Federal Government To Bully States Into Passing Bans On Texting While Driving

Proof • October 30, 2009

According to this article, some in Congress are looking at ways to use state dependence on federal funding to bully the states into passing bans on texting while driving.

What would be more effective in getting you to stop texting while driving – incentives or penalties? Two top senators are betting on incentives. On Tuesday, they introduced a bill that would provide grants to states that enact texting while driving bans.
Sens. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, chairman and ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee, respectively, introduced the Distracted Driving Prevention Act, which would allocate safety belt education funds for distracted driving campaigns.
The bill conflicts with a bill introduced in July by fellow Commerce Committee member Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat. His bill, the Alert Drivers Act, would require states to enact driving while texting or e-mailing bans or risk losing federal funds.
“I so believe that our approach is right because I don’t think we ought to get into states rights,” Sen. Hutchison said during a Wednesday hearing on distracted driving.

It’s a little amazing to me that someone who is supporting using federal funding as a cattle prod to herd states into compliance with federal demands is protecting “states rights.”
First of all, texting while driving is already illegal. All fifty states have statutes against reckless driving in one form or another. Texting while driving is reckless driving, meaning that any additional ban on texting while drivign would be entirely superfluous. And, frankly, unenforceable. After all, how does a law enforcement officer tell from outside a car while in traffic that a driver is texting as opposed to dialing a phone call or changing tracks on an iPod?
Reckless driving covers drivers doing all those things. A texting-while-driving ban does not.
Second, here in North Dakota our legislators voted down a ban on texting while driving because (rightfully) they saw the law as silly and superfluous. But now the federal government is going to use our state’s dependence on federal funds to override the decision of our elected representatives and ram-rod a ban through anyway?
So much for the “will of the people,” I guess.

Tags: Asshats, Domestic Issues, Politics

http://Array sayanything-13784

This gets more like carter part 2 everyday, why not mandate 55 mph again.
robert108

Again with the lying smear, Rob! I don’t support what you say I support, so you lied, and you didn’t answer my question, which was a request for information as to why you have your panties in a bunch over this. Instead of answering my question, you try to smear me with one of your usual lies. It’s not a “canned response”, since I only give it when you use lying smear instead of any facts or logic.

Maybe you can answer the question as to who is harmed here? Are you supporting the stupid and destructive texting drivers as “maximum liberty”?

Again, I asked a question, and got lies and hysterical personal attack for asking.
What happened to “Say Anything”? You seem to be more focused on stabbing me in the back.
sayanything-1321

Anyone who thinks that texting while driving (or talking on your cell phone) should not be banned is a fool. It is something we call “common sense”. This is not a matter of protecting us from ourselves. It is about public safety and the welfare of the people. Since the states obviously see this as somehow political, they lack the will to ban the practice. This is where the federal government steps in and does the right thing.
John Rob

Losing a limb or losing life was my constant bet on road. Thanks to drivesafe.ly application, now I reach home safe.
robert108

Your canned response is to tell some lie about me, rather than making any sort of argument for your position, btw. Texting while driving isn’t even on my radar, so you lied about the “pet peeve” stuff. Your pet peeve seems to be anything sensible that gets in the way of stupid and destructive behavior, with no regard for the consequences of that behavior.
robert108

I don’t understand what the big flap is all about. Texting while driving is obviously stupid and destructive, and since no has yet declared it to be a “right”, what’s the big deal? I don’t see why the feds should be involved in this at all, since it doesn’t involve foreign trade or interstate commerce. Where’s the point of entry?

I don’t get the attempt to make an equivalence to the stupid 55 mph speed limit, which was originally designed to “save fuel” after Carter screwed our domestic oil industry.
That affected everybody, while the texting thing only affects those who are too stupid to know that taking their eyes off the road is dangerous.
jimmypop

we have …… er, had…. a $1.2B surplus and get 3x our money back from the fed. i say we start telling them to screw off.
MarkSD

55 will probably be back.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

The point is that distracted or reckless driving is already illegal, and so a ban would be superfluous.

Though I’m not surprised that you support unnecessary goverrnment as long as it targets one of your pet peeves.

Big 180′s canned resposne: “Lying smear!”
MarkSD

“Distracted Driving Prevention Act”? If they want to protect me they better add a provision that pretty girls have to stay off the streets and sidewalks!

SayAnythingBlog.com

Federal Government To Bully States Into Passing Bans On Texting While Driving

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments