Michigan House Bill HB4252

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/9/23
• Refer: 3/9/23
• Report Pass: 4/20/23
• Engrossed: 5/2/23
• Refer: 5/3/23
• Report Pass: 5/9/23
• Refer: 5/9/23
• Enrolled: 5/11/23
• Chaptered: 6/7/23
• Passed: 6/7/23

Caption

Traffic control: violations; forwarding abstract of record or report to secretary of state for penalties for operating a vehicle while sending or receiving a message on an electronic wireless device; enhance. Amends secs. 602c, 732 & 907 of 1949 PA 300 (MCL 257.602c et seq.). TIE BAR WITH: HB 4250'23, HB 4251'23

Impact

The impact of HB 4252 will be felt across state traffic regulations. It reinforces the prohibition against using cellular devices while driving for new license holders and integrates specific penalties and enforcement procedures. Furthermore, the bill mandates that penalties for infractions be reported to the Secretary of State, thus maintaining a comprehensive record of traffic violations. This is expected to contribute to the reduction of road accidents attributed to distracted driving, ultimately benefiting public safety.

Summary

House Bill 4252 seeks to amend existing vehicle laws in Michigan, primarily focusing on the handling of violations associated with the use of electronic wireless devices while operating a vehicle. This bill particularly targets individuals holding level 1 or level 2 graduated licenses, prohibiting them from using cellular phones during operation of a vehicle. The intent is to enhance road safety by limiting distractions caused by phone usage while driving. Violation of this provision is classified as a civil infraction, emphasizing the need to uphold safety on public highways and roadways.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding HB 4252 appears to be supportive, particularly among safety advocates and public health officials who argue that limiting phone use while driving will reduce accidents and fatalities. However, there may also be concerns from those who feel the implementation of such rules could be perceived as overly restrictive. The discussion reflects a balancing act between enhancing public safety and managing individual freedoms.

Contention

Notable points of contention include concerns about how the bill intersects with local ordinances regarding traffic safety and whether it encroaches on personal freedoms, particularly for younger drivers. There may also be apprehensions about the practical aspects of enforcing these regulations, including how violations will be monitored and reported. The requirement for local courts to forward findings of infractions further complicates enforcement, raising questions about the efficiency of compliance with state mandates.