For MADD, I am a Volunteer Victim Advocate and the Harrison, Hancock and Stone County Community Action Site Leader.

Transcription

1 Bill Downs Harrison, Hancock and Stone County Community Action Site Leader MADD Mississippi Before the House Judiciary B Committee Testimony in Support of the House Bill March 2012 Thank you Chairman Gipson and members of the committee for allowing me the opportunity to submit written testimony in support of House Bill 586 expanding the use of ignition interlocks for all convicted drunk drivers in Mississippi. My name is Bill Downs and I am a volunteer with the Mississippi affiliate of Mothers Against Drunk Driving or MADD. For MADD, I am a Volunteer Victim Advocate and the Harrison, Hancock and Stone County Community Action Site Leader. I always thought it would happen to someone else; however, on October 6, 2007, I became that someone. It started by my coming up on a road block at the intersection of Hwy. 53 and Canal road, where a Harrison County Deputy Sheriff was detouring traffic off of Hwy. 53 onto Canal road. I immediately called my wife and told her I would be a little late getting home due to the detour. As I turned down Canal road, I looked back over my shoulder at the distant wreck and noticed what seemed like every emergency vehicle in the county was in the curve of the road at the scene. I have never seen so many red and blue flashing lights. As I continued with the detour, my wife tried to call my son Brad, his wife Samantha, and best friend Chris, a young man I had learned to love as a son, to warn them to avoid the area. She called me as I had reached the half-way point in the detour and told me that she could not contact any 3 of the cell phones they had with them. I drove to the movie theater where they were supposed to be watching a movie. I had talked to Chris at 8:50pm that night. He had told me they were going to see a movie and I had told him to (1 of 7)

2 be careful and tell my son and his wife to be careful and have fun, that I would see them later that night. I later identified Chris body at the local hospital where he had arrived DOA after the 2001 Ford Mustang they were in had been hit head-on by a drunk driver; killing my son Brad and his wife Samantha instantly. The drunk driver also was killed instantly as her car burst into flames. Her passenger was also transported and is the only survivor of this 80 mph drunk driving crash and will live handicapped the rest of her life. After having to bury my son, his wife and this young man I loved as a son, I petitioned MADD National to allow me to become the Voice of the Victims here on the Ms. Gulf Coast. Every day is a new challenge to get the message out about how important it is not to drink and drive and the penalties of doing so. I will go where ever I am allowed to speak out and be the voice of those who have no voice. MADD supports House Bill 586 and applauds the leadership of Speaker Philip Gunn for authoring this lifesaving legislation. MADD s support of ignition interlocks for all convicted drunk drivers is simple it is about saving lives and stopping drunk driving. More than 15 peer reviewed studies conclude that ignition interlock devices for all convicted DUI offenders are the most highly effective tool available to stop drunk driving. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) endorsed interlocks for all convicted offenders earlier this year after reviewing the research. The CDC found that these devices reduce repeat drunk driving offenses on average of 67 percent. As you probably know, an ignition interlock is a breath test device linked to a vehicle s ignition system. When a convicted drunk driving offender wishes to start his or her vehicle, he or she must first blow into the device. The vehicle will not start unless the driver s BAC is below a preset standard. A data recorder logs the driver s BAC for each attempt to start the vehicle. Interlocks are calibrated to have rolling retests, which require a driver to provide breath tests at regular intervals, preventing drivers from asking a sober friend to start the car, drink while (2 of 7)

3 driving, or leave the car idling in a bar parking lot. Currently, these devices are discretionary for repeat offenders in Mississippi. Drunk driving related crashes and deaths remain a problem in Mississippi. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 236 people were killed in drunk driving crashes in 2010 in Mississippi representing 37 percent of all total traffic fatalities. MADD believes a more proactive approach must be taken to stop drunk driving in Mississippi. House Bill 586 is part of that approach. House Bill 586 will helps save lives. Similar laws in Arizona and Oregon have decreased drunk driving fatalities by 51 and 52 percent respectively. In Louisiana, drunk driving deaths are down by 40 percent. In New Mexico, drunk driving deaths have decreased by 30 percent. In November 2006, MADD launched its national Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving, which includes support for all-offender ignition interlock laws like House Bill 586. Prior to the Campaign launching in 2006, only one state, New Mexico, had a law requiring ignition interlocks for all first time convicted drunk drivers. Now, fifteen states plus a pilot program in California have laws requiring or highly incentivizing interlock usage by all first time convicted DUI offenders. 1 Drunk driving is a violent crime that is 100 percent preventable. Currently, 90 million Americans are protected from repeat drunk drivers thanks to states which have begun to rely on this technology. Unfortunately, Mississippi residents do not fall into this category. By advancing House Bill 586 on to the House floor, this Committee can send a clear message that drunk driving in Mississippi is not tolerated. House Bill 586 is also an economically sound public safety measure. Every life saved or injury prevented by the device translates to millions of taxpayer dollars no longer spent subsidizing drunk drivers. A study of New Mexico s interlock program found the cost of an interlock was 1 New Mexico, Arizona, Louisiana, Illinois, Washington, Nebraska, Alaska, Colorado, Arkansas, Utah, Hawaii, New York, Oregon, Kansas, Connecticut (3 of 7)

4 $2.25 a day for the offender, but for every dollar invested on first offender interlock laws the public saves three dollars. 2 The interlock acts as a virtual probation officer riding in the front seat. It should be noted that the convicted drunk driver pays for the device so that the taxpayer is not further burdened with subsidizing drunk drivers. Some may argue that requiring ignition interlocks for first time offenders is too harsh. This is not the case. We know that the average first time offender has driven drunk before the most conservative study showed drunk drivers getting on the road an average of 80 times before the first arrest. We know it is not enough to simply revoke the license of a convicted drunk driver. Studies show that 50 to 75 percent of convicted drunk drivers continue to drive even while their license is suspended. This is the reason that interlocks are so critical to protecting the public. The offender is going to drive anyway, so let s make sure that they do so in a manner that protects the public. You also will hear talk about punishing those who are one sip over the legal limit. The illegal level in Mississippi is a.08 blood alcohol concentration. The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism notes that to get to a.08 BAC, men must typically consume 5 or more drinks, and women must typically consume 4 or more drinks, in about 2 hours. 3 This dispels the myth that someone can be arrested for DUI after one beer at a ball game or a glass of champagne at a wedding. In conclusion, House Bill 586 presents an opportunity for the legislature to change the status quo in Mississippi by enacting an effective measure that is proven to reduce drunk driving. For this reason, Mothers Against Drunk Driving urges this committee to support this legislation. By doing so, you will help save lives and end the taxpayer subsidy of the 100 percent preventable violent crime of drunk driving. Enclosed is more information on ignition interlocks. Thank you. 2 Roth, Richard, Voas, Robert and Marques, Paul (2007) 'Interlocks for First Offenders: Effective?', Traffic Injury Prevention, 8:4, URL: 3 A standard drink is defined as 12 ounces of beer, 5 ounces of wine, or 1.5 ounces of 72-proof distilled spirits, all of which contain the same amount of alcohol about.54 ounces. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. "Alcohol Screening and Brief Intervention in the Medical Setting." DOT HS Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, July (4 of 7)

5 Ignition Interlock Fact Sheet In 2010 in Mississippi, 236 people were killed in crashes involving a drunk driver representing 37 percent of all traffic fatalities. (NHTSA) An ignition interlock is a breath test device linked to a vehicle s ignition system. When a convicted drunk driver wishes to start his or her vehicle, he or she must first blow into the device. The vehicle will not start unless the driver s Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) is below a preset level. Currently, these devices are discretionary for repeat offenders in Mississippi. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), interlocks are effective in saving lives and reducing drunk driving recidivism by 67 percent. (CDC) 15 states, including Louisiana and Arkansas, plus a California pilot program (covering a population of over 13 million) have laws requiring ignition interlocks for all first-time convicted drunk drivers. An ignition interlock is more effective compared to license suspension alone as 50 to 75 percent of convicted drunk drivers continue to drive on a suspended license. (Peck, et al, 1995 and Beck et al, 1999) Ignition interlocks are optional for repeat offenders in Mississippi. MADD would like to see these devices required for all convicted drunk drivers including first time offenders with an illegal BAC of.08 or greater. Public Supports Interlocks for First-Time Convicted Drunk Drivers. o 88 percent support interlocks for all convicted drunk drivers. (Center for Excellence in Rural Safety at the University of Minnesota, May 2010) o 84 percent support ignition interlocks for convicted drunk drivers. (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety 2009 Survey) o Over 3 of 4 persons support requiring interlocks for first-time convicted drunk drivers. (AAA 2011 Survey: Ignition interlocks for convicted drunk drivers save taxpayers money. The DUI offender pays for the installation and monitoring of the interlock. A study of New Mexico s interlock law found the cost of an interlock was $2.25 a day for the user, but for every dollar invested in an interlock for a first-time offender the public saves three dollars. (Impact DWI, PIRE study in Traffic Injury Prevention, 2007) Conservative estimates show DUI offenders have driven drunk at least 80 times before they are arrested. (CDC Vital Signs: Alcohol-Impaired Driving Among Adults United States, As a result of similar ignition interlock laws in Oregon and Arizona, drunk driving deaths are down by 52 and 51 percent respectively. (NHTSA-FARS Query) Government does not bear the cost of the interlock device the devices are paid for by the convicted drunk driver. For more information on ignition interlocks, please visit (5 of 7)

6 House Bill 586 Overview Requiring all convicted drunk drivers to use an ignition interlock. Introduced by Speaker Philip Gunn. Ignition interlock periods for convicted drunk drivers 1 st offense blood alcohol concentration (BAC).08 to.14: 30 day license suspension (no driving privileges) followed by six months on interlock. 1 st offense BAC.15 or greater: 45 day license suspension followed by one year on interlock. 1 st offense with a child passenger under 16 in a vehicle: 45 day license suspension followed by one year on an interlock. 2 nd offense: 45 day license suspension followed by two years on interlock. 3 rd or subsequent offense: 45 day license suspension followed by five years on interlock. Ignition interlock periods for convicted drunk drivers under 21 1 st offense: 30 day license suspension followed by one year on interlock 2 nd offense: 45 day license suspension followed by two years on interlock 3 rd offense: 45 day license suspension followed by five years on interlock Ignition Interlock Device Fund Non-indigent offenders will be ordered by courts to pay between $30 to $100 to the Driver s License Bureau of the Department of Public Safety. Non-indigent offenders must pay $25 monthly to the Driver s License Bureau monthly while on the interlock. Indigent status is determined by a judge. The fees paid into the fund will offset any possible administrative oversight costs to the state. Penalties for tampering/circumventing the interlock Offender will have an additional 90 days on the interlock. (6 of 7)

7 Status of State Ignition Interlock Laws First Conviction Mandatory.08 Conviction Mandatory with a BAC of at least.15 Mandatory with 2 nd Conviction Discretionary/ Other Alaska Kansas (7/11) Alabama (9/11) Tennessee (1/11) Georgia**** (5/99) All other states Arizona (9/07) Louisiana (7/07) Delaware (7/09) Texas**** (9/05) Iowa (7/10) Arkansas (4/09) Nebraska Florida (10/08) Virginia (10/04) Massachusetts (1/06) California Pilot Program* (7/10) New Mexico (6/05) Maryland (10/11) West Virginia (7/08) Missouri (9/01) Colorado** New York (8/10) New Jersey (1/10) Wisconsin (7/10) Montana (5/09) Connecticut (1/12) Hawaii (1/11) Oregon*** (1/08) Utah (7/09) North Carolina (12/07) Oklahoma (11/11) Wyoming (7/09) Ohio (9/08) Pennsylvania (10/03) Illinois** Washington South Carolina (Month/Year listed note laws effective date) * California s pilot program covers the counties of Los Angeles, Alameda, Sacramento, and Tulare. These counties combined have a population of over 13 million. **Interlocks are highly incentivized in that, if the offender chooses not to use the device, he or she has a year long license suspension ***Mandatory upon license reinstatement (7 of 7)