Articles Posted in Motor Vehicle Accidents

In another sign of the speed with which distracted driving has gone from a fringe issue to center stage, the US Department of Transportation moved Tuesday to ban bus drivers and drivers of large trucks from texting while operating their vehicles, according to media reports. The measure will exist above and beyond the Oregon distracted driving law that went into effect this month.

The New York Times reports that the ban is effective immediately and that violators will “face civil or criminal fines of up to $2,750.” Here in Oregon distracted driving, including texting and the use of hand-held cellphones behind the wheel, has been illegal since the first of the year. Similar bans exist in about a dozen other states as well as the District of Columbia. The federal government is able to go beyond these state laws because of the authority it possesses to regulate the trucking industry at the national level.

In addition to cellphones the new rules also cover the dashboard computers long-haul drivers use to communicate with their dispatchers. The move comes partly in response to an increasing body of statistical evidence of the dangers posed by distracted driving. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has been an increasingly vocal opponent of distracted driving since taking office last year.

Oregon’s new distracted driving law helped earn the state the state a ‘Green Light’ – the highest rating – in the annual report card issued by Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety. For 2009 the group added a ban on texting while behind the wheel to its list of recommended state-level legal and safety measures. Oregon’s distracted driving law, which bans texting, was signed into law in 2009 and came into force this year.

Overall, Advocates judged states by the number and strength of 15 different legal areas associated with highway safety. Oregon was one of ten states (plus the District of Columbia) to earn the ‘Green Light’ designation.

Rising awareness of Oregon distracted driving and other highway safety issues was a key feature of the state’s politics last year. As the new law takes effect it raises separate questions about how it will be enforced by the state’s courts and what that may mean for drivers or pedestrians injured by an Oregon distracted driver.

With the stroke of midnight and the beginning of 2010 Oregon joined the growing list of states restricting the use of cellphones by people driving cars. In Oregon and around the country distracted driving has emerged over the last two or three years as a serious issue of public concern. The interesting question may, in fact, be why it took so long for this to happen. As the New York Times link below indicates, concern about the issue is not particularly new. AAA issued its first warning that drivers ought to pull over before picking up the phone in 1984 (yes, 1984).

Oregon’s new distracted driving law requires drivers to use a hands-free device, such as a Bluetooth headset, when making and receiving calls. Telephone use by drivers under the age of 18 is banned entirely. Also banned (for drivers of all ages) is texting while behind the wheel. More details about the new law can be found here.

While there have been a number of media reports during the last few weeks of brisk headset sales around Oregon, it will probably take some time before the real impact of the Oregon distracted driving law becomes clear. Anecdotal evidence from other states with distracted driving laws indicates that enforcement regimes vary widely (for example: New York, one of the first states to enact a distracted driving law, has a reputation for relatively relaxed enforcement while Washington DC is said to be unusually strict).

The new Oregon distracted driving law that comes into effect Friday has been getting a lot of attention over the last week. This weekend, however, the state’s leading newspaper raised serious questions about whether the law already contains a fatal flaw.

An editorial in the Portland newspaper The Oregonian points out that the Oregon distracted driving law requiring drivers to use a hands-free device if they are talking on the phone while behind the wheel contains an exception for people “operating a motor vehicle in the scope of a person’s employment if operation of the motor vehicle is necessary for the person’s job.” The paper says the language was inserted at the insistence of business lobbyists, but worries that “necessary for a person’s job” is not defined anywhere in the legislation.

The loophole, the paper notes, “may well be big enough for real estate agents, contractors, FedEx drivers and just about anyone who needs a car for work.” Interpretation of the provision will lie with Oregon’s courts, and it may take some time for legal judgments under the new law to offer Oregon distracted driving attorneys guidance on what “necessary for the person’s job” means in practice.