Bicycle Laws (Main)

Bicycle Laws

Passing on the Right, May 1999 Update

Signals

Stay to the Right, September 1998 Update

We Have a Right to the Road . . .
But Which Road? November 1998 Update
But How Much Road? July 1999 Update

What to do if You’re in an Accident April 1998

When is a Shoulder not a Sidewalk

Yellow Lights

Zero Tolerance for Road Rage

Oregon's Largest 3rd Party Verdict

Passing on the Right, May 1999 Update
An Idea Whose Time has Come and Gone

By Ray Thomas, bike lawyer

Long-time cyclists will certainly recall that Oregon’s law prohibiting passing on the right causes much confusion and legitimate frustration on the roads. Typical roadway practices for bicyclists involve moving to the right as cars gain speed and pass, which cars are allowed to do even if we are in a no passing zone so long as they do not have to cross the center line in order to do it. Then at the next intersection or red light the cars all stop and, under current law, bicyclists may not pass the stopped motorists on the right side. Under Oregon law the only time a bicyclist may pass a motorist on the right is if the motorist is turning left. ORS (Oregon Revised Statute) 811.415 makes it a traffic infraction to do anything other than sit stopped in the long line of cars breathing the fumes from exhaust pipes and waiting for the cars up ahead to slowly move. Once the cars and any bicyclist caught in the line-up reach a point where the bicyclist is slowing the cars down, then the bicyclist is supposed to move over and allow the cars to pass.

This law is almost universally ignored by bicyclists, who usually make the decision about passing on the right relative to whether or not there are any drivers ahead making sudden right turns or cars parked in the curb lane which might cardoor a bicyclist squeezing in between the parked and stopped cars. Unfortunately, if a bicyclist does get squeezed off or pinched, then it is at best going to be a split liability situation because the bicyclist who has passed on the right will have technically violated the law. This is a stupid law and it should not exist. The practice of passing on the right is part of the "dance" engaged in by bicyclists and drivers all around the world. If bicyclists in a foreign country were told about this law, they would probably think it was laughable, but when it is part of the statute books in your home state it can become a trap for the unwary.

A number of members of the bicycling community have bristled about this law for years, and in the 1997 legislature, the Bicyclist Transportation Alliance (BTA) decided to do something about it. A bill allowing passing on the right was drafted and presented to the 1997 legislation, with the expectation that it would at least get a fair hearing that would allow bicyclists to show the legislature that it should be eliminated. However, when the bill was set for hearing, the BTA was called to attend on a Monday. Monday was the day when the BTA offices were closed; no message was received by the organization, no one showed up, and the bill went nowhere.

Then, in 1999, the BTA again rallied and proposed what became known as HB2522. During this legislature the BTA worked with lobbyist Ward Armstrong and he has acted as a capable shepherd on our behalf. Unfortunately, the prospects for passage of the bill into law are grim at best, due to traditional political interests which view any law that gives bicyclists more as necessarily giving drivers less. However, such an interpretation is wrong-headed. Absent a near miracle, our bill is probably dead, at least during this term.

The original version of the bill attempted to resolve potential conflict between right turning motorists and bicyclists passing on the right in a way that led even our friends to conclude that we were making the solution overly complex; this problem was solved with a re-write of the bill to make it more closely resemble laws of other states that allow passing on the right. For example, Alabama, Arizona, Nevada and Wisconsin all allow passing on the right so long as the bicyclist uses due care.

In January 1999 the BTA’s bill was amended to require that "the person operating the bicycle exercise due care when overtaking and passing." In this revised law we have seen considerable support within the bicycling community, including Oregon Department of Transportation bicycle program director, Michael Ronkin . Representative Bob Montgomery (R-Cascade Locks) sponsored the bill in front of the House Transportation Committee and the BTA’s witnesses at the hearing on the bill did an excellent job in relaying this benefit to committee members. Our lobbyist, Ward Armstrong, did a fine job in meeting with each of the committee members and convincing them that the bill was a good idea. The amendment removed any reservations by committee members, and the many letters bicycling supporters sent to committee legislators demonstrated the grass roots nature and wide support of the campaign. Several legislators noted that the letters that they received had obviously been written by bicyclists with their own perspective, instead of a canned form type letter (a valuable asset in any legislative effort).

Richard Devlin (Democrat) carried the Bill to the House floor where it passed unanimously 52/0. HB 2522 then was transferred to the Senate Transportation Committee chaired by Marilyn Shannon (Republican). Readers may recall that it was this committee that scheduled hearings on the so called "Replacement Bike Bill, SB 881." This was the bill that was mistakenly drafted in response to tremendously inflated bicycle funding figures for Oregon bicycle programs and arguments by some legislators that bicyclists were receiving too much money for projects that created huge expenditures for an activity that some legislators equated with recreational skiing, instead of improved modes of transportation (i.e. fewer fume belching cars on our congested roadways).

When the BTA pointed out, and proved through testimony of ODOT staffers, that the operating assumption about funding expenditures were grossly inflated, the hearing on SB 881 was revealed to be a hatchet job based upon an incorrect premise. SB 881's hearing was cut short but the embarrassment of the Senate Committee over the whole process may have had negative political repercussions for HB 2522. The best information we have is that the Senate Transportation Committee is not likely to recommend a hearing on the Passing On The Right Bill, and without a hearing it is dead in the water, even though the House side passed it by a unanimous vote. If it is stalled then the battle is over, at least for this legislative session.

In retrospect, the bicycling community achieved considerably greater success in the 1999 legislature then we did two years ago. However, we have to recognize that the Oregon Senate has a significantly different political orientation from the Oregon House in that it does not favor high population centers which are traditionally greater proponents for integrating bicycling into roadway traffic. Consequently, we encountered a negative attitude towards bicycles, one that equates bicycles with recreational toys rather than legitimate vehicles.

Political realities require (as our experience in 1997 demonstrated) that a political lobbyist is a necessary accessory for any legislative effort. However, those of us in advocacy positions in the bicycling community must also comes to grips with our vulnerability to internal combustion versus human powered stereo-types and priorities. In truth, HB 2522 would have merely recognized what is really happening on the streets and highways, that bicyclists pass cautiously on the right when possible to avoid having to be stuck in a long line of stopped cars.

However, so long as politicians fail to recognize that promoting bicycle and pedestrian use of the roads is in their best interest, they will continue to oppose our legislative reforms because they cannot believe improvements in the lives of bicyclists do not come at some cost to the rights of motorists. Financial support from riders, bicycle dealers and others who profit from increased bicycle usage is essential if we are to improve our lot on Oregon’s roadways. The experience of other states that allow passing on the right has been that legal recognition has not led to a greatly increased number of passing accidents, nor have motorists experienced a restriction of their own rights to the roadway.

We all owe considerable thanks to the legislators who supported our efforts, the BTA for leading the charge, and to lobbyist Ward Armstrong for taking us as far as we got in 1999. HB 2522 would have removed a statutory trap for the unwary bicyclist and provided increased legitimacy for the bicycling community. When the call goes out during the next legislature for letters and phone calls to legislators, please lend a hand by using your own personal experiences to educate legislators about why it is that some reforms are necessary in Oregon’s vehicle laws to give us all a safer road to share with motorized vehicles.