RI senators introduce bills for changes in DUI, driving laws

03/11/09 - The Rhode Island Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings at the State House to discuss a number of bills that could establish new motor vehicle offenses last Thursday.Of the 12 bills under consideration, five are aimed specifically at strengthening penalties against drivers convicted of driving under the influence.

One bill, sponsored by Sen. Leonidas Raptakis (D-Warwick), would make it a felony to drive with a license suspended for either DUI or refusing to submit to a chemical test.

Another bill, sponsored by Sen. V. Susan Sosnowski (D-South Kingstown, New Shoreham), would allow police to obtain a search warrant to take blood, breath or urine samples for testing from drivers suspected of being under the influence.

Under current law, drivers suspected of driving under the influence may refuse to submit to tests, but can be charged with a misdemeanor for doing so.

Sosnowski, who sponsored four of the bills, said the purpose of the legislation was "to save lives."

"I've seen too many families destroyed by . loved ones being killed or seriously injured," Sosnowski said in an interview. "There's plenty of unfortunate accidents that happened right here in South Kingstown."

Sosnowski said she has been a strong proponent of DUI legislation since one of her constituents lost a son to a drunken driver.

Another of Sosnowski's bills would make it a felony for an adult to provide alcohol to a minor who then causes death or serious injury while under the influence.

"The idea of this bill is to make adults accountable, to make them think twice before they furnish alcohol to a minor," Sosnowski said. "The main thing is to save lives."

URI junior Kathryn Whitehouse said the bill was a good idea.

"I think that's a great law actually," Whitehouse said. "It teaches you a lesson."

Senior Jason Smith offered a different opinion of the law.

"I don't think it's a good idea, I don't want us to be in a country where people are held responsible for what some one else does," Smith said.

Two bills dealing with the use of cellular phones while driving were also discussed.

One would ban text messaging while driving, and the other would ban all non-hands-free cell phone use while driving.

Sen. John Tassoni (D- Smithfield, North Smithfield,) who sponsored the text-messaging bill, said he drafted the legislation after an ex-police officer, who lost an arm and a leg after being struck head-on by a texting driver, approached him.

Junior Jordan Pailthorpe agreed with the substance of the bill, but expressed concern about enforcement.

"You're kind of an idiot to do that anyway, but at the same time . it's so hard for somebody to really be able to prosecute you for that," Pailthorpe said.

Whitehouse and her friends sophomore Emily Pascoe and junior Brianna Moon agreed with the law without reservation.

"I totally approve of that law," Pascoe said.

"As much as it's like teenagers' lives to be using their phones, text while driving, get directions . I know people that have gotten into accidents," Whitehouse said.

Amy Vitale, program coordinator for the state American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) attended the hearing and testified against a number of bills on behalf of the organization.

The ACLU didn't take issue with Tassoni's bill, Vitale said, but it did object to the bill banning the use of non-hands-free cell phones in general due to the broad language of some of its provisions

"For us, that was worded extremely broadly, and we were concerned that that could really refer to anything as simple as changing the radio station while driving," she said.

Sosnowski's bill allowing search warrants for the taking of blood, breath or urine samples drew the most serious objection from the ACLU, with Vitale calling it "a grave invasion of privacy."

"We oppose this on the grounds that we see it as something that is unconstitutional because it would be forcing a person to provide evidence against themselves," Vitale said earlier this week.

Self-incrimination is illegal under the Fifth Amendment and the state constitution, she said.

Another bill sponsored by Sosnowski is intended to address the dangers of second hand smoke, banning drivers from smoking with a child small enough to require a safety seat in the car.

The ACLU also opposed this bill, not out of opposition to the bill's intentions, but out of opposition to the expansion of police powers.

"We really don't believe that we should be giving police more reasons to stop motor vehicles," Vitale said. "Especially if it doesn't have anything to do with a crime or a safety issue to the actual driver or to other drivers on the road."

The ACLU also objected to a bill that would extend the period of time during which drivers convicted of drug or alcohol related driving offenses could be ordered to use an ignition interlock system, and would make use of the device mandatory rather than leaving it up to a judges discretion.

Ignition interlock systems require the driver to give a breath sample before starting a vehicle and periodically during the course of a drive.

As well as being expensive to the user - the driver must rent and pay for the installation of the device - it inconveniences any other users of the vehicle and creates an unsafe distraction to the driver, Vitale said.

"For example, if you're driving 70 mph on the freeway . and there was no shoulder, it's not all that safe to pull over just to blow into this device," Vitale explained.

Other bills discussed during the hearings included one strengthening penalties for a hit-and-run, and one allowing police to confiscate a car's license plates if the owner is arrested for driving with a suspended, revoked or canceled license.

The judiciary committee has until the second week in April to consider the bills before rejecting them, tabling them for further study or passing them on for consideration in the Senate and House of Representatives.