Just to Clarify

Should LaHood Ban Passengers?

One great thing about being a cabinet secretary is you get a car and driver.  It’s great because you can then propose banning the driver’s use of cell phone use and not have to worry being a hypocrite.

Banning all cell phone use is exactly what the Honorable Ray LaHood seems to be proposing.  In an article that ran in Automotive News, LaHood compares cell phone use to drunk driving and seat belt use. (Seriously) 

I get that drivers need to pay attention.  Accidents and injuries caused by driver distraction are a bad thing.   But as Automotive News notes, even the IIHS has said that LaHood is focusing too much attention on distracted driving instead of other safety pursuits.

So what is LaHood really up to?  Perhaps burnishing his safety credentials for his post DoT career?

It is hard to say for sure.  One thing I can say:  If he is really serious about driver distractions, why stop at cell phones?  Why not go all the way and ban other forms of distractions a well? 

And what could be more of a distraction than turning to talk with a passenger?    Why not ban passengers?

After all, when you are being chauffeured to work, what is the downside?

You can read the Automotive News piece here.

More on Distracted Driving

Just in time for the Honorable Ray LaHood's Distracted Driving Summit , California's AAA released a study showing that texting while driving has doubled since it was banned.  (More on the study here.)

Presumably this is not what California's legistators had in mind.  The AAA, perhaps predictably, called for more and harsher enforcement. 

Let me be clear, texting while driving is a bad idea.  Having said this, the solution to every problem is not regulation. 

We posted a good piece last week that looks at possible solutions.  You can read it here.

 

Is the Distracted Driving Summit a Distraction?

I sent another letter this week to our friends in Washington.  This one is to The Honorable Ray LaHood about his distracted driving "summit" to be held September 21st. http://www.edmunds.com/industry-car-news/distracted-driving-summit-letter.html

 

If the intent is to generate headlines he has scripted the summit well, with safety advocates (isn't that everyone?), researchers and victims all slated to appear.

 

It is easy to compare distracted driving to seat belt use and assume that mandating (or banning) various activities is the fix.

 

This would but a win on the safety checklist, but would also be a mistake.  After all, there are plenty of examples of "fixes" that sound good but are useless.  Think about the seat belt* warning stickers that are plastered all over your vehicles visor.  Have you ever read them?  A few manufacturers deserve praise for making these stickers--albeit difficult--possible to remove.  Most fuse them on in a manner that means removal will destroy the visor.

 

Or how about the distracted driving warning screen that pops up when you try to use your Bluetooth to make a cell phone call.  Finding the enter button to remove the screen is so distracting it could easily cause an accident.

 

Distracted driving is a nice blameless way to describe a problem that really should be termed irresponsible driving.  No responsible driver would eat cereal while commuting to work.  Or apply makeup.  Or shave.  Or read the paper.  Or take their eyes of the road to talk with a passenger.  Etc, etc. etc.

 

I am all for discussing this issue.  But it needs to be an adult conversation that acknowledges the real benefits of modern technology and looks for real solutions.

 

*  This was a test.  They actually are airbag warning labels.  Just wanted to see if anyone actually paid them any attention.