The Lane Ranger: House unit crippling of teen driving bills irks many
Joey Ledford - Staff
Wednesday, March 7, 2001

When it comes to passing new laws in Georgia, it's never over until they bang the final gavel and start throwing paper all over the place.

But with the 2001 legislative session gearing up for the hectic final days, proponents of a tougher teen driving bill are noticeably discouraged over the gutting of the two leading bills by the House Motor Vehicles Committee.

"I'd hate to get through this whole thing and get nothing, which is the way it's feeling," said Brian Luders, a Duluth parent and advocate for more stringent laws.

First came the stripping of Gov. Roy Barnes' proposal to raise the driving age in 18 metro Atlanta counties to 17. The driving age proposal was removed altogether from Barnes' comprehensive highway safety bill. The bill would toughen Georgia's DUI laws and create tough penalties for a new driving offense known as aggressive driving.

But most eyes remained focused on Senate Bill 1, introduced by Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor and Sen. Phil Gingrey (R-Marietta). It passed the Senate intact; unanimously, in fact, and would make a real difference on Georgia roads if it becomes law.

But the House Motor Vehicles Committee has, in the words of one longtime observer, "catfished" the bill.

The tough teen driving curfew outlined in the bill, praised as a genuine lifesaver in other states, has been rendered useless. Instead of a 10 p.m.-to-6 a.m. curfew with no exceptions for 16-year-olds, and a midnight-to-6 a.m. no drive time for 17-year-olds, the bill as it stands changes the curfew from midnight to 6 a.m. for both ages, and adds a laundry list of exceptions, including jobs, school or church events.

Chairman Bobby Parham defended the gutting of the curfew, saying there was no support in the House for it.

Also gutted was a provision that would have suspended for six months the license of a 16-year-old convicted of any moving violation. Currently, the law suspends the license of young drivers convicted of a single severe, four-point violation like speeding more than 24 mph over the limit or passing a school bus or reckless driving, but it takes eight two-point violations to suspend a license.

Gingrey is not discouraged by the amendments. This week he chose to dwell on the provisions that have thus far survived the legislative ax.

"They didn't mess with the restrictions on the number of passengers," he said, referring to the provision that limits 16- and 17-year-olds to one unrelated teenage passenger. "They didn't mess with the educational, instructional component, the 40 hours of supervised driving. Who's to say what's the most important component?"

The committee even added one potentially valuable component --- requiring teens in the four metro core counties to take an approved driver's education course as part of their 40 hours of training behind the wheel.

If the version of the Gingrey-Taylor bill passed by Parham's committee becomes law, it wouldn't be much of an improvement from the teen driving bill that became law in 1997. But Gingrey isn't giving up.

"We're going to fight the amendment to take the curfew back," he said. Gingrey also plans a fight on the moving violations, and he adds that "there's a middle ground on that issue."

Why not restrict young drivers to two moving violations in 12 months --- four points total --- instead of letting them rack up 14 points as long as none is a four-point violation?

"I don't think we really want a 16-year-old to get seven speeding tickets and still be out there driving," said Gingrey.

The House has a long tradition of gutting highway safety measures. Georgia's current law, for example, allowing police to pull over motorists for failing to wear their seat belts, is credited with saving lives and increasing belt use. It passed only after proponents agreed to mollify rural lawmakers by exempting those in pickup trucks --- and doing away with the 55 mph speed limit.

Will it happen again?

"I believe every legislator is going to hear from their constituents if we don't do something," said Gingrey.

e-mail: [email protected]