2021-Ignition Interlock Report-Updated_V6

IGNITION INTERLOCK REPORT

Putting an End to Drinking and Driving Attempts

This report looks at ignition interlock stops from 2006 to 2020

Released January 2022

Embargoed until 10:00am ET on January 13, 2022

INTRO- DUCTIO

I gnition Interlocks Stop Drunk Driving and Save Lives. MADD’s efforts are driven by victims. This report honors victims and survivors who advocate for change to eliminate impaired driving through the passage of strong ignition interlock laws. Advocacy efforts of victims and survivors have helped save lives by preventing millions of drinking and driving attempts. Ignition interlocks are effective in changing behavior and are a valuable tool for saving lives and preventing injuries on our nation’s roads. However, these devices are vastly underutilized. It is more important than ever

that states strengthen ignition interlock laws and review impediments to getting these devices on offenders’ vehicles. During the COVID-19 pandemic, drunk driving fatalities increased 9% despite fewer vehicle miles traveled, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Courts, driver’s license agencies, and policy makers must double down in supporting ignition interlocks to ensure every drunk driver utilizes these lifesaving devices before ever driving unrestricted on the road.

2 Ignition Interlock Report

- ON

From 2006 to 2020, interlocks stopped 3.78 million attempts to drive drunk with a blood alcohol concentration of .08 or greater, including 390,456 attempts to drive drunk in 2020.

What is an ignition interlock? It is a device about the size of smart phone that requires a driver to blow into a mouthpiece to test their blood alcohol concentration before they can start a vehicle. If the device detects an alcohol level greater than allowed by the monitoring authority, it prevents the engine from being started.

Ignition Interlock Report 3

4 Ignition Interlock Report

By 2006, MADD had successfully advocated for .08 BAC laws and hundreds of other proven policies and countermeasures designed to reduce drunk driving fatalities and injuries. However, drunk driving was still too common, killing 13,500 people a year in 2006. Additionally, the percentage of drunk driving deaths to overall traffic deaths remained at the same level since 1995. To renew the call to stop drunk driving, in 2006 MADD launched a Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving. Since then, MADD has pushed state legislatures to require the use of ignition interlocks for every apprehended drunk driver. The Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving and Ignition Interlocks

Why the Push for Interlocks for Drunk Drivers?

Even with increased penalties, drunk driving has continued to be a national public health crisis. To complement existing anti-drunk driving countermeasures such as high-visibility law enforcement activities, MADD pursued a data-driven technological approach that is proven to stop drinking and driving. Research shows that interlocks are reliable, and that they effectively change behavior and save lives. Ignition interlocks accomplish what license suspension simply cannot— to separate drinking and driving and allow an apprehended drunk driver to continue daily activities, while not posing a serious safety risk to the motoring public.

Ignition Interlock Report 5

When MADD started a nationwide push for interlocks for every drunk driver in 2006, only one state, New Mexico, required the use of ignition interlocks for all drunk drivers. Today, 34 states and Washington, D.C. have enacted all-offender interlock laws. For more What MADD’s Advocacy for Ignition Interlocks Accomplished since 2006

than 14 years, MADD has successfully advocated for passage of over a hundred laws aimed at improving the implementation of laws throughout the United States.

EFFECTIVENESS OF IGNITION INTERLOCKS

Reduce repeat drunk driving offenses by 67% while the device is installed compared to license suspension alone. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011) Mandatory laws for all convicted drunk drivers reduce deaths by 16 percent (Insurance Institute for Auto and Highway Safety, 2018). Interlock is more effective than license suspension alone, as 50% to 75% of convicted drunk drivers continue to drive on a suspended license. (Nichols and Ross, 1990)

FIGURE 1.0

TOP FIVE STATES WITH THE MOST DRUNK DRIVING STOPS BY AN INTERLOCK

2006 to 2020

2020

Texas

371,345 357,946 298,401 184,148 147,435

Texas

34,367 28,281 28,078 26,989 17,835

Wisconsin California

Wisconsin California

Iowa

Iowa

Washington

Arkansas

Discussion

on the interlock until the driver learns how to drive sober again. The threat of extra time on the interlock could deter people from trying to drive drunk with a BAC of .08 or greater

As Texas and California have large populations, it is logical that these states are in the top five. But why do ignition interlocks stop so many drunk driving attempts in Wisconsin, Iowa, and Arkansas? The most likely answer is these three states lack a compliance-based removal aspect to their law. With a compliance-based law, multiple interlock device violations extend the time

6 Ignition Interlock Report

Ignition Interlock Report 7

Ignition interlocks are one of many tools that work together to fight drunk driving, but they are underutilized. The battle against drunk driving is far from over.

How States can Improve Implementation of Ignition Interlock Laws

All-offender law. All drunk drivers should use an interlock in order to drive. States should require the use of ignition interlocks in order to obtain any driving privileges for the duration of a license suspension or revocation. The duration on ignition interlock should be six months. Interlock available upon revocation or conviction. States still make drunk drivers wait days or months before having the opportunity to be taught to drive sober with an interlock. Ensuring these devices are available as soon as legally possible after a drunk driving offense will eliminate hoops drunk drivers must go through in order to guarantee they drive sober. No wait out of interlock order. Require successful use of an ignition interlock before the person can obtain unrestricted driving privileges. If a person does not comply with the interlock order, the person cannot obtain legal driving privileges. Compliance-based removal of interlock order. A person should only exit an interlock program after proving compliance with the interlock order. Multiple device violations should extend the time on the interlock until the person learns how to drive sober. Affordability program. An interlock costs the user around $3 a day to lease, which for six months costs around $500. A DUI conviction typically costs the offender more than $10,000. If an offender is determined indigent, the offender should pay less for the interlock with device vendors defraying the costs.

Interlocks for refusals. Nationally, one in five suspected drunk drivers refuse to submit to a test after being pulled over for driving under the influence. More than 30 states already require interlocks for refusals. Day-for-day credit for early installation. If a person installs an interlock after arrest, they should have the successful time on the interlock credited toward any DMV or court time required on the device. Ensure interlocks are part of every sentence for a drunk driver. According to MADD’s Court Monitoring Program, the average conviction rate of an original drunk driving charge is around 60%. Even under a mandatory law, interlocks may be waived as part of the plea deal or simply not ordered by a judge. As noted in the state overview of laws, some state interlock laws are not impacted by the threat of plea deals or diversion agreements thanks to strong DMV administered laws . Revenue neutral to the state. Drunk drivers who use an interlock should pay fees to courts or other agencies that implement the program so overhead is neutralized. Additionally, the interlock law should be implemented statewide, which typically requires the Driver’s License Agency to ensure every drunk driver used an interlock before being granted an unrestricted license.

To view a state-by-state breakdown on ignition interlock laws and how to improve on each law, please visit: www.madd.org/iidlaw

8 Ignition Interlock Report

DRUNK DRIVING STOPS BY AN IGNITION INTERLOCK FIGURE 1.1

2006 to 2020

2020 2,447 1,146 11,005 17,835 28,078 15,365 11,754 995 20 11,809 4,368 811 2,545 9,141 2,811 26,989 7,852 2,096 17,462 1,692 7,042 4,358 1,945 6,881 1,507 11,100 828 4,726 4,059 1,791 16,105 6,958 8,157 5,045 314 4,438 12,650 4,150 9,336 1,839 2,072 197 10,989 34,367 3,417 1,422 3,815 14,089 1,478 28,281 768 390,345

8,404 18,036 120,782 112,531 298,401 135,963 93,164 7,870 299 109,127 44,313 11,595 10,596 129,893 15,079 184,148 123,647 8,980 135,090 17,503 73,978 47,435 32,223 88,050 9,485 128,196 7,054 43,241 16,503 14,529 119,122 89,658 111,043 30,306 715 34,927 104,009 57,645 93,037 7,848 12,655 2,040 79,530 371,345

Alabama Alaska Arizona

Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware D.C. Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia

26,472 11,700 28,952 147,435 31,052 357,946 20,831 3,784,383

Wisconsin Wyoming Total

“Drunk driving stops” refers to attempts an ignition interlock prevented a person from driving with a breath alcohol concentration of .08 or greater. Data collected from ignition interlock vendors, from December 1, 2006 to December 31, 2020.

Ignition Interlock Report 9

GRADING IGNITION INTERLOCK LAWS FIGURE 1.2

Ignition interlocks are an invaluable and underused tool that can greatly reduce drunk driving. Most states are not maximizing the effectiveness of this tool. With drunk driving deaths increasing, it is time for states to double-down and ensure that all offenders utilize an ignition interlock during a license suspension period. MADD is calling on legislatures to take more action to close loopholes in drunk driving laws. MADD graded each state based on the following criteria:

A

B

C

D

F

100-90

80-89

70-79

60-69

0-59

WEIGHTED SCORE

LAW

DESCRIPTION OF SCORE

A CDC meta-analysis of interlocks studies found that ensuring all offenders use an interlock to drive during a license revocation or suspension is proven to reduce repeat offenses by 67% compared to license suspension alone. This category of the law is the most important and the most weighted in our grading chart. States still make drunk drivers wait days or months before having the opportunity to be taught how to drive sober with an interlock. Ensuring these devices are available as soon as legally possible after a drunk driving offense will eliminate hoops drunk drivers must go through to obtain an interlock. Many states first enacted a .15 BAC law before an all-offender law. Ensuring that interlocks are required for first-time convicted drivers with a BAC of .15 or greater is important. The biggest loophole that the majority of states have with their interlock law is the ability to wait out the use of an interlock following revocation. The best way to ensure that a drunk driver uses an interlock is to require the person to use the device before ever obtaining a legal unrestricted driver’s license. Studies on interlock found that once the device is off, the person can relapse and drive drunk again. Compliance-based removal extends a drunk driver’s use of an interlock when there are too many drunk driving attempts or other violations while utilizing the device. A drunk driving offense typically costs more than $10,000. An interlock for six months costs around $500 total. However, a person’s inability to fully cover the cost of an interlock should not exclude any drunk driver from this lifesaving device. According to NHTSA, nearly one in five suspected drunk drivers refuses to submit to a chemical test upon arrest. Ensuring that interlocks are a condition of any driving privileges granted for a refusal helps close loopholes, and the majority of states have enacted such laws. The post-adjudication licensing process varies greatly from state to state, which makes the implementation of credit for installing interlock prior to a court conviction order of the device very tricky. However, in the interest of preventing further drunk driving behavior, it is important to make an interlock available as soon as possible after an arrest and allow the time on the device to count toward any court or DMV issued interlock restriction. Plea deals or diversion agreements allow drunk drivers to avoid a conviction and fines. As noted in the state overview of laws, some state interlock laws are not impacted by the threat of plea deals or diversion agreements undermining the implementation of their interlock thanks to strong DMV administered law. However, through MADD’s Court Monitoring Program, we found that only three out of every five drunk drivers are convicted for their original DUI offense. What does this mean for ignition interlock use? This means that interlocks are a bargaining chip when it comes to convicting drunk drivers; because of plea deals with courts, drunk drivers are avoiding using ignition interlocks.

All-Offender

35

IID available upon revocation

11

IID required for 1st .15 BAC

10

No wait out of interlock

23

Compliance-based removal

9

Affordability program

2

IID Refusals

5

IID day for day credit

2

Interlocks as part of sentence for a drunk driver (plea/ diversion)

3

TOTAL

100

The grades are meant to encourage action in legislatures to improve drunk driving laws. MADD thanks prosecutors, law enforcement, highway safety officials and all of those involved with implementing current ignition interlock laws to keep the public safe.

10 Ignition Interlock Report

GRADING IGNITION INTERLOCK LAWS CONTINUED FIGURE 1.3

ALL-OF- FENDER (35)

REVOCA- TION (11)

NO WAIT- OUT (23)

AFFORD- ABILITY (2)

REFUSAL (5)

DAY-FOR- DAY (2)

PLEA DEAL (3)

TOTAL (100)

STATE

0.15 (10)

CBR (9)

GRADE

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecti- cut Delaware

35 35 35 35

5.5*

10 10 10 10

0 0

9 0 9 0 0 9

2 2 0 0 2 2

5 5 5 5 0 5

0 0 0 0

3 0

69.5

D+

0

52

F

5.5*

23 23

3** 3**

90.5

A-

11 11

87 14

B+

0

0

0

1*

0

F

35

0

10

11.5*

0

3**

75.5

C

35

0

10

23

9

0

5

0

3

85

B

35 35

0

10 10 10

5.75*

9 9 9 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 9 0 0 9

2 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2

5 0 0 0 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 0 5

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2

3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

69.75

D+

D.C.

11

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

67 19

D

Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana

0 0

0

F F

5.5*

0

5.5

35 35 35

11

10 10 10

63 55 72 29 61 75 74 55 47

D-

0

F

11 11 11

C-

0

0

F

Iowa

35 35 35 35 35 35

10 10 10 10 10 10

D-

Kansas

0

23

C C

Kentucky Louisiana

11

0 0 0

0 0

F F

Maine

Maryland Massa- chusetts Michigan Minnesota Missis - sippi Missouri Montana Nebraska

11

5.75*

79.75

C+

0

0

0

0

9

2

0

0

0

11

F

0 0

0

0 0

0 0

9 9

2 2

0 0

0 2

0 0

11 24

F F

11

35

11

10

0

9

2

5

2

0

74

C

35

11

10

0 0 0 0

9 0 0 9

2 0 2 2

0 0 5 5

0 0 2 2

0 0 0 0

67

D+

0

0

0 0

0

F F

35 35

5.5*

49.5

Nevada

11

10

74

C

New Hampshire

35

0

10

0

9

2

0

0

0

56

F

New Jersey New Mexico

0

0

66.5

D

35

5.5*

10

0

9

2

5

35

11

10

23

9

2

0

0

0

90

A-

New York North Carolina

35

11

10

0

9

2

0

2

0

69

D+

0

5.5*

10

0

0

2

5

0

0

22.5

F

North Dakota

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

F

Ohio

0

0 0 0

0

0 0 0

9 0 9

2 0 2

0 5 0

0 0 0

0 3 3

11 53 59

F F F

Oklahoma

35 35

10 10

Oregon

Ignition Interlock Report 11

GRADING IGNITION INTERLOCK LAWS CONTINUED FIGURE 1.3

Pennsyl- vania

0

5.5*

10

0

9

0

5

2

0

31.5

F

Puerto Rico Rhode Island

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

F

35

5.5*

10

0

9

0

5

0

0

64.5

D

South Carolina South Dakota

0

5.5*

10

11.5*

9

2

0

0

0

38

F

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

F

Tennessee

35 35 35 35 35

11 11

10 10 10 10 10

0 0 0 0 0

9 9 0 9 9

2 2 0 2 2

0 0 5 5 5

2 0 0 0 0

0 3 0

69 70 50 75 75

D+ C-

Texas

Utah

0

F

Vermont Virginia Washing- ton

11 11

3** 3**

C C

35

11

10

0

9

2

5

2

3

77

C+

West Virginia

35

11

10

0

9

2

5

2

0

74

C

Wisconsin

0

5.5*

10

11.5*

0

2

5

0

0

34

F

Wyoming

0

0

10

0

0

2

5

1*

0

18

F

AVERAGE

51.13

F

*Partial credit as aspect of law only applies to certain drunk drivers. **Strong administrative IID law neutralizes threat of plea deals to avoid interlock use.

The grades are meant to encourage action in legislatures to improve drunk driving laws. MADD thanks prosecutors, law enforcement, highway safety officials and all of those involved with implementing current drunk driving laws to keep the public safe.

12 Ignition Interlock Report

Ignition Interlock Report 13

Since 2006, ignition interlocks prevented 26 million attempts to drink and drive, including 3.4 million attempts to legally drive drunk.

MADD National Office 511 E. John Carpenter Freeway Suite 700

Irving, TX 75062 877.ASK.MADD 877.MADD.HELP 24-Hour Victim Help Line madd.org

© 2022 Mothers Against Drunk Driving ® Embargoed until 10:00am ET on January 13, 2022

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14

Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs