California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB63

Introduced
12/12/16  
Introduced
12/12/16  
Refer
1/19/17  
Refer
1/19/17  
Report Pass
4/5/17  
Report Pass
4/5/17  
Refer
4/6/17  
Refer
4/6/17  
Report Pass
4/18/17  
Refer
4/18/17  
Refer
4/18/17  
Refer
4/26/17  
Refer
4/26/17  
Report Pass
5/26/17  
Engrossed
6/1/17  
Engrossed
6/1/17  
Refer
6/5/17  
Refer
6/5/17  
Refer
6/14/17  
Refer
6/14/17  
Report Pass
7/3/17  
Report Pass
7/3/17  
Refer
7/3/17  
Refer
7/3/17  
Report Pass
7/12/17  
Report Pass
7/12/17  
Refer
7/12/17  
Refer
7/12/17  
Refer
8/21/17  
Refer
8/21/17  
Report Pass
8/23/17  
Report Pass
8/23/17  
Refer
8/23/17  
Refer
8/23/17  
Report Pass
9/1/17  
Report Pass
9/1/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Vetoed
10/7/17  

Caption

Driver’s licenses: instruction permits and provisional licenses.

Impact

By extending the provisional licensing age, the bill potentially increases the number of supervised drivers on the road, thereby improving overall road safety for both new and experienced drivers. It also introduces a more rigorous certification process requiring 50 hours of supervised driving practice before a provisional license can be issued, along with specific documentation to ensure responsible driving habits among young drivers. Moreover, the bill mandates that individuals aged 18 to under 21 hold an instruction permit for a minimum of 60 days before they can apply for a provisional license, thereby providing a reduction in what was previously a more extended period.

Summary

Assembly Bill 63, introduced by Assembly Member Frazier, aims to amend, repeal, and add several sections of the California Vehicle Code concerning drivers' licenses, particularly focusing on instruction permits and provisional licenses. The bill expands the eligibility for the provisional licensing program derived from the Brady-Jared Teen Driver Safety Act of 1997, raising the age range for applicants from under 18 to under 21 years. This change is intended to enhance safety among younger drivers by imposing necessary supervision and practice requirements leading up to full licensing.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding AB 63 appears largely supportive, as it embodies proactive steps to reinforce teen driver safety measures. Supporters, including various advocacy groups and lawmakers, view this bill as a necessary enhancement of current laws that will lead to safer driving conditions. However, there may be some contention related to the additional requirements placed upon new drivers and the impact on driving education programs, particularly with respect to costs and accessibility for young drivers seeking to comply with these new regulations.

Contention

Notable points of contention may arise regarding the exemptions outlined in the bill for active duty members of the military and those with specific driver certificates, which some stakeholders might argue could create discrepancies in the level of training and supervision among young drivers. Furthermore, by demanding an investment in time and resources for supervised practice, driving schools might face operational challenges, particularly if they need to accommodate more extensive training programs. The implications for local driving schools regarding fee structures and compliance with new certification regulations could also be areas of debate.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB1267

Driver’s licenses: instruction permits and provisional licenses.

CA SB473

Driver’s licenses: instruction permits and provisional licenses.

CA AB2388

Driver’s licenses: instruction permits and provisional licenses.

CA AB3067

Driver’s licenses: instruction permits and provisional licenses.

CA SB571

Driver’s licenses: instruction permits and provisional licenses.

CA AB2385

Driver’s licenses: instruction permits and provisional licenses.

CA AB863

Driver’s licenses: instruction permits.

CA AB2440

Driver’s licenses: provisional licenses.