WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 1927

Traffic Safety - As introduced, enacts the "Super Speeder Accountability Act," which requires intelligent speed assistance devices to be installed on motor vehicles operated by persons convicted of certain driving offenses where speed was a factor; creates a licensing system for device providers; requires compliance-based device removal; authorizes indigent users to apply for assistance from the electronic monitoring indigency fund; makes other revisions. - Amends TCA Title 55.

114th Regular Session (2025-2026) Introduced by Becky Massey

Mandates speed-limiting devices on vehicles of convicted speed offenders with provider licensing and indigent-assistance provisions to improve traffic safety.

Placed on Senate Regular Calendar for 3/19/2026
#trafficsafety
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1927

Legislative bill overview

SB 1927 requires mandatory installation of intelligent speed assistance (ISA) devices on vehicles operated by drivers convicted of speed-related traffic offenses. The bill establishes a licensing system for device providers and allows device removal once compliance is demonstrated. It also creates an indigency fund to help low-income offenders afford the technology.

Why is this important

Speed-related violations contribute significantly to traffic fatalities and injuries. This bill attempts to reduce repeat offenses by using technology to limit vehicle speed, potentially improving public safety. The indigency provision addresses fairness concerns by preventing financial barriers from blocking compliance.

Potential points of contention

  • Privacy and autonomy concerns: Mandatory speed-limiting devices restrict driver control and may be viewed as excessive government intrusion into vehicle operation
  • Cost burden and equity: Device installation, monitoring, and removal costs may disproportionately affect low-income drivers even with indigency assistance; questions remain about fund adequacy
  • Scope of application: Unclear whether the mandate applies only to repeat offenders or broader categories; potential due process questions about proportionality of punishment
  • Device reliability and appeals: No clear mechanism described for drivers to contest device malfunction or for removing the requirement if circumstances change
  • Implementation challenges: Licensing system oversight, device standardization, and enforcement mechanisms are underdeveloped in the bill text

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.