a motor vehicle while using a cell phone or other wireless communications device.	Died in committee.
South Dakota	HB 1055 - Requires accident reports to include information about the use of cellular phones and communication devices.	Died in committee.
South Dakota	HB 1061 - Prohibits the use of a mobile telephone while operating a motor vehicle. Exceptions for hands-free phones and emergency situations.	Died in committee.
Tennessee	HB 186 - Prohibits the use of hand-held cell phones while driving. Provides emergency exceptions. Companion to SB 685.	Died in committee.
Tennessee	HB 3200 - Prohibits use of hand-held phone while driving. Exceptions for emergency situations. Creates rebuttable presumption of negligence if driver was using a cell phone at the time of a crash.	Died in committee.
Tennessee	HB 2142 - Prohibits use of hand-held phone while driving. Exceptions for emergency situations. Creates rebuttable presumption of negligence if driver was using a cell phone at the time of a crash. Companion bill to HB 3200.	Died in committee.
Tennessee	HB 2354 - Requires accident reports to include information regarding cellular telephone use at the time of an accident.	Died in committee.
Tennessee	SB 3158 - Prohibits use of hand-held phone while driving. Exceptions for emergency situations. Creates rebuttable presumption of negligence if driver was using a cell phone at the time of a crash. Companion to HB 3200.	Died in committee.
Utah	HB 194 - Prohibits inattentive driving which is operating a motor vehicle while the driver's duties are divided from the safe operation of a vehicle by using a phone, computer, fax machine, personal hygiene products, or by eating or drinking, physically attending to a passenger, or observing a television. Secondary enforcement provision.	Defeated in House.
Utah	HB 67 - Makes inattentive driving an infraction with a fine. Provides for secondary enforcement of violation. Cell phone use while driving is included in the definition of inattentive driving.	Defeated on House floor.
Virginia	SB 87 - Prohibits the use of hand-held mobile telephones while driving a motor vehicle. Exceptions for emergency personnel and emergency situations.	Continued to 2003.
Virginia	HB 796 - Prohibits the use of wireless telecommunications devices by people younger than 18 years old while operating a motor vehicle.	Died in Committee.
Virginia	HB 808 - Prohibits the driver of a motor vehicle from using a hand-held wireless communication device while the vehicle is in motion unless the driver is using a hands-free device. Violators subject to $25 penalty. Requires law enforcement agencies to maintain a record of hand-held wireless communication device related accidents.	Continued to 2003.
Washington	SB 6101 - Requires accident report forms to include information about cell phone involvement in motor vehicle crashes.	Died in committee.
Washington	SB 6100 - Prohibits the use of a hand-held cell phone while driving.	Died in committee.
West Virginia	HB 4266 - Prohibits the use of a hand-held mobile phone while operating a motor vehicle. Provides emergency exceptions.	In House Judiciary Committee January 2002.
Wyoming	HB 10 - Prohibits the use of a hand-held mobile phone while driving. Provides emergency exceptions.	Died.

Source: NCSL, 2002

Federal Action

To date, the federal government has not acted to regulate the use of mobile phones and other wireless technologies in motor vehicles. Federal lawmakers proposed legislation to curb cell phone use in cars for the first time in 2001. If passed, Senate Bill 927, authored by Senator Jon Corzine (N.J.), and House Bill 1837, sponsored by Representative Gary Ackerman (N.Y.), would have required states to prohibit hand-held cell phone devices in motor vehicles or risk losing federal highway funds. However, neither measure made it out of committee and no new legislation was proposed in 2002.

NHTSA has long studied the traffic safety implications of mobile telecommunications technology in motor vehicles. In 1997, NHTSA published a report-An Investigation of the Safety Implications of Wireless Communications in Vehicles-that summarized driver distraction research. In 2000, NHTSA took public comment about the potential safety implications associated with driver distraction while using advanced in-vehicle technologies. Following a public comment workshop, NHTSA's then Deputy Administrator Rosalyn Millman stated that "...NHTSA's consumer information will now include advice that growing evidence suggests using a wireless phone or other electronic device while driving can be distracting, and drivers should not talk on the phone or use other devices while their vehicles are in motion."

The current NHTSA Administrator, Dr. Jeffrey Runge said, upon his appointment in August 2001, that it is too soon to regulate the use of cell phones in cars. He added that NHTSA would not be able to formally regulate cell phone use because the phones are not part of the car and therefore do not fall under NHTSA jurisdiction. New technology, such as on-board navigation devices that are part of the car, does fall under NHTSA jurisdiction. Runge said more research needs to be done in this area before NHTSA would issue any regulations.

An observational survey published by NHTSA in July 2001 indicates that, at any given time during daylight hours, about 3 percent of drivers of passenger cars, vans, SUVs and pickups-or approximately 500,000 drivers-are using a cell phone. The report also estimates that 54 percent of drivers reported that they "usually" have some type of wireless phone in their vehicle. Fifty-five percent of these drivers report that their phone is on during all or most of their trips, and 73 percent reported using their phone while driving. NHTSA estimates that driver distraction in all its forms contributes to between 20 percent and 30 percent of all motor vehicle crashes.

In response to a February 2002 fatal motor vehicle crash in Maryland that involved suspected cell phone use, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) initiated a study of driver distraction issues. However, the NTSB is still investigating the incident and has not released its final recommendations on the issue.

National efforts are under way to better coordinate data collection for driver distraction related crashes. In August 2002, representatives from the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Governors Highway Safety Association and numerous state and local agencies and organizations revised the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC) to include guidelines for collecting driver distraction data. MMUCC are standardized data elements collected by law enforcement officers at crash scenes. Most states use the 75 minimum criteria in MMUCC as a baseline for developing crash report forms. The changes in MMUCC are intended to encourage states to begin collecting more driver distraction related information.

Local Action

Action at the local level has had a significant effect on cell phone and driving regulations. Some media reports have estimated that as many as 300 local jurisdictions have considered restrictions on phone use in the car, and at least 20 local jurisdictions have prohibited drivers from using hand-held phones while driving. These include:

• Miami Dade County, Fla.	• Westchester County, N.Y.
• Pembroke Pines, Fla.	• Brooklyn, Ohio
• Westin, Fla.	• North Olmstead, Ohio
• Brookline, Mass.	• Walton Hils, Ohio
• Santa Fe, N.M.	• Conshohocken, Pa.
• Marlboro, N.J.	• West Conshocken, Pa.
• Nutley, N.J.	• Lebanon, Pa.
• Carteret, N.J.	• Hilltown Township, Pa.
• Suffolk County, N.Y.	• York, Pa.
• Nassau County, N.Y.	• Sandy, Utah

Although all these local communities passed cell phone restrictions, many are not currently enforcing their laws. A Pennsylvania appellate court struck down the ordinance in Hilltown Township, and the state attorney general issued an opinion against the provision in Brookline, Massachusetts. The new statewide restriction on hand-held cell phones superseded the laws passed in three New York counties. The Florida Legislature preempted local jurisdictions from passing restrictions.

International Action

At least 25 countries restrict or prohibit use of cell phones and other wireless technology in motor vehicles. Israel, Japan, Portugal and Singapore prohibit all mobile phone use while driving. Australia, Brazil, Chile, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, the Philippines, Romania, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, New Delhi, India, and Hong Kong prohibit the use of handheld mobile phones while driving. Drivers in the Czech Republic, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom may use cell phones but can be fined if they are involved in crashes while using the phone. Drivers in the United Kingdom and Germany also can lose insurance coverage if they are involved in a crash while talking on the phone.

Driver Focus and Technology Report

In March 2002, NCSL published its final report from the Driver Focus and Technology Partnership Forum. The forum brought state legislators and staff, wireless service providers, auto manufacturers, other interested companies and industry, safety groups, federal agencies, academics and other stakeholders together to discuss the growing concerns about technology in motor vehicles. During an eight-month period, the group met three times and heard presentations from 24 of the nation's leading experts on driver distraction issues. The group identified areas of agreement among all the stakeholders and better defined areas of disagreement.

The final report of the forum-Along for the Ride: Reducing Driver Distractions-contains summaries of expert presentations and background information about legislation. The report includes information about five major topics: communications, information and entertainment technology in motor vehicles; emergency response and safety systems; driver education; data collection and studies; and different drivers using technology. The report also details 14 principles developed by the forum members. These principles are as follows:

Federal law clearly governs equipment embedded in motor vehicles. Driver behavior, however, is a state issue. States, rather than the federal government, should decide whether to regulate the use of wireless telephones and other communications, information and entertainment technology in motor vehicles.
States, rather than local jurisdictions, should decide whether to regulate the use of wireless telephones and other communications, information and entertainment technology in motor vehicles.
Drivers should not have access to traditional broadcast televisions or other embedded communications, entertainment or information devices that are not intended for driver use while operating motor vehicles.
No regulation should prevent a driver's use of hand-held and hands-free wireless telephones in emergency situations. Emergency situations are circumstances where the driver is using a mobile telephone or other telematic device for the sole purpose of communicating with an emergency response operator; a hospital, physician's office or health clinic; an ambulance company or corps; law enforcement personnel; or a fire department, district or company. Emergency situations also include communications by police officers or peace officers; members of a fire department, district or company; or operators of an authorized emergency vehicle in the performance of official duties.
Legislation, if contemplated, should consider and support automatic crash notification systems and other emergency response related technology. Any restrictions on wireless communication use should not impede emergency response technology.
States should include information about driver distractions-including information about the responsible use of potentially distracting technology-in driver education programs.
All drivers should receive driver distraction educational materials.
The federal government and state governments should work with industry and safety groups to develop appropriate driver education materials.
All states should collect data about the involvement of driver distractions-including potentially distracting technology in motor vehicles-on crash report forms. Motor vehicle administrators and other experts should determine the crash form content, with an emphasis on encouraging uniform data elements, collection methods and officer training.
Academic studies-such as driving simulators, road tests and epidemiological research-should supplement information obtained from crash report forms.
The federal government, states and industry should encourage additional research in several specific topic areas, including the effectiveness of hands-free devices, data collection processes and the effects of various entertainment and communications devices on different types of drivers.
Because teenage and novice drivers lack driving experience, they are more susceptible to the distractions caused by communications, entertainment and information technology in motor vehicles.
School districts should be encouraged to provide mobile telephones for school buses. However, states should consider prohibiting school bus drivers from using phones while driving the school bus except in emergency cases.
If states pass restrictions on the use of wireless phones and other communications, information and entertainment technology in motor vehicles, they should phase in enforcement to allow consumers enough time to adjust to restrictions.

While forum participants agreed on these 14 principles, they did not agree whether to regulate specific technologies in motor vehicles. Additionally, participants did not reach agreement on the issue of whether states should prohibit the use of hand-held wireless phones. The report details the major areas of contention as well as the positions of forum participants on these topics. More information about the driver focus and technology report is available online.

Conclusion

There is no consensus whether to regulate driver use of mobile telephones or other communications, entertainment and information technologies in motor vehicles. However, as both the quantity and sophistication of these devices has continued to grow, lawmakers at the state, federal and local level have shown increased interest in driver distraction issues. In the next couple of years, states and researchers will begin to accumulate more information about the implications of mobile phones and other technology on traffic safety. As more data become available, the relationship between technology and driver distraction will likely remain a popular topic for legislators.

References

Cain, Alasdair and Mark Burris. Investigation of the Use of Mobile Phones While Driving. Tampa, Fla.: Center for Urban Transportation Research College of Engineering, University of South Florida, April 1999.

Department of California Highway Patrol Office of Research and Planning. Effects of Cellular Telephone Use on Driver Behavior. Sacramento, Calif., September 1997.

General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Joint State Government Commission. Driver Distractions and Traffic Safety. Harrisburg, Pa., December 2001.

Hahn, Robert W., and Paul C. Tetlock. The Economics of Regulating Cellular Phones in

Vehicles. Washington, D.C.: AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, October

1999.

Lissy, Karen S.; Joshua T. Cohen; Mary Y. Park; and John D. Graham. Cellular Phone Use While Driving Risks and Benefits. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, July 2000.

McKnight, James A., and Scott A. McKnight. The Effect of Cellular Phone Use Upon Driver Attention. Landover, Md.: National Public Services Research Institute, prepared for AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, January 1991.

National Conference of State Legislatures. Along for the Ride: Reducing Driver Distractions. Denver, Colo., March 2002.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. An Investigation of the Safety Implications of Wireless Communications in Vehicles. Washington, D.C.: NHTSA, November 1997.

Redelmeier, Donald A., and Robert J. Tibshirani. "Association Between Cellular-Telephone Calls and Motor Vehicle Collisions." The New England Journal of Medicine 336, no. 7 ( Feb. 13, 1997): 453-458.

Stutts, Jane C.; Donald W. Reinfurt; Loren Staplin; and Eric Rodgman. The Role of Driver Distraction in Traffic Crashes. Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, prepared for AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, May 2001.

Utter, Dennis. Passenger Vehicle Driver Cell Phone Use Results from the Fall 2000 National Occupant Protection Use Survey. Washington, D.C.: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Research Note, July 2001.