STAND

STAND. COM. REP. NO. 95

Honolulu, Hawaii

, 2005

RE: H.B. No. 88

H.D. 1

Honorable Calvin K.Y. Say

Speaker, House of Representatives

Twenty-Third State Legislature

Regular Session of 2005

State of Hawaii

Sir:

Your Committee on Transportation, to which was referred H.B. No. 88 entitled:

"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO CELLULAR PHONES,"

begs leave to report as follows:

The purpose of this bill is to increase motor vehicle safety by:

(1) Prohibiting the use of a hand-held cellular phone while operating a motor vehicle upon a public highway; and

(2) Imposing fines for using a hand-held cellular phone while operating a motor vehicle.

Verizon Wireless and Sprint PCS testified in opposition to this measure. The Department of the Prosecuting Attorney of the City and County of Honolulu, the Hawaii Transportation Association, Cingular Wireless, and T-Mobile commented on this measure.

The use of a hand-held cellular device while operating a motor vehicle can be a distraction that may lead to a motor vehicle collision. A study conducted by the New England Journal of Commerce in 1997 found that the risk of a collision when using a cell phone quadrupled. This risk is comparable to the risk of driving while intoxicated. Your Committee finds that collisions due to the use of a hand-held cellular device could be avoided and personal injury and property damage eliminated if regulations exist to restrict the use of a hand-held cellular device while operating a motor vehicle.

However, your Committee recognizes that this measure, as currently written, sets forth a rebuttable presumption that the driver holding a mobile telephone in the immediate proximity of the operator's ear while the vehicle is moving is presumed to be talking or listening on a cellular phone and that, under the Hawaii Rules of Evidence, finding a presumed fact against an accused is prohibited in criminal proceedings. Moreover, your Committee notes that questions remain as to what constitutes a hand-held cellular device and whether use of a hands-free mobile telephone would be allowable.

Accordingly, your Committee has amended this measure by deleting its contents and inserting language that:

(1) Prohibits the use of a mobile telephone while operating a vehicle on a public highway, unless it is equipped with and used in the hands-free mode;

(2) Provides exceptions for the required hands-free use of a mobile telephone while operating a vehicle on a public highway in cases of a medical or safety emergency;

(3) Provides an unspecified fine for the use of a mobile not in hands-free mode while operating a vehicle on a public highway; and

(4) Defines "commercial mobile radio service," "hands-free mode," "mobile telephone," "operates a vehicle," and "using a mobile telephone."

Technical, nonsubstantive amendments were also made for clarity, consistency, and style.

As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Transportation that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 88, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 88, H.D. 1, and be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Transportation,

		____________________________ JOSEPH M. SOUKI, Chair