With our rights, we must be responsible

Published 12:49 am Friday, October 3, 2008

I’d like to thank the Snoqualmie Valley Record for giving me the opportunity to explain my stand on North Bend’s cell-phone ordinance. The ordinance, as proposed, prohibits the use of handheld cell phones while driving within the city limits.

We are experiencing a dramatic change in driver behavior. It is hard to ignore that wireless phone use is increasing at an exploding rate. The rate of new subscribers, 40,000 per day, exceeds the birth rate! It follows that increasing distractions increases risk and leads to unintended consequences. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that we are experiencing 330,000 to 730,000 crashes per year as a result of cell-phone use.

This ordinance was not simply the result of the frustration we all feel when a driver is paying more attention to a cell-phone conversation than driving. There are dozens of academic and private studies showing that the use of a cell phone while driving is dangerous.

A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded, “The use of cellular telephones in motor vehicles is associated with a quadrupling of the risk of a collision …” The University of South Florida found that people who used a mobile phone while driving were anywhere from 34 to 300 percent more likely to have an accident.

The Transportation Research Laboratory in Berkshire, England, concluded driving while using a mobile phone is 30 percent more dangerous than driving over the alcohol limit. It doesn’t seem to matter where the research was done, they all reach similar conclusions: The use of a cell phone while driving is dangerous.

The council has heard objections to this ordinance. What follows are the most common objections and appropriate responses:

There is no indication that cell phones have played any role in North Bend traffic accidents.

A lack of statistical data about a problem is not the same thing as a lack of evidence. We don’t have statistics because we don’t collect them. Even if no accidents happen over the course of a year, that hardly means using a cell phone doesn’t lead to a huge increase in risk. If your family’s teen-age driver insisted on applying makeup while driving, would you accept her argument that it wasn’t risky behavior because there hadn’t been any accidents in North Bend involving makeup and driving?

How do we enforce such a law?

Enforcement of this ordinance would be no different than most other traffic laws. If an offender wants to challenge a ticket in court, that’s his or her right. The defendant can present a cell-phone statement showing what time he or she was, or wasn’t, on the phone. I suspect we will see far fewer challenges of cell-phone tickets than of radar guns.

There are already laws on the books that speak to negligent and reckless driving.

By that line of reasoning we should rescind laws that specifically prohibit running a red light, speeding, drinking and driving and not stopping for a school bus loading children. After all, they could all be considered negligent and reckless driving. When we recognize a specific behavior as being particularly hazardous we address it independently.

There are many other activities that a driver might engage in while driving that are just as unsafe. This ordinance does not address those activities.

There are three types of driving distractions: visual, mechanical and cognitive.

Of all the activities the council has considered (i.e. applying makeup, eating, etc.), only cell-phone use incorporates all three distractions.

The sheer magnitude of cell-phone use also differentiates these behaviors. Eighty-five percent of cell-phone owners use their phones while driving – more than 75 million drivers using the phone.

It’s a curtailment of my personal freedoms or rights.

With rights and freedoms come added responsibilities. Technology has brought us the the freedom of better communication. With that freedom comes added responsibility. No one believes that the right to drink alcohol gives one the right to drink and drive. The ordinance does not outlaw cell phones in cars, only the use of handheld cell phones.

The law will be bad for business.

At a previous council meeting, the council heard from the owners of two downtown businesses expressing fear that this ordinance would discourage shoppers from coming to North Bend. If there is any evidence of this having occurred in the other cities, New York state, or nations which have implemented this regulation, please share it with us so we may take your concerns into consideration. We believe people are more likely to choose to shop in a safer environment.

Conclusion:

As Americans we are naturally hesitant to accept restrictions in our day-to-day lives.

This, however, is not a “rights” issue or a “business” issue. This is a public-safety issue. Some may ask, “Why enact this ordinance if it only applies to North Bend?”

An ancient Chinese proverb says, “A journey of a thousand miles starts with but a single step.” It is my hope that this regulation will lead to statewide regulation of cell phones while driving. We have studied the issue, read the research and made what I believe to be a reasonable, logical decision – void of politics and free from outside influences. If, at any time, I was thought to be condescending toward those who oppose this ordinance, I apologize. I firmly believe that this ordinance is the right thing to do. I now ask for your support as the council considers regulating the use of handheld cell phones while driving.

Ed Carlson is a member of the North Bend City Council.