HELMET LAW:  REPEAL

House Bill 4747

Sponsor:  Rep. Richard LeBlanc

Committee:  Regulatory Reform

Complete to 3-24-10

A SUMMARY OF HOUSE BILL 4747 AS INTRODUCED 3-31-09

The bill would eliminate the requirement that a person of any age operating or riding on a motorcycle wear a crash helmet.

Currently, a person operating or riding on a motorcycle must wear a crash helmet approved by the Department of State Police. 

House Bill 4747 would amend the Michigan Vehicle Code (MCL 257.658) to specify that a person operating or riding on a motorcycle may, but would not be required to, wear a crash helmet.  The requirement that a person less than 19 years of age must wear a crash helmet if operating a moped on a public street would remain in force.

FISCAL IMPACT:

A fiscal analysis is in process. However, in discussing similar bills in previous legislative sessions, it was estimated that both the state and local units of government could experience increased operational costs due to increased insurance premiums. The state could also experience additional costs in the Medicaid program. This bill relaxes the requirements for crash helmet use and it is expected that injuries and fatalities would increase as a result of lower helmet use. With the potential for more injuries, the expectation is that insurance costs may go up and Medicaid assistance would increase.

Also, by eliminating the requirement for operators of motorcycles to wear crash helmets, local and state law enforcement would no longer be able to issue tickets for operation of a motorcycle without a helmet.  When tickets are written under statute, the civil fine revenue goes to libraries.  If the ticket is written under local ordinance, the civil fine revenue is split between the local court funding unit and the local government.

                                                                                           Legislative Analyst:   Susan Stutzky

                                                                                                  Fiscal Analyst:   Ben Gielczyk

■ This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House staff for use by House members in their deliberations, and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.