BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 695
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 25, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Bonnie Lowenthal, Chair
AB 695 (Norby) - As Introduced: February 17, 2011
SUBJECT : Motorcycle helmets
SUMMARY : Exempts from the requirement to wear a helmet,
motorcycle drivers who are 18 years or older and have either
completed a motorcyclist safety training program meeting the
standards established by the California Highway Patrol (CHP) or
been issued a class M1 license or endorsement, or comparable
license from another jurisdiction, for two years or more.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires motorcycle drivers and their passengers to wear
CHP-approved helmets when traveling on a public roadway.
2)Establishes the California Motorcyclist Safety Program (CSMP)
in the CHP.
3)Establishes funding for CMSP through a $2 per vehicle
surcharge on motorcycle registration fees.
4)Mandates CMSP training for all riders under 21 years of age
seeking a California motorcycle license.
5)Authorizes students who successfully complete the CMSP course
to waive the riding skills test required for licensing by the
Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : This bill is essentially a reintroduction of AB 1205
(Logue) of 2009, and AB 2427 (Canciamilla) of 2006, both of
which failed passage in this committee.
The author of this bill asserts that California's 1991 mandatory
helmet law was intended to save lives and money by reducing
AB 695
Page 2
injuries and fatalities among motorcyclists; however, its
initial effect was to cause many riders to stop riding rather
than be forced to wear a helmet. Because fewer people were
riding, the author cites that the number of accidents
temporarily decreased, resulting in an estimated loss of $191
million from motorcycle license fees between 1992 and 2006.
The author also states, that for the last thirteen years,
California motorcycle fatality rates have been higher than
before the helmet law was enacted and that across the country,
states with helmet laws have historically had higher fatality
rates than states that allow all, or some, riders to ride
without helmets. Data cited by the author shows that the number
of deaths per accident among motorcyclists has risen, with the
ratio of deaths per 100 motorcycle accidents shown to have
increased from 3.22 in 1991 to 3.53 in 2011 despite data that
shows the number of motorcycle accidents has plunged sharply
(64%) from 1986 to the present (2011).
The author suggests that the sharp drop in accidents is
attributed, in part, to the success of the CMSP, a legislatively
mandated, statewide program that is mandatory for all riders
under 21 years of age seeking a motorcycle license in
California. As an incentive to get all riders to complete the
CSMP, students who successfully complete the course are allowed
to waive the riding skills test requirement for licensing by the
DMV.
Requiring motorcyclists to wear helmets has been a controversial
issue that has been debated by the Legislature many times over
the past more than 30 years. In 1966, federal legislation
authorized the withholding of highway funds from any state that
failed to enact a mandatory helmet requirement. A majority of
states complied with the federal requirement, but California
remained one of three states that did not comply. It was not
until 1991 that California achieved full compliance through the
enactment of AB 7 (Floyd), Chapter 32, Statutes of 1991.
Subsequently, in 1995, the federal government repealed the
penalty sanction for states without helmet laws, giving
individual states a choice in deciding as to whether to require
the use of motorcycle helmets. Currently, 20 states and the
District of Columbia require safety helmets for all motorcycle
riders, and 27 states have helmet laws that apply to some riders
(generally riders younger than 18 years of age). Three states,
AB 695
Page 3
New Hampshire, Illinois, and Iowa, have no laws mandating helmet
use.
Opponents contend that helmet laws have proven to be a very
effective means of reducing motorcycle fatalities and point to
studies that show that a rider not wearing a helmet is 40% more
likely to suffer a fatal head injury and 15% more likely to
suffer a nonfatal injury in a crash than a helmeted rider.
Opponents also cite a National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) study conducted in 1997 showing that when
states repeal their helmet laws, motorcycle fatalities and
injuries increase significantly. From 1984 through 1997, NHTSA
estimates that helmets saved the lives of 8,474 motorcyclists
and if all motorcycle operators and passengers had worn helmets
during those years, an estimated 6,817 additional lives would
have been saved. NHTSA reports also show that head injuries are
the leading cause of death in motorcycle crashes and that
wearing a helmet reduces the likelihood of a crash fatality by
37%.
Supporters and opponents of this bill each can cite numerous
studies, reports, and analyses to defend their point of view.
Beyond the competing claims, the issue can be reduced to a
simple question: How should the Legislature balance the belief
of the scientific, safety, and medical communities, which seem
largely to agree that helmets are effective in reducing
motorcycle rider head injuries and fatalities and their
associated medical and societal costs, against the rights of
adult motorcyclists who wish to be able to make informed choices
regarding the manner in which they ride?
Previous legislation : AB 1205 (Logue) of 2009, and AB 2427
(Canciamilla) of 2006, both of which were identical to this
bill, failed passage in the first policy committee. Also in
2006, SB 969 (Ducheny) would have made compliance with the
mandatory motorcycle helmet law voluntary for the motorcycle
operator, providing certain minimal licensing and other
requirements were met, and for the motorcycle passenger if
certain medical insurance coverage were maintained. That bill
failed passage in the Senate Transportation and Housing
Committee.
AB 2700 (Mountjoy) of 2002, passed out of this committee after
being amended so that it exempted from the helmet law
motorcyclists 21 years old and over who carry proof of at least
AB 695
Page 4
$1 million in medical insurance on their persons. That bill was
subsequently defeated on the Assembly floor. SB 685
(Hollingsworth) of 2003 would have exempted from the helmet law
persons who file a physician's certificate with the DMV
substantiating a disability that renders them unable to wear a
helmet. That bill was defeated in the Senate Transportation
Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
ABATE of California (Sponsor)
174 Individuals
Opposition
Association of California Insurance Companies
California Hospital Association
California Medical Association
California Police Chiefs Association Inc.
California State Automobile Association: Automobile Club of
Southern California
County Health Executives Association of California
Emergency Nurses Association-California State Council
Health Officers Association of California
League of California Cities
Personal Insurance Federation of California
Analysis Prepared by : Victoria Alvarez / TRANS. / (916) 319-
2093