Committee Hears Heated Debate Over Bill to Require English-Only Driver’s Tests; Vote Deferred
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
A House committee held a public hearing on HB 88, which would require Alabama driver’s license tests be administered in English only. Lawmakers split over public-safety arguments and access concerns; the committee carried the measure over for further work and possible subcommittee review.
A state House committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security on Thursday heard emotional testimony and sharp questioning about House Bill 88, which would require that Alabama driver’s license examinations be given in English.
Representative Pettis, the bill’s sponsor, said the proposal responds to safety concerns about drivers who cannot follow English directions during a road test. “This bill, all it does is say it will be done in English only,” Pettis told the committee, adding that some examiners have had difficulty when applicants do not follow basic test commands.
Supporters framed the bill as a public-safety measure. Representative Estes said ensuring license holders can read and obey highway signage is critical, warning of incidents where drivers who passed tests in other languages later provoked dangerous errors: “We saw a young man try to make a turn on an interstate highway. He tried to turn on the interstate and go in the opposite direction.”
Opponents argued the measure would create barriers to lawful driving and labeled parts of the bill “cruel and inhumane.” Representative Jackson said the bill “takes away opportunity” and questioned why the state would limit access rather than provide language assistance. Representative Wadsworth described working for years to help people secure licenses and warned that additional documentation and procedural hurdles could trap people in a cycle of unlicensed driving and fines.
Lawmakers also debated a provision that would bar the use of electronic translators, dictionaries or human interpreters during testing. Representative Betzal asked if a narrow amendment—mandating an English test but allowing controlled use of translation devices—would achieve the sponsor’s intent; Pettis responded that the device ban is intended to prevent cheating and ensure uniform treatment of applicants.
The committee did not take a vote on HB 88. The chair said the public hearing would be carried over to next week for additional consideration; Representative Wadsworth asked the measure be sent to a subcommittee to work through suggested changes.
Next steps: HB 88 will return to the committee next week for further debate and possible amendments.