THE COUNCIL OF STATE GOVERNMENTS 2014 APRIL

CAPITOL RESEARCH

TRANSPORTATION

Enforcement of Texting While Bans

In March 2014, Gov. Susana Martinez signed legislation to ban texting while driving in the state.1 “We know that texting while driving is a lethal distraction,” Martinez said, according to press reports. “There is no text message that is worth a person’s life.”2 The measure, which takes effect in July 2014, pro- hibits drivers from sending or reading text messages and , or making Internet searches from smart- phones or other handheld wireless devices. Drivers who violate the law will have to pay a $25 fine for the first offense and $50 for subsequent violations.3 New Mexico joined 41 other states plus the District States Without Comprehensive Texting Bans of Columbia, Guam and the Virgin Islands to prohibit As of March 2014, eight states had neither a texting behind the wheel by all drivers. primary nor secondary ban on texting for all drivers. The New Mexico law allows for primary enforce- But all of them have seen legislative efforts to change ment, which means an officer can stop and ticket a that in 2013 and/or 2014. driver solely for texting while driving.4 Four states • In , Sen. Steve Farley has introduced tex- with texting bans—, , and ting-while-driving bans the past several years, but —have secondary enforcement statutes, which with no success so far. “(Texting while driving) is require an officer to catch the driver in another so far out there as a danger than anything else— offense, such as speeding.5 Legislators in two of eating a burger, putting on makeup, anything those states—Iowa and Nebraska—have introduced else—it deserves to be called out as a specific bills in recent months to make texting while driving practice that needs to be banned,” he said in 2013, a primary offense. The eight states with no texting according to The Arizona Republic. Opponents in while driving ban have all seen texting legislation the state have argued that drivers should be able introduced in recent years. to make their own decisions or that a separate But even as states and law enforcement seek to law for texting is unnecessary because Arizona crack down on texting and other forms of distracted statutes regarding and reasonable driving, some question the degree to which such laws and prudent speed already apply to distracted 6 can be enforced and the efficacy of the tools and drivers. strategies available to them. Some of those strategies • House Transportation Committee are being evaluated around the country by a number Chairman Robert Johnson III also has supported of law enforcement and government agencies, which stricter texting-while-driving laws for years to no should have data and best practices to present soon. avail. “I think it’s worse than ,” he But ultimately, some believe, it may be reminders said in February 2014, WJTV Newschannel 12 in about the existence of the laws and about the dangers Jackson reported. “I think it causes more acci- of texting while driving are the best enforcement dents than DUI or any kind of other impairment.” tools available. Mississippi law only prohibits drivers with a

1 learner’s permit, intermediate license holders and have a regular legislative session in 2014. school bus drivers from texting while operating a • Much like Mississippi, bans only driv- vehicle. The 2013 legislative session saw no fewer ers with a learner’s permit, intermediate license than 12 texting-while-driving bills introduced, holders, and bus and public transit drivers from but ultimately fail. Johnson and other supporters texting.11 Republican Rep. Terry O’Donnell have seen more support in 2014 from both sides bucked some members of his own party in 2014 of the aisle for House Bill 484, which would make to introduce House Bill 2540, which would outlaw it illegal for anyone under 18 to text and drive.7 texting while driving. His bill would allow only for The measure cleared the House in February and secondary enforcement, unlike previously unsuc- cleared the Senate, as well as a House-Senate cessful primary enforcement legislation. Officers conference committee, in March. Senate Bill 2434, could assess a $500 fine if a driver is pulled over which the Senate passed Feb. 5 but eventually for another offense and is suspected of texting died in a conference with the House, would have and driving. The bill passed a House committee in taken a broader approach. Under that measure, February, but it was laid over by the full House.12 anyone caught sending a text or checking a social Two other measures in the Senate have had some media site while driving could have been charged success. Senate Bill 442 would make it illegal to with careless driving and face a fine of anywhere compose, send or read a text message while driv- from $5 to $50.8 ing. Senate Bill 1601 would ban most cellphone • law only prohibits drivers from texting if use in school zones in the state. Both measures they are 21 or younger. At least half a dozen bills cleared the Senate Public Safety Committee in have been introduced during the 2014 session that February.13 Senate Bill 442 was referred back would change that in some fashion. House Bills to committee while Senate Bill 1601 passed the 1282 and 1316 would eliminate any reference to Senate unanimously and, as of late March, was an age limitation in the statute. House Bills 1256 awaiting consideration by a House committee. and 1964 would not only remove the age limita- • has no laws prohibiting drivers tion, but also would create an exception to the from texting.14 The Senate Judiciary Committee texting ban for those who use voice-activated, in February approved legislation—Senate Bill hands-free technology. House Bill 1106 and Sen- 416—that would implement a texting ban and ate Bill 840 would prohibit all drivers from using subject offenders to escalating fines. The panel handheld cellphones to text or call while driving.9 also recommended Senate Bill 459, a ban on driv- As of late March, none of the bills had made sig- ers with beginner’s permits or restricted driver’s nificant progress through the legislature. licenses from using a cellphone while traveling.15 • Sen. Christine Kaufmann sponsored The texting measure would be a primary enforce- unsuccessful legislation—Senate Bill 390—in 2013 ment measure; however, the bill language as that would have allowed drivers to talk on their introduced says, “A law enforcement officer shall cellphones only with a hands-free device. Minors not stop a person for a violation of this section behind the wheel would not be allowed to talk on except when the officer has probable cause that a their phones. No driver would have been allowed violation has occurred based on the officer’s clear to text and drive under the measure, which died and unobstructed view of a person who is using in committee.10 The Montana legislature did not a wireless electronic communication device to

2 compose, send, or read a text-based communica- at the issue of whether to move up from a secondary tion while operating a motor vehicle on the public enforcement measure to a primary one. streets and highways.”16 Officers would not be “Unfortunately, we made the mistake of pass- able to seize or search a phone, however; some ing a law that has no teeth,” Rob Reynolds said of lawmakers said that would make the ban difficult Nebraska’s 2010 secondary enforcement texting law, to enforce and difficult to prove the texting took according to The Omaha World-Herald. Reynolds’ place. The full Senate passed the measure 41-1 in 16-year-old daughter died in a 2007 crash caused March. In the absence of a state texting law, sev- by an apparently distracted driver. He joined other eral municipalities have passed their own texting safety advocates at a Lincoln event in January 2014 measures, which Senate Bill 416 would trump if to push for legislation making texting while driv- passed.17 ing—as well as failure to use a seat belt—a primary • The legislature approved a state- traffic offense. wide ban on texting while driving during its 2014 State Sen. John Harms sponsored legislation in session.18 Gov. Dennis Daugaard signed the bill the 2014 legislative session calling for the change in late March.19 When the law takes effect July 1, to Nebraska’s texting law. As of late March, the texting will be considered a secondary enforce- legislature had not taken action on Harms’ bill. In ment offense and carry a $100 fine. The measure 2011 and 2012, there were 234 convictions statewide will not prohibit local governments from having for texting while driving, which Harms said is not stricter bans.20 Texting bans previously extended enough to deter texting. only to drivers with a learner’s permit and inter- “Just go down to the nearest stoplight, and you mediate license holders.21 can see that,” Harms said, according to The Omaha • law prohibits texting by bus drivers carrying World-Herald. minors, drivers who are younger than 18, driv- But while Nebraska law enforcement officials said ers in school crossing zones and on public school making texting a primary offense is a great step to property during times when reduced speed limits help save lives, it can be difficult to enforce because apply.22 A proposed statewide ban on texting motorists can claim they are performing some other while driving made it all the way through the task on their phone instead of texting. Proving a legislature in 2011, but was vetoed by Gov. Rick driver was texting may require a subpoena of cell Perry, who called texting while driving a matter phone records, something a judge would be unlikely of personal responsibility. The same measure, to grant unless an accident is involved. Twelve states known as the Alex Brown Memorial Act, made it ban all cellphone use while driving, which many through the House in 2013 but was left pending believe makes enforcement easier.24 in a Senate committee after Perry made it clear Iowa also allows only secondary enforcement of he had not changed his mind on the issue.23 Texas texting. According to The Des Moines Register’s Iowa does not have a regular legislative session in 2014. poll conducted in February 2014, 83 percent of Io- wans want the texting laws to be tougher.25 Between Primary vs. Secondary Texting Laws 2001 and 2012, Iowa saw about 8,000 crashes caused While some states are still contemplating whether by that resulted in 4,000 injuries to pass a texting ban at all, others are now looking and dozens of deaths.

3 who added the only people he has cited for texting and driving are people involved in accidents who admit to it. LeMars Police Chief Stuart Dekkenga thinks a pri- mary law might be an improvement and discourage more people from texting and driving, but it probably would continue to be difficult to enforce. “I don’t know if the (proposed legislation would) have any real bearing on making any significant change,” he said.27

Efficacy of High-Visibility Enforcement Demonstrated Enforcement of texting bans has become a signifi- cant focus for agencies at all levels of government in recent years. In 2010 and 2011, the cities of Hartford, Conn., and Syracuse, N.Y., took part in demonstration programs to test whether a high-visibility enforcement model could reduce talking or texting using cellphones. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, also known as NHTSA, worked with the Department of Transportation and the Department of Motor Vehicles’ Governor’s Traffic Safety Committee to conduct the programs along with state and local law enforcement. The high-visibility enforcement included dedicated law enforcement during specified periods, paid and earned media emphasizing an enforcement-based message, and evaluation before and after the enforce- ment periods. Campaign messaging borrowed from The Iowa Senate approved legislation during NHTSA’s successful “” seat belt the 2014 session to make texting while driving a enforcement campaign and the “Drive Sober or Get primary offense and a , meaning Pulled Over” drunken driving campaign. drivers would accrue points on their license.26 But The enforcement techniques used to nab texters in the Iowa House of Representatives did not consider each community differed slightly. Law enforcement the measure. Lawmakers said there simply was not in Hartford used a spotter technique, where an officer enough time for a bill that was considered somewhat standing on the side of the road would radio ahead controversial. Similar legislation is expected to come to another officer when he or she observed a passing before the legislature in 2015. motorist using a hand-held cellphone. The second While the measure won 41 of 48 votes in the Iowa officer would make the stop and write the ticket. Senate, it was not without its detractors. Syracuse employed roving patrols, where officers ac- “I thought it was a little vague,” said Sen. Bill An- tively sought out distracted drivers using cellphones derson, who voted “no,” The LeMars Daily Sentinel or texting in their jurisdictions. Officers also noted reported. “You’re still able to program your naviga- that higher vantage points, SUVs and unmarked tion system, change CDs. I don’t think it would really vehicles were particularly effective in helping them do much to help with safety on the road. … Unless identify violators. you outlaw every activity in the car, I don’t know if With four waves of high-visibility enforcement you’re really dealing with distracted driving.” completed, Hartford reported a 72 percent decline Anderson also said he and some of his Republi- in texting while driving, according to the NHTSA. can colleagues were concerned about the measure Syracuse reportedly saw a 32 percent drop. opening the door to law enforcement officers seizing In its assessment, NHTSA said the demonstration drivers’ cellphones and the breach of privacy that programs document that the “high-visibility enforce- might entail. ment model can be effectively applied to distracted Local law enforcement in Iowa questioned the driving enforcement and that various law enforce- enforceability of the measure. Plymouth County ment strategies can be used to observe and ticket Sheriff Deputy Aaron Leusink told the LeMars cellphone and texting violations.”28 Daily Sentinel he hasn’t made pulling over suspected texters a priority under the state’s secondary law Getting to Best Practices in Enforcement because it’s difficult to prove. As a follow-up to the Hartford and Syracuse “If I can’t prove it, I’m not going to pull somebody programs, NHTSA in October 2012 awarded grants over and start guessing at that point,” said Leusink, to Connecticut and to help them plan

4 and conduct high-visibility anti-texting enforce- enforcement by June 2014. A NHTSA contractor, ment programs. The grants are being used to train Sam Schwartz Engineering, will help process what police on spotting texting offenders and to work on they discover. effective media campaigns that alert the public to the “We are systematically collecting and analyzing ob- dangers of texting and driving. servational data, survey data, and spending time with The grants also call for the two states to develop the law enforcement agencies to assess the strate- best practices for anti-texting enforcement protocols gies used under this project,” said Richard Retting, and techniques, including things like stationary director of safety research for the engineering firm. patrols, spotters on overpasses on elevated roadways “We will work with NHTSA to develop firm conclu- and roving patrols. The states were charged with sions from the research process to help define best evaluating the effectiveness of their enforcement practices in enforcement techniques and protocols.” activities over a two-year period. The results will be But Retting cautioned even though the data col- documented for the benefit of other states.29 lection process is scheduled to be completed in 2014, “We are doing this pilot in a pre-selected area of he is unable to predict a timetable for producing a the state that includes a large municipality, a small final report because of NHTSA’s internal review town and a regional traffic unit that consists of processes.31 Other states looking for guidance on how several small towns working together as a regional best to enforce texting laws likely will have to wait a team,” said Edmund Hedge, law enforcement liaison little longer. for the Connecticut Department of Transportation’s Even as the pilot projects in Connecticut and Mas- Highway Safety Office. “We have been trying differ- sachusetts continue, some in law enforcement remain ent enforcement techniques—roving, spotter-type, skeptical about how successful any such enforcement officer-initiated, etc.—and they are all working, of techniques can ever be. course. But preliminary indicators are that using a “It’s next to impossible to enforce,” said Wayne spotter-type enforcement technique works the best.” Sampson, executive director of the Massachusetts Hedge explained how the latest iteration of the Chiefs of Police Association. “The reality is if spotter technique works. somebody’s driving down the road and they’re doing “The spotter (police officer) stands in an area it down in their lap, you don’t know what they’re where he can observe vehicles passing at a slower doing in their lap. Really, unless the kid is holding speed, usually just before an intersection, stoplight or (the phone) up on the steering wheel and you drive stop sign,” he said. “When he observes a violation, he by him, you can’t see it.” will call ahead by radio to (up to five other) waiting Sampson agreed that often the only way to prove officers who stop the vehicle and issue a citation. someone was texting at a certain time is to obtain With this all said, it is extremely important that the his or her phone records after the fact through legal spotter obtain as much of a description as possible means, which can prove too much of a challenge if (including the) color of car, color of phone, left hand/ texting is the only offense. right hand, before a ticket is issued.” “In Massachusetts, they’re still allowed to use their Hedge conceded the efficacy of the technique in cell phone,” he said. “All they have to say is ‘Yeah, (I other communities may depend on their geography was) dialing the phone.’ How do we know the differ- and demographics, as well as the available manpower ence? Without going and getting a search warrant, of the local police forces.30 which our courts are not going to let us do for every Connecticut officials plan to wrap up their pilot car that we see with (a driver with) a cellphone in project with two more waves of high-visibility their hand. You have to have more (in the way of

5 probable cause) than just that they had a cell phone Sean Slone, CSG Program Manager for Transportation Policy | [email protected] in their hand.” Sampson said such loopholes make even primary enforcement laws like the one in Massachusetts debatable. REFERENCES “It’s nice, feel-good legislation, but is it really that effective? The jury’s still out on that one,” Sampson 1“Ban on texting while driving to become New Mexico law.” Associated Press. March 2, 2014. Accessed from: said. http://www.lcsun-news.com/las_cruces-news/ci_25259562/ban-texting-while-driving-become-new- Sampson doesn’t believe complete bans on mexico-law 2“Texting while driving now banned statewide in New Mexico.” KTSM-TV. March 2, 2014. Accessed from: cellphones in vehicles are very realistic either. http://www.ktsm.com/news/texting-while-driving-now-banned-statewide-new-mexico “I’m not promoting that,” he said. “I’m just saying 3New Mexico Legislature. “Senate Bill 19.” Accessed from: that enforcement is always going to be difficult. With http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/14%20Regular/final/SB0019.pdf 4 the number of new drivers every single day who are National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. “U.S. Transportation Secretary Foxx Commends New Mexico for Enacting Ban on Texting While Driving.” Press Release. March 4, 2014. Accessed from: http://www.nhtsa. kids (and who believe) those particular laws don’t gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/2014/U.S.+Transportation+Secretary+Foxx+Commends+New+Mexico apply to them because they can drive better than +for+Enacting+Ban+on+Texting+While+Driving everybody else and they know how to text better 5Governors Highway Safety Association. “Distracted Driving Laws.” March 2014. Accessed from: than everybody else and it only takes a second—all http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/cellphone_laws.html 6Rebecca McKinsey. “Driver-texting ban still elusive in Arizona.” The Republic. Aug. 2, 2013. Accessed from: of the standard excuses that kids always use.” http://www.azcentral.com/news/politics/articles/20130805arizona-driver-texting-ban-still-elusive.html When enforcement is possible, often the best way 7Brad Soroka. “Special Report: Texting While Driving Continues in Mississippi.” News Channel 12. Feb. 11, 2014. to have an impact on younger generations is through Accessed from: their parents, Sampson said. http://www.wjtv.com/story/24698642/special-report-texting-while-driving-continues-in-mississippi 8“Mississippi considers broader ban on texting and driving.” Associated Press. Feb. 14, 2014. Accessed from: “If you want to see somebody go ballistic, you issue http://www.wapt.com/news/politics/mississippi-considers-broader-ban-on-texting-and-driving/24481994 a citation to some high school kid and have them lose 9“Missouri lawmakers look to expand texting while driving law,” Copeland Law Firm Press Release. March 5, their license for 60 days,” Sampson said. “They could 2014. Accessed from: http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/1773003 10 care less. They’re just going to go on with their life. “Statewide cellphone ban debated for Montana drivers.” Associated Press. March 27, 2013. Accessed from: http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/statewide-cellphone-ban-debated-for-montana-drivers/ Their parents go nuts because now they’re going to article_3cf30f00-96d7-11e2-a7fc-0019bb2963f4.html have to drive them every place again. This is a huge 11Sarah Rich. “Have All States Banned Texting While Driving?” Government Technology. July 30, 2013. Accessed inconvenience for the parents and they’re the ones from: http://www.govtech.com/public-safety/Have-All-States-Banned-Texting-While-Driving.html 12 that get so upset about it. That’s where it really hits Erielle Reshef. “Bill to make texting while driving illegal passes committee.” KOCO.com. Feb. 27, 2014. Accessed from: http://www.koco.com/news/politics/bill-to-make-texting-while-driving-illegal-passes- 32 home.” committee/24724226 Many believe more than being just an enforcement 13Randy Ellis. “Oklahoma Senate committee OKs bills to limit cellphone use while driving.” The Oklahoman. Feb. issue, distracted driving is about a constant education 21, 2014. Accessed from: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-senate-committee-oks-bills-to-limit-cellphone-use- process. while-driving/article/3936096/?page=2 14Rich. “We have signs all over the highways,” said Hedge. 15Andrew Shain. “Statewide texting ban drives forward in SC.” The State. Feb. 25, 2014. Accessed from: “As soon as you enter the state, there’s a big, huge http://www.thestate.com/2014/02/25/3291285/statewide-texting-ban-drives-forward.html sign that says ‘hands-free state.’ We use our overhead, 16South Carolina General Assembly. “S. 416.” 120th Session, 2013-14. Introduced in the Senate Feb. 21, 2013. variable message board signs. April is distracted Accessed from: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess120_2013-2014/bills/416.htm 17Jeremy Borden. “S.C. panel recommends statewide no texting while driving measure.” The Post and Courier. driving month. Every variable message board in the Feb. 25, 2014. Accessed from: http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20140225/PC1603/140229572 state will say ‘no texting’ or ‘one text will wreck it all’ 18Nora Hertel. “South Dakota primes for texting and driving ban.” Associated Press. March 21, 2014. or something like that.” 19“South Dakota Gov. Signs Texting While Driving Ban.” Siouxland News. March 28, 2014. Accessed from: Still, Hedge sounded somewhat frustrated the http://www.siouxlandnews.com/story/25106006/south-dakota-gov-signs-texting-while-driving-ban 20“South Dakota Legislature Approves Texting While Driving Ban.” Associated Press. March 24, 2014. Accessed state’s heavily publicized law and the seemingly com- from: http://www.insurancejournal.com/magazines/features/2014/03/24/323865.htm?print mon sense recognition about the perils of texting and 21Rich. driving don’t sway everyone. 22Ibid. 23 “The normal person can’t drive and text at the Ryan J. Rusak. “Texas House votes to ban texting while driving.” The Dallas Morning News. April 17, 2013. Accessed from: same time,” he said. “Texting while driving is like http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2013/04/texas-house-votes-to-ban-texting-while-driving.html/ driving with a (high blood alcohol content). Every- 24Paul Hammel. “Bill in Nebraska Legislature aims to eradicate texting while driving.” The World Herald. January body knows the risks. … You can’t text (and drive). 9, 2014. Accessed from: Everybody knows that. I don’t know how much http://www.omaha.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140109/NEWS/140108911/1694 25Jason Noble. “Iowa Poll: Iowans overwhelmingly support crackdown on texting while driving.” education you have to do.” The Des Moines Register. Mar. 3, 2014. Accessed from: http://www.app.com/article/D2/20140303/ NEWS09/140303008/Iowa-Poll-Iowans-overwhelmingly-support-crack-down-texting-while-driving 26Sen. Matt McCoy. “Legislative Update: Texting while driving penalty could be strengthened.” The Des Moines Register. March 17, 2014. Accessed from: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20140318/COMM04/303180027/ 27“Texting and driving—Legislature takes a pass on tougher texting law.” LeMars Daily Sentinel. March 17, 2014. Accessed from: http://www.lemarssentinel.com/story/2061349.html 28National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. “Four High-Visibility Enforcement Demonstration Waves in Connecticut and New York Reduce Hand-Held Phone Use.” Traffic Safety Facts Research Note. July 2011. Accessed from: http://www.distraction.gov/download/research-pdf/508-research-note-dot-hs-811-845.pdf 29National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. “U.S. Department of Transportation Gives Connecticut and Massachusetts $550,000 for Texting Ban Enforcement Demonstrations.” Press Release. Oct. 16, 2012. Accessed from: http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/2012/U.S.+Department+of+Transportation+G ives+Connecticut+and+Massachusetts+$550,000+for+Texting+Ban+Enforcement+Demonstrations 30Telephone and e-mail interviews with Edmund Hedge. March 20, 2014. 31E-mail interview with Richard Retting. March 26, 2014. 32Telephone interview with Wayne Sampson. March 21, 2014.

6 State Distracted Driving Laws (as of March 2014)

All Cell Phone Ban Ban

State Hand-held Ban School Bus Drivers Novice Drivers All Drivers School Bus Drivers Novice Drivers 16, or 17 w/ Intermediate License <6 Alabama months (P) Alaska Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Arizona Yes (P) 18 - 20 years old (P) Yes (P) <18 (S) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Yes (P) <18 (S) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Connecticut Yes (P) Yes (P) <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Yes (P) Learner or Intermediate License (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Florida Yes (S) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Yes (P) <19 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Iowa Restricted or Intermediate License (P) Yes (S) Covered under all driver ban Learner or Intermediate License (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Learner or Intermediate License Yes (P) 1st year of License (P for <18) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) <18 w/ Learner or Provisional License (S) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Massachusetts Yes (P) <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Level 1 or 2 License Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) <18 w/ Learner or Provisional License (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Mississippi Yes (P) Yes (P) Learner or Provisional License (P) Missouri <21 (P) Montana Nebraska <18 w/ Learner or Intermediate License (S) Yes (S) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Yes (P) Permit or Provisional License (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban New Mexico State vehicles Learner or Provisional License (P) Yes (P) - eff. 7/14 Covered under all driver ban New York Yes (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Ohio <18 (P) Yes (S) Covered under all driver ban Oklahoma Learner or Intermediate License (P) Yes (P) Learner or Intermediate License (P) Yes (P) <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban South Carolina South Dakota Learner or Intermediate License (S) Learner or Intermediate License (S) Yes (P) Learner or Intermediate License (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes, w/ passenger Yes, w/ passenger Texas Intermediate License, 1st 12 mos. (P) Intermediate License, 1st 12 mos. (P) <17 (P) <17 (P) Utah Yes (P) <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban In work zones <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) <18 (S) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) Learner or Intermediate License (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Yes (P) <18 w/ Learner or Intermediate License (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Learner or Intermediate License (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban <18 (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Washington, D.C. Yes (P) Yes (P) Learners Permit (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Virgin Islands Yes Yes Covered under all driver ban Puerto Rico Yes (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban Guam Yes (P) Yes (P) Covered under all driver ban

(P) - Primary (S) - Secondary

Source: Governors Highway Safety Association. “Distracted Driving Laws.” March 2014. (Based on data collected from Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and State Highway Safety Offices). Accessed from: http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/cellphone_laws.html

7