(Continued from page 31)

but as soon as they turn 16, they can talk and text all they want.
• Supporters of the bills argued that young drivers should not use cellphones and no one should text while driving because doing so increases the chances they will cause an accident. Opponents said there's no proof that banning cellphones reduces crashes.
• Common sense alone will tell you that talking on a cellphone or texting are dangerous distractions.
• The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has studied the causal relationship of distracted driving and automobile crashes. A 2009 NHTSA study found that driver distraction was the cause in 26 percent of fatal accidents in 2008. The leading distractions were dialing a hand-held device, entering text or talking on a hand-held device (cellphone). The NHTSA website notes that drivers texting while driving are 23 times more likely to be involved in an accident.
• That's plenty of proof for us.
• When the House Judiciary Committee rejected the texting ban, not one person testified against the bill, yet committee members were sufficiently convinced that texting while driving is not a problem.
• Opponents said there are other ways to teach that texting is not acceptable. Why pass laws then, if lawmakers believe they're not effective in changing behavior?
• It's irresponsible for legislators to reject a bill that prohibits a driver distraction that NHTSA studies have linked to an increase in accidents by claiming the behavior isn't hazardous.
• The teen cellphone ban was the only recommendation from the teen driving task force to pass the Legislature - a disappointment to the task force members who devoted many hours and miles to improving teen driver safety only to have all but one of their solutions rejected.
• This year, state lawmakers have failed their driver safety test.
• ___
• Argus Leader, Sioux Falls, March 12, 2013
• Advocate for transparency during Sunshine Week
• South Dakota is a small place, and our lives are defined by close relationships with neighbors and friends, including those we elect to govern us.
• Certainly, familiarity and relatively easy access to government are two advantages of living in our sparsely populated state.
• But even that culture of trust and familiarity needs some limits. When our government officials' actions are allowed to be kept secret, they risk cheating the voters' good faith and trust.
• That's why this state's unwillingness to restrain officials' power by allowing public

(Continued on page 33)