Washington's timid cellphone ban: lackluster results suggest a tougher law

Hey, you with the cellphone that just dropped from hand to lap because of a passing police officer: I see you. And, you, with the cellphone pressed surreptitiously to your ear: No one believes you drive with a cold pack stuck to your head, so that must be ... a cellphone.

And you in the mirror — yes, gulp, me.

Not to worry, few officers will make a stop unless we drive fast or erratically.

So it goes with Washington's overly timid cellphone ban. Sure, many Washingtonians bought hands-free equipment last summer to keep chatting legally while driving. Talking on a phone in the car is a time saver, a way to endure the ennui of traffic.

But halfhearted legislation produces halfhearted results. The Legislature approved the ban as a secondary offense, meaning an officer cannot stop anyone for driving with a handheld cellphone unless the motorist commits another offense, such as speeding or sporting a dead taillight.

State lawmakers approved the weak bill because they lacked enough votes to pass a law with real guts. If it were a primary offense, an officer could do a fast U-turn and bust a cellphone queen or king on the spot. No other threshold need be met.

Six states and the District of Columbia have handheld-cellphone bans. Of those, Washington is the only state with the law enforced as a secondary rather than primary offense, says Anne Teigen of the National Conference of State Legislatures in Denver.

Same goes with Washington's texting ban — again a secondary offense, while 12 other states made it a primary offense.

Let's face it. We are wimps. Lawmakers should change the law because the secondary-offense provision makes the ban more a suggestion than a rule.

There's a ton of evidence that cellphone use while driving causes crashes.

Distracted driving is the leading factor in most crashes and near crashes, according to landmark research released in 2006 by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Virginia Tech. The most common distraction — among all the makeup applying, reading, eating and so on — is use of cellphones. The number of crashes and near crashes attributable to dialing is nearly identical to the number attributable to talking on a handheld device. But the dialing occurs less than the talking.

If Washington is serious about compliance, the state should have a law that allows officers to cite folks blatantly ignoring the law.

Already, preliminary data show cellphone-related crashes in the state declined last year, even with the secondary ban, but we can do better.

Washington State Trooper Christina Martin says yes, more people are using Bluetooth or headset equipment. But just as many are driving and holding cellphones — hoping not to get caught. Martin said motorists were more diligent at first but have now relaxed. The new rule took effect July 1, 2008.

Steve Lind at the Washington Traffic Safety Commission is not aware of any studies showing primary laws are more effective specifically for cellphones but studies do show primary laws on traffic safety in general are more effective.

Washington's seat-belt law, enacted in 1986 as a secondary offense, is a prime example. In 2002, the seat-belt rule became a primary offense. Presto chango. Almost overnight, usage zoomed from 82 percent to 90 percent. Real behavior change.

Lind says he knows cellphones are bad for driving. "I can prove it because I know how stupid I used to drive with a handheld cell."

Same goes with texting while driving. The rules for these offenses should be tougher because driver inattention is more overwhelming.

State Sen. Tracey Eide, sponsor of cellphone legislation, has been asked by safety advocates to make the law stricter. Eide always wanted the ban to be a primary offense but couldn't muster the votes. It is unclear if she will push for a stricter law next session.

She should. Handheld cellphones make roads more dangerous for everyone — drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. The current law is too gutless.

Joni Balter's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. Her e-mail address is jbalter@seattletimes.com