08/21/23: News from the MRF
Will you ask your Senators to protect the internal combustion engine?
Members of Congress are in the middle of a 6-week break away from Washington, D.C. While lawmakers won’t return until after Labor Day, their staff are still working on several policy issues.
Earlier this year, the Biden Administration rolled out plans to shift this country to a majority electric vehicle market over the next ten years. In June, Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma introduced S. 2090, the "Preserving Choice in Vehicle Purchases Act." The bill would amend the Clean Air Act to prevent a ban on the sale of internal combustion engines, effectively trumping any state law that outlaws their sale. S. 2090 is the Senate’s version of H.R. 1435, which recently passed out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
While the House version of the bill is moving, the Senate version of the bill still needs more cosponsors. Will you ask your two Senators to protect the internal combustion engine?
Click here to contact your Senators and ask them to support S. 2090.
06/28/23: Thanks Again! By: Geoff Viscount
Once again this year we, as Connecticut's motorcyclists, faced a number of legislative issues on the State level that would have negatively impacted us, had they not been addressed and followed up on. What do they say: "When the going gets tough, the tough get going."? Well, again, for more times than I can count since being a member of this great organization, this came to fruition. And stepping up to the plate, as he has done for so well over 40 years for countless times, our legislative l.eader, Richard Paulkner, came through with his persistence, expertise and common sense, to lead the charge. And right at his side, Ryder FitzGerald, with his stats and diligence, assisted in keeping the pressure on up in Hartford, to those who would strip our rights as adult motorcyclists away from us. I can only imagine that our group has had one of the most profound impressions of any group ever to represent themselves in the halls of the Capitol in Hartford. With the persistence of leaders looking out for their flock, these two, facing an uphill battle in the beginning of the session, won the war again. Kudos to the two of you, Richard and Ryder! You both have my eternal thanks and appreciation. I look forward to years of working with both of you in our fight to maintain our rights as adult motorcyclists, and not be railroaded by those with no experience, who think that they know what's best for us. Long live "Let Those Who Ride Decide"!
06/07/23: Good News! The 2023 legislative session ended with a nearly twelve hour final day. Happily, very little happened in the way of motorcycle related changes.
The final results for bills that we were watching is as follows: SB-96 died in committee; SB-97 died in committee; SB-955 died on the Senate floor; SB-1036 passed; SB-1195 passed; HB-5494 died in committee; HB-5917, the bill that was of most concern because, as raised, it would have imposed a mandatory helmet law for all motorcyclists, was amended to (among other things) eliminate that helmet law section before being passed; HB-5984 died in committee; HB-6166 died in committee; HB-6744 died in committee; HB-6745 died in committee. For details of these bills see the original mentions further down this page.
Of the bills that passed, SB-1036 will probably have minimal impact, but was somewhat worrisome as it mentions groups of motorcyclists in Hartford as one of it's targets. SB-1195 will have very little impact, but we are concerned about "autocycles" being grouped with "motorcycles", as it may result in crash data being skewed by any crashes that involve autocycles. And finally, as mentioned previously, HB-5917 had the offensive Section 3 removed before the bill was passed.
So, we can celebrate for now, but be prepared for more attacks on our freedom of choice in next year's session.
On another note, the MRF reports that Nebraska has become the 33rd State to repeal their helmet requirement for adult motorcyclists. This fact should be mentioned to your Legislators if further helmet laws get proposed next session.
05/23/23: Today the House discussed HB-5917, and an amendment was proposed that, among other things, removes Section 3 (the universal helmet law). The amendment was passed, and the bill (as amended) was also passed. This is Great News! However, before breaking out that rare vintage Champagne (or whatever you use to celebrate), keep in mind that the remaining bill itself will then go to the Senate, where (although unlikely) someone could propose an amendment that would reinstate Section 3. We are keeping a close watch on this, but are tentatively optimistic. I'll post more info as it becomes available.
05/05/23: In reviewing written testimony submitted by supporters of the helmet law, those who give reasons seem to always make claims that "ample evidence", or even "overwhelming evidence" shows that helmet laws reduce fatalities and serious injuries. This would be hard to argue against - IF IT WERE TRUE! And yet, they never actually submit any such evidence, which is not surprising, since it does NOT exist!
Unfortunately, Legislators typically do not know the facts. This is why it is extremely important that every Legislator, and the Governor, be supplied with a copy of this study. When contacting your Legislators and/or the Governor, send them a copy, and ask them to provide any actual evidence (actual data, not just unsupported hearsay) that supports helmet laws. I've said this before, but it is even more urgent now!
05/02/23: At yesterday's Appropriations Committee meeting, there were several bills of interest under consideration, most importantly HB-5917 which includes a mandatory helmet law provision for all motorcyclists.
Unfortunately, this bill was passed by this Committee (40 to 13). Here is the Vote Tally Sheet. What this means is that, should the bill be passed by the House and Senate, funding will be available to implement it. If you reach out to any of the Legislators on the Tally Sheet, try to keep in mind that a vote in favor does not mean that they are opposed to our position - in a bill of this complexity there are some parts that they may strongly favor whether or not they like section 3. Likewise, a vote against does not mean they are our supporters - they may dislike some other part of the bill.
Having the funding available greatly increases the chance that some form of this bill will, in fact, be passed.
Although it is pretty boring and tedious, those of you who are interested can see the meeting here. The sections of interest are 1) the first two minutes of opening remarks, in which Senator Osten makes it clear that this meeting, and the voting done at it, is strictly on the issue of funding the bill (should it pass) - NOT on the merits of the bill itself or any parts of it; and 2) the part where HB-5917 is being considered, which starts at approximately 2:04:20 (two hours and four minutes into the meeting), and ends at about 2:07:58. Two of those who voted in favor expressed some reservations about the bill itself - Representative Bolinsky (district 106) saying it needed more work, while Representative Felipe (district 130) voted in favor "for the moment". In keeping with the opening remarks, neither went in to any details, but if you are from either district, this is an opportunity to agree that the bill is flawed, and then encourage them to try to remove section 3.
The other bills on the agenda that we've been keeping an eye on were SB-1036, which was passed by this committee, and HB-6744, which they did not get around to dealing with, so it will probably appear on the agenda of some future Appropriations Committee meeting.
SB-1036: AN ACT ESTABLISHING A GREATER HARTFORD REGIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TASK FORCE TO COMBAT ILLEGAL ROADWAY TRAFFIC ACTIVITY.
is of concern only because it contains the language "The task force shall combat illegal traffic activities on greater Hartford area roadways committed by organized groups of individuals riding motor vehicles, motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles or other vehicles.", which may be interpreted in such a way as to encourage "profiling", and lead to harassment of motorcyclists in that area.
HB-6744: AN ACT CONCERNING COMPENSATORY REFORESTATION PLANS, THE CONSTRUCTION OF NOISE BARRIERS, DECIBEL TESTING FOR MOTOR VEHICLES AND IDLING MOTOR VEHICLES.
includes the language originally part of HB-6745 (mentioned below on 02/22/23) which extends the time for the implementation of noise testing of motor vehicles (including motorcycles), which was signed into law last year.
What's next? HB-5917 will now go back to the House for consideration - keep writing/calling/emailing your Representatives to try to get section 3 removed, or the entire bill scrapped. If it passes the House, it will then move to the Senate, so keep after your Senators also. There is also a rumor that the Governor is not happy with some aspects of the bill, although he is known to favor the helmet law, so reach out to the Governors office and let them know that you do not favor this bill either.
05/01/23: HB-5917 is on the agenda of the Appropriations Committee meeting scheduled for this afternoon at 1:00 pm. This meeting will be broadcast live on CT-N
04/26/23: The House moved HB-5917 to the Appropriations Committee on 04/25/23. Not sure what impact this will have, but it does mean that they are considering the bill earlier than expected.
03/30/23: HB-5917 has been moved to the House, on today's calendar, and it is imperative to immediately contact all your legislators, particularly your Representatives, to try to either stop the bill entirely, or remove Section 3.
03/27/23: Where do we go from here? Now that HB-5917 has been moved out of the Transportation Committee, and will move to the House shortly, it is more important than ever to contact all your legislators, particularly your Representatives, to try to either stop the bill entirely, or remove Section 3.
In addition, consider sending letters to the Editor of your local Newspaper, to help raise public awareness and keep pressure on the Legislature.
Here is an example that was developed by several of our members, that can be used as a basis for your own letters:
Dear Editor,
Lawmakers are up to their old tricks at the State Capitol. A group with the unlikely name of "Vision Zero Council" and comprised of only state employees has formulated HB-5917, an act implementing the recommendations of the Vision Zero Council.
This group has put together a measure that includes the installation of red-light cameras at certain intersections, the installation of speed cameras, a universal helmet requirement for adult motorcyclists, increased powers for the Commissioner of Transportation under eminent domain, as well as mandated state programs for municipalities without any additional state funding. Most of these proposals have a long legislative history with little or no success. Lawmakers refer to such legislation as "Christmas tree" bills.
As a motorcycle rider and a taxpayer, I vehemently object to having a 40-year-old controversial proposal like an adult helmet requirement placed in this omnibus proposal. Whether you support removing that freedom of choice from adult riders or not, the issue deserves a clean up-or-down vote. I also fear the potential abuse of using cameras to enforce traffic safety laws. I always believed that was part of our police officers function.
With little or no private sector input Governor Lamont is trying an end-run vote on unpopular issues. According to the Webster dictionary, zero vision means "without sight". Obviously this group has little regard for such public concerns and wishes.
Remember, although as CMRA members we are most concerned about the helmet law provisions in Section 3, there are many other objectionable aspects of this bill in particular, and this sort of "Omnibus Bill" in general, that may encourage people who might not care about the helmet issue to oppose it's passage.
We want this bill to fail, for whatever reason!
03/17/23: In reviewing written testimony submitted by suporters of the helmet law, those who give reasons seem to always make claims that "ample evidence", or even "overwhelming evidence" shows that helmet laws reduce fatalities and serious injuries. This would be hard to argue against - IF IT WERE TRUE! And yet, they never actually submit any such evidence, which is not surprising, since it does NOT exist!
Unfortunately, Legislators typically do not know the facts. This is why it is extremely important that every Legislator be supplied with a copy of this study. When contacting your Legislators, send them a copy, and ask them to provide any actual evidence (actual data, not just unsupported hearsay) that supports helmet laws.
03/11/23: Late-breaking news: Video of the 03/10/23 Transportation Committee meeting is available here. There is a lot of dead-air at the beginning, as the meeting started late.
As usual, this meeting is quite long, with most of the time spent on other issues, but the part relating to HB-5917 appears at the following approximate time: 2:31-3:12 (that's starting two hours and thirty-one minutes into the video).
Unfortunately (from our point of view) the bill has been passed by the Committee (22 to 14) with Section 3 intact, so it still is requiring helmet use by ALL motorcyclists.
It will then go (with possibly a few stops along the way) to be voted on by the House as a whole, so you should contact your own State Representatives and politely but firmly express your opposition to Section 3(a). Clog their phone lines, fill their email in-boxes, bury them with paper mail!
If it passes the House vote, it will then go to the Senate to be voted on, so you should also contact your State Senators in the same manner.
In all cases, consider bringing this study to their attention.
The text of the bill (as voted on) can be read here.
03/09/23: Late-breaking news: It appears that the Transportation Committee plans to move forward and vote tomorrow (03/10/23) to pass
HB5917: AN ACT IMPLEMENTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE VISION ZERO COUNCIL.
without removing or altering section 3(a), which imposes mandatory helmet use for all motorcyclists!
Call the Transportation Committee at (860)240-0590 first thing Friday (03/10/23) morning saying: "As a CMRA member, I feel we have been betrayed by the Committee's decision to include a universal helmet requirement in HB-5917".
Contact all of the members of the Transportation Committee (particularly if you are a registered voter in their district), and let them know how you feel about this.
03/08/23: A new bill has been introduced that may be of interest to our members.
SB-1195: AN ACT ESTABLISHING SECONDARY TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS.
Currently before the Judiciary Committee, this rather lengthy bill seems to be primarily intended to reduce in-person traffic stops by defining certain violations as "secondary" and making those insufficient in themselves to justify a traffic stop. Unfortuately this includes language in Section 2(6) and 2(60) that defines an "autocycle" to be considered as a type of "motorcycle", something that we have been opposed to for some time now. It should be noted that this definition has also appeared elsewhere in proposed legislation.
02/22/23: Several new bills have been introduced that may be of interest to our members.
SB-955: AN ACT CONCERNING ANATOMICAL GIFTS.
Currently before the Public Health Committee, this includes language in Section 2 that appears to have been stimulated by Senator Looney's SB-96 (see below), a bill that should never have been introduced, let alone be considered seriously by the legislature.
This language would set up a study of how many motorcyclists got killed over the last ten years while riding without a helmet, and how many of these were voluntary organ donors.
SB-955 was introduced by the Public Health Committee after consideration of SB-96 was turned over to them.
SB-1036: AN ACT ESTABLISHING A GREATER HARTFORD REGIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TASK FORCE TO COMBAT ILLEGAL ROADWAY TRAFFIC ACTIVITY.
Currently before the Public Safety Committee, this bill basically repeats the contents of HB-5494 (see below) with a slightly lower emphasis on motorcycles.
HB-6745: AN ACT CONCERNING THE CONSTRUCTION OF NOISE BARRIERS, A PLAN IMPLEMENTING A STATE-WIDE DECIBEL LEVEL TESTING PROGRAM AND IDLING MOTOR VEHICLES.
Currently before the Transportation Committee, section 2 of this bill modifies last year's Public Act No. 22-44, to the extent of giving the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles until October 1st to submit a plan for noise testing vehicles (including motorcycles) at official emissions inspection stations. The current requirement was for a plan to be submitted by January 1st of this year, which apparently didn't happen.
Section 3 of this bill allows ticketing of any operators who let their vehicle idle for more than three minutes, without allowing for things like red lights or traffic jams that may cause delays in excess of that time.
02/02/23: With regard to Senator Looney's proposed
SB-96: AN ACT ESTABLISHING A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION THAT PERSONS KILLED IN A MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENT WHILE RIDING WITHOUT A HELMET WISH TO DONATE THEIR ORGANS.
The American Motorcyclist Association sent an opposition letter to Senator Looney's office.
They also set up an "Action Alert" page here to help people submit their own feelings on this issue.
Special thanks to the AMA, and to Patrick and Karima Mastrolillo for taking the initiative to bring this matter to the AMA's attention.
02/02/23: We also need to keep an eye on:
HB5494: AN ACT ESTABLISHING A GREATER HARTFORD REGIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TASK FORCE TO COMBAT ILLEGAL ROADWAY TRAFFIC ACTIVITY.
This bill is extremely vague, and I'm not sure what the drafter's intent is, but it includes the following language "to combat illegal traffic activities on area roadways committed by organized groups of individuals riding motorcycles".
01/31/23: In spite of some technical difficulties, the public hearing on HB5917 was held yesterday.
Surprisingly, our usual opponents did not appear to speak in favor of the helmet law provisions.
Written Testimony can be seen here. Although not obvious, if you click on the title of any testimony, the text of it can be read.
Support for a universal helmet law appears in the following written testimony: Kevin Borrup-page 2; Kenneth Cains-page 1; Garrett Eucalitto-page 2; Tara Gill-pages 1, 10, 18 and 19 of her 70 page "brochure-ware" testimony; Gannon Long-pages 1-2; Aishwarya Pillai-page 1; Kerri Ana Provost-page 2; Antonio Riera; and Steven Winter. Where the testimony attempts to justify unuversal helmet use, these almost all rely on repeating long-discreditted, misleading and inaccurate propaganda spread by NHTSA as "evidence". The one exception being Ms. Provost who has mixed feelings on the issue and takes the trouble to write a very well thought out discussion of why.
Opposition to the helmet law appears in the following: Ryder FitzGerald; Diana Frink; Michael Garabedian; Peter Lessor; Karima Mastrolillo; Patrick Mastrolillo; Christopher Oberg; Richard Paukner (of course!), and Geoff Viscount. Of these, Ryder FitzGerald and Richard Paukner include data to support their opposition.
The remainder of the testimony focuses on other sections of the bill.
Special thanks to those of you who submitted testimony.
Written testimony may still be submitted here.
A video of the 01/30/23 public hearing before the Transportation committee is now available here.
This hearing ran more than five hours, with most of the time spent on other issues, but the spoken testimony relating to mandatory helmet laws appears at the following approximate times: Opposition to the helmet law was expressed at approximately 1:48-2:34 (that's starting at one hour and forty-eight minutes into the video) by Rich Paukner; 3:47-3:49 by Ryder FitzGerald; and 3:50-3:53 by Geoff Viscount. Support for the universal helmet law appears briefly at 0:10:29-0:10:55 Garrett Eucalitto (that's a bit more than ten minutes into the hearing) and at 4:22-4:23 by Alec Slatky (four hours and twenty-two minutes into the hearing.
If I missed any other references to the helmet law, please let me know here.
01/26/23: Attention CMRA members:
HB5917: AN ACT IMPLEMENTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE VISION ZERO COUNCIL.
Section 3(a) (starting at line 56) of this proposed legislation would remove the words "under eighteen years of age", thus requiring ALL motorcyclists to wear helmets.
As usual, there was hardly any advance warning, and the "Public Hearing" is scheduled for Monday, January 30 (yep, this coming Monday, 9:00 am).
To further complicate matters, because of continuing health concerns, this "Public" hearing is being conducted via Zoom, rather than in person.
If you wish to speak, you must sign up now.
Registration will close on Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 3:00 P.M. Speaker order of approved registrants will be listed in a randomized order and posted on the Transportation Committee website on Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 6:00 P.M. under Public Hearing Testimony.
We would like as many of you as possible to sign up for speaking, even if you don't actually speak - that will show that this is not something that is being overlooked.
Written testimony may be submitted here.
If you do not have internet access, you may provide testimony via telephone. To register to testify by phone, call the Phone Registrant Line at 860-240-0593 to leave your contact information.
If you are unsure of who your legislators are here is a current list of all State Senators and Representatives, along with their districts and links to their websites where contact info can be found.
If any of the Transportation Committee members are from your Legislative district(s) it is very important to let them know how you feel about this!
01/25/23: We are also monitoring the following bills:
HB5984: AN ACT CONCERNING MOTOR VEHICLE NOISE POLLUTION.
and
HB-6166: AN ACT CONCERNING LOUD AND EXCESSIVE MOTOR VEHICLE NOISE.
Although neither of these bills are specific to motorcycles, if enacted they will have an impact on all motorists.
01/13/23: The following legislation has been proposed by Senator Martin Looney:
SB-97: AN ACT REQUIRING THE USE OF HELMETS BY MOTORCYCLE OPERATORS AND PASSENGERS UNDER TWENTY-ONE YEARS OF AGE.
and
SB-96: AN ACT ESTABLISHING A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION THAT PERSONS KILLED IN A MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENT WHILE RIDING WITHOUT A HELMET WISH TO DONATE THEIR ORGANS.
The first is just a rehash of the effort to require helmet use by motorcyclists under 21 (as opposed to the current, under 18 requirement), similar to 2020's SB148 and 2022's HB 5255. The second singles out motorcyclists for special, and predjudicial treatment.
Proposed bill 96 may have some legal repercussions in as much as the matter of choice determining the donation of an organ is already in effect in CT statues. The question of organ donation can't be arbitrarily presumed, after being involved in a mishap without a helmet, for multiple religious and medical reasons.
The CMRA (as an organization) has voted, in the past, not to oppose changing the age limit, in order to focus on opposing any universal helmet-use legislation. However, I know that many individual motorcyclists are opposed to ANY attempts to impose any legislation that singles out motorcyclists for unfair and discriminatory treatment.
01/07/23: Attention CMRA members: The 2023 Legislative Session began 01/04/23.
Check this page for updates as they become available.
Here is a current list of all State Senators and Representatives, along with their districts and links to their websites where contact info can be found.
