Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Control Signal Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate rejects bill allowing drivers to enter empty intersections on red
Summary
After hours of debate about safety, pedestrians and enforcement, the Arkansas Senate voted to defeat Senate Bill 372, a proposal that would have allowed drivers to treat a red signal as a stop sign when no other traffic or pedestrians were present.
The Arkansas Senate on a later roll call rejected Senate Bill 372, which would have allowed drivers to enter an intersection while a red light was showing if they determined the intersection was clear of vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists.
The bill’s sponsor, Senator Clark, said the measure was aimed at rural and late-night situations where a permanently installed traffic signal operates like an unnecessary stop at 2 a.m. “This says there can't be anyone in the intersection,” Clark told colleagues during debate, describing the bill as a safety and efficiency change for low-traffic conditions.
Supporters argued the change would reduce needless delays and fuel consumption in areas with very low traffic after hours. Senator Payton and other supporters said the bill was in the spirit of existing allowances — for example, right turns on red — and pointed to places where drivers commonly face long waits at empty signals.
Opponents raised enforcement and safety concerns. Senator Payton warned the bill’s wording risked confusing law-enforcement officers and could shift liability to drivers who entered intersections to find a vehicle already stopped in the intersection. Senator Tucker and others questioned how the law would interact with crosswalks and pedestrian signals; Senator Deese said an amendment would be required to make clear that no pedestrians or cyclists could be visible when a motorist decides to proceed.
Several senators also raised concerns about inconsistent traffic-control technology — timers versus vehicle sensors — and about how drivers from neighboring states would react to rules that might differ across borders. Senator Clark said he was willing to amend or remove a contested paragraph that placed yielding obligations on other drivers but ultimately the Senate voted not to adopt the change.
A roll-call vote followed extended debate; the motion failed and the measure did not become law.
The discussion prompted senators to recommend administrative fixes and technology updates — improving sensors and timing — rather than the statutory change SB 372 proposed. Clark said he would consider drafting clarifying language if the idea is revived.
Votes and next steps: The Senate formally recorded the bill as failed on the floor and later moved to expunge the failed vote from the record; members debated whether to return to the concept at a later date.
