USDOT Distracted and Operating
Under the Influence
The United States Department of Transportation has
seriously compromised safety by allowing itself to be distracted while
"operating under the influence" of special interest groups. This diversion from its safety charter is
directly contributing to an incredible number of lives lost, injuries and
financial mayhem for many millions more.
By Chad Dornsife, Executive Director
Best Highway Safety Practices Institute
August 14, 2009
Executive Summary:
Kudos to the USDOTÕs inventive crisis development
team and its marketing agency for the recent avalanche of releases and news
stories that appear to be from disparate sources, making one plausible dire
highway safety need for intervention claim after another; distracted driving,
cell phone use, texting, teen drivers, 55 mph limit and increased death rates,
community policing etc.
These calls for intervention can be seen as part of
a coordinated nefarious strategy to circumvent our laws and safety standards,
and expand the USDOTÕs power for the benefit of a few, culminating with a
"LaHood to the rescue" declaration, on cue, with his Trojan horse
distracted driving Safety Summit. The
question is whether LaHood is a victim, like most who trust the USDOT, or is he
a purveyor of this fraud? More importantly, how did this happen?
What we did right: With ÒThe Highway Safety Act of 1966Ó, Congress laid the foundations to
advance roadway safety per its Constitutional authority in Article 1. Thus all rules governing the field of
ÒRoadway SafetyÓ shall be Constitutional, conform to CongressÕ intent, and the
exercise of police powers thereof SHALL also be fact based and uniformly
applied regardless of state lines, entity type or classification on any private
or public roadway, bike path or pedestrian facility open to public travel
within the US and its territories.
All USDOT administrative acts are subordinate.
Where it went wrong: Early after the USDOTÕs creation in 1966, its mission became duplicitous
in that Congress also charged
National Highway Traffic Safety Agency (NHTSA) to market the merits and success
of its National Maximum Speed Limit (NMSL) after Congress had vested heavily in
creating an army, with support staff to enforce it, when the data was showing
nothing could have been further from the truth. Thus, NHTSA, the USDOT agency charged with these responsibilities
began manipulating the data to show success, when that wasnÕt sufficient, they
started manufacturing the data and supporting studies.
Where we are now: Over time,
NHTSAÕs with its ends justifies the means ethos, manufactured data, false cause
and effect safety myths, and the aid of billions of dollars and ubiquitous
unchallenged PSA's created to mislead our engineering and public safety
institutions, the judiciary, academia and We the People, and with its
coconspirators, it ultimately misled Congress. NHTSA and its beneficiary special interest have parleyed this
costly Public Safety Face into a controlling interest in the USDOTÕs conduct,
to the clear detriment of safety and due process.
What can we do: If Congress
really wanted to be constructive and advance highway safety, it would hold
hearings to ask why the USDOT has facilitated a state of anarchy in practice,
expectation and due process, and compel them to return to best practices, the
rule of law and assure our nationÕs practices conform; with a representative government
representing We the People. WhatÕs
also been missing is a no nonsense champion for the common good, a leader,
someone who is knowledgeable and not under the influence. Because without uniformity and fact
based laws, neither safety nor due process can be achieved.
USDOT Distracted and Operating Under
the Influence
LaHood announces Trojan Horse Safety Summit being
delivered in September! The
universal solution is always new laws and ever growing justifications for
traffic stops, improvements in writing citations en masse and curtailing due
process. One thing that would
shock most Americans is the fact that writing traffic citations, as practiced
on our highways, has been documented to have a virtual zero effect on accident
rates. Well over 90 percent of the
more than 50 million citations written each year are issued to those according
to the FHWA; et al are otherwise driving safely.
This is where the National Highway Safety
Administration, NHTSA, AKA the Federal Agency of Urban Myth shines. With billions of public treasure and
billions more from insurance companies over the decades they have created a
public cause and effect perception that is patently untrue. The special interests have taken over
our public safety policies to a point that true safety programs go unfunded and
neglected. This is where it gets
scary, because what is killing us is not attributed.
Who will we find manning this Trojan Horse Summit? The guest list is a whoÕs who of
regulators that benefit from regulating, special interest, empire and political
favor seekers and those that profit from them and their minions; none represent
the ÔCommon GoodÕ, ÔWe the PeopleÕ or the ÔRule of LawÕ or empirical scientific
findings or our safety. NONE!
This USDOT Safety Summit is like a national meeting
of McDonaldÕs franchisees being organized to represent the rights of cattle. Thank you CNBC and your guest speaking
on behalf of small business in regard to the special interest running
Washington for this gem, because itÕs perfect for our current highway safety
industrial complex, too.
The National
Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA) chart here clearly shows that there is NO
CORRELATION between their myriad of crisis claims, safety programs and the
actual accident data. Cell phone
use increased exponentially and in the month of December 2008 10 billion texts
were sent, with zero effect on the rates, not even a bump, likewise, for the
other issues in the headlines recently. The greatest correlation to the number of fatalities and
fatality rates is the economy and levels of discretionary driving, roadway and
vehicle design, not the number on a sign or the regulation of a reasonable
person acting responsibly.
How did NHTSA, AKA the Federal Agency of Urban Myth
get its start? It first came to
our attention with its National headline talking point was the more than 9,000
lives saved by the 55 mph limit. Small
details didnÕt seem to bother them; like the fact deaths dropped in every
category and that the overwhelming majority of the reductions came from
roadways posted 45 mph and less, not our highways. Talking points they still use today.
How did this Safety Myth come to be what we
believed? The oil shock, and
rationing put our country into a severe financial downturn. The national speed limit on the other
hand was windfall for the insurance companies from the millions and millions of
citations they were able to attach surcharges to. It was also a full employment act for the traffic enforcement
industrial complex; more than a half million of new officers, judges, clerks,
DAs etc, building of court houses, police facilities etc. The radar vendors were in nirvana; the
return on investment for a police department was measured in weeks. The entire industry was in a boom period
while the country suffered.
Oil shock subsides and we have an expansive
increase in infrastructure dedicated to writing citation, manned with an army
of PUBLIC employees, and the insurance companies were very happy with their
take too. That is when the
fictitious 9000 lives saved became the lynchpin of what is now safety
propaganda. Congress signed up to
keep this fraud going by citing the mythical safety benefits.
The fly in the ointment for the state was if they
didnÕt show compliance they would lose federal highway funding.
This is when NHTSA also became creative in its
compliance reporting requirements. The states no longer had to show the free flowing speeds;
they could use the 24 hour all traffic averages, including congestion to show
compliance. That was just the
beginning, compliance reports discouraged using snow days, but it didnÕt
exclude them, some states placed highway patrol vehicles at the measurement
sites, some used roads that werenÕt even posted 55 mph and so on. Now you know why when you drove your
eyes told you few were driving at or below the speed limit, when NHTSA on every
news outlet was reporting the wide acceptance by the public and compliance
nationwide.
Next was showing that the enforcement was reducing
accidents, which wasnÕt true, either. Transportation Research Board Special
Report 204, Ò55: A Decade of ExperienceÓ documented a very different story when
you separated the PR from the actual data. Speed enforcement as practiced had no effect on accidents or
traffic speeds except for a speed halo in the vicinity of an enforcement vehicle
regardless if they were writing citations or not. Unmarked cars had no effect either except increased citations.
Saturation enforcement changed
speeds when their presence was expected, but that too was gone within a day.
The vehicles traveling faster than the average had
the lowest accident rates. The overwhelming
majority of the high profile enforcement efforts were targeted at the motorists
that are least likely to be involved in an accident, on the safest roads. On the open highway excessive speed as
the cause of an accident was closer to 1-2 percent, not the Related 31 percent
NHTSA used. Traffic had returned
to its prior speeds and accidents rates continued on their historical decline.
Thus the public safety advertisements (PSA) that
speed enforcement was a critical factor in accident reduction had no factual
foundation, SAFETY MYTHS, reinforced and paid for with millions and millions of
tax dollars. Myths we continue to
allocate significant treasure to while we neglect those programs that could
save lives.
In 1995, when Congress was making noise that were
considering repealing the Nation Speed Limit this entire industry went in to
panic mode, what were they going to do, speed citations were their primary/only
source of funding.
NHTSA had a crisis of their own looming because their
Traffic Law Enforcement (TLE) division constituents needed new crises to ensure
their funding levels. TLE is
staffed with officers on loan from their respective agencies learning how to
write and administer enforcement grants. NHTSAÕs marketing agency works with them to develop crises
and the marketing plans to implement the need and support for intervention:
road rage, aggressive driving, seat belts, red lights, zero tolerance to speed
limits etc.
The plan, yell fire and see which the public
accepted best and then move to capitalize on them. It doesnÕt matter much that
none of them were fact based, they sounded good.
1995 the new PR campaign begins. The Stop Red Light Running Campaign is
on virtually every network as well as local news program and newspaper across
the Nation. The National Motorists
Association (NMA) complains and NHTSA admits that their data was grossly exaggerated.
Undeterred by facts, the USDOT in
their 1996 release and again in a 1998 release began with 8,100 intersection
fatalities as the nexus for their campaign against Red Light Running. True to form, as in all their
(misinformation) campaigns, only a small percentage of these actually occurred
at intersections with traffic lights, and much smaller number of those involved
entries on red.
Nonetheless, enforcement officers could earn
personal supplemental pay for writing tickets, providing they met their
enforcement quotas; by sitting in at high volume low accident rate intersections
writing red light running tickets. Good program, high volume and easy money for
all.
After the success of these propaganda campaigns by
the USDOT, this is when the art of using ÒRelatedÓ became something many other
federal agencies began to emulate. Related is what you use when the conclusion isnÕt supported
by the facts. Name a PSA, program
or study, repeat process based on ÒRelatedÓ, same incredible false foundations.
For decades now not single ÒrelatedÓ
headline has survived review.
Suffice to say that all studies that do not support
USDOT agendas have been removed from the government reference base, been
discredited or replaced with faux studies using NHTSA data designed to deceive.
After decades of fraud why hasnÕt the mainstream
press reported the truth, because our rights and freedoms are dependent on
transparency and public exposure of wrong doing. Think about this way, they need content and government safety
headlines have become safe content, inexpensive to produce fill, which make
great headlines. Add to this the
US Government; insurance companies etc are also long term staples of their
advertising revenues. ItÕs not good business to question one of your largest benefactors.
Then there is always the good
community member factor where we shall not speak badly about our public
servants, our heroes. They would
never doing anything except what is best for our safety, like Madoff did for
his investors.
Then, politicians add their weight behind the
efforts; and here we find another miracle, articulated rescue legislation ready
for enactment with a cute acronym title that was drafted weeks and months
before the crisis in search of a solution headline was reported in the news.
These are not coincidences. TheyÕre well financed and orchestrated
charades backed by tax payer funded national marketing plans to pummel the
public with a barrage of releases that appear to be on the same message but
arrived at independently. This is
an end justifies the ends conspiracy on a scale that is unimaginable; what they
have in common is empire building, power, unfettered access to the public
trough and your wallet.
Our NationÕs Highway Safety Programs themselves
have become nothing more than Ponzi schemes that are reaching a breaking point!
The oil shock wounded their cash
cow and the economic downturn put it on life support; related fees, fines,
surcharges and funding sources are all down dramatically while their operating
cost has increased. Add to this,
these Ponzi schemes also have massive unfunded legacy entitlement costs that
are soaring. Their only source of
funding is YOU! They need new
crimes to be invented, with increased fees, fines and justifications for the
MONEY! The USDOT even has a
marketing group dedicated to inventing new crimes and justifications and
creating the public myths needed for adoption.
Massive unfunded legacy cost?
During the National Maximum Speed Limit (NMSL)
Congress financed and mandated the build up of an army to write citations to
save fuel that was to be paid for with the take from traffic citations? Which also meant an army of support
personnel with facilities, courthouses etc. Billions of citations over the years written to motorists
according to the FHWA for otherwise driving safely, creating a funding
ADDICTION for this highway safety industrial complex with no viable alternative
source, except new crimes and you.
A failed policy for sure, but repealing the NMSL
didnÕt end its fiscal consequences. Now we had a public sector monster vested
in writing citations and manned with people guaranteed a job, with retirement. Now, who pays for the estimated half
million personnel that have now retired with full pay and benefits; officers,
support staff, DAs, judges, court clerks, DMV etc whose jobs were based on
traffic citation income? You! OH! Yes, weÕre also paying for the retirement and medical plans
for their replacements writing citations to those otherwise driving safely,
too!
Automated enforcement has become the public safety Promised
Land because it gives them a chance increases their take, at lower cost. But before it could be made truly
profitable the USDOT and the insurance companies conspired to totally eliminate
the safety standard impediments and the pesky due process or Constitutional
implications in their accessing your wallet. In the short term, they have
succeeded because the courts also get a piece of the take, but this purported
authority and its foundations were unlawfully promulgated by the USDOT and itÕs
challengeable.
We claim they are killing us by the thousands each
year, which is true. LetÕs take a look how this effects roadway safety. There are so many organizations that use
the word safety, so many they need their own phone book, have their own
conventions and millions of members. But when it you get into the organization, infrastructure and
engineering of safe roadways some shocking truths become apparent. Each is only interested in its own
interest and there is no person, or procedure under our federal safety
standards to assure the safety of roadway.
In 1988, federal law required a safety audit
(comprehensive engineering study) on every roadway open to public travel once
every five years, it never happened, still the case 20 years later. In states like California that require
them on some classifications of roads, they have devolved into a 10 minute
survey that has gone out to bid for as little as 35 dollars each. Of course the engineer that signs it did
not review the safety condition or read the accident reports, either. Oh, this is good for seven years there. When we complained to the FHWA, they
removed the requirement and said you can now set all traffic control per local
whim, it doesnÕt matter that this is insanely unsafe practice and contrary to
our federal laws.
The traffic engineers do traffic control devices,
if you have one, the majority of the entities do not have traffic engineers. The police write citations, emergency
services respond to incidents and public works builds the roadways.
There are too many of the following to explain them
here, but federal law requires every device in the public right of way be
designed to breakaway because during the life of the roadway the probability of
an errant collision is high. Notwithstanding,
the traffic engineerÕs authority, if you have one, stops with the traffic
control device. If the city
decides to plant a tree that when it matures is two feet in diameter behind a
breakaway bus stop sign, there is no mechanism or safety engineer who has
authority oversight to stop it.
The number leading killers on extended trips is
sleep deficit, fatigue, complications form medical conditions etc and the most
effective remedy has been encouraging the use of rest stops to get out and walk
around or to take cat naps. We
have the money to pay overtime with ticket quotas, but no money to keep our
rest areas open.
Per the head of the FHWA Office of Traffic
Operations (HOTO), we have no time for standards or practice oversight, weÕre
just not interested in it; our focus is on building roadways. In addition to
removing factual foundations for roadways, they sanctioned yellow light timing
that gives a green light to cross traffic without adequate time for the
conflicting traffic to clear. DonÕt
worry; it makes your town or city lots of money.
In fact one member of the traffic safety industrial
complex (Lockheed Martin) parleyed its public sector VP (prior House
Transportation Committee Chairman), and a member of its board of directors
(wife of US VP) into a cabinet post; and then they hired a former Chief of the
California Highway Patrol as its automated division president, spokesperson. What an effective and profitable
enterprise for the money - according to the Washington DC public safety
officials. Writing more than
70,000 citations a month, mostly to visitors, based on very unsafe engineering
practices which increase their take.
ItÕs for safety, despite the 70 thousand safety
tickets written in a month that must make it the safest place in the US - DC
has the dubious honor of having one of the highest insurance claim rates in the
country. They were writing so many
citations that the city employee responsible for fine collect told those that
got a citation, and thought they were innocent, DC was no longer able to see
people in person, so if you have complaint, send us a letter. When the public uproar got to be a
problem for LM, they sold this operation for 800 millions, and shortly
thereafter their VP resigned his Transportation Cabinet post.
DonÕt worry the insurance have figured out to get
their pound of flesh, using their access to each stateÕs DMV records and their
proprietary underwriting practices, without legislative approval or points
being assessed to a driving record, they are picking and choosing justification
that just appear on the new premium statement, without explanation. The following can cause up to a doubling
of premiums, one day late paying, poor credit report, child support action, the
mention of an incident even if no claim is filed, a vehicle you own caught in
automated enforcement trap or by license plate reader for unpaid property tax
or records latency between a payment and it being register in the computer
record etc.
Notwithstanding, there is only so much money you
can steal in the name of safety before those you think youÕve conquered get out
their pitchforks, and our ÔWe the PeopleÕ Constitution is on our side. Does the bailout cover USA made
pitchforks or light sabers? We would have said Tea Bags, but it seemed a little
inadequate.
Early in 2008,
in a press release, we made two based-in-fact forecasts;
1. That 2008 would have both the lowest number of those killed and
fatality rates of all time; and
2. That every public
agency that could issue a press release, would claim credit for their program du
jureÕs reductions in fatalities which they had nothing whatsoever to do with.
Both were right on point and came true!
Which prognosticator has the greatest direct
correlation to fatality rates? ItÕs
the health of the economy, unemployment rates, the cost and availability of
fuel and how these affect travel patterns, vehicle choice, occupancy and miles
driven. ItÕs not traffic
enforcement, the number posted on a sign, zero tolerance, roadblock, check your
papers or pretext stops, devices or method of communication, double fines or
the age of the driver.
During periods of a system shock, the highest risk
discretionary driving all but ceases. Therefore the drop in fatalities will always be greater than
the reduction in miles driven. During
these shock periods vehicles and roadways improve and by the time the economy
recovers, the rates appear to plateau for a few years, as they gradual return
of the highest risk activities are mitigated for by the improvements. Thus, when charted over time, the
overall rates continue their historical decline virtually unabated.
LetÕs talk about some of the recent Trojan Horse headlines;
free content that the media outlets love to use and pontificate on, but never
verify. There is no excuse for the
Politicians except ignorance or power, and neither is a good answer.
Trojan Horse #1
ÒHigher U.S. speed limit linked to 12,500 more
deathsÓ
Great attention getting headline and double the
6,400 deaths a year the lobbyist safety experts, IIHS, NHTSA et al claimed
would occur if the speed limits were repealed in 1995, which never happened.
Speeds went up, death rates dropped, and this correlation over 10 years to
higher posted limits is no less incredible. Then there were the lives purportedly saved by the 55 mph
limit, by NHTSA, courtesy of the same pool of creative statisticians we are
getting our current jobs created and economic recovery data from.
There are many correlated causation factors in
short term incremental fatality rate increases which include normal deviations,
the economy, weather, roadway environment and nature of use; but raising the
number on a sign on a limited access highway isnÕt one of them! Montana Paradox: During this period of
this purported increase caused by higher posted limits, Montana recorded its
lowest fatality rate in modern times by eliminating its daytime speed limits.
Truth: Death rates during peak enforcement
of the 55 mph National Speed Limit were 3.5 deaths per million miles
driven, now it's 1.12*, or fatality rates were 313 percent higher with the
55 mph NMSL. Despite this
Trojan horse headline, today speeds have never been higher and our roads have
never been safer. For those concerned about our total carbon footprint, they
will be surprised to learn that lower highway speed limits DO NOT save energy
either. (details upon request) *1st quarter 2009 (NHTSA FARS)
Trojan Horse #2
ÒU.S. Withheld Data
on Risks of Distracted DrivingÓ
What an amazing responsive government we have: from
the NY Times report that the government is withholding safety data; to all of
distracted driving studies being released and cited in multiple national media
outlets; to 4 US Senators drafting and introducing the ÒALERT DriversÓ Act that
would take away 25% of a stateÕs highway funding for non compliance; and the
USDOT having set a date certain Safety Summit scheduled where Mr. LaHood
assures action will be taken, in advance of the findings. ALL IN TWO WEEKS? IsnÕt it incredible
how efficient they can be when they want access to your wallet or subjugate you
to their whim?
WhatÕs more troubling is CongressÕ and the USDOTÕs
et al lack of knowledge in this field. TheyÕve become so vested in propaganda,
self and special interest, power and empire building, they missed the fact that
roadways and their regulation is already in Constitution. Congress delegated roadway safety
oversight to the USDOT; the US Constitution and federal regulations govern its
conduct, and all acts by the states and US territories in this field are
subordinate.
If this is a safety problem the mechanism to
promulgate the appropriate regulations are already in place. It requires reasoned a hypothesis,
empirical studies and field trials to verify the hypothesis and unintended
consequence, acceptance, economic effects, and effectiveness in accomplishing
the stated goals; if need substantiated, standards and practices are to be promulgated
and implemented uniformly regardless of state lines or jurisdiction to assure
safety, and due process.
The problem is the USDOT doesnÕt do regulation
oversight, reasoned, empirical fact based or uniformity well, in fact it could
be argued it has been non existent for decades now. If Congress really wanted to be constructive, it would hold
hearings to ask why the USDOT has strayed from its delegated by law fact based
standards and oversight responsibilities, to assure we have one nation, application,
expectation and due process protections.
Before we get into the underlying foundations of
their arguments, letÕs take a moment and look at the scope of what is included
in the category of distracted driving: any human emotion or activity, including
banning mothers from talking to their children while driving. Truth is always stranger than fiction;
look at the SB 1800 that passed out of the California Senate Transportation
Committee by the same cadre of Trojan Horse sponsors. It took considerable effort to thwart
this. Once an act is passed, additions become all but impossible to stop. A be careful of what you wish for
because it can be very scary!
Section 23123 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read:
(b)
For the purposes of this section, a "distracting activity" is any of
the following:
(1) Using or adjusting a wireless telephone,
regardless of whether the telephone is specifically designed and configured to
allow hands-free operation
(2) Using or adjusting a personal electronic
device, including, but not limited to, a personal digital assistant
(3) Adjusting the controls of an audio or other
entertainment device
(4) Adjusting or manipulating the controls of an
information system device
(5) Smoking
(6) Eating or drinking
(7) Interacting with children, animals, passengers,
or objects in the vehicle.
(8) Performing personal grooming or personal
hygiene activities
(9) Reading or writing
Besides the traffic stops that truly put you or
your loved ones in real danger on the shoulder of a busy highway, feet away
from high speed traffic to extract a few dollars, there is no evidence
whatsoever that these cell phone laws have had any effect. ItÕs probably because there is no
evidence that cell phone use has had any statistically significant effect on
accident rates. Particularly when you add in the trips they eliminate or when
they assist the driver to a more direct route.
DonÕt worry; if youÕre killed or injured as the
consequence of traffic enforcement activity, there is no such database. Therefore, it never happened. The only thing they attribute is if the
officer or their vehicle is involved. Oh, guess itÕs also impolite to mention that none of these
use bans were adopted per the requirements of the US Constitution or governing
federal prerequisites; illegal. ThatÕs
OK, despite the USDOTÕs oversight mandate, anarchy in oversight, standards,
application, expectation and compliance is the norm, and its long-standing
policy is not to act on violations.
As for FOIA and the withheld studies, that was a
charade too because these studies were already in the public domain. Each was the result of USDOT grants
whose conclusions were preordained. The video clip from Utah is a classic; a narrow,
10 foot wide serpentine course lined with low cones, that you cannot see when
you are close to them. A course
that some were having trouble navigating without distractions, then the
students were told to drive at the same speed and dial their phones etcÉ DUH!
Aside from banning mothers from talking with their
children or changing the channel on their radio, in regard to distracted
driving what does a cell phone and its use represent to us a society, our
safety and an incomprehensible probable-cause pretext law that would sanction
traffic stops at will. That once
passed would never be relinquished, a prohibition on steroids. The prelude to a
Police State in which the USDOT is a already charter member; pilot efforts
coordinate pretext traffic stops for quote ÔCommunity PolicingÕ - profiling and
papers please, see Trojan Horse 3.
At best, the Trojan Horse Safety Summit is focused
on looking backwards, like the Luddites who shunned technology, rather than
examining what is good, where are we going and how can we take advantage of
these technologies to improve our safety, commerce and environment.
What we know for sure when you look at the use and
accident charts, there is no foundation for new draconian federal regulations
that will be ignored, ineffective in its stated goals and irrelevant, except
for the abuses and barriers to advancements that would come to pass. Which defines NHTSAÕs regulation of
technologies since its inception; where staff personal opinion, turf and
special interest based regulations are the norm, not advances in science or the
common good.
The term cell phone has been a misnomer for some
time now. TheyÕre Communicators:
personal interfaces between people and computers in commerce, navigation,
security, personal assistants, social networks and thousands of other
applications whose use is ubiquitous in a 21st century society. Electronic extension of our lives in a
mobile society, tools whose use for many began when they were eight or nine
years old when their parents provided them for security and communication
purposes.
Driving, computer interfaces and communications use
motor skills and cognitive thought. Our brains have a remarkable ability to assimilate motor
skills that allow us to perform a host of tasks almost
automatically—driving a car, riding a bicycle, typing on a keyboard,
talking and texting for many. Cognitive
thought requires our attention; nonetheless, our motor skills continue to work
autonomously in the background.
ItÕs not uncommon when we drive and talk to miss a
turn off, but that doesnÕt mean a crash was immanent. Our safety record shows that doing both
is not irreconcilable with safe driving. Humans are also amazing because we
adapt and invent solutions accordingly to the need, taking advantage of the
technologies at hand. If weÕre uncomfortable
with something, we stop because we do not like to be outside of our comfort
zone. Those that can multi task
safely do, those that are not comfortable with multi tasking, donÕt.
Intelligent vehicles and roadways are our safety
future. They will tell you of
approaching curves, use adaptive cruise control to maintain safe following
distances and even maintain your vehicle track in your lane.
Smart phones have many of the advanced navigation
features too, including providing us with the most efficient route according to
our choice, tell us in advance of a turn, which lane to be in, closest gas,
food etc or of traffic jams ahead and possible alternative routes. These are very powerful computers that
already have application options that can turn text to speech or speech to
text. TheyÕre advancing faster
than we can assimilate all the options, so we pick a few that meet our needs
best for daily use.
For those whose motor skills include texting, they
prefer it speech to such a point that ÒAn Iowa 911 Call Center is the First to
Accept Text MessagesÓ. ThereÕs
more than a little irony in those that have trouble texting a few words a
minute, outlawed it for those that text on average 70 words a minute without
looking, even when theyÕre stopped in traffic.
As for commerce, on board computing increases
productivity, safety, reduces cost, fuel use and today, the NOT IN THE USA news
headline: ÒVirtual co-drivers will make trucks of the future saferÓ
Trucks of the future could be equipped with an on-board
digital co-driver to assist the human behind the wheel, or even take over if
the driver loses control. The HAVEit project (short for Highly Automated
Vehicles for Intelligent Transport) has 28 million Euros (USD$40 million) at
its disposal and is aiming to develop a virtual co-driver that responds to both
traffic conditions and drivers' needs.
This type of seed money and research just doesnÕt
happen here, what they are doing there is the equivalent of DARPA for safer
roads and vehicles. Thereby creating
new jobs from technology. We need it here! Sorry, we do spend money on
increasing the efficiency of processing the take.
Are there instances or locations where any activity
that would cause an operator to be distracted to point of causing a safety
problem, yes, and that needs to be addressed, but passing a draconian law to
subjugate an entire nation to their whim is not an acceptable option in a free
society.
Again the real crime here is the if USDOT took
safety seriously, we could save thousands each year and injuries to hundreds of
thousands more within a few years, without a single new law or enforcement
program, if there was funding for infrastructure safety innovations, research,
or solutions.
Trojan Horse #3
ÒData-Driven Approaches to Crime and Traffic SafetyÓ
By James H. Burch II, Acting Director, Bureau of
Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.; and Michael
N. Geraci, Director, Office of Safety Programs, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C.
http://policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display&article_id=1839&issue_id=72009/
The parallels here to our current criminal justice
system, the USDOT, DOJ, NIJ, BJA, IACP, et al, the Stanford Prison Experiment
and our Founding FathersÕ fears of the manifestation of power, are all combined
in this effort. The title belies the truth, this is nothing more than using
traffic stops as a pretext for selective enforcement, profiling and papers
checks. AKA Community Policing and
DDACTS. We have made many data driven solution recommendation that could make
the roadways safer, but that is all they would do. Therefore funding is
virtually impossible.
We have the quaint and old fashioned belief that
the Constitution has meaning, that USDOT administrative acts must be in
compliance with the Constitution, CongressÕ intent and federal regulation that
govern its conduct, including its oversight responsibilities, and that all
engineering practices be fact based and the exercise of police powers conform
to the requirements of our laws.
Roadway safety and all traffic control is governed
by Law of the Land; the U.S. Constitution, CongressÕ intent in this field,
Title 23 and its MUTCD et al, Supremacy, Commerce and Equal Protection
Clause(s), the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th amendment protections thereof regarding
the exercise of police powers enforcing federally regulated devices. The
exercise of police powers thereof SHALL also be fact based and uniformly
applied regardless of state lines, entity type or classification on any public
or private roadway, pedestrian facility or bikeway open to the public within
the U.S. and its territories.
A concept that is openly ridiculed and to our
knowledge, not a single entity in the country is in compliance. We even have considered running a
contest to find just one location. Bottom line, without oversight by the USDOT, no one else in
the system will act against their own interest regardless of the Law of the
Land.
When you overlay actual risk, the law and practice,
over 90 percent of our current traffic stops are for invented reasons, for
revenue, and not safety according to the FHWA. Stopping someone for a license plate light being out has
always been tenuous probable cause, at best. Then you add federal ticket quotas
and incentives for writing citations for personal gain, pretext roadblocks that
become paper checks in selected communities where assessments are often greater
than a hundred thousand dollars in fees and fines in a single day, not counting
the confiscation of more than a hundred vehicles.
How did we get to point where these are good
things? These programs are turning
us into a police state, itÕs not policing for the common good. Safety and fair laws need dedicated
professionals that are champions for their profession, the rule of law,
uniformity and fact based standards, as well as common good stewards for ÒWe
the PeopleÓ. Maybe the USDOT just needs a little help to find the instruction
manual that came with its charter.