Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Distracted Driving topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate debate stalls on hands-free driving bill after safety, scope disputes
Summary
Senators engaged in extended debate over a bill to require hands-free phone use while driving (second substitute HB63). Sponsors argued the technology and voice controls make compliance practical; opponents raised enforcement and scope concerns including commercial 'push-to-talk' devices. The sponsor withdrew a passage motion and an on-floor amendment was circled for further work.
Senators spent more than an hour debating Second Substitute House Bill 63, a hands-free distracted-driving proposal that would prohibit holding a phone to the ear and require use of hands-free or voice-activated functions while operating a motor vehicle. Sponsor Senator Eckhart framed the bill as an incremental safety step that modern phones and vehicle systems can already accommodate, demonstrating voice-activation features during remarks.
The bill’s proponents emphasized safety and deterrence. Senator Escamilla gave personal testimony, saying, “In August fifteenth of 2014, my 9 year old daughter was in a very serious car crash” caused by a distracted driver and arguing a hands-free requirement would offer additional protection. Supporters cited research and expert testimony as evidence that hands-free use reduces visual-manual distraction.
Opponents raised enforcement and scope questions. Senator Henderson asked whether commercial push‑to‑talk devices used in distribution and trucking would be covered; Senator Jenkins and the sponsor discussed statutory exemptions and the bill text that allows devices explicitly designed for hands‑free talking. Senator Stevenson and others expressed concern about overreach and the balance between public safety and individual freedom, describing the policy as a judgment call for the body rather than a settled technical fix.
Floor procedure interrupted final action. The sponsor moved for passage but then withdrew the motion; an on‑floor amendment proposed by Senator Jenkins (to clarify the status of push‑to‑talk phones and similar commercial devices) was moved to circle and the motion to circle passed. No final vote on HB63 occurred in this sequence, and sponsors agreed to continue work on technical language before returning the bill to the floor.
