Make no mistake; DOT and its safety partners will continue fighting against distracted driving

Last Thursday, I blogged about misleading claims from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) disparaging the effectiveness of good laws and good enforcement in our campaign to end distracted driving.

Unfortunately, they're at it again today with another misleading "study."

The Highway Loss Data Institute, an affiliate of IIHS, is now saying that state anti-texting laws may actually "increase" the overall number of crashes statewide. There are numerous flaws with this "study," but the most obvious is that they have created a cause and effect that simply doesn't exist.

For example, we have a national law against drunk driving. People are also required to wear seat belts. But if the number of fatalities in a state goes up one year, would it now pass as "research" to say that seat belt and anti-drunk driving laws are to blame?

This "study" is also inconsistent with research that HLDI-IIHS has relied on in the past, showing that drivers are four times as likely to crash if using a handheld device while driving. What's more, they don't actually take into account whether distracted driving behavior went up or down in the four hand-picked states they looked at.

Fortunately, the Department of Transportation can help on that front, and we can prove that good laws coupled with tough enforcement can reduce deadly distracted driving behavior. In April, we launched pilot enforcement campaigns, called "Phone in One Hand, Ticket in the Other" in Hartford, CT and Syracuse, NY.

In the last six months alone, hand held cell phone use has dropped 56% in Hartford and 38% in Syracuse; and texting while driving has declined 68% in Hartford and 42% in Syracuse.

Listening to Syracuse Police Dept. Captain Shannon Trice discuss the effectiveness of our pilot enforcement program

But you wouldn't know about the importance of good enforcement from reading IIHS's misleading report.

That's because they leave enforcement completely unaddressed. But we all know that good laws don't mean anything without tough enforcement.

Look, from 2005 to 2008, distraction-related fatalities as a proportion of all traffic fatalities jumped from 10% to 16%. In 2009, for the first time in four years, that percentage was stabilized. That leveling off coincided with our national anti-distracted driving campaign, other public education efforts, and an increasing number of state anti-distracted driving laws.

That tells us that--although distracted driving is still a massive epidemic--our efforts to raise public awareness, enact tough laws, and step up enforcement can make a difference and save lives.

Look, distracted driving-related crashes killed nearly 5,500 people in 2009 and injured almost half a million more. So we are not about to put the brakes on this safety campaign.People's lives are at stake.

Gina Harrisdescribes the last moments of her daughter, Brittanie, who crashed her car and died while talking on her cell phone.

I'm not alone in my criticism of IIHS's "study" today. It's own members have taken notice.

In a statement today, Allstate VP Joan Walker said:

"Legislation is only the first step. To have real impact, laws must be strongly enforced so that the consequence for texting while driving is a tough penalty and not the end of a life. Legislation must be combined with law enforcement and public education programs to create a real shift in changing safe driving norms.”

Motorist advocates AAA agreed:

"It is not realistic to expect that simply enacting a law to ban texting while driving will have a large, immediate impact on crash totals in a state in the first months. Well established safety research suggests changing dangerous behavior takes well written laws, strong public outreach, high-visibility enforcement, substantial penalties for violations and adequate time."

And the families who have lost loved ones to distracted driving can't afford to see our efforts undermined. As Focus Driven President Jennifer Smith said:

"We are not surprised that claims did not decrease after texting laws were implemented in these states. Texting is a compelling, maybe addicting activity. But we need to start somewhere, and texting legislation with significant penalties and strong enforcement is a great start."

The National Safety Council joined the groundswell of opposition, saying:

"Importantly, NSC disagrees with any suggestion that the narrow findings of today’s report are definitive evidence that all cell phone or texting bans do not and will not ever work."

Russ Hurd, who spoke at our Distracted Driving Summit last week about the loss of his daughter also noted the importance of the good laws-good enforcement model, saying, "We only learned not to drink and drive because it's against the law."

It's also important for people to realize that as we fight to end distracted driving and get drivers to take personal responsibility for their driving behavior--we have redoubled our road safety efforts across the board. And we have been effective so far at bringing down road fatalities.

In fact, in 2009, traffic fatalities declined to their lowest number on record. And yesterday, NHTSA released a report showing that in the first half of 2010, that downward trend of traffic fatalities continued, plummeting another 9.2%.

These numbers tell us that our efforts are saving lives. But our roads can always be safer, and you can rest assured I will continue working to put an end to distracted driving and tackling our other road safety challenges.

Comments

[Joeseph]

Quit being misleading by going against the studies. Your own uninformed opinion seems less relevant than 2 studies with statistics backing them up.

[Live Chat Software Guy]

Glad to see those numbers of texting while driving coming down.

I encourage public awareness to the problem.

I feel for those families that have lost loved ones due to distracted driving.

One question I have is, is distracted driving always considered by cell phone use or does radio, eating and other factors contribute to the statistics?

[PHIL LATONA]

CHECK OUT THE WEB SITE, NODRIVERDISTRACTION.COM LOTS OF INFO . ABOUT DISTRACTION IN DRIVING...

[Bruce Bartolf]

Ray, I appreciate your feelings, but you're responding emotionally to a single data point. It will take at least a year or two of data collection before we know the impacts of laws.

But you, too, are creating false conclusions without data. I don't know who is correct, but both sides need more data before we write more laws that may not work, or may work counter to your desired outcome.

Thanks for your thoughtful blogging. I appreciate public figures who communicate and are passionate about what they do.

[Michael]

Perhaps LaHood is correct that no safety effect shows up in the data because of an absence of enforcement. But this seems to be the best study to date, and the finding of no effect should at least cause some hesitation about claims that distracted driving causes many deaths. The best study of cell phone use -- the only one to use a methodology that can successfully separate out correlation and causation -- shows a similar result. http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2007/08/13_cellphone.shtml My guess is that there may be small safety effects from texting, but that the effects are not much greater than other distractions, and that is why this is not showing up in the data.

LaHood seems to believe that academic research should only be taken seriously when it confirms his preexisting notions. (He took a similar approach to a study on child safety seats, siding with one study over another, even though the study questioning safety improvements had by far the better methodology.) The appropriate reaction of LaHood in this case might be to say that we should be cautious in interpreting the latest results and that more study is needed. Instead, he simply assumes that his preexisting beliefs are correct and denounces the study.

Incidentally, there is no reason to believe that IIHS is biased. In general, IIHS has strong incentives to improve highway safety, because such improvements will tend to benefit insurance companies.

[Harland Roades]

It amazes me that the government is not aware that current technology exists today to prevent people from using their electronic devices. My GPS will not take instructions if it is moving. I own a Garmin Nuvi 1300 GPS and the unit will stop taking instructions when the car travels over a certain speed. Most phones have GPS and it would be simple for a manufacturer to install such a feature in cell phones.

[Ed McCormick]

While I strongly agree with your position regarding the use of wireless devices while driving, I see a major lack of law enforcement response to curtail the use. As a matter of fact, I see a lot of law enforcement using phones while driving, whether texting or talking. I feel they should be the first to follow the suggestions and refrain from the use, while driving. That effort may begin to get the message across.

[Michael Price]

Unfortunately the statistic is probably accurate. Here's why if I may quote another's posting on Jalopnik (and in honesty I find myself doing this too)...

OMGItsWeasel on 09/28/10 wrote:
wow. common sense says that if you can't do something out in the open, you do it as hidden as you can. the reason its gone up is because instead of being able to prop my phone against the wheel and text with my peripheral vision, i now have to put the phone in my lap and glance at the phone to check what im saying, taking my eyes totally off the road instead of just kinda off the road.

[Adam R.]

As Jennifer Smith stated, "texting legislation with significant penalties and strong enforcement is a great start."

Notice the key words there... "strong enforcement"

Here in California there is no "strong enforcement" in fact there is no enforcement of these anti-txting/anti-cellphone laws at all! When the laws were first passed one could see a slight dip in the number of people with a phone plastered to the side of their head or with their faces at their steering wheels while they txted on their phones. However that 'dip' has gone away and now when you drive through the streets of any random California town you'll notice people are still driving distracted with their cell phones stuck to their faces or txting while driving.

We NEED "strong enforcement" of these laws! I see far too much of this behavior happening and far too many police officers passing the people committing these infractions. Can someone please actually put some pressure on our law enforcement agencies to actually enforce these laws? It's great to have a law... but without enforcement its just a bunch of words on paper.

[Scott Shapiro]

With all due respect, Mr. LaHood, isn't it *possible* that with a law against using mobile devices in the car that people are now simply using them below the dash instead of above (taking their eyes off the road even more than before?) I appreciate your efforts and I'm not saying there don't need to be laws to save lives, but I think the problem cannot be solved this way alone. I would like to see some proposals coming out of Washington which focus on how to *safely* integrate the use of mobile technology into vehicles. Heads-up displays, voice recognition, and proximity sensors have been mainstream off-the-shelf technology for years now. If implemented in tandem, we would have a safe texting experience which would kill the display when the car senses danger (proximity to car ahead, lane diversion, excessive speed, etc.) Yes, this could even be the first real incentive for people to reduce speeding...

[J.P.Mathis]

Please continue the fight!

I almost lost my daughter-in-law and two precious grandchildren because of this idiotic behavior. After that incident last year, my life changed forever.

I live in a state that has yet to ban texting or the use of hand held devices while driving. As long as there is breath in my body, I will work (along with others in my community) to raise the level of awareness of the dangers of distracted driving; facilitate efforts to modify the behavior of those who engage in this dangerous behavior; and to rally support for passing a law to ban texting while driving.

We will be right there with you in this effort (fight) to save lives!

We are grateful to you for your passion,hard work and determination.

May God bless you.

[Michael E. Bailey]

We need to keep moving forward in the fight to end distracted driving and we cannot be sidetracked or go backword because of a poorly done study that an indistry organization has done. It is not just the state law that counts; yoyu also have to include tough law enforcement, high penalties and public outreach and education integrated into a total package. Such a package is what works best and is what was not looked at in the industry report. Best wishes, Michael E. Bailey.

[Carroll]

Distracted driving is becoming a real problem. I hope that all the States enact laws against it. And, I also hope that all the Police Departments will enforce those laws.

It's one thing to make people aware of the problem, and make laws against it, but they must bare their teeth and make people obey those laws.

[Ryan]

Distracted driving is a serious problem in this country! As is the overall low skill level of drivers on the road.

It would be nice to see the US DOT champion some programs that would actually improve road safety and increase traffic flow, rather than beating a dead horse.

1) Implimenting more stringent drivers training
2) Creating "levels" of licenses based on the size/class of the vehicle you drive. (driving a Geo Metro is alot different than a Ford F350 super duty isnt it?)
3) Keep right EXCEPT to pass.... Enforce current laws!
4) More frequent driving tests. Driving is a privlidge, not a right.

[A.G.]

Secretary LaHood--

ADHD is a condition where moderation of stimulation is helpful. Often, a person with ADHD is more distracted when there's less stimulation, as his mind searches to meet that need. Cellphone usage has decreased the distractedness of some drivers, paradoxically, as it allows them to focus more on driving. Is the DOT going to take a stance wholly against disabilities and safety, or will it consider cellphones as an adaptive technology for some and allow their use to improve safety?

[Phillip]

Enforce the laws on the books first. Then create new ones that prevent other current unsafe conditions.

[Jim Klark]

I know what the studies say, but when I am driving down the road and come across a vehicle that is moving erratically, going too slow, weaving out of their lane it is usually a case of the driver texting or talking on their cell phone. I don't need a study to tell that these drivers are unsafe. I all for the distracted driving legislation.

[DeeAnn Downing]

Dear Secretary LaHood,
I am forty six and since I was a little girl, folks have been dying in car crashes while changing their radio dial. Are you going to ban radios and iPods too?

People WANT to be distracted and will find something else to distract themselves.

By the way, do you drive yourself to work or do you have a driver? Minus that drive / talk time from your work day. You will be affecting folks' productivity across every socio-economic level--that is except for those can afford a drivers.

I listened to you interview on NPR today. You sound insincere and self-righteous on this one. Can you find something else to crusade that you are truly passionate about?

My best,
Dee Downing
Park City, Utah

[Grilled]

I know what the studies say, but when I am driving down the road and come across a vehicle that is moving erratically, going too slow, weaving out of their lane it is usually a case of the driver texting or talking on their cell phone. I don't need a study to tell that these drivers are unsafe. I all for the distracted driving legislation.

Forex On Autopilot
http://forexonautopilotonline.com/

[Dan B]

I like what on of the other comments mentioned about his GPS not working above a certain speed. if the same technology were applied to cell phones, the number of injuries and deaths would drop dramaticly.

[Mass Traffic Leak]

This will be very hard to apply because not all the smartphones have GPS incorporated. I think would be easier to make a campaign to promote some bluetooth devices and make the teenagers aware of the danger they put in when they use the cell phone when driving!