2018 General Election
ABATE of Alaska
Board and Officers
November 16, 2017
General Membership Meeting
Inside the Peppermill at the Sea Galley
If you have not yet mailed in your ballot,
Join us as of our business member Team CC
We hope to see you at the
We have published our end-of-season newsletter for October 2017!
We’ve had a busy year and you, the membership, have helped make it a very strong one!
You may download the newsletter and read it from here:
(In order to reduce costs and continue to be good stewards of your ABATE funds, we are now sending the newsletters only electronically. If this is an issue for you, please reply to this email or contact us at a meeting to get a hard copy. We will have hard copies available at the November General membership meeting!)
Thank you all for supporting ABATE of Alaska!
Push for Helmets
|Reprinted with permission from the
Motorcycle Riders Foundation
October 20, 2015
| Right now, the push for motorcycle helmet laws is stronger than ever. It’s bigger than a handful of the usual government agencies pushing for mandatory helmet laws—it is that, of course—but there is another factor at work as well: child safety. It’s a very natural thing, the desire to protect children. Many skate parks, BMX parks, horse rides, go-carting, etc. all now require helmets for youngsters, and we are okay with that. So long as that attitude continues, the likelihood of keeping states helmet-law free gets slimmer.
Agencies and departments all over the country are pushing for helmet laws, and it’s getting nasty. Recently at the State Motorcycle Administrators annual conference the Vice President of Government Relations for the Governors Highway Safety Association, Erik Strickland, touted the benefits of an Obama-backed transportation plan that would have given back to the federal Department of Transportation the ability to lobby state legislatures about implementing helmet laws. Then in the next breath he referred to the language in the transportation bill currently working its way through Congress (and is likely to pass soon). Specifically, he called the language to stiffen the lobby ban so that it would apply to the whole of the federal government, state governments and local governments, “A real pain in the ass.” That bill also contains language that would commission a study to determine the best practices to avoid motorcycle crashes in the first place, thus saving lives instantly. Is that also a “real pain in the ass,” Erik Strickland? That, folks, is your governor’s direct pipeline for ideas for state law.
In a recent publication by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, they had a two-page article about the actions the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has taken to enforce helmet laws by law enforcement officers. The proposed rule by the safety agency would effectively give law enforcement the ability to pull over and, after a visual inspection, ticket (or worse) any motorcyclist wearing a helmet that the officer felt did not meet the new appropriate standards. Should this rule become final—and that is almost a certainty at this point—any helmet that to a traffic cop appears to be less than one inch in thickness gives that cop the authority to pull you over for further inspection. Of course the Insurance Institute publication just echoed the same un-truths that all of the other safety groups march out. It is interesting and troubling that the agencies that are charged with making things safer—most of whom do not ride motorcycles—don’t care to listen to the very people they are trying to protect. Bureaucracy at its best.
Then to make things stranger, in the Wall Street Journal this week was an article about groups of bicyclists who are opposing mandatory bicycle helmet laws. They say mandatory helmet laws, particularly for adults, make cycling less convenient and seem less safe, thus hindering the larger public-health gains of more people riding bikes. They think that more bicycles on the street will result in a greater degree of visibility in numbers and therefore reduce injuries and fatalities. Cycling advocates are quick to say they’re not anti-helmet. Instead, they’re opposed to helmet laws and their unintended consequences. Sound familiar? Helmet laws make strange bedfellows.
But all is not lost. We need to stay engaged and active. We, the guardians of motorcycling, must do what those before us (and those before them) have done. A fight is brewing and we need to be ready. The forward force to pass mandatory helmet laws is swelling. We need to push back with a tidal wave.
To start that wave, you should email your new best friend, Erik “pain in the ass” Strickland, Vice President of Federal Relations for the Governors Highway Safety Association. You can reach him here: email@example.com or give him a ring at his direct line, 202-789-0942 x180
Tell him the MRF sent you!
All Information contained in this release is copyrighted. Reproduction permitted with attribution. Motorcycle Riders Foundation. All rights reserved. Ride With The Leaders ™ by joining the MRF at http://motorcycleridersfoundation.wildapricot.org/page-1654836 or call (202) 546-0983
You are receiving this message because you opted in at http://motorcycleridersfoundation.wildapricot.org/. If you choose to not receive these alerts moving forward, please click the unsubscribe button or contact the office at: firstname.lastname@example.org(202) 546-0983
Mayor Sullivan has proclaimed June 20th as Ride To Work Day! Please read the attached proclamation of his directing motorcycles and scooters free public (MOA meters and lots) parking that day!
WHEREAS, scooters and motorcycles use comparatively less fuel, cause less pollution and have little impact on our infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, scooters and motorcycles require only a fraction of space taken by other; and
WHEREAS, the price of fossil fuels is growing and supply is diminishing; and
WHEREAS, the use of fossil fuels continues to damage our health by adding to pollution and risking our future through global warming; and
WHEREAS, our infrastructure repairs fail to keep pace with its degradation; and
WHEREAS, for these reasons, scooters and motorcycles offer a form of daily transportation to be encouraged; and
WHEREAS, June 20, 2011 has been designated as “Ride To Work Day” to highlight the positive daily use of scooters and motorcycles; and
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Dan Sullivan, Mayor of the City of Anchorage, Alaska, do hereby proclaim June 20, 2011, to be
“Ride to Work Day”
and to encourage scooter and motorcycle riders to ride to work on that day, and pursuant thereto, do further direct that on June 20, 2011 parking at meters and in publicly owned garages in the City of Anchorage will be free of charge to motorcycles and scooters in recognition of their utilitarian value and to encourage the daily use of those vehicles.
NEW YORK, Feb. 18, 2011 /PRNewswire/ — Motorcyclists across the nation are awaiting a decision from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York which they hope will declare New York’s “motorcycle only” roadway checkpoints to be unconstitutional. The case Wagner et al. v. The County of Schenectady, et al. could end up in the United States Supreme Court. The checkpoints, which target well-known motorcycle events, force motorcyclists traveling to and from those events to leave the roadway, regardless of any wrongdoing, and have their vehicles and equipment inspected for safety and non-safety equipment violations and stolen VIN numbers. Motorcyclists have been detained as long as 45 minutes in makeshift stockades while undergoing the inspections. The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration recently began Federal funding for motorcycle checkpoints nationwide in order to assess their effectiveness despite objections raised by members of Congress.
The New York lawsuit is the first to challenge the constitutionality of motorcycle checkpoints. The plaintiffs are being represented by Proner & Proner, a plaintiffs personal injury law firm with a long history of doing “pro bono” legal work on behalf of motorcyclists. The Proner firm commenced the lawsuit on behalf of four motorcyclists who were detained at two separate checkpoints.
The checkpoints are funded by a grant from the New York Governor’s Traffic Safety Committee and the troopers who work them are paid overtime. Although the stated purpose of the checkpoints is to promote safety, the majority of the more than a thousand tickets which were issued during the first year of the checkpoints had nothing to do with safety and instead focused on non-safety violations such as loud pipes. The written guidelines for the checkpoints specifically state that one of the purposes of the checkpoints is to look for stolen and forged VINs and the police readily admit that they often have undercover members of their gang and auto theft units working the checkpoints looking for signs of criminal activity.
The Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly made it clear that any roadway checkpoint whose primary purpose is general crime control constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment and is presumptively unconstitutional. Notwithstanding that fact, the progress reports which the police prepared on the checkpoints specifically state that the grant funds are used “for overtime for intelligence gathering and the subsequent criminal and traffic enforcement.” The police admit that the checkpoints, which focus only on equipment violations and forged and stolen VINs, do not address any of the major causes of motorcycle accidents such as reckless driving, driver inattentiveness and alcohol impairment.
Lawyers for the Plaintiff Riders and Defendant State Police are both seeking summary judgment on the Fourth Amendment claims. The future of motorcyclists’ rights hangs in the balance.
For more information contact: Mitchell Proner 212 986-3030 or MProner@Prolaw1.com
ABATE of Georgia: http://www.abatega.org/state_director.htm
As many of you know, the State of Georgia received $70,000.00 from the NHSTA for Motorcycle ONLY Safety Check Points. They will stop all Motorcycles at these Check Points.
We were informed by unnamed sources that the Check Points would start in early March to coincide with The Daytona Bike Week Event. Most points of entry to Florida will be involved.
We are anticipating them to start March 3rd in order to take advantage of the additional flow of Motorcycle traffic thru our State.
I was told that the officers conducting the safety check points have been trained in what to check for so be sure you, your paper work and your bike are in order.
We understand that this is just a way to increase revenues so do all you can to avoid adding to the state funds.
There are many who Trailer into Georgia and ride into Florida from here. You may wish to change your plans and trailer on through to Florida
Dan Forrest, State Director of A.B.A.T.E. Georgia
SB219 was heard again in the senate finance committee this morning.
Senator Charlie Huggins offered up an amendment to an amendment to remove the language that ABATE opposes, thanks in large part to the work and letters from Scott Hamman of Kenai ABATE.
Senator Donnie Olsen ask that the bill again be held so he can look further into the ramification of the mandatory helmet clause, would place on his constituents out in the bush where they do not have helmets readily available from purchase. This in my opinion a very good sign.
HB262 – May Is Motorcycle Awareness Month Has passed it first hurdle in the House. With very high praise from the legislators HB262 was passed unanimously out of the House Transportation Committee on Iits way to the house for a vote on the floor.
03-19-10 I forgot to menstion in the earlier post that there was one admenment to this bill. It was amended to say Motorcycle and Motor-scooter Awareness Month. One of the legislators is a motor-scooter rider.
Bills that I worked on while in the Capital
HB 181 Mandatory Headlight Bill
SB73 Mandatory Headlight Bill
SB219 Brain Trauma Bill – This bill has six to eight words that need to be removed because it is a back door to mandatory helmet laws. Scott Hamman found this and told me about the night before I left for Juneau.
HB328 Brain Trauma Bill dropped in the house while I was there.
I also touch lightly on the cell phone bills while I was there but they do not look like they are going to make it. The above bills pose more harm to us than passage of the cell phone bills.
I arrived on Wed. Feb 10 and met with Rep. Wes Keller from Wasilla, He has introduced HB 262 “Motorcycle Awareness Month”
I also met with Rep Herron’s (JUD) staff to discuss HB 181 and told them of our concerns of the brain trauma language coming from the senate bill.
I then spent the rest of my time making appointments with Senators to work on the senate bills
Later that night I met with Dan McCrummen and Bob Heflin. Dan is the President and Bob Is the Legislative Affairs Officer of Juneau ABATE. We discussed all of the legislation that we want to work on this year. Bob will join me in my meetings Thursday afternoon.
Thursday Feb 11.
Met with Rep Ramaras (Chair- JUD) Discussed HB 181, SB 73, SB 219. He told me he does not see 181 moving this year.
Met with Rep Gruensburg (JUD) staff. Discussed HB 181, SB 73, SB 219. While I was there a Blogger came in and interviewed me. During the interview Rep Gruensburg came into the office. He talked to the staff member and came out and grabbed me. He is a co-sponsor on 181. We had a real good talk about the safety aspect of the bill. While he did not come off his support of the bill, he did insist that I testify as to our concerns of the bill if it comes up for a hearing. In fact he said he was going to call me to insure that I know when it comes up.
That afternoon Bob and I met with the following:
Senator Steddman (Co-Chair Finance) Staff
Senator Thomas (FIN) Staff
Rep. Gatto (JUD)
Senator Olsen (FIN) Staff
Rep. Dahlstrum (JUD) Staff
Friday Feb 12.
I met with Rep. Kawasaki the sponsor of HB 181 and told him of our concerns with the bill. He told me that he was still going to push it and I can respect that. I did not have any thoughts that I would be able to change his mind. It was a courtesy visit anyway.
I met with Rep. Lynn (JUD)
Met with Senator Menard for a courtesy visit as she is the sponsor of SB 73
Met with Senator McGuire’s Staff she sponsored SB 219. We had a real good chat about the language. However we could not get it changed because it is schedualed for a hearing Monday Feb 15 at 1:30pm I will be there to testify. I also found out that they plan on changing the language of the bill to mirror HB328.
Costs for the trip
Here is a vidio of what I was explaining to the legisators about the Headlight bill
These Bills are different from each other in wording, but our objections are the same in both bills.
I believe that HB328 will be the laungage of both bills when all is said and done. Senator McGuire’s staff told me that they will be offering the lauguage of HB328 into her bill SB219. The senate bill will become SB219R. Because of this I have not included the laugage of SB219
I’ve marked through the lauguage that we object through in each bill
HOUSE BILL NO. 328
IN THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
TWENTY-SIXTH LEGISLATURE – SECOND SESSION
BY REPRESENTATIVES JOHNSON, Dahlstrom, Peggy Wilson, Herron, Cissna, Buch
Referred: Health and Social Services, Finance
FOR AN ACT ENTITLED
1 “An Act establishing a traumatic or acquired brain injury program and registry within
2 the Department of Health and Social Services; and relating to medical assistance
3 coverage for traumatic or acquired brain injury services.”
4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA:
5 * Section 1. AS 18.15.360(a) is amended to read:
6 (a) The department is authorized to collect, analyze, and maintain databases of
7 information related to
8 (1) risk factors identified for conditions of public health importance;
9 (2) morbidity and mortality rates for conditions of public health
11 (3) community indicators relevant to conditions of public health
12 importance; [AND]
13 (4) longitudinal data on traumatic or acquired brain injury from
14 the registry established under AS 47.80.500(c)(1); and
1 (5) any other data needed to accomplish or further the mission or goals
2 of public health or provide essential public health services and functions.
3 * Sec. 2. AS 47.07.030(b) is amended to read:
4 (b) In addition to the mandatory services specified in (a) of this section and the
5 services provided under (d) of this section, the department may offer only the
6 following optional services: case management services for traumatic or acquired
7 brain injury; case management and nutrition services for pregnant women; personal
8 care services in a recipient’s home; emergency hospital services; long-term care
9 noninstitutional services; medical supplies and equipment; advanced nurse practitioner
10 services; clinic services; rehabilitative services for children eligible for services under
11 AS 47.07.063, substance abusers, and emotionally disturbed or chronically mentally ill
12 adults; targeted case management services; inpatient psychiatric facility services for
13 individuals age 65 or older and individuals under age 21; psychologists’ services;
14 clinical social workers’ services; midwife services; prescribed drugs; physical therapy;
15 occupational therapy; chiropractic services; low-dose mammography screening, as
16 defined in AS 21.42.375(e); hospice care; treatment of speech, hearing, and language
17 disorders; adult dental services; prosthetic devices and eyeglasses; optometrists’
18 services; intermediate care facility services, including intermediate care facility
19 services for the mentally retarded; skilled nursing facility services for individuals
20 under age 21; and reasonable transportation to and from the point of medical care.
21 * Sec. 3. AS 47.07.030 is amended by adding a new subsection to read:
22 (e) In this section,
23 (1) “case management services for traumatic or acquired brain injury”
25 (A) care and service coordination to assist individuals and
26 families affected by traumatic or acquired brain injury to minimize the
27 disabling effects of the injury;
28 (B) collaboration with providers and other organizations to
29 expand and strengthen the local capacity for delivery of needed services,
30 including housing, for the care and support of a recipient who is diagnosed
31 with traumatic or acquired brain injury;
1 (C) participation in planning and accessing services within the
2 community for the care and support of a recipient who is diagnosed with
3 traumatic or acquired brain injury;
4 (D) the provision of information, referral, and case consultation
5 services to a recipient who is diagnosed with traumatic or acquired brain
7 (2) “traumatic or acquired brain injury” has the meaning given in
8 AS 47.80.590.
9 * Sec. 4. AS 47.07 is amended by adding a new section to read:
10 Sec. 47.07.046. Traumatic or acquired brain injury services. (a) The
11 department shall provide traumatic or acquired brain injury services under a waiver in
12 accordance with 42 U.S.C. 1396 – 1396p (Title XIX, Social Security Act), this chapter,
13 and regulations adopted under this chapter, if the department has received approval
14 from the federal government and the department has appropriations allocated for the
15 purpose. In addition to the annual assessment required in (b) of this section, the
16 department shall establish in regulation additional standards for eligibility and
17 payment for the services.
18 (b) Before the department may terminate payment for services provided under
19 (a) of this section, the recipient must have had an annual assessment to determine
20 whether the recipient continues to meet the standards established by regulation under
21 (a) of this section.
22 (c) In this section, “traumatic or acquired brain injury” has the meaning given
23 in AS 47.80.590.
24 * Sec. 5. AS 47.80 is amended by adding new sections to read:
25 Article 5A. Traumatic or Acquired Brain Injury.
26 Sec. 47.80.500. Statewide traumatic or acquired brain injury program. (a)
27 A statewide traumatic or acquired brain injury program is established in the
28 department for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness and availability of
29 information and services for the prevention and treatment of traumatic or acquired
30 brain injury in the state. The department shall consult and collaborate with state
31 agencies, private nonprofit entities, and other organizations in the state that provide
1 brain injury services in implementing all aspects of the program.
2 (b) The program established under this section must include
3 (1) review and consideration of data collected under (c)(1) of this
5 (2) supervision and coordination of services provided to persons with
6 traumatic or acquired brain injury;
7 (3) evaluation of standards and laws pertaining to the prevention of
8 traumatic or acquired brain injury and to the treatment, care, and support of persons
9 with traumatic or acquired brain injury;
10 (4) assessment of the availability of acute and long-term treatment,
11 care, and support options in and outside the state for persons with traumatic or
12 acquired brain injury;
13 (5) evaluation of the need for and scope of community services for
14 persons with traumatic or acquired brain injury throughout the state;
15 (6) investigation of the models of service coordination that can be
16 replicated at a local level in the state;
17 (7) coordination and expansion of publicly and privately funded
18 residential and nonresidential acute and long-term services to persons with traumatic
19 or acquired brain injury, including education, referral, and home and community-
20 based services;
21 (8) facilitation of admissions to and discharges from acute and long-
22 term care facilities for the treatment of traumatic or acquired brain injury;
23 (9) identification and description of available treatment and care
24 facilities of all types for persons with traumatic or acquired brain injury based on
25 length of stay, patient capacity, available services, and barriers encountered to
26 community placement after discharge;
27 (10) a plan that describes recommendations for the development of a
28 statewide service delivery continuum of comprehensive rehabilitative, supportive
29 living, and community programs.
30 (c) The department shall
31 (1) establish and implement a traumatic or acquired brain injury
1 registry of information from service providers that includes
2 (A) health status, including age, cause, and severity of injury
3 and region of brain affected;
4 (B) acute recovery period;
5 (C) location of the
6 (i) event that caused the injury;
7 (ii) hospital treating the injury; and
8 (iii) residence of the person with traumatic or acquired
9 brain injury;
10 (D) access to and use of rehabilitation services, including
11 behavioral, vocational, and long-term care services;
12 (E) access to and use of neuropsychological assessment;
13 (F) status of long-term recovery at five-year intervals;
14 (G) financial and social effects on family;
15 (H) cost associated with services;
16 (2) establish standards and recommendations for improvement of
17 prevention, assessment, treatment, and care of persons with traumatic or acquired
18 brain injury in the state;
19 (3) contract with service providers and qualified entities to carry out
20 the purposes of this section;
21 (4) provide a standardized reporting form for use in gathering data for
22 the registry.
23 (d) In (c) of this section, “service provider” means a public or private entity
24 that provides health education, group shelter, or criminal justice services to individuals
25 in the state.
26 Sec. 47.80.590. Definition. In AS 47.80.500 – 47.80.590, “traumatic or
27 acquired brain injury” means an insult from physical force or internal damage to the
28 brain or its coverings, not of a degenerative or congenital nature, that produces an
29 altered mental state and that results in a decrease in cognitive, behavioral, emotional,
30 or physical functioning.
This above Highlighted laugage is what would allow them to write helmet laws if the laugage we want struck out is still in the bill when it is passed
HOUSE BILL NO. 181
IN THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
TWENTY-SIXTH LEGISLATURE – FIRST SESSION
BY REPRESENTATIVES KAWASAKI, Gruenberg
Referred: Transportation, Judiciary
FOR AN ACT ENTITLED
“An Act relating to the use of headlights when operating a motor vehicle.”
1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA:
2. * Section 1. AS 28.35 is amended by adding a new section to read:
3. Sec. 28.35.195. Use of headlights required. A person may not operate a
4. motor vehicle on a highway unless the headlight system required by law for that motor
5. vehicle is illuminated.
6. A person who violates this section is guilty of an infraction.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 73(JUD)
IN THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
TWENTY-SIXTH LEGISLATURE – FIRST SESSION
BY THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Sponsor(s): SENATORS MENARD, Paskvan
FOR AN ACT ENTITLED
1. “An Act relating to the use of headlights when operating a motor vehicle; and providing
2. for an effective date.”
3. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA:
4. * Section 1. AS 28.35 is amended by adding a new section to read:
5. Sec. 28.35.195. Use of headlights required. A person may not operate a
6. motor vehicle on a highway unless the headlight system required by law for that motor
7. vehicle is illuminated. A person who violates this section is guilty of an infraction.
8. * Sec. 2. This Act takes effect October 1, 2009.