- Home
- Create an account
- Advanced searches
- Scorecards
- Links
- About
Public Act 60 of 2010
Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Rep. Lee Gonzales (D) on February 24, 2009, to prohibit driving while using a two-way electronic device including a cell phone to send text messages. The violation would be a “secondary” one, meaning that a driver could not be stopped just for this, but if stopped for some other violation this one could be tacked on.
- Referred to the House Transportation Committee on February 24, 2009.
- Reported in the House on October 22, 2009, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-3) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the House on December 8, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises various details, but does not change its substance. This version was subsequently superseded by another substitute with more minor changes. The substitute failed by voice vote in the House on December 8, 2009.
- Substitute offered by Rep. Andrew Kandrevas (D) on December 8, 2009, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance of the bill as previously described. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on December 8, 2009.
- Referred to the House Transportation Committee on February 24, 2009.
- Passed 94 to 13 in the House on December 8, 2009.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on December 9, 2009.
- Referred to the Senate Transportation Committee on December 9, 2009.
- Reported in the Senate on February 24, 2010, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-4) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on March 18, 2010, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance as previously described. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on March 18, 2010.
- Amendment offered by Sen. Jud Gilbert (R) on March 25, 2010, to make the proposed violation a "primary offense," meaning that a driver could be stopped just for this. The amendment passed by voice vote in the Senate on March 25, 2010.
- Referred to the Senate Transportation Committee on December 9, 2009.
- Passed 28 to 10 in the Senate on March 25, 2010, to prohibit driving while using a two-way electronic device including a cell phone to send text messages. The violation would be a “primary” one, meaning that a driver could be pulled over and stopped just for this.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on March 25, 2010.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Kenneth Horn (R) on April 20, 2010, to revert the bill to the original House-passed version, which makes "texting while driving" a secondary offence (a driver cannot get pulled over just for this). The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on April 20, 2010.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Tom McMillin (R) on April 20, 2010, to define texting as "entering or sending not more than 10 characters," which would clarify that a person can't be ticketed for dialing a phone number. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on April 20, 2010.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Justin Amash (R) on April 20, 2010, to prohibit law enforcement agencies from obtaining a person's phone records to use as evidence in a "texting while driving" prosecution. The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on April 20, 2010.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Tom McMillin (R) on April 20, 2010, to revert the bill to the original House-passed version, which makes "texting while driving" a secondary offence (a driver cannot get pulled over just for this). The amendment failed by voice vote in the House on April 20, 2010.
- Passed 74 to 33 in the House on April 20, 2010, to concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill, which makes "texting while driving" a primary offence (a driver can get pulled over just for this).
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on April 30, 2010.
Most Recent Comments
1) Re: 2009 House Bill 4394 (Ban texting while driving ) by Freerider on June 26, 2010
My Libertarian instincts would normally tell me that more laws/government in our lives is a bad thing. However, not in this case. Studies have shown that texting while driving is more dangerous than drunk driving. So then shouldn't the punishment be at least equally as stiff? Think about it. What if the punishment for DUI was only a $100 fine? No getting arrested, no going to jail, no getting your car impounded, no losing your license, no points, and no jacked-up insurance rates. Would there really be any reason NOT to drink and drive? The $100 fine may be less than the cab ride home depending on how far away you were. The only reason less people are drinking and driving is because the punishment is practically the chair. So why only a slap on the wrist for something that is MORE DANGEROUS? It's every bit as negligent. I'm sure whatever random thought that was in your empty head at the time you just HAD TO send that text was FAR MORE IMPORTANT than the life you took due to your own stupidity!
Reply
Rep. Agema, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:
“Mr. Speaker and members of the House:
The problem with this bill is you don’t know if someone is answering a call, dialing a number etc. yet if an officer thought you were texting, you could be ticketed. If someone causes an accident because of a careless act- ticket him. What will happen here is that people will put their phones lower in the car causing more distraction and cause more accidents. You lose you freedoms one law at a time.”
Reply
Rep. Geiss, having reserved the right to explain his protest against the passage of the bill, made the following statement:
“Mr. Speaker and members of the House:
It is my belief that texting while driving should be a primary offense in the State of Michigan, rather than the secondary offense as contained in HB 4394. 25 other states make this offense primary, only 4 states make it a secondary offense. Common sense says that you should not text while driving. We, as legislators, need to send a clear message to those who do not have common sense. This bill, unfortunately, is not a strong enough message, or legislation.”
Reply
View Full Conversation
