Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Motorcycle Helmets topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee rejects change that would let adults 21+ ride without helmets

Transportation and Safety Committee · March 11, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Transportation and Safety Committee voted 4–5 to defeat an amendment that would have allowed motorcyclists age 21 and older to choose not to wear helmets; proponents cited economic benefits, opponents cited federal safety data and lifetime costs of traumatic brain injury.

The Transportation and Safety Committee voted down an amendment to Senate Bill 26‑48 that would have allowed adult motorcyclists (age 21 and older) to decide whether to wear a helmet. After debate and public testimony the chair announced the tally: 4 ayes and 5 noes, and the measure failed in committee.

Sponsor Senator Roberts framed the question as a policy choice about personal freedom and economic opportunity, saying lawmakers must decide "who decides whether an adult motorcyclist wears a helmet?" Supporters, including Humphreys County Executive Mike Pagraba, urged the committee to consider tourism dollars, with Pagraba telling the panel: "We conservatively estimate that an annual revenue increase of over $500,000,000 in added revenues for Tennessee." Pagraba argued loosening the law could draw riders to Tennessee events and local businesses.

Opponents pressed the public‑safety consequences. One senator who previously worked with brain‑injured patients said traumatic brain injuries impose lifelong costs that exceed insurance, while another cited National Highway Traffic Safety Administration findings on helmet effectiveness. The chairing senator noted federal safety research: "helmet use collapses, fatalities rise, traumatic brain injuries increase," characterizing universal laws as the only proven strategy to reduce motorcycle deaths.

Committee members also discussed fiscal and enforcement questions. Supporters said financial impacts should be examined by the finance committee and that other states have not seen dramatic cost increases; critics cited high long‑term medical costs and said partial laws reduce compliance and are harder to enforce. The committee did not amend the jurisdiction of other committees and the bill failed to advance from committee.