New state laws take effect Wednesday

» 31 Comments | Post a Comment

New state laws that ban text messaging while driving and get tougher on drunken drivers take effect this week.

In a 46-day session, the General Assembly approved 879 bills, most of which take effect Wednesday.

The session will probably be best known for a measure prohibiting smoking in most restaurants and bars in Virginia. This measure will not take effect until Dec. 1 to give restaurant owners more time to prepare for the ban.

Here's a look at some highlights of laws that take effect this week:

State budget -- The revised $77 billion budget uses about $1.4 billion in federal stimulus funds to keep the spending plan in balance.

Texting while driving -- Those who text or e-mail while driving can receive a $20 fine or $50 for a second offense. Drivers can be cited only if pulled over for another offense. Thirteen other states and the District of Columbia have banned texting while driving.

Drunken driving -- People twice convicted of drunken driving within 10 years will be required to use ignition interlock devices, electronic devices installed in motor vehicles connecting a breathalyzer to a vehicle's ignition system. The devices prevent the starting of a motor vehicle if alcohol is detected on the operator's breath.

Payday lending -- Lenders will be required to choose between offering payday loans, whose fees are fixed, and open-ended loans, which can carry sky's-the-limit interest rates. Lenders getting out of the payday business would lose their licenses to offer such loans in Virginia for a decade.

Voting -- Voters will be allowed to go to the polls wearing clothing such as T-shirts or buttons that back a candidate. Before the presidential election last year, the State Board of Elections -- interpreting a state law that forbids electioneering within 40 feet of the polls -- said voters should not wear such clothing to the polls. After the General Assembly approved the new legislation, three free-speech organizations dropped a lawsuit against the elections board.

Novelty cigarette lighters -- Stores will not be allowed to sell novelty cigarette lighters to juveniles. Such lighters must be kept out of reach to the public, and any clerk who sells one to a minor will face up to a $100 fine.

Health insurance -- Health insurers will be allowed to offer group health-insurance policies that do not include state-mandated health benefits to employers with 50 or fewer employees.

Concealed weapons -- Those applying for a concealed-weapons permit may complete the required firearms training online or by video. Legislators overrode Gov. Timothy M. Kaine's veto of the bill.

Tax amnesty -- The State Tax Commissioner is authorized to operate a tax-amnesty program during the 2009-2010 fiscal year, which begins Wednesday.

Tax credit -- The amount of the land-preservation tax credit that may be claimed in 2009 and 2010 is reduced to $50,000 from $100,000.

Inmate fees -- The amount that a sheriff or jail superintendent may charge an inmate per day to defray the costs of the prisoner's keep increases to $5 from $1.

Mental health -- The name of the Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services is changing to the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services.

School absences -- A court may suspend a minor's driver's license if the student misses 10 consecutive days of school.

Financial literacy -- Local school boards will be required to establish educational objectives in financial literacy for middle and high school students.

Annexation -- The moratorium against annexation by cities is extended from 2010 to 2018.

Wildlife -- The Department of Game and Inland Fisheries will be allowed to issue a kill permit to an airport operator if the department finds wildlife is creating a hazard. Currently, a kill permit can be issued only for deer.


Contact Tyler Whitley at (804) 649-6780 or .

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Advertisement

 
View More: tim kaine,general assembly,
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by 12steprevenge on June 29, 2009 at 12:49 pm

News for you, Rev: school policies already don’t count going to your part-time job as an excused absence, no matter if the folks, the manager down at Wendy’s, or Dave Thomas himself write a note to that effect. Regardless of that, if you would consider allowing your child to choose going to a part time nickel and dime gig over getting an education, you are a poor excuse for a parent.

Anyway… the law already dictates that a child missing more than 10 consecutive unexcused days of school is to be referred for truancy (i.e. dragging the courts into it). This provision just gives the judge something meaningful to apply as punishment once it gets to that point. Driving = privilege. Education > privilege of driving.

Of course, enterprising youth with disinterested parents will find a way to circumvent the law, but you can’t blame the GA for trying to give judges something to work with.

Flag Comment Posted by Reverend on June 29, 2009 at 11:44 am

Most seem fairly reasonable, the School absences one poses a quandry. Shouldn’t it be up to the parent to determine if the kid’s licenses should be pulled for absences? Dragging’ the court into it seems a bit extreme.

Because figure the kid it 16-18 years old, probably has a part-time job (assuming to pay for their part of the insurance and/or vehicle), if they’re missing ten days consecutively there may be an underlying reason of which the parent is aware.

Let them decide for the kid, not the guv’mint.

Flag Comment Posted by Phil on June 29, 2009 at 11:43 am

Amen Welshwoman.  I personally think cell phones should be out right banned while driving.  I’ve had too many near misses on the highway from people changing lanes, following too closely, etc. while yapping on their cell phones.

Flag Comment Posted by tman70043 on June 29, 2009 at 11:30 am

ramgrl,

you surf facebook while driving? WOW.

How are they going to inforce this law? I dont see how. How will they prove someone was texting? Looking at calls, dialing a number,etc etc can look like texting, so how would they actually enforce this?

Flag Comment Posted by Welshwoman on June 29, 2009 at 10:30 am

I’ve run enough rescue calls where the cell phone was still open on the floor or seat to know that talking on cell phones is bad enough but texting has got to be worse.  And I support the 2 DUI special ignition too.  It’s a shame people can’t just grow up and be responsible for their own behaviors like they used to be.  Now, everyone has excuses for bad behavior and want it minimized or ignored so you have several hundred thousand laws to enforce 10 Commandments.  Grow up America.

Flag Comment Posted by dkb123 on June 29, 2009 at 6:51 am

The $20-$50 texting fine will be a drop in the bucket compared to the payday when someone gets sued for being distracted while texting that results in an accident.

Otherwise, it’s a sad day when there is a need for most of these laws.

Flag Comment Posted by ramgrl on June 29, 2009 at 6:02 am

Texting while driving is being cited only if being pulled over for another offense, which means the officer has to catch you texting basically, or checking your email. What about using web pages like facebook or myspace? Most people have phones that support these features and if I were to post a status update on one of these sites, then I am not technically texting and if I am only looking at the website but not responding to it then I am certainly not texting….too much loophole there. Not to mention the fact that the officer doesnt have the legal right to take the phone and go through its contents so whats the point in this law anyway? Oh yeah, so the cops can pull over anyone they see with a phone and make some money for the county/city. As for texting being the same as having a .15 BAC…in case no one has noticed, drivers in VA drive like they have a BAC that high normally.

Flag Comment Posted by lakotahope on June 29, 2009 at 5:11 am

Remember the 70’s and everyone had a CB radio in their vehicle?  No one talked of impairment while simultaneously using the radio and driving. Of course, most of these drivers were males and the BAC level was .15, ah the good ole’ days when you could actually drink a cold beer while driving home from work.  Oh well, Life is Still Good…

Flag Comment Posted by VaGentleman on June 29, 2009 at 4:57 am

Studies indeed demonstrate that driver distraction caused by cell-phone use is identical to having two drinks, including the impairment in personal perception that “I’m not drunk / distracted.“

Flag Comment Posted by 12steprevenge on June 28, 2009 at 10:51 pm

The only problem that I have with the texting/driving law is that it is a secondary offense, but most people I see doing it drive bad enough that they’ll give any cop a reason to pull them sooner than later. 9 times out of ten, when I see someone driving erratically they are on the phone. The bottom third of those are the text messengers.

If someone is proficient enough to be able to text and drive and keep it between the lines, good for them… but I still think they deserve a ticket for it.

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

  • Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
  • Respect others.
  • Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
  • See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Click here to post a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Videos
Weekend
 

Advertisement