Hand-held cell phone laws: Are they effective?

Currently, seven states plus the District of Columbia have hand-held cell phone laws. The last to go into effect was California in July 2008, and other state bans are pending. However, there are questions as to whether these laws are working. The headlines this week showed a picture of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s wife, Maria Shriver violating his state’s law and using her hand-held cell phone while driving. While she was caught in the act by paparazzi and not police, the Governor responded and said there would be “swift action.” This raises the issue as to whether these laws are making an impact. A new report from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) took a look at a few states with the ban to see if drivers are still complying with the law and the results are mixed.

New York was the first state to institute a hand-held cell phone ban in 2001. Connecticut’s ban was enacted in 2005 and the District of Columbia in 2004. In New York, immediately after the ban, cell phone use declined by 47 percent. In Connecticut, it dropped by 76 percent. However, in those states, cell-phone use has started to increase. In the District of Columbia hand-held phone use dropped by half immediately and almost five years later has moved up a little bit, but is still holding relatively steady compared to their neighboring states, Maryland and Virginia, who don’t have cell phone laws.

To look at the long-term effects, IIHS analyzed cell phone use from 2001-2009 in the three states with bans, as well as nearby states without bans, to estimate how many drivers would be expected to use the hand-held phones had the laws not been enacted. The study found that in New York, hand-held use was an estimated 24 percent lower because of the ban, 65 percent lower in Connecticut, and 43 percent lower in the District of Columbia. From this data, it is clear that there are positive effects to the laws, but many drivers still use their hand-held phones or switch to hands-free, even though some studies have shown that the crash risk is the same for both uses.

There have been a number of studies conducted to see if there is an increased risk of a crash when using a phone while driving and all have shown that there is, but it not clear as to how much risk and how drivers respond to a ban.

What is known is that these laws have yielded thousands of tickets each year in the states with the laws and it is getting harder to enforce whether a driver is holding a phone to the ear, sending a text message, or talking on a hands-free phone. Also, many drivers simply have not been caught in the act, don’t think that there is enforcement, or haven’t yet changed their behavior since the laws have been passed, which may have been the case with Mrs. Shriver.

A few weeks ago the Department of Transportation conducted a summit to address driver distraction and discuss a course of action. While more and more states are enacting cell phone bans, texting bans, and bans for beginner drivers, this issue is a growing problem and there isn’t one clear answer. For now, the discussion will continue until a plan of action that will most likely include legislation, technology, and driver education is in place to help combat this growing safety issue.

—Liza Barth 

For more information on distracted driving see our related reports:

Distracted driving summit: The highlights

Choosing words wisely in the distracted driving discussion
Distracted Driving Summit: The hands-free debate
Defining the problem: Casting a wide net over driver distraction
Automakers agree to ban
Anti-texting video to scare drivers straight
Using wireless communication devices while driving
Cell phone use and driving laws
Dangers of cell phones while driving
Should cell phone use by drivers be illegal?

Comments

[David]

A police officer told me that the law takes into account where the mind is as much, if not more, than where the hands are. Hands-free or not, it should be illegal in all 50 states to drive and talk. You can either let your phone go to voice mail or you can pull over to the side of the road and talk (I have actually seen a few drivers do this - my thanks to you for setting a good and responsible example that all should follow). Common sense.

[Steve]

Wait a minute here, we are given the ability to speak via the cellphone to anyone at anytime and then we are told not to speak while driving.
How about if we find a way to use all this new technology to make the vehicle crash proof. You know the vehicles in close proximity could open a communication channel between them etc. All roads have a speed limit that gets transmitted to each car that enters.
Instead of giving billions to auto Insurance companies and traffic courts the money could be spent in technology that would really save life and limb.

[Chris]

The question posed in the title was not answered in the article at all. I'm not sure that it was even addressed. To address whether hands free laws are "effective" you have to see if they accomplish anything, not whether people follow the law. The whole premise behind a law like these are that having your hands holding a phone is the issue, and it is not. Studies indicate that it is the distraction of talking on a phone at all that causes the distration, not whether or not your hands are free. The fact that politicians enact legislation without regard to evidence is not surprising. It is clear to me that a total cell phone ban while driving will not happen anytime soon since it would be too unpopular. I personally am not in favor of a total ban, since all distracted driving should be addressed. Why pick on cell phones alone? There are already laws regarding distracted driving... how about driving and shaving, eating, applying make up, etc. Lets all hope that evidence is used when creating laws

[Timothy McClaughry]

The illogical argument that the poor cellular telephone users when driving are being picked-on or somehow singled-out for the particular state bans kind of reminds me of the tobacco smoker who questions the surgeon general's warning statement of health hazard on cigarette packs. Apparently, there should be no such warning put on any tobacco product because this fellow's "Uncle Bob" lived to age 93 or so when he smoked like a chimney every day of his adult life. Despite overwhelming evidence of the inattentional blindness trait of human beings when distracted, some "bonehead" will undoubtedly question the integrity of the study or the person performing it. Go figure.