Attention South Carolina Cyclists. New Law Proposed

Triathlon Forum
1

South Carolina cyclists, please have a look at the legislation introduced last week by Rep. Wendy Nanney, Greenville County Districy 22. A friend of mine spoke with her by phone this morning, but she did not seem persuaded by my arguments that cyclists have every right to the road, even in congested areas, and that requiring permitting and insurance would in no way help the problem she’s trying to address. Please call her to voice your concern, her office number is: 864-979-4735.

The text of the proposal is below:

A BILL
TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 56-1-1715 SO AS TO REQUIRE THE OWNER OF A BICYCLE TO OBTAIN A PERMIT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND LIABILITY INSURANCE AS IS REQUIRED OF MOTOR VEHICLES BEFORE OPERATING A BICYCLE ALONG A HIGHWAY WHOSE MAXIMUM SPEED LIMIT IS AT LEAST THIRTY-FIVE MILES AN HOUR; AND BY ADDING SECTION 56-3-115 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW, FOR THE PURPOSES OF REGISTRATION AND THE REQUIRED LIMITS OF LIABILITY INSURANCE, A MOPED IS A MOTOR VEHICLE.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:
SECTION 1. Article 9, Chapter 1, Title 56 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
“Section 56-1-1715. (A) Notwithstanding another provision of law, the owner of a bicycle who is at least fifteen years old shall obtain a bicycle permit from the Department of Motor Vehicles upon payment of a fee of five dollars and maintain liability insurance on the bicycle as is required of an owner of a motor vehicle as provided in Chapter 77, Title 38, before operating the bicycle along a highway whose maximum speed limit is at least thirty-five miles an hour.
(B) Before the department issues a bicycle permit, the applicant must pass successfully all parts of a bicycle safety written examination that is developed by the department. The examination shall include a test of the applicant’s eyesight, as pertains to the operation of a bicycle, a test of his ability to read and understand highway signs regulating, warning, and directing traffic and his knowledge of the traffic laws of this State. This permit must be in the applicant’s immediate possession when the bicycle is operated along a highway whose maximum speed limit is at least thirty-five miles an hour. A person who is less than fifteen years old may not operate a bicycle along a highway whose maximum speed limit is at least thirty-five miles an hour.”
SECTION 2. Article 3, Chapter 3, Title 56 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:
“Section 56-3-115. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for the purposes of registration and the required limits of liability insurance, a moped is a motor vehicle.”
SECTION 3. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.

Her Facebook Page is here:
https://www.facebook.com/RepresentativeWendyNanney

2

Worst part is that she actually Greenville’s rep (District 22). Clearly, she introduced this without speaking to a single cyclist or local cycling organization. Just dumb-founding on so many levels. Sadly, I’m sure that she will easily win re-election this fall. Meanwhile, our roads continue to fall apart because SC needs to have the lowest gas tax in the nation. Second double-flat in less than a year north of Furman Saturday because of a bridge / road in need of repair. Why not work on solutions that help everyone that use our roadways?

3

And here is her official SC Legislature page. You can send her emails/messages directly from here too.

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/member.php?code=1401704378

One more reminder of why I am glad I moved out of SC, but can’t say I’m glad to have it. :wink:

4

and that requiring permitting and insurance would in no way help the problem she’s trying to address.

How so? She’s trying to get cyclists of her roads. Looks like she’s got that addressed pretty well. :-/

This has nothing to do with safety (drumroll - trumpets - SAFETY!!! - is the ace card in politics, beaten only by the joker terrarists!!! card) and everything to do with inconveniencing cyclists to the point of getting them off the roads.

2 Likes
5

and that requiring permitting and insurance would in no way help the problem she’s trying to address.

How so? She’s trying to get cyclists of her roads. Looks like she’s got that addressed pretty well. :-/

This has nothing to do with safety (drumroll - trumpets - SAFETY!!! - is the ace card in politics, beaten only by the joker terrarists!!! card) and everything to do with inconveniencing cyclists to the point of getting them off the roads.

bot are trumped by, “for the children…”

1 Like
6

What about people on tricycles, unicycles or just plain walking? This proposed law needs to cover them all. Plus, every motorist has to purchase a “walkers license and insurance” in case they break down at the side of the road and have to walk somewhere for help.

1 Like
7

Before the department issues a bicycle permit, the applicant must pass successfully all parts of a bicycle safety written examination that is developed by the department.
I wonder if the motor vehicle exam has any questions about how to safely drive when cyclists are nearby. Actually I don’t wonder, I have a pretty good notion – not one question.

8

Well, this is going to pose a major problem for George Hincapie’s business investment:

http://hoteldomestique.com.

9

surprising … as I found the motorists in and around Greenville to be the most cyclist-friendly and tolerant as anywhere I’ve ridden (visit in Oct '13).

So … if you say live in NC and you cross the border does that mean you’d need the SC permit and proof of insurance?

Or if you drive there from out of state to do, oh let’s say the Rock Hill Bicycle Classic. Would you need the permit for that too?

3 Likes
10

To build on your point, what if I’m merely in the state vacationing, do I buy a one-week license? Or I’m vacationing in North Carolina and go for an epic ride that takes me across state lines, do I buy a one-day license (a 2 hr license until I get back to NC)? Maybe the state uses Active.com to manage the licensing process.

11

Three lines into this…very bad idea. Tell this to the 10 year old or the poor working class person who can only afford a bike as transportation.

12

A Republican. Bob Jones University. Anti abortion. Jesse Helms protege. Yup. She checked all of my favorite boxes. Classic. So much from the reduction of government, expansion of personal freedom and lower taxes. Could it be anyone other than a “Nanny” who would propose such a thing? I will stop there lest I get booted to the Lavendar Room.

13

… So … if you say live in NC and you cross the border does that mean you’d need the SC permit and proof of insurance?

Or if you drive there from out of state to do, oh let’s say the Rock Hill Bicycle Classic. Would you need the permit for that too?

Interesting question since there are several rides we do where we cross over the state line and ride down to the North Greenville area (Hotel Domestique area). Hell, the Assault on the Carolinas ride (in 2 weeks) crosses into SC for a decent amount of the ride.

2 Likes
14

Below is my letter to Rep. Nanney:

"I write the following as a man born and bred in South Carolina, and proud of my home state. I have roots in the Upstate of South Carolina stretching back to the beginning of the 19th century and my family is still farming that original land grant. I may now reside in Georgia, but I know a real peach is from Cherokee county, just up the road from Greenville; my friends can talk all they want about the beaches of Destin but I know it cannot compare with the Grand Strand, and Georgia may have barrier islands but the flora and fauna of Edisto is for me.

"I’ve been notified though a very popular cycling and triathlon forum – www.slowtwitch.com – that you’ve proposed a bill in the SC legislature that would require all persons older than 15 to obtain a permit for riding a bicycle on any highway with a speed limit greater than 35 MPH. If this is internet hearsay, I apologize for the inconvenience of wasting your time. If it is not, there are a few issues I would like to address.

"Can I ask why you would propose such a bill?

"Why, in an age of growing population, congested roads, bridges and roads badly in need of repair, popular mistrust of government, rising obesity and poor health, lack of government/infrastructure funding, and rising pollution (let’s stop there for sake of argument) would you build roadblocks in the way of the members of your constituency who would very much like to fix almost all of these problems? Our cities should be encouraging more citizens to commute and recreate on bicycles, not trying to – very literally! – run them off the road. For a cyclist at once reduces congestion and pollution, increases his or her own health (an added benefit to the community through lower shared healthcare cost), and reduces the wear and tear on infrastructure since they are pedaling a 20-lb bicycle and not driving a 4,000-lb motor vehicle. Additionally, these brave citizens do so at their own peril, for it can be held in little doubt who shoulders most of the risk when a person with a foam helmet meets a multi-ton machine.

"And for a representative of Greenville, of all places, to propose such a bill! The shining star of South Carolina’s Upstate; the city that has held national cycling races and counts a very distinguished cycling celebrity and business owner among it’s own population. Rep. Nanney, have you assessed the impact of cycling tourism in your area? Why, just last week there was an entire thread on Slowtwitch urging cyclists from Canada to visit Greenville for it’s culture and world-class cycling. And now word has spread of this new bill, and users are already voicing their displeasure and speaking of skipping right over SC for future visits if this bill is made law. What is the provision for tourists?

"And for what purpose are we subjecting our state the slings and arrows of the international community? Are we protecting the cyclists and children, by not allowing them the form of exercise they prefer? Why not require permits of all swimmers above the age of 15 who swim in a river, lake, or pond in which boats and jet skis also operate, and by extension, bar all children younger then 15 from swimming in these bodies of water at all? Does the logic not follow? After all, if you are not swimming in a lake, you cannot be hit and killed by a boat. Are we protecting drivers, by giving them an escape route if they happen to hit a cyclist by their own negligence? I don’t mean to insinuate such a despicable reason, but I suppose it should be on the table. Are we permitting bicyclists as a means to increase revenue? I’d hardly think that would fly in a red state such as ours (not to mention our collective aversion to unnecessary regulation) and surely the revenue increase would be negligible in our state coffers.

"Shall I even launch into a discussion of those of our state who are too poor to own a car and thus rely on a bicycle to commute to and from work or school? Surely the economic realities of the working poor aren’t very far from your attention as a State Representative. I think we should agree without argument that another level of bureaucracy stacked against the least of our brothers and sisters is a damning reflection of our society. Shall I invoke the words of Christ to make my point here? As a professed Baptist, I trust you are familiar with any of his teachings I should bring to bear here and as a fellow Christian I have faith that you will consider their implication in this matter.

"Enough of my rhetorical questions and now for two direct ones: Whom was this bill written to protect? Whom will this bill benefit?

I, and the cycling community, graciously await your answer."

19 Likes
15

augusta 70.3 goes in South carolina
.

16

Fabulous letter! Well done!

17

I can see wanting to have cyclists be aware of traffic and safety laws, but the rest of it? And how is South Carolina going to pull off the cost of running this proposed new program of developing a bicycle operations test with all its attendant parts along with an eye exam and all the regulations and administration associated therewith for $5?

And bicyclists have to purchase a liability insurance policy with the same terms as auto policies? Is there a public policy issue that exists in South Carolina where its citizens are routinely being injured and incurring significant costs at the hands of negligent cyclists and not receiving recompense? The cynical side of me has trouble this portion of the proposed law as nothing but another attempt to transfer wealth from ordinary citizens to rich corporations.

18

Cool. Now I can use the WHOLE LANE without worry, as I’d be a licensed motor vehicle. Likewise, when passed on a double yellow by a passing motorist, they get a ticket for aggressive/unsafe driving? Sweet. Finally, I assume there will be a new South Carolina government website, let’s dub it “Nanneycare”, where I can get this newly-created class of bicycle liability insurance? You know, to fill the gap of non-existing insurance now.

19

A variation of this was proposed in Georgia last year at the local level. They had a public hearing to discuss it which drew hundreds of angry cyclists and cycling advocates. It never even came close to passing.

20

thank you for taking the time to write and send. very well done.