DUI Seattle, Seattle DUI Lawyer, Seattle DUI Attorney

By KRISTIN DIZON
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

For the past six years, Sen. Tracey Eide, D-Auburn, has been trying to pass a bill in Washington against hand-held cell phone driving, which would make ours the third state to do so.

Last session, Eide’s bill didn’t even get a hearing in the transportation committee she sits on, even though she got the support of two wireless companies: Cingular and Verizon Wireless.

But the tide may be turning.

New York first enacted such a ban in 2001. New Jersey’s and Washington, D.C.,’s laws both took effect in July. Approximately 25 American cities have also done so, along with the Army base at Fort Campbell, Ky. Maine and New Jersey prohibit drivers under 21 with a learner’s permit from driving while phoning.

Besides state laws, companies are beginning to ask their employees to stop phoning and driving, and plaintiffs are collecting multimillion dollar awards for wrongful death caused by cell phone-wielding drivers.

Eide used to call constituents from her car until she missed a stop sign while talking on the phone. “I taught myself. It scared me.” Now, she turns off her phone while driving.

Other lawmakers, however, fear restricting cell phones in cars may hamper the development of new technological devices for cars that may be beneficial. Called telematics, such devices include new generations of embedded, voice-activated phones, in-dash navigational systems and more.

And many legislators like to phone while driving, and know how popular it is.

A constituent who called after nearly getting sideswiped twice on one trip by drivers on cell phones got Eide’s legislative wheels turning.

“I don’t want to outlaw them. I just want to have it so they’re hands free — so you can turn, you can shift, you can signal,” said Eide, whose young adult and teen children are trained not to call and drive.

Her bill, most recently titled SB5487, makes exceptions for emergency calls, to summon medical help, or report accidents and illegal activity. It exempts anyone operating an authorized emergency vehicle.

She also tried to get state collision reports changed to track cell phone involvement in crashes, but that hasn’t happened yet either.

“If people would just stop and realize what they’re doing, they would be mortified,” she said, recalling the time she saw a state trooper who was on the phone driving erratically.

Another time, Eide was a guest on radio’s “Car Talk” with Click & Clack, aka Tom and Ray Magliozzi, staunch opponents of phoning and driving who’ve given out “Hang up and drive” bumper stickers. A legislator from another state, calling from the road on his wireless, was saying that cell phone driving is safe and shouldn’t be regulated. Suddenly a swear word, followed by a crash, filled the airwaves. The man had gotten into a collision on live radio.

“Doesn’t that just say it all?” Eide says.

Since introducing the bill in 1998, Eide has heard from people who support it, such as Cheryl Miller of Tacoma, who was almost broadsided by someone on a cell phone.

That didn’t make Miller, 56, drive defensively. “It increased my road rage exponentially,” she said. “It made me drive more aggressively. It was just sheer anger, and all kinds of expletives for these idiots out here on the roads.”

Miller owns a cell phone and appreciates calls from her husband and daughters on the road, saying they’ll be late or their plans have changed. So she feels some ambivalence, but wants more emphasis on responsible behavior.

The former chair of the Highways & Transportation committee, Sen. Jim Horn, R-Mercer Island, opposed Eide’s bill and declined to grant it a hearing last session.

Horn believes many people can phone and drive safely.

“I do it quite frequently. I have a cell phone that’s voice activated. I think the most inattention is when you’re trying to punch in a number,” said Horn, who mostly holds his phone when driving.

“Would anybody say that it’s impossible to drive responsibly while talking on a cell phone?” he asked, adding that people who do it often are usually better at it. “I think most people tend to act responsibly on this thing. I don’t think you have to regulate and define under what conditions you can and can’t do it.”

But Horn just lost his bid for re-election and the Senate balance tipped from Republican to Democratic control, so Eide may have better luck next session.

Some think the pendulum is swinging in favor of regulation, perhaps none more so than Felix Ortiz. In 2001, the New York state assemblyman got the first state hand-held ban passed in the country.

It took five years for Ortiz to make it happen, facing initial opposition from law enforcement and the wireless lobby.

“When they make that comment — about we need more data — I fought back and said, ‘Would you like to see your son or daughter in that data?’ ” he said.

The catalyst for the bill was an erratic driver on a cell phone in his district. “I witnessed a person who was driving and crossing both sides of the road. Then she hit a pole. And I stopped to help her,” he said.

Though New York is still crunching the numbers, Ortiz says his law has reduced crashes attributable to cell phones. “This legislation is all about saving lives,” he said.

From December 2001 through May 2004, New York issued more than 286,000 of the $100 citations for driving with a hand-held cell phone.

Ortiz said he’ll work to strengthen his bill, aiming for a complete ban except for voice-activated phones. He hopes the law can be amended in the future to add other distractions, including DVD players, Web surfing, text messaging and more.

He sees a day when the federal government intervenes, perhaps tying the release of highway funds to states’ banning the practice.

“I’m probably going to be 50 or 60 years old, but I’ll look back and say I had a vision,” said Ortiz, who is 44.

Ortiz is not the only one who thinks the handwriting is on the pavement. Leading telecom industry analyst The Yankee Group wrote, “It is inevitable that wireless usage in automobiles will be further regulated,” in a September 2003 research note. “Any opposition by wireless carriers or device manufacturers will work against them in the future.”

The paper concludes the best scenario for industry is hands-free laws, which increase the sale of hands-free equipment. The worst outcome is a total ban, “which would have a significant negative effect on revenue for wireless carriers and device manufacturers.”

This entry was posted on Friday, November 16th, 2007 at 1:40 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.