Driving While Suspended: Sidestepping the System

A perpetual challenge in the fight against hardcore drunk driving is the pervasiveness of people driving while their driver’s licenses are suspended or revoked. Taking a hardcore offender’s license away is often not enough to keep him or her off the road. Studies have found as many as 75 percent of these drivers continue to drive during periods of suspension or revocation, albeit less often and more carefully. An observational study at one site found 88 percent of first-time DWI offenders whose licenses were suspended drove during their suspension period (McCartt, Geary, and Nissen 2002).

The number of offenders driving while suspended (DWS) has increased with the widespread use of administrative license revocation. Only a small proportion of DWI offenders reinstate their licenses when eligible because the process is time-consuming and costly in terms of fees and other requirements. Notification of the driver’s insurance company of his or her suspension, attendance at education or treatment programs, or use of an alcohol interlock are often required by states before a license is reissued. Researchers also attribute the low incidence of re-licensure to a perception on the offender’s part that the risk of apprehension for driving while suspended is not great enough to justify the hassle of reinstatement (Voas 2001).

This reluctance on the part of the offender to reinstate his or her license poses several threats to addressing the drunk driving and driving-while-suspended problem. Low rates of license reinstatement weaken the authority of motor vehicle departments to motivate safe driving since re-issuance of the license is the only incentive they can offer. Offenders’ lack of interest in driving legally also threatens mandatory interlock laws.

Reduction in the number of offenders who drive while suspended or revoked is important because research shows these offenders are over-represented in crashes. In California, drivers with suspended or revoked licenses have 3.7 times the fatal crash rate as the average driver (NHTSA Traffic Tech 1998). The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) found drivers with suspended or revoked licenses and a prior DWI are 4.43 times more likely to have been drinking at the time of a crash than those with a valid license and no prior DWI. Another study found the percentage of drivers in fatal crashes under the influence of alcohol was 56.7 percent for suspended drivers and 74.1 percent for revoked drivers (Griffin and DeLaZerda 2000).

According to NHTSA, 43 percent of fatally injured drivers in 1998 with a positive BAC had at one time or another had their licenses revoked or suspended. A 2003 study found overall, drivers without a valid license have a much higher percentage of alcohol involvement preceding a fatal crash than drivers with valid licenses (Scopatz et al.).

The 2003 AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety follow-up study on unlicensed driving found the proportion of drivers in fatal crashes whose licenses had been revoked, expired or canceled declined by a small amount between 1993 and 1999. However, the statistics for suspended drivers were not so encouraging: the proportion of suspended drivers involved in fatal crashes increased slightly from 4.5 percent in 1993 to 5 percent in 1999 (Scopatz et al.).

"Unlike speeding, non-use of safety belts or driving while impaired, driving with a suspended or revoked license is an offense that cannot be observed by patrol officers and clues cannot be articulated to justify a legal traffic stop" (Moser 1998).

Effective Deterrents for Driving While Suspended

Deterrence of DWS can be increased by ensuring a swift application of severe penalties. Jail is one often-used penalty. However, cost and sporadic prosecution for DWS has limited its use.

A number of studies have found sanctions against an offender’s vehicle can be an effective countermeasure to driving while suspended or revoked. Minnesota has a vehicle license plate impoundment program allowing for license plate seizure at the time of arrest for driving-while-revoked recidivists. In the year after the law went into effect, drivers whose plates had been impounded had a 50 percent lower recidivism rate than those whose plates were not (Moser 1998).

Some states are adopting tougher measures to crack down on DWS. As part of Michigan's recently enacted Repeat Offender Package, DWS offenses will be punished by immobilization and plate seizure. These laws apply even to vehicles not owned by the offender if the owner knowingly let him or her drive (Michigan State 2002).

A study in Ohio found the DWS recidivism rate of offenders whose vehicles were not immobilized was 100 percent higher than those whose vehicles were (Voas 1998). Another study found an 18 percent reduction in recidivism among DWS offenders in Christchurch, New Zealand, who participated in a cognitive behavioral therapy treatment program emphasizing anger management, stress management and communication skills (Bakker, Hudson, and Ward 2000).

Based on interviews from six states with DWS countermeasures in place, the 2003 AAAFTS study on driving without a valid license recommends states do the following to combat DWS:

• Implement and enforce administrative license revocation and suspension laws;
  
  
• Establish vehicle impoundment, seizure and immobilization programs for DWS;
  
  
• Implement plate removal at the scene;
  
  
• Implement special plates or stickers as probable cause for a traffic stop;
  
  
• Establish mandatory jail time for multiple offenders;
  
  
• Establish ignition interlock programs;
  
  
• Establish a separate law enabling license status checkpoints;
  
  
• Block registration of vehicles by drivers lacking a valid license;
  
  
• Establish strong administrative control of license actions;
  
  
• Establish driver assistance programs and informational campaigns on relicensing;
  
  
• Reduce the use of plea-bargaining of DWS charges; and
  
  
• Create links between driver and vehicle registration files (Scopatz et al.).

Moser, Jr., A.N. 1998. Guidelines for a Suspended or Revoked Operator Enforcement Program. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and National Sheriffs’ Association.

Griffin, L.I., and DeLaZerda, S. June 2000. Unlicensed to Kill. Washington, DC: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.