Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety Drugged Driving topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House panel adopts per‑se drugged-driving offense for certain prohibited substances
Summary
House Bill 344 creates a per‑se driving‑under‑the‑influence offense for nonalcohol prohibited substances in drivers’ blood. Sponsor framed it as aligning with other states and protecting roads; opponents warned low detection thresholds risk prosecuting unimpaired drivers.
House Bill 344, sponsored by Representative Mitchell, passed on a committee vote after floor debate about impairment thresholds and laboratory testing methods.
Representative Mitchell said the bill “adds to the list of prohibited substances for non commercial and commercial drivers” and creates a per‑se DUI for “drivers on dangerous drugs,” noting the committee amendment removed urine testing and added fentanyl to the prohibited list. “We should not be endorsing as a state drivers driving on meth, cocaine, fentanyl, heroin, LSD, PCP, and the list goes on. Let's make Montana Road safe again,” Mitchell said.
Representative Cunningham rose in opposition after the amendment, arguing the lower detection levels in the amendment “do not indicate impairment, but indication indicate past ingestion,” and warned the bill could open the door to “erroneous prosecution for DUI.” Cunningham said she would have supported the bill before the amendment, which she said reduced applicable thresholds too far.
The motion recommending House Bill 344 do pass carried on a recorded vote of 67 in favor and 33 opposed. Representative C. Fitzpatrick was recorded as voting no as an absentee.
