State Lawmakers Eye Tougher Ban on Texting While Driving
The changes to the Senate bill put the proposal closer to a House measure, which made its first appearance of the legislative session on Tuesday.
March 26, 2019 at 01:18 PM
4 minute read
An effort to put more teeth into Florida's ban on texting while driving continued its Senate journey, after lawmakers stripped out proposals that could have allowed police to pull over motorists for potential distractions such as talking on cellphones, eating hamburgers or self-grooming.
The changes to the Senate bill (SB 76) put the proposal closer to a House measure (HB 107), which made its first appearance of the legislative session on Tuesday.
Rep. Jackie Toledo, a Tampa Republican sponsoring the House proposal with Rep. Emily Slosberg, D-Boca Raton, said she doesn't anticipate trouble for the measure, which received House support a year ago.
“This is the bill that was passed last year in the House, exactly as it was passed, so we had bipartisan support, 112 members supported the bill,” Toledo said.
The Senate version, which was approved by the Judiciary Committee, would shift texting while driving from a “secondary” offense to a “primary” offense. Currently, police can only cite motorists for texting if they are pulled over for other reasons. By making it a primary offense, police could pull over motorists for texting behind the wheel.
However, senators removed from the bill language that would have broadly defined distractions to include reading, writing, grooming, applying beauty products or interactions with pets or unsecured cargo. Also eliminated was a proposal that would have banned talking on cellphones that are not “hands free.”
Senate Judiciary Chairman David Simmons, an Altamonte Springs Republican who offered the amendment that limited the listed distractions, said the change was in reaction to questions about law enforcement potentially using the wider definition to conduct stops involving racial profiling.
“If you're on a phone, or you are eating a hamburger, or drinking a cola, or listening to your significant other yell at you, or if you are singing with too much gesticulation, the fact of it is that each one of those would be circumstances that would be distracted driving that would permit a law enforcement officer to go ahead and … certainly stop you,” Simmons said.
The ban on texting and driving as a secondary offense was approved in 2013 but has faced criticism from traffic-safety advocates who say it should be a primary offense.
The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles reported 1,671 citations issued in the state last year, of which 39 were for repeat offenders.
While the House last year passed a measure to make texting while driving a primary offense, the measure failed to advance in the Senate amid concerns about issues such as racial profiling. This year's Senate proposal, sponsored by Sen. Wilton Simpson, R-Trilby, has been approved by three committees.
The House went before the Transportation & Infrastructure Subcommittee on Tuesday.
Last year, then-House Speaker Richard Corcoran, now the state's education commissioner, publicly announced his support for the measure, saying he had become convinced by statistics showing the dangers of texting while driving, particularly for younger drivers.
House Speaker Jose Oliva, R-Miami Lakes, is “supportive of distracted driving legislation,” Oliva spokesman Fred Piccolo said on Monday.
Toledo anticipates Oliva's support for the current proposal.
“From what I understood he preferred the distracted driving bill, all of the distractions, but this is a good step in the right direction,” Toledo said.
The Senate proposal would lead to a public-awareness campaign, with warnings being handed out to violators from Oct. 1 through the end of the year, at which time citations would start to be issued.
Users' billing records for wireless devices would be admissible as evidence only when the drivers are involved in crashes involving death or serious bodily injury. First-time offenders could, if eligible, get their charges dismissed by taking a distracted driving program.
Jim Turner reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCOVID-19 Death Suit Against Nursing Home Sent to State Court, 11th Circuit Affirms
Year-End Tax Planning: How Real Estate Investors Can Leverage Qualified Opportunity Funds
5 minute read'Horror of Horrors': Florida Judges Spar Over En Banc Review in Binance Ruling
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Remembering Ted Olson
- 2Support Magistrates: Statutorily Significant
- 3Nelson Mullins, Greenberg Traurig, Jones Day Have Established Themselves As Biggest Outsiders in Atlanta Legal Market
- 4Immunity for Mental Health Care and Coverage for CBD: What's on the Pa. High Court's November Calendar
- 5Monday Newspaper
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250