States

Letter Opposing Senate Bill (SB) 69 to Weaken North Carolina’s Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) Law

 150 150 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety

The learner period is the safest time for novice drivers, supervised by a licensed adult, while they gain skills and confidence to drive independently and responsibly. This is also the stage in which the
supervising adult has an opportunity to help instill lifetime safe driving behaviors. Unfortunately, SB 69 seeks to reduce the critical learner’s period from 12 to just six months.

read more

Letter in Support of House Bill (HB) 74 to Upgrade Ohio’s Distracted Driving Law

 150 150 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety

This legislation will improve safety on Ohio roads by upgrading the state’s distracted driving law to primary enforcement, curbing distracting viewing behind the wheel, and adding a ban on handheld mobile device use. Current state law is secondary enforcement which significantly hinders police efforts as they are required to first observe an additional violation before stopping the driver for texting while driving. Considering the prevalence of distracted driving crashes, this legislation is critical and timely.

read more

Letters Supporting Efforts in South Carolina to Enact an All-Offender Ignition Interlock Device (IID) Law

 150 150 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety

Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) supports House Bill (HB) 3008/Senate Bill (SB) 28 to require the use of ignition interlock devices (IIDs) by all convicted drunk drivers, including first time offenders. We urge you to advance this measure and join the 34 states and Washington, DC that have made their streets and highways safer by enacting an all-offender IID law.

read more

Letter Opposing Legislative Bill (LB) 271 to Weaken Nebraska’s All-Offender Ignition Interlock Device (IID) Law

 150 150 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety

LB 271 would weaken the IID law by allowing participation in a 24/7 sobriety program and use of a 24/7 sobriety program driving permit as an alternative to the IID requirement. This change would not prevent an offender from getting behind the wheel and driving drunk, which the IID technology requirement does, and therefore fails to safeguard the offender and all other road users.

read more