Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on May 15, 2007, to repeal the mandatory motorcycle helmet requirement for a motorcycle operator who pays an extra $100 annual fee (or $200 for three years), has had a license for two years (or takes a safety course), and purchases extra insurance with $20,000 personal injury coverage. Passengers would have to pay another $100 (or $200) to ride helmetless. The bill also increases the penalties for riding helmetless without paying the extra fee. Those who have paid would get a license plate sticker indicating this. Out-of-state riders would not have to buy the permit if they own their motorcycle

The vote was 69 in favor, 39 opposed and 2 not voting

(House Roll Call 476 at House Journal 107)

Click here to view bill details.

Wednesday, June 6th. 12:00 noon. Capitol Bldg in Lansing. BE THERE !!! It's time to show Jennifer we mean business. We are not going to go away. We will continue to fight for freedom until freedom is achieved!

...for introducing this bill. ABATE of Michigan and all freedom loving motorcyclists across the state are so greatful for people like you in Lansing who understand to principle of "the will of the people." Now if you can just get Jennifer to understand that, Michigan would be much better off!

Actually is severely restrictive. Check the cost and permitting provisions.

...that Jennifer understands the principle of "the will of the people." After Prop.2 passed by the voters by a 2-1 margin (which, by the way, is a much larger margin of victory than she got) she tried to overturn "the will of the people" WHO ELECTED HER NONE-THE-LESS, by trying to overturn the vote. It's too bad WE THE PEOPLE can't overturn a vote that WE feel the people got wrong. If so, DeVos would be governor RIGHT NOW. And therefore Michigan would be a freedom-of-choice state RIGHT NOW !!!

I feel the amendments in this bill are way out of line. Unfortunately, for some reason, Jennifer got re-elected. And Jennifer is the only reason Michigan is not a free state. In the state house and senate we have even more support than last time. But the political reality is that we still have to deal with Jennifer. Therefore these B.S. amendments are nessesary if we are going to have any chance of Jennifer signing it and finally making freedom a reality. If Posthumus had won in ' 02, we would've become a free state sometime between ' 03 and ' 05. Had DeVos have won last year, this bill would have already been passed this year without any of these B.S. amendments. These amendments are the reason the bill took this long to introduce in the first place. If DeVos were governor this would have been done no later that March. But we had to come up with something to please Jennifer. Again, I am not in favor all the B.S. attached, but the political reality is this is the only chance we have of FINALLY making freedom a reality.

Wednesday, June 6th. Capitol Bldg. Lansing. Take the day off, we need you there. We need to show Jennifer that she needs to pass this bill!

Wednesday, June 6th. 12:00 noon. Capitol Bldg, Lansing. Take the day off. We need you there. It's time to show Jennifer we are not going to go away !!!

Wednesday, June 6th. 12:00 noon. Capitol Bldg, Lansing. Take the day off. We need you there. It's time to show Jennifer we are not going to go away !!!

Wednesday, June 6th. 12:00 noon. Capitol Bldg, Lansing. Take the day off. We need you there. It's time to show Jennifer we are not going to go away !!!

There really were significant, broad-based support for this idea, the restrictive and costly provisions in this bill would not be necessary. By "significant, broad-based support," it is meant sufficient legislative support to make a true no-helmet bill veto-proof. The governor, alone, certainly is influential and has substantial power but is not necessarily the final decision-maker in these things.

...she is. This bill passed both the house and senate last time only to be vetoed by the governor. Therefore she does have the final say. The only alternatives after that would be a veto override. To do that you would need a 2/3rds majority vote from both the house and senate, which we probably have. However vetoed bills are seldom overidden. The only other option would be to get enough signatures by registered voters to overturn it. That's how the single business tax was eliminated.

I'M THERE!!!

exactly. The no-helmets bill lacked sufficient support politically to override the governor's veto. No-helmet advocates need gto generate sufficient support to make their bills veto-proof. The governor's power, while very substantial, is far from absolute. To constantly scapegoat the governor on this issue is only petty politics and demagoguery that accomplishes little. It won't change minds in the legislature, which is where the case must be made.

Logon to abateofmichigan.org and get all the info you need to fight for freedom. Or better yet you can become a member for just $20 per year. You can join online. The monthly newsletter alone is worth that price. Use the newsletter to find out where meetings in your area are. Going to meetings are the best way to get information. The info in the newsletter and on the website is limited because AAA has actually used our info against us through half-truths, misrepresentations of facts, and outright lies! If you are insured through AAA I highly recemend you go through someome else. Anyway, the best way to get involved is to come to a meeting and find out first hand what we are about. We are not anti-helmet, we are pro-choice. We are also the only grass roots organization in Lansing fighting for YOUR freedom. Granted this bill is a high priority but there is a lot more we are working on than this. Motorcycle riders education and car driver awareness programs are also a high priority. The "and justice for all" bill which would toughen the fines and penalties for car drivers who are at fault when they hit us and cause the majority of car/motorcycle accidents. And of course insuranse disrcimination against motorcyclists. If this intrests you and you would like to help make Michigan a better place to ride a motorcycle then logon to abateofmichigan.org and get involved! Thanks for giving a crap !!

is a load of crap. All of our neighboring FREE states are at-fault states. And (not coincidentaly) their insurance rates are about half of what ours are. All this and helmet-choice too! The problem is that Michigan created no-fault insurance. Every other no-fault state used us for their blueprint. However in other no-fault states, such as Florida, they are not 100% no-fault. If you hit someone else, you're liable. How that qualifies as no-fault I'm not really sure. It sounds like logic and common sense at-fault to me. But our insurance system is the root cause of our problem. I would vote for any politician, Republican or Democrat, who would vow to get rid of this crappy system!

...however the fact remains that the only reason Michigan is not a helmet-choice state todat is because of Granholms veto. Last year we were a little shy of the 2/3rds vote nesessary to override the veto. This time we have enough votes for an override but the house now has a Democratic majority. With a Democratic governor the question isn't "could" they override a veto, it's "would" they? During Englers 12 years as governor the legislature had only overriden one veto and that was when Engler vetoed a bill to suspend the gas tax when gas first went to $2 a gallon. Like I said vetos are seldom overriden. As far as the extra fees are concerned, although I oppose them, in the long run it still would be cheaper then all the time and money I spend avoiding riding in Michigan. An hour to Ohio and an hour back home takes two hours out of my riding day, not to mention all the money I spend on gas and food while out of state. The extra fees I do oppose, but it's better than what we have now. My point was that if DeVos were elected this bill would've been voted on and signed into law no later than this past March without all the B.S. That's undeniable. However we're still not sure if this is going to be enough for Queen Jennifer's approval. Hopefully it will be!

This is a non-partisan bill. Last sessions bill was introduced by Republicans. This time by Democrats, a Democratic woman in fact! Support and opposition has been pretty even on both sides. I myself vote for the PERSON who I feel best represents me. I voted Kerry for president, I voted DeVos for governor. Had those elections gone my way do you think things would be better today? I sure as hell do!

Governor Granholm's veto of the no-helmets bill last year is not the only reason it failed to become law. The governor's veto is just half the reason. The other half of the reason is that -- as you acknowledge -- there was insufficient support among legislators to override the veto. That is why it is important to generate more legislative support for true no-helmet legislation -- deliver a veto-proof bill to the governor's desk. This will not be accomplished by petty demagoguery aimed at the governor or her political party. It will be accomplished by engaging and persuading legislators of all parties.

riders who can afford the several hundred dollar permit to ride helmetless. it is a good GESTURE, but poorly administered. this 'permit' costs the state nothing, except for the cost of the sticker itself, which should be the ONLY costs involved to be passed on to the end user. as a practical matter, any motorcyclist who has basic insurance coverage already has 20,000 in medical coverage. now i suppose that anybody who wants to RIDE on a motorcycle (kids, wives, girlfriends, etc.) will have to all pay the permit fees as well. i also say that if the state DOESN'T come up with an "approved helmet" by a specific date, that ALL helmet use should be dropped. if they can't agree on what is, and is not an 'approved helmet, then we shouldn't have to wear one that is not permitted.

The helmet law was put on the books because it was said that helmets made riding safer. How does sending $100 to lansing add to the safety of riding. This is just another TAX imposed on the people of Michigan. Where does the $100 go in the state. If you pay the tax and get a sticker for your plate, what do you do when you ride your other bike, or ride someone elses bike.

the state feels it must mandate your safety is proof positive that they don't trust you. most riders, given the choice, would choose at some time or another to wear a helmet, just not all the time. this hundred dollar bounty on our liberties is an affront to all citizens. stop holding freedom for ransom.

Yes this is a very restrictive bill, the most restrictive in the nation. Proves that Michigan is a restrictive state. Maybe that's why Michigan trails the nation in economic development as well. This bill would finally bring Michigan in line with the majority of other states, and could also bring up to $1.2 billion to Michigan's economy.

Getting rid of motorcycle helmet requirements is the cure for Michigan economic woes, as many no-helmet advocates claim, then the state's economy is either so far down the tube it is beyond salvage or it is in a lot better shape than anybody is letting on.

If everyone is so worried about safety then why are all the car's on the road not the same size and weight? 100$ is for nothing, I can agree with the carring of a larger amount of insurance so if you did crash you do not cost taxpayers more money when you can not pay your medical bills.

How many of the people making these law's ride motorcycles? That would be interesting to know.

Someone please explain how an additional $20mil in the state's coffers (200k bikes x $100) will change Jen's mind? Legitimate economic impact studys have already indicated that sales and tourism gains should be far in excess of this amount (not to mention the increases in employment as a result). That's essentially the only difference between this bill and the one Jen vetoed. As I see it, it's not the money, folks - at least not the additional $20mil from the no-helmet tax. Consider though, if helmet freedom were allowed, how much political support would be lost from mandatory-helmet lobbyers, for example the insurance industry? Sustaining electability is far more important to career politicians than sustaining the state's financial solvency. Decisions are largely based on what will win them re-election rather than doing the right thing without regard to the impact on their re-election. Assuming the bill is signed into law - what provision will allow visitors from neighboring states (tourism) to ride into our state helmet free? Will they get a free pass with an out of state license plate? I think not. Will they be forced to stop and turn over $100 upon entry into the state? Highly likely. So much for tourism. Again I ask, how will an extra $20mil going into the state's coffers change the mind of our congress, or the governor? Am I off base? What is it that I don't see?

... that will get the a no-helmets law on the books in Michigan is to deliver a bill to the governor that has sufficient legislative support to make it veto-proof. This means the measure will have to be supported by legislators of both major political parties.

I don't think the government has any business regulating helmet usage or seat belt usage. If you want to bust your skull open on a bike, it should be up to you. Just don't expect the government to pay your medical bills. However, if your insurance co. doesn't want to insure you if you don't were a helmet, they shouldn't be required to by law either. As far as the $100 a year goes, that is outright robbery and just another complicated tax on Michigan.

Wow for a hundred no helmet what can I get for 200.00 Or better Yet, What can you get for cash under the table?

(additional $20mil in gov jens pocket),She vetoed it last time. Its gonna take more money Than groups that oppose it. This bill will be vetoed. Add another 20mil. She might go for it. This is all bull It should BE your Choice.I think mandatory full face helmets for some of you bikers should be a law. Keep America beautiful

POLICE were charged with keeping an "APPROVED" list of helmets !!!! THEY NEVER DID !!! as stupid adults how are we supposed to know which helmets are safe.THEY DIDN'T DO THIER JOB !!! since 1969. now, if i didn't do my job i got fired. so why is the state police with thier all knowing additude getting away with it ??? nobody cares !!! when the state police don't invesegate a crime they get called on the carpet. it is a crime that they didn't do thier job by keeping us safe with a list of "APPROVED" helmets. it's a dirty shame that THEY can pick and chose what they want to enforce. instead of sitting their ass in the medien of the e-way bothering people going to work, do your damned job and give us an "APPROVED" helmet. after all we are not smart enough to deciede on our own.

the state police were to be a TEMPORARY force. They were then to be disbanded.

Yep that pretty much says it all

Ask anyone in any other state that doesn't have a helmet law: there are no additional insurance concerns, no higher insurance rates,no more accidents, etc. Just because Michigan's no-fault insurance law is already costing Michigan citizens more than most states is not the fault of those who want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet. Ask any doctor in any hospital if a helmet will keep you alive if your brain gets shaken. Of course not. The only thing a helmet protects is your head from getting cut or scratched, which a leather skull cap would do just as well. Also, what about all the money the state is losing in tourism from riders who won't come to Michigan because of the helmet laws. And how would the law affect people from other states riding in Michigan? Would they have to pay $100 extra for a visit to Michigan?

100 dollars to exercise a choice that involves us and only us? it's not the responsibility of the state to 'take care of me' if i am injured, it's MINE. this state refuses to relinquish it's control over me and my decisions. it's not the proper role of government to tell me whether or not i want to wear a helmet. it's as simple as that. my government wastes so much time fretting about helmets and leg hold traps, that it forgets to provide adequate police protection, and enough prisons to punish the criminals. our wonderful governor, bless her liberal little heart, thinks it's a good idea to fire cops and free prisoners to cut expenses, yet she refuses to cut any of the money hungry programs her party has instituted over the years. let's develop an attitude that says you are either part of the solution, or you are part of the problem. granholm is definately part of the problem.

"If getting rid of motorcycle helmet requirements is the cure for Michigan economic woes, as many no-helmet advocates claim, then the state's economy is either so far down the tube it is beyond salvage or it is in a lot better shape than anybody is letting on." Instead of appealing to the planned-ecopnomy dogma as an excuse, why not just do it because freedom is good?

has been conditioned over many years to believe what the nice government man tells him. he has FORGOTTEN that freedom is good. he needs to be taught that lesson again. the government has forgotten that when a man is free to make his own decisions, that he will USUALLY make good decisions, and those that don't will have to live with the bad ones. our legislators think that they are doing things for our own good, forgetting that they have no clue what really is good for us. freedom is good for us. liberty is good for us. less government is good for us. less taxes are good for us. government only doing government's job is good for us.

i'm sorry, you can't prove that based on looking at the last one hundred and seventy years of michigan history. we lost MOST of our freedoms when the democrats started taxing and fee-ing us to death. we have lost the rest when restrictive, draconian laws were passed, supposedly "FOR OUR OWN GOOD". they have done no one any good, except those elected into government. i see a movement in the general population of this state, the citizens want their freedoms back. the liberals shake and sweat in darkened rooms, brooding over the "swing to the right", the rest of us see it as a return to the way things aught to be.

This bill is the biggest scam on michigan motorcyclist yet.I mean it may actually make it past the Governor's office with the $100.00 for freedom fee.The thing I don't understand is what are they gonna do to out of staters normally you look around if no one is wearing a helmet you take your's off.I say just get rid of the helmet law and give us one of the thousand freedoms they stole from us.Write your legislators every day until they respond start a petition for recalls.The people are suppose to be in charge let's do it oust these nazi pricks if they won't give us our freedom.