Estimated read time: 3-4 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY -- Lawmakers and police alike say Utah's texting-and-driving ban is making a difference, despite new research that contends the bans do not improve safety on the roads.
Texting bans don't reduce crashes; effects are slight increase in crashes
Currently, 30 states and the District of Columbia outlaw texting behind the wheel. The Insurance Institute of Highway Safety and its sister organization, the Highway Loss Data Institute, looked at four states: California, Louisiana, Minnesota and Washington.
Finding no reduction in crashes, or even a small increase, doesn't mean it's safe to text and drive.
–Adrian Lund, president of HLDI & Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
"Texting bans haven't reduced crashes at all. In a perverse twist, crashes increased in 3 of the 4 states we studied after bans were enacted. It's an indication that texting bans might even increase the risk of texting for drivers who continue to do so despite the laws," says Adrian Lund, president of both Highway Loss Data Institute and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
He went on to say that while crashes weren't reduced because of the texting bans, it doesn't mean it's safe to text and drive.
He said, "There's a crash risk associated with doing this. It's just that bans aren't reducing this crash risk."
The institute also said noncompliance is a likely reason texting bans aren't reducing crashes. It says survey results indicate that many drivers, especially younger ones, shrug off these bans.
UHP believes ban is working
In 2009 there were 15 deaths from distracted driving, which represented 6 percent of deaths. Five of these deaths involved cell phones; three people were texting and two were talking on the phone.
In 2008 there were 18 deaths from distracted driving, which represented 7 percent of deaths. Four of these deaths involved cell phones: all four people talking or answer their phone. None were texting.
Utah Highway Patrol Trooper Todd Johnson says the ban is working.
"I believe people are being responsible, but we still have a long way to go in educating people on the importance of not texting and driving and, for that matter, just not using cell phones or electronic devices while they're driving," Johnson said.
Increases varied from 1 percent more crashes in Washington to about 9 percent more in Minnesota.
Researchers with the Highway Loss Data Institute believe drivers are simply lowering their phones to avoid police attention, which in turn increases the distraction from the road.
Johnson says troopers are watching for other behavior that indicates distracted driving.
"You can tell when somebody - by the way they're holding their head, where their eyes are at - you kind of get a sense that perhaps they're texting," Johnson said. "We have to be careful with that on making a traffic stop. We'll watch them closely and once it's obvious that they are texting we can stop them and deal with that."
Lawmakers need to approach ban differently
The researchers also say the statistics are a sign that policymakers need to re-evaluate how they are approaching the problem. They suggest a broader approach - perhaps one that accounts for eating and doing make-up behind the wheel.
Rep. Kay McIff, R-Richfield, was a co-sponsor of the original Utah ban legislation and says he doesn't know how much of an appetite there is for more regulation in the car.
"To specify you can't eat a hamburger or you can't drink a soda pop when you're driving or you can't check your lipstick - I just think that's very difficult to enforce," McIff said. "You hope people's personal level of judgment would keep them within a safe range of conduct."
McIff said he hadn't detected any interest on Utah's Capitol Hill in strengthening the current legislation.
Methodology of study questioned
He also questioned the methodology of the report and the breadth of data examined.
"Unless the statistics revealed something substantial, it would be difficult to rely on the conclusions they're apparently reaching," McIff said.
AAA Utah spokesman Rolayne Fairclough expressed a similar concern over the data. "It's just premature - it takes time," Fairclough said, pointing to the time it took for child safety laws to make a difference. "These things don't change overnight."
E-mail: aadams@ksl.com
