SSB 5890
In CommitteeSenate
Reckless driving, speed
Addressing reckless driving in cases involving excessive speed.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill expands Washington’s definition of reckless driving to include driving more than 30 mph over the speed limit, and adds new penalties and requirements—including mandatory ignition interlock devices and intelligent speed assistance technology—for certain reckless driving convictions, especially those linked to impaired driving or repeat offenses. It also creates a new probation period with strict monitoring rules.
- Adds a new category of reckless driving: driving more than 30 miles per hour over the posted speed limit, in addition to the existing standard of 'willful or wanton disregard' for safety.
- Maintains the current gross misdemeanor penalties (up to 364 days in jail and $5,000 fine) for reckless driving, but adds new post-suspension probation requirements.
- Requires a minimum 30-day license suspension for reckless driving convictions, with special rules for credit if the conviction stems from a DUI-related charge.
- Mandates ignition interlock devices for repeat offenders or for reckless driving convictions tied to impaired-driving charges (DUI, DWI, etc.).
- Introduces a 150-day probation period after license suspension, requiring installation and use of an intelligent speed assistance (ISA) device on all vehicles driven; violations during probation trigger additional suspensions.
Who is affected
- Drivers convicted of reckless driving — People convicted of reckless driving, especially those driving more than 30 mph over the limit or with prior impaired-driving convictions, face harsher penalties including longer license suspensions, mandatory ignition interlock devices, and new probation requirements involving speed-assist technology.
- Drivers with prior DUI or impaired-driving convictions — Drivers with prior impaired-driving convictions (e.g., DUI) who are later convicted of reckless driving may face longer license suspensions and mandatory use of ignition interlock devices for a longer period.
- Drivers whose licenses are suspended — People whose licenses are suspended for reckless driving may lose driving privileges for at least 30 days, and if they have prior offenses or are on probation, face additional suspensions or restrictions.
- People required to use intelligent speed assistance devices — People convicted of reckless driving must install and maintain an intelligent speed assistance (ISA) device on all vehicles they drive during a 150-day probation period after license suspension, or face additional penalties.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Creating a distinct, enhanced category for extreme speeding (>30 mph over limit) and requiring ignition interlock devices for reckless driving tied to impaired driving strengthens deterrence and reduces recidivism among high-risk drivers—evidence from other states shows ISA reduces speeding by 20–40%.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(ii), Sec. 2(3)(b)Mandating ignition interlock devices for repeat offenders and for reckless driving convictions arising from impaired driving aligns with best practices for reducing drunk driving recidivism; Washington’s existing interlock program has reduced DUI reoffending by 67% (WSDOT 2023 data).
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(b), Sec. 2(3)(a)The 150-day probation with ISA devices provides structured behavioral reinforcement and real-time monitoring to prevent repeat offenses, especially for drivers with prior impaired-driving convictions—targeting the highest-risk group for traffic fatalities.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(a), Sec. 2(4)(d)Allowing credit for time served under administrative suspension (e.g., from a DUI stop) ensures fairness and reduces unnecessary license suspension overlap, preventing arbitrary double punishment for the same incident.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(b)Clarifying that ISA use does not excuse unsafe driving reinforces individual responsibility and prevents defendants from shifting blame to technology—a common defense in speeding cases.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(d)
Potential Concerns (5)
Expanding reckless driving to include >30 mph over the limit criminalizes a broader range of behavior without distinguishing intent or actual harm, potentially over-policing low-income and rural drivers who may have fewer alternatives to high-speed travel on limited-access highways.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(ii), Sec. 2(1)(ii)Mandatory 150-day probation with intelligent speed assistance (ISA) devices creates a new surveillance regime that may disproportionately burden low-income drivers who cannot afford device installation, maintenance, or repeated violations that trigger additional suspensions—effectively criminalizing poverty.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(a)-(c)Automatic 30-day license suspensions for any moving violation during probation create a punitive feedback loop: minor infractions (e.g., speeding 5 mph over ISA limit) trigger cascading penalties that extend driving bans and increase financial hardship, undermining rehabilitation goals.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(c)Mandating ISA devices on all vehicles driven during probation—without opt-out or privacy safeguards—raises significant Fourth Amendment concerns about persistent vehicle monitoring and data collection, even for non-criminal activity.
Rights & LibertiesLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(a), Sec. 2(4)(d)Small business owners and independent contractors who rely on driving for work (e.g., delivery drivers, field technicians) face operational disruption if ISA devices malfunction or are misinstalled, potentially losing income during probation—a risk not equally shared by salaried employees.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(a), Sec. 2(4)(d)
Who Is Most Affected
Drivers convicted of extreme speeding (>30 mph over limit) face new mandatory penalties and surveillance; while this group is a subset of all reckless drivers, the policy targets high-risk behavior and may reduce recidivism—net effect is positive for public safety but negative for individual liberty and mobility.
Drivers with prior DUI/DWI convictions are the primary target of the ignition interlock and ISA mandates; evidence shows this group benefits most from behavioral monitoring, but the added surveillance burden may disproportionately affect low-income individuals in this group.
Low-income drivers, especially those in rural or transit-poor areas, face disproportionate hardship from license suspensions and mandatory ISA costs; they are less able to absorb lost mobility or device expenses, making this group net losers despite public safety gains.
Technology vendors and installers of ISA devices may see new demand, but the bill does not specify procurement standards or affordability programs—benefits likely flow to larger firms unless small businesses are included in implementation contracts.
Law enforcement and courts face increased administrative burden from probation monitoring and ISA compliance enforcement, but may see reduced recidivism and court caseloads over time—net impact is mixed but likely positive for long-term public safety.