Bitter Smith said she’s not trying to draft a bill just to kill it. In fact, her staffers are researching whether to have that law be the one and only Arizona measure on the subject.
Make driving while eating illegal?
Sept. 24, 2007
Howard Fischer
Howard Fischer
PHOENIX — Alarmed by one city’s new law banning texting while driving, Arizona’s cell-phone industry is writing a proposed state law that could override local ordinances.
One Tucson legislator calls the industry’s plan “completely disingenuous.”
But Susan Bitter Smith, lobbyist for the Arizona Competitive Telecommunications Association, said the new Phoenix law too narrowly and unfairly targets cell-phone texting by motorists as a cause of accidents.
That ordinance, which took effect last week, assesses fines up to $100 for drivers who send or receive text messages on cell phones and other hand-held devices while their vehicle is moving. If there is an accident, the penalty is $250.
The move came over the objections of the cellular industry, which earlier this year beat back a similar proposal by Rep. Steve Farley, D-Tucson, for a statewide ban on texting while driving.
Bitter Smith said attorneys are researching whether cities have any legal right to impose their own texting laws. Even Gov. Janet Napolitano conceded she does not know if the Phoenix ordinance runs afoul of state laws.
But Bitter Smith said a simpler way to resolve the issue is a statewide law, one that covers all issues of distracted driving.
She said that could include not just texting but other activities that can be dangerous, ranging from eating while behind the wheel to turning around to yell at the kids in the back seat.
Farley said Bitter Smith’s proposal is a sham designed to put an end to the whole idea of regulating texting while driving.
“She wants to put everything and the kitchen sink into it,” he said. “She’s gambling that people will be very upset by something that will not allow them to eat or put makeup on while they’re driving.
“That would not have any support, and the whole thing would die,” he said.
Bitter Smith insists she is serious about getting a law passed — but a broad one. “What the industry’s position is, is there are a multitude of behaviors that you should not be doing while driving,” she said.
“They range anywhere from potentially texting to smoking a cigarette, whatever. If you are driving distractedly or recklessly, regardless of the reason, that’s what the statute should cover, not a single behavior.”
Farley’s counter-argument: “We have to draw a line somewhere where we are able to get the law done,” he said. “And frankly, I don’t think the people of Arizona are ready for a law that forbids them to turn around and talk to their kids while driving or to put their makeup on.”
Bitter Smith said she’s not trying to draft a bill just to kill it. In fact, her staffers are researching whether to have that law be the one and only Arizona measure on the subject.
That could have advantages for her industry.
Listing what activities are “distractions” effectively says others are not. So even if texting is on that list, it might not include the regular use of cell phones by drivers. Since 1999, Bitter Smith has repeatedly beaten back attempts at the Capitol to prevent cell-phone use while driving.
She says that any law might need to allow only “secondary enforcement.” That means police could issue a citation only if a motorist were first stopped for another violation.
Arizona law already makes reckless driving a criminal offense, punishable by up to four months in jail and a $750 fine. That is defined as operating a motor vehicle “in reckless disregard for the safety of persons or property.”
Bitter Smith and Farley do agree on one point: That law is hard for police to enforce preemptively, with officers often writing citations only after an accident occurs. A measure on distracted driving — or even just texting — would allow ticketing for activities that could result in a crash.
