Health Care/Joan Retsinas

Micro Points of Light: Distracted Driving in the States

In search of Peggy Noonan’s hundred points of light, I have been a honing pigeon, circling over the mass of health legislation, seeking laws that improve Americans’ health. Nothing on the federal level; on the contrary, Uncle Sam is making us sicker. On the state level, the grim bills abound; notably, cuts in Medicaid, and restrictions on abortions anywhere, anytime, for any reason.

But states’ bans on distracted driving constitute a point of light, even if a micro one., in a dim political firmament.

Common sense screams: drivers should focus on driving; but when common sense comes up against the gizmos that let drivers stay in touch with the world off- road, common sense fails. Drivers intent on sealing the deal, finding a restaurant, or checking email “double-task.” The time behind the wheel can be so boring. Why not talk, surf, text?

The National Center for Statistics and Analysis proclaims why not. People die from “distracted driving,” which includes eating, chatting with passengers, and fiddling with the radio. It killed 3,166 people in 2017. The three-part mantra for safety is: hands on wheel, eyes on the road, mind focused on task. The gizmos we have grown to need are the key culprit.

In 2012, with Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), Congress provided $17.5 million in grants during fiscal year 2013 for states with primary enforcement laws against distracted driving, including cell phone use. (Primary enforcement lets an officer stop a motorist holding a phone; secondary enforcement allows an officer to stop a motorist for another reason; talking on the phone is a “secondary” offense.) States with secondary enforcement laws cannot receive these funds.

States responded, if not to the grants, then to common sense. Almost all states (except Arizona, Missouri and Montana) ban texting. Texting “see you soon” (five seconds) takes your eyes off the road for the length of a football field. The National Safety Council traces one in four accidents to texting, with 390,000 injuries.

Next are hand-held cell phones. A slew of states ban them totally: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Washington D.C.) — and now Massaschusetts, which just voted, almost unanimously, to ban the phones.

Some states have made partial steps toward a total ban. Thirty-six ban them for new drivers. In a parsing of danger, 19 states and Washington DC ban them for school bus drivers with children on board. Texas forbids motorists driving near a school from talking on their phones. New Mexico lets municipalities set the rules. (See “Cellular Phone Use and Texting While Driving Laws” at ncsl.org.) Florida has just proposed making talking on a cell phone a primary offense.

Hands-free phones are harder to ban, though Connecticut bans them for motorists under age 18. Often built into the car, those phones let drivers keep their hands on the wheel, their eyes on the road. Yet the danger persists: the driver is distracted, the possibility of accidents, just as high. (National Center for Statistics and Analysis, January 2019, “Driver electronic device use in 2017” Traffic Safety Facts Research Note. Report No. DOT HS 812 665. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.)

Another point of light: This president, who has overturned much of President Obama’s legislation, including swatches of Moving Ahead with Progress, has not sought to restore the driver’s seat as a sacrosanct fiefdom, to put a phone into every driver’s hands. Maybe he is distracted. Tariffs, wars, twitter: it is hard to keep eyes on the I-hate-Obama target.

Joan Retsinas is a sociologist who writes about health care in Providence, R.I. Email retsinas@verizon.net.

From The Progressive Populist, July 1-15, 2019

Populist.com