At 23, Victoria Wong thinks that someday she and her husband might like to live somewhere outside the city, where being close to a bus stop isn't a necessity.
But that day looks far off for the Charles Village resident because she doesn't yet drive and Maryland imposes some of the stiffest requirements in the country for those applying for their first driver's license once they've reached legal adulthood. The costs of taking the same driver education courses a teen-ager must pass, and the difficulty of fitting such training into a busy work schedule have ensured that she remains a regular bus rider, Wong says.
On Tuesday, a Maryland Senate committee will hear testimony on a proposal to ease licensing requirements for individuals over age 18 — a measure that has the backing of many advocates for low-income workers who find the hurdles the state put in place with teens in mind have become a barrier to advancement into the middle class.
One of the problems, the bill's supporters say, is that adult license applicants often don't have a parent or mentor available and must pay an instructor to take them for the mandatory 60 hours of driving practice at a cost of thousands of dollars.
Wong, who didn't obtain a driver's license as a teen in California because of the costs of operating a car, hopes the bill will be adopted by the General Assembly.
"I think it would help me. It would help a lot of people," she said.
The bill faces opposition, however, from a trade association for the state's driving schools. They contend that even if Maryland is an outlier among the 50 states, it did the right thing for safety when it imposed stringent training and practice requirements on all new license applicants, no matter what age.
"A new driver is a new driver," said David Resnick, treasurer of the Maryland Professional Drivers Education Association and the owner of Elite Driving School. "To drive is a privilege. It's not a right to get a driver's license."
Jack Cahalan, a spokesman for the Maryland Department of Transportation, said the state Motor Vehicle Administration would not take a position on the bill before the Senate hearing.
The controversy behind the bill dates to 1998, when Maryland — in an effort that was largely sold as a measure to keeps teens safer — imposed tougher requirements on new drivers before they can obtain a license.
Since then, the General Assembly has further tightened the requirements for first-time license applicants, whether under or over 18. In 2005, Maryland increased the amount of time a holder of a learner's permit must wait before applying for a license from four months to six; in 2009 it increased that time to nine months in a move intended to raise the minimum age for a license to 161/2 years.
Meanwhile, the 2005 bill also required drivers on learner permits to log 60 hours of driving — an increase from the previous 40 — with a parent or a mentor.
Lawmakers have required adult drivers to jump through the same set of hoops as teens. The result, according to supporters of the bill, is that many lower-income workers have found their path to better employment blocked.
The proposed legislation seeks to ease up on adults 18 and over by reducing the nine-month waiting period between permit and license to 45 days. It would also allow adult applicants to fulfill their requirement of 30 hours of classroom instruction by taking an Internet course at their own pace. Proponents said the change would let adults structure the class around work and child care schedules.
The legislation would also remove the requirement for 60 hours of supervised driving for those over 18. But if a license candidate over 18 is found to have committed a moving violation, the applicant would have to hold a learner's permit for the same nine-month period that applies to teens.
The legislation would retain a requirement that adult applicants take six hours of behind-the-wheel training in addition to the 30 hours of classroom instruction. Adults, like teens, would have to complete a three-hour drug and alcohol education program.
This year's Senate bill is sponsored by Democratic Sens. Jamie Raskin of Montgomery County and Victor Ramirez of Prince George's County. A House version, sponsored by Del. Cheryl Glenn, D-Baltimore, will be heard later this month.
Ramirez said he's been hearing complaints about the current requirements from constituents. He said the enhanced requirements are appropriate for those 16 or 17 years old but not for older applicants
"When you are older, things are a little different, and I think your maturity level's a little different as well," he said.
Andrea Payne Roethke, senior policy analyst with the Job Opportunities Task Force, said the steeper hurdles for new adult drivers in Maryland have not been shown to make driving safer. "Unfortunately, driver's ed is not proven to improve safety behind the wheel," she said.
Russ Rader, a spokesman for the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, said Roethke is correct.
"For teens, it has no effect," he said. "There's no difference in the crashes for those teens who take driver's ed compared with those who don't. So we wouldn't expect it to be any different for adults."
One of the driving forces behind the bill is Eugene D'Onofrio, a driver educator who has been an off-and-on critic of the law since it was first adopted.
"No state but us makes adults do what they're doing," D'Onofrio said. "It's crazy." D'Onofrio estimated that about 35,000 Marylanders obtain a learner's permit each year but do not go on to receive a license. Even if the bill passes, he said, Maryland will still have the toughest requirements in the nation for adult drivers.
Elbridge James, chairman of the NAACP's political action committee, said he will testify about the current law's impact on young adult's in Baltimore's inner city. He said many are caught in a "Catch-22" where they can't get jobs because they don't have driver's licenses and can't afford to get licenses because they don't have jobs.
One permit holder who doesn't know whether she will be able to advance to a license is a 28-year-old resident of the Sara's House shelter near Fort Meade and mother of a 3-year-old autistic son. Latisha, who asked that her last name be withheld because of the stigma surrounding homelessness, said the current law makes it too expensive for her to accumulate the practice hours she needs to get a license.
Latisha said that without parents or supportive adults nearby, she would have to pay an instructor to ride along with her for about $70 per five-hour session, or $840 to meet the 60-hour requirement. She said that's more than she can afford on her pay at the dollar store where she works. But having no license limits her ability to earn more.
"If I had a vehicle, that would make me more reliable at work, and they would probably give me more hours," she said.
Wong, who had little need for a car while a student at Johns Hopkins University, said she would now like to get a license.
For her, the provision of the bill that is most appealing is the one that would let her fulfill the driver's ed requirement by taking an Internet-based course. She said her job at a downtown lab often requires her to work until 7 p.m. or so. Then she would have to take a bus to the driving school, she said. Being able to take the course from a home computer would be a big help, she said.
But Resnick said Internet instruction doesn't make the same impression on new drivers as interaction with a human instructor.
"There's a lot of Internet programs out there that are very bad," he said.
Resnick added that "driver's education is a lot about attitude," he said. "If you're 18-19-20, those people still have the same thought process of invulnerability."
Even setting the bar at 21 for less rigorous requirements, as some states do, would be a bad idea, Resnick said. He added it isn't until a driver turns 25 that less stringent standards might make sense.