Ronnie Polaneczky: To save teen lives, let's get HB 67 passed

HERE WE ARE, in the midst of another spring and another season of prom-night driving, and I'm writing yet another column about the need for a teen-driving law in Pennsylvania.

Trust me, I'm as sick of writing about this topic as you must be of reading it.

You can help stop the madness by contacting two of Pennsylvania's esteemed state senators (I'll tell you who, and how) and letting them know that convenience should not trump safety when it comes to passage of House Bill 67, which would save teen drivers from themselves.

And us from them.

In its original form, the bill - a set of restrictions on teen driving that passed a House vote last year and was to have been voted upon in the Senate this week - is such a no-brainer piece of legislation, it's crazy that it's not been signed into law by now.

The bill acknowledges a fact that all but the most obstinate naysayers understand: Teen-driver crashes are the leading cause of death among teens.

In fact, 16-year-old drivers have crash rates three times higher than 17-year-old drivers and five times higher than 18-year-old drivers. That's because the part of the brain affecting risk-taking behavior and judgment isn't fully developed until we're closer to our 20s.

In fact, most teen-driver crashes are caused not by drugs, booze or deliberately risky behavior but by distractions and/or inexperience.

And one of the biggest distractions is the presence of other teens in the car. The more teens in the car, the higher the risk for a fatal crash-up to five times higher when two or more teen passengers are in the car.

That's why HB 67, as passed by the House, restricts the number of nonfamily minors a teen driver can have in the car.

To address the inexperience factor, HB 67 smartly increases from 50 to 65 the number of hours a teen must spend behind the wheel as a learner before he can test for his license. Ten of the additional hours must be spent driving at night; five in inclement weather.

If it passes, HB 67 would make seat-belt use a primary offense, not a secondary one, for teen drivers and front-seat occupants under age 18. And it would prohibit drivers with learner's permits or junior licenses from using interactive wireless devices while they drive.

 
If HB 67 seems like one of those coddle-the-kids-for-no-good-reason kind of laws, well, we need only look to Massachusetts for proof that these kinds of limitations save lives and curtail nonsense behind the wheel.

Since Massachusetts passed restrictions on teen drivers in 2007, the number of fatal accidents involving drivers under 18 has dropped by 75 percent.

Readers, that's no typo.

In addition, the number of speeding tickets issued to new drivers has plunged by almost 60 percent, as has the number of citations for other driving offenses and violations.

That's an unbelievable return on an investment of plain-old reasonableness.

So why can't we have it here?

I'll tell ya why. Because the Senate has been mucking up

HB 67 with amendments that so weaken the bill, we might has well flush it down the crapper.

One proposal changes the seat-belt-enforcement provision from a primary to a secondary offense. Hmmm, how does that reinforce to new drivers the importance of seat restraint?

Another will allow teens to use their cell phones as long as

they're in "hands free" mode. Like they need another distraction while they learn to merge in traffic?

The worst allows teen drivers, if they've gone six months without a violation, to add up to three nonfamily passengers to the vehicle.

Excuse me, but if a teen driver has gone six months without a violation, maybe not having other teens in the car has something to do with it?

"These changes put convenience before safety," says Rep. Joseph Markosek, who introduced HB 67, which was pulled back from a Senate vote yesterday, in light of the amendments that neuter the bill's very intent.

"I'm very disappointed, obviously, but I hope we can work this out when the Senate returns from break" at the end of this month.

I hope so, too. If you agree, please e-mail Senate leaders

Dominic Pileggi (dpileggi@ pasen.gov) and Joseph Scarnati (jscarnati@pasen.gov) and tell them you want HB 67 passed, without those amendments.

Lives depend on it.

And I'd be tickled to never have to write about this again.

E-mail polaner@phillynews.com or call 215-854-2217. For recent columns:

http://go.philly.com/polaneczky. Read Ronnie's blog at http://go.philly.com/ ronnieblog.