HARTFORD, CT – While there was bipartisan support for reducing fatalities and improving road safety among members of the General Assembly’s Transportation Committee on Wednesday, disagreements persisted over public safety versus government overreach, civil liberties, and the practicality of enforcement.
One of the key concepts up for discussion was listed as An Act Reducing Blood Alcohol Limits for Impaired Driving and Concerning Roadside Phlebotomy and Electronic Warrants. The legislative concept generated considerable debate.
Initial questions were raised about the implementation of roadside phlebotomy, which is the idea that law enforcement officers would be trained to draw blood at the scene of a traffic stop. The state is already running a pilot program trying this out in Connecticut.
“There are currently 29 certified officers [certified to draw blood] throughout the state,” noted Rep. Aimee Berger-Giralvo, D-Ridgefield, adding that another training class is scheduled in March. “This is something that is going to be expanding already, organically, with or without our input at this point.”
Yet, lawmakers’ concerns have lingered over whether individuals should be compelled to submit to roadside blood draws.
“Currently, if a trained phlebotomist comes onto the site, it requires consent,” Sen. Christine Cohen, D-Guilford, said. “The e-warrant could change that a bit.”
Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, also voiced her reservations about the practice.
“Relative to doing e-warrants and doing phlebotomy on the roadsides, how much of an overreach are we doing here?” Osten said. “We are going to conduct activity on the sides of the roads that normally we would do in a laboratory?”
Osten also questioned whether the program’s funding, currently supported by federal grants, would be sustainable at the state level.
Another point of contention is the proposal to decrease the legal blood alcohol content limit to 0.05%.
“I couldn’t have a drink going out to dinner without being over the limit that we are proposing here,” Osten argued. “I don’t happen to drink, but this would mean some people can’t even have one drink with dinner.”
Cohen pointed to the state of Utah, the only US state to have enacted a 0.05% BAC law.
“New data coming out of Utah shows that alcohol sales did not go down. In fact, alcohol sales have gone up, and crash data is showing a lower number of crashes,” Cohen said.
The proposal, Cohen argued, is not about stopping people from drinking but about ensuring they make responsible decisions before getting behind the wheel.
Opponents argue the measure unfairly targets responsible drinkers without addressing cannabis and polydrug impairment. Cohen emphasized the availability of public transportation and rideshares in Connecticut, while Osten countered that such options are limited in her district, where law enforcement response times can reach 40 minutes.
The discussion continued over how the legalization of marijuana has introduced new complications for law enforcement in identifying impaired drivers. Unlike alcohol, where a BAC test provides clear evidence of intoxication, cannabis and polydrug impairment are harder to measure.
“This is a test that would enable law enforcement to determine whether or not somebody just recently used cannabis or other drugs,” Cohen said.
Sen. Tony Hwang, R-Fairfield, addressed the difficulty with cannabis use on the roads.
“When we were evaluating the legalization of marijuana in the Connecticut General Assembly, we did not go through the Public Safety Committee. We did not go through Public Health,” Hwang said. “None of the committees that had expertise to offer input before we opened up the genie’s bottle on legalization were ever heard. The approval occurred in the Finance Committee.”
He said lawmakers are now playing catch-up, trying to draft laws to curb impaired driving without infringing on civil liberties.
“We have the 800-pound elephant in the room when we talk about the legalization of marijuana in Connecticut,” Hwang said. “Now we’re trying to put the genie back in the bottle.”
Several committee members called for the bill to be broken down into separate pieces, rather than bundled with a bill on polydrug use and a separate bill on phlebotomy.
“Public hearing notices will be posted five days in advance,” Hwang said, encouraging citizen participation and noting that the public can testify in person or via Zoom.
“This committee has a tall task ahead of us,” Hwang said. “But one thing is clear: We want to avoid preventable deaths on our roadways. And unfortunately, right now, it is unconscionable the numbers that we are enduring.”
The committee considered several other concepts for bills to be drafted that had limited to no discussion, including measures to improve infrastructure in smaller harbors, explore new revenue sources for the Special Transportation Fund, and implement key recommendations from the departments of Transportation and Motor Vehicles.
Additional concepts focused on enhancing transportation worker safety, improving highway, pedestrian, and cyclist safety, regulating transportation network companies like rideshare services, addressing rail infrastructure, airport policies, expanding the Blue Envelope Program for individuals with communication challenges, and resolving issues related to auto dealerships.
The committee reviewed several proposals, including House Bill 5241, which aims to implement weigh-in-motion systems for commercial truck enforcement, Senate Bill 1146, requiring extended rear-facing child restraint systems, and Senate Bill 1081, proposing an economic study on areas surrounding the Mohegan-Pequot Bridge. Additionally, the committee considered changes in reference for House Bill 6679, concerning the Local Bridge Program, and Senate Bill 1082, regarding nonemergency transportation options.
H/T: ctnewsjunkie.com
