Chill greets 2 cell phone proposals Critics point out shortcomings; defeat of bills seems likely

AUGUSTA – A pair of bills that would curb the use of cellular telephones by motorists appeared to be headed for defeat Monday as critics queued up to pan the measures during a legislative public hearing.

Sponsored by Reps. Joseph E. Brooks, D-Winterport, and Gerald E. Bouffard, D-Lewiston, the bills would require those who use their cell phones while driving to purchase hands-free accessories for the devices. Both men maintained Monday that motorists are losing control of their vehicles while becoming distracted on the phone, resulting in increased accidents.

Bouffard’s legislation, LD 102, would make it illegal for motorists to operate a cell phone without a hands-free accessory. Brooks’ bill, LD 95, not only would affect cell phones but also would prohibit motorists from using other hand-held electronic devices such as two-way radios, CB radios, computers and tape recorders. Violations of either bill would be considered traffic infractions.

Representatives of Maine’s cellular phone industry were out in force at the hearing before the Legislature’s Transportation Committee, but they were actually outnumbered by amateur, or ham, radio enthusiasts who saw the legislation as a major infringement on their hobby. A similar ban offered by Bouffard in 1999 received an overwhelming ought-not-to-pass recommendation and Sen. Christine R. Savage, R-Union, predicted this year’s proposals would meet a similar fate.

“They’re too difficult to enforce,” said the committee’s Senate chairwoman. “I suspect there will be strong ought-not-to-pass sentiment on this committee.”

“I think the pluses of being able to have access to a cell phone on the highway far outweigh the negatives,” agreed Rep. George H. Bunker Jr., D-Kossuth Township.

But Brooks persisted, urging the committee to take “a long and hard look” at his bill which would exempt 911 callers and those who use a cell phone in their work. He said cell phones and other electronic devices that can be used in a motor vehicle continue to proliferate and, with them, the number of motor vehicle accidents.

“I am going to stop short of recommending a ban, simply because I don’t think that’s appropriate,” he said. “In this electronic age, we have the ability to be connected, but I don’t think we should be connected at a risk to others on the highway. I’m suggesting this bill as a way to find some middle ground. At the very least, we should add cell phone use as one of the incidences that should be recorded when police gather accident information.”

Brooks was unable to provide statistical information from the Maine State Police concerning accidents in which cell phone use was a contributing factor. In Maine, such instances now are listed under “driver inattention.”

“Now, a few years ago we didn’t know how many people were using safety belts, but now that is a standard part of an accident investigation,” Brooks said. “By adding cell phone use to that list, we will have better information. If we choose to do nothing this year, then at least in the future we’ll have a little more data.”

In making a case for his bill, Bouffard produced news reports from other states where highway fatalities had occurred involving cell phones. He said a number of municipalities already have banned cell phone use behind the wheel through local ordinances.

“Are we in Maine going to wait until a 2-year-old child is killed or a promising high school student is struck and if not killed, so seriously injured that he or she will never reach their full potential?” Bouffard asked. “I say let’s act now and be the first state to pass the initiative so that once again as Maine goes, so goes the nation.”

Only one member of the audience spoke in favor of the bills, citing driver distraction as his main reason for opposing cell phones on the road. David Bagley told the committee if the Legislature wouldn’t ban the devices, they should permit only hands-free phones. But Kenneth M. Lefebvre, vice president of operations for Unicel and Star Cellular, argued that drivers engage many activities behind the wheel, from eating to applying makeup in addition to using cell phones.

Many of the wireless communication company representatives said the firms were working to educate the estimated 100,000 cell phone owners in Maine about the need to use the devices responsibly. Lefebvre added that his companies encourage drivers to pull over to the side of the road if a conversation is going to become protracted.

“The wireless industry believes that education is the key to addressing driver distraction issues,” he said. “A wireless phone, out of all potential driver distractions, is the only one that could save your life or the lives of others.”

A number of amateur radio operators were also on hand to protect their ability to take their hobby on the road. As the section coordinator for Maine’s Amateur Radio Relay League, Max Soucy of Dover-Foxcroft said the state’s 5,500 licensed radio operators play a large role as first responders in emergency situations when large-scale communications outages occur. The volunteer efforts of the radio operators, he said, include compliance with a federal mandate to provide service to the public during emergencies such as the ice storm of 1998.

“We use this equipment on a daily basis, much of it when we’re driving to and from work, the store or during a Sunday drive,” he said. “It allows us to gain experience with the equipment and ensure its readiness. If LD 95 were to pass and we were prohibited from using our equipment in our vehicles, much of the investment that’s been made will deteriorate. Hams would no longer buy mobile radios for their vehicles. Because of that, the state would lose a significant portion of our emergency readiness capability.”

The committee has scheduled 9 a.m. Feb. 21 as a work session for the bills.