Lawmakers toughen drunken driving bill

State lawmakers toughened a drunken driving measure yesterday by extending the sentence for vehicular manslaughter and allowing prosecutors to use court records to prove that a convicted defendant is a repeat offender.

In voting for the new, tougher provisions, legislators agreed to two of the three changes in Melanie's Bill that Governor Mitt Romney had backed. But they rejected Romney's bid to stiffen the penalties for motorists who refuse to take a breathalyzer test, opting instead for rules that are tougher than current law, but not as tough as Romney wanted.

Nevertheless the Republican governor, after a rare victory on Democrat-dominated Beacon Hill, said last night he plans to sign the legislation, perhaps as early as today.

''It's a whole new day," Romney said in a written statement released by his office after last night's final vote. ''I'm very pleased with the seriousness with which the Legislature dealt with my amendments to Melanie's Bill. I look forward to making Melanie's Bill Melanie's Law."

Melanie's Bill is named for Melanie Powell, who was 13 when she was struck and killed by a repeat drunk driver in 2003 as she walked with friends on Route 139 in Marshfield. Coming after several high-profile accidents involving drunk drivers, the debate over the measure has dominated headlines and captivated attention across the state, placing enormous pressure on lawmakers to crack down on repeat offenders.

Last week, the House and Senate passed a version of the bill that Romney and some victims' families complained was a watered-down version of the original. The Legislature had acted last week as a half-dozen lawmakers, including Representative Eugene L. O'Flaherty, a supporter of the weaker version, left on a trip to Spain and Portugal.

Yesterday, after the morning's Globe detailed the lawmakers' vacation, House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, Senate President Robert E. Travaglini, and the governor's aides scrambled to put together a compromise.

Much of the day was spent on a provision that has thus far gained relatively little attention: the penalty for refusing to take a breathalyzer test. Supporters of tougher penalties for refusing to take the test say that repeat offenders always refuse, because they know doing so lessens the chances of a conviction.

Under current law, the penalty for refusing to take the test is a six-month driver's license suspension. If the driver is acquitted before that period is up, the license is reinstated.

Romney's amendment would have left that penalty in place for people without prior convictions or refusals, but he would have toughened it for repeat offenders, those who have refused a test before, and drivers younger than 21.

His amendment mandated a one-year suspension for young drivers or people who have been convicted or who have refused the test once before; a five-year suspension for those with two prior convictions or refusals; and a lifetime suspension for those with three or more prior convictions or refusals. The governor's amendment would have made the suspension periods mandatory, whether or not the driver was eventually acquitted.

The final version of Melanie's Bill will leave the current penalty in place for people without prior convictions or refusals. It lays out longer suspensions for people with prior convictions, but not refusals. Also, drivers who are acquitted will get their licenses back immediately.

Before the House voted, DiMasi delivered a rare floor speech, expressing indignation at what he said was the news media's unfair portrayal of his chamber. DiMasi defended the version of the bill that came out of a House-Senate conference committee last week, rebuffing critics who said House members had taken out some of its toughest provisions.

''We can stand up, go home to our constituents and say, 'We voted for a very tough bill, maybe one of the toughest in the country,' " DiMasi said. ''I know that members of this House can stand tall and say we did what we needed to do to protect the public safety in this state."

Arguing that Romney had fine-tuned the language in the records provision and proposed a reasonable mandatory sentence of five years in prison for manslaughter by vehicular homicide, DiMasi urged his colleagues to support those two amendments. But he insisted that the breathalyzer amendment Romney sought was too harsh, arguing that it would punish people who may ultimately be acquitted of drunken driving.

The Senate, which approved breathalyzer rules nearly identical to Romney's last month, also rejected the governor's breathalyzer amendment yesterday. That outcome fueled speculation that a deal had been struck under which the House agreed to accept two of the governor's amendments in exchange for a face-saving victory on the third one.

Senator Steven A. Baddour, who helped shepherd Melanie's Bill through the Senate, denied that there was an agreement between Romney and DiMasi. Baddour said supporters simply didn't want to risk a break with the House that would send the bill back to a panel of House-Senate negotiators and perhaps put its eventual passage in doubt.

''It's a good bill," Baddour said. ''It's probably one of the toughest drunk driving bills in the country. To me, it wasn't worth risking all that."

Baddour said Democratic senators consulted with the governor's aides and Ron Bersani, Melanie Powell's grandfather and a leader in the fight for the bill, before deciding to relent.

Bersani supported that account. ''What we said was, we could be satisfied and happy with this bill," Bersani said as he sat in the Senate gallery watching the debate. ''At what point do you say, 'This is the best we can do.' We think we're at that point."

Senate minority leader Brian P. Lees and his Republican colleagues mounted an emotional appeal for the stricter version. But after a meeting in Travaglini's office, the Democrats returned to the Senate chamber and acceded to the will of the House. Several of them warned that if the Senate broke with the House on the breathalyzer issue, it might put the entire bill in jeopardy.

Lees rejected that argument, insisting that the Senate could have persuaded the House to shift toward the Senate's position.

''We should be ashamed," Lees said angrily. ''What happened in here was absolutely outrageous. We were the good guys. What happened?"

Throughout the debate, Romney and the Senate favored tougher measures, while the House consistently tried to scale back the bill. House leaders said they were concerned about protecting the rights of the accused. But critics, including Romney, suggested that House opposition was rooted in the fact that many members of that chamber are lawyers who have defended drunk drivers.

The bill includes several other tough new provisions designed to discourage drunken driving, including creating several new crimes: driving under the influence with a child under 14 in the car; knowingly loaning a car to someone who is drunk; and manslaughter by drunken driving.

It also also requires that offenders with more than one drunken driving conviction install an ignition-interlock device on their vehicles as a condition of having their licenses reinstated.