Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Pacific Northwet - Where it's green. And wet.' started by Byway Writer, Jan 22, 2015.
Are we still using this thread for 2017 legislation? If so, there's another bill that's been introduced to allow lane-splitting in Oregon...
This may have been posted already......I got it today.
Subject: Bill for lane splitting in WA for motorcycles
There is a bill to make lane splitting with restrictions legal in WA. The below makes sense and as you know I experienced lane splitting in CA and it works well.
Below highlights the bill. First link below is to support it and to contact the representatives via AMA (takes about 1 minute).
2nd link is to the bill itself.
The operator of a motorcycle ((shall not)) may overtake and pass in the same lane occupied by the vehicle being overtaken. No person shall operate a motorcycle between lanes of traffic or between adjacent lines or rows of vehicles unless the operator of a motorcycle is traveling at a rate of speed no more than ten miles per hour over the speed of traffic flow and not more than thirty-five miles per hour. Any operator of a motor vehicle that intentionally impedes or attempts to prevent any operator of a motorcycle from operating his or her motorcycle as permitted under this subsection is guilty of a traffic infraction.
Please get as many of your family and friends (including their families and friends) to contact the representatives and to support this bill.
Let’s make it legal!
HB1157 will not even get a hearing before the House Transportation Committee (that is the first step) unless committee chairman Judy Clibborn has a change of heart.
If you want to take a stab at politely changing her mind, her email address is:
Judy was the "point man" on the idea of I-90 tolling. After years of saying "never", all of a sudden she embraced it warmly.
So I embraced my email address book, and emailed everyone I knew at the time, including all the reps in my then district (Judy's) asking them to vote her out of office. I cc'd her as well. It didn't take long before she modified her position.
I wouldn't trust JC to give me the time of day correctly.
I just read in City Bike, a motorcycle magazine out of San Francisco that the people pushing this went down to Cal and got safety dats to help support it. It's never going to happen if we don't push it. Write your reps, tell them bikes get 50 miles to the gallon, good for the environment, weigh less, goods for the roads, park any where, and, based on a report I think in Belgium, if ten percent of the of people now in cars, rode, traffic congestion would decrease by 40%. And of course it's safer, take it from an ex Californian. Or just klick the "support" button. Takes five minutes.
That Belgian study and the reduction of traffic congestion is a huge talking point that rarely gets discussed. Lean on it. Hard.
Talking points from Larry Walker:
Lane Sharing Discussion Points:
Accidents will not increase.
By moving between lanes the need to scan the rear 180 degrees of area is eliminated, and the need to side scan is lessened, allowing the rider to concentrate forwards, locating potential conflicts well in advance.
Maximum speed differential between bikes and autos will be 10 MPH (15 FPS) allowing a 2-3 car length minimum distance for rider reaction.
Injuries will not increase.
A study done by UC Berkley indicated that the optimum speed differential between a motorcycle splitting lanes and the surrounding traffic should be in the 10 MPH range. With the 10 MPH (15 FPS) speed differential any collisions that might occur will be more as a bump or brush than the catastrophic collisions that could occur at greater differential speeds incident with a rear end collision.
Vehicles will not change lanes into motorcycles.
With the 2-3 (minimum) car length advance scan available riders will see the potential lane change situation developing well enough in advance to mitigate the hazard. Any spot opening up in a lane that will allow a vehicle to change lanes will be spotted by the rider as it opens up so that they can respond appropriately.
As an overtaking vehicle, a motorcycle will still bear the responsibility incumbent with being an overtaking vehicle.
Enforcement will not be any more difficult than with the current statute.
Enforcement could even be easier, as an officer could make the discretionary call that lane sharing/splitting is being done in a safe and sane manner, therefore no enforcement pursuit is necessary.
High speed lane splitting (illegal under current and potential statutes) will continue to be problematic for pursuit and apprehension.
Hat tip to @Grahamcracker for spotting another ludicrously stupid bill proposed in Oregon. Copied directly from his thread:
Once again law makers are coming after poor people and our cool old vehicles. A proposed bill is calling for a $1000 dollar fee every 5 years for motorized vehicles over the age of 20 years.
I'm all for saving the planet, but don't penalize us that can fix and maintain our vehicles that we already have. Let's call our state reps about this money grab and see if we can't stop it. I'm not sure who proposed the bill but will post their phone when I find out.
It's been proposed by the Committee on Revenue, chaired by Phil Barnhart. You can email him here: https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/barnhart
FYI - it seems as though SB 5378 in WA is moving on to the rules committee.
Here are their email addresses:
I got a invalid email response for Annettee Cleveland.
I also got a canned response from Marko Liilas, vaguely saying he will look at supporting it.
Thank you for taking the time to contact me. I always appreciate hearing from my constituents on what issues are important to our community.
I strongly believe it important to have laws on the books that protect the rights of motorcyclists with the greater cause of safety for all our motorists. I have been a champion for more efficiencies in our transportation systems to increase safety and reduce congestion. As this bill continues through the legislature, I will keep your thoughts in mind.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me. It is essential for me to hear what folks have to say about the issues and programs that affect them. I hope that you will stay in touch so that I can be a better advocate for our community. Feel free to contact me again should you have any other questions, comments, or concerns.
Fixed - thanks
I've had that same response from him, a few times now. I assume a staffer just copy/paste/sends it. Do any senators actually read their mail? Is there any point to making a thoughtful reasoned appeal?
Rep. Blake and Sen Takko both sent what looked/read like personal responses albeit sent through a staffer.
Some do more than others.
Sometimes you are SOL.
Most other times it comes down to the quality of the legislator and/or the quality of your mail.
@tod701 Forgive my ignorance what does this mean on SB5378? "On motion, referred to Rules Green Sheet for second reading."