The head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says he favors airing television commercials depicting graphic car crashes to bring home the message of vehicle safety. Dr. Ricardo Martinez, NHTSA chief, said his office would like to get commercials out by the end of this year or early next. They would be re-enactments similar to those shown in Australia, not crash footage, he said. " I love the concept, " said Martinez, who acknowledged the idea may face resistance from television stations reluctant to broadcast disturbing messages.

Martinez also said that fewer than 5,000 people have asked to de-activate their vehicle's air bags since a rule was passed late last year. The rule allows small people and certain other to request that a dealer de-activate the air bag. Martinez called for a minimal safety standard for cars and light trucks - sport-utility vehicles, pickups and mini-vans. " We believe strongly that all these vehicles, if used extensively in transportation of our children and families, should offer a minimum safety standard, " he said. Cars and light trucks meet most of the same safety mandates, such as side-impact requirements, but not all of them, he said. Martinez said NHTSA will be studying weight and safety issues as they relate to crashes between cars and heavier trucks. " We're concerned about the compatibility issues on that, " he said. But he added that data results will not be available before the end of the year.

Martinez said NHTSA is trying to focus public attention on the fact that driving distractions are becoming more of a concern. But he said the agency is not pushing for federal legislation that would regulate cellular phones or other devices it views as distractions. Martinez also said NHTSA would like to find a way to study rollover standards. And he urged the auto industry to work with crash investigators on vehicle design and view crash data as unbiased feedback.

This article originally appeared in the Chicago Tribune Transportation Section.

Return to Table on Contents

Higher-Risk Driver Crackdown: New Program Proposal Targets Repeat Offenders

Few events are more tragic than the death of an innocent person in a crash caused by a convicted drunk driver. Why is such an individual driving drunk again? Why is such an individual driving at all? MADD has always fought for drunk driving sanctions to prevent recurrences of this high-risk behavior that kills thousands of people and injures more than a million others each year. Research continues to provide insights into the dangers of hardcore drunk drivers. Yet, we have made little progress over the last 20 years in controlling this menace.

The driver who killed the daughter of MADD's founder was convicted of drunk driving four times before and twice after that fatal crash. A repeat drunk driving offender killed 27 children and adults in the infamous 1988 Kentucky bus crash-the most deadly alcohol-related traffic crash in U.S. history. Sadly, these preventable, violent deaths are routinely covered in the back pages of major newspapers.

These higher-risk drivers often are repeat offenders-people who repeatedly drive after drinking, especially with a high blood alcohol content (BAC). They are resistant to changing their behavior. Most U.S. drivers convicted of driving while intoxicated (DWI) have a .15 percent BAC or higher. A driver at .15 BAC is over 300 times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash. While an estimated 85 percent of drivers in alcohol related fatal crashes don't have prior drunk driving convictions, those who do pose a substantially greater risk of causing a drunk driving crash.

Why do drivers who've been arrested and convicted, lost their licenses, and maybe served jail time continue to drink and drive, and to kill innocent motorists? While some drinking drivers are problem drinkers, others are menaces because they have personality problems that include aggression, hostility, and thrill seeking. Alcohol, in conjunction with personality disorders, makes these drivers hard to change. According to one study of injured drinking drivers a year after their crashes, one-half reported that they had driven while impaired after leaving the hospital. Experiencing serious injury doesn't deter many hardcore drinking drivers.

Not all higher-risk drivers come to the attention of the authorities before they are involved in a crash. But because they drink frequently and heavily, many eventually are apprehended for drunk driving, often more than once. Still, state laws and the criminal justice system overall are failing significantly to ensure that repeat drunk driving offenders do not get on the road again under the influence. There is a lack of knowledge about how to apprehend these offenders and control their impaired driving.

However, there is new promise in recent evaluations of state efforts including vehicle impoundment and forfeiture, license plate impoundment and tagging, and alcohol safety interlocks. These measures, combined with other effective tactics including license suspension and treatment programs, provide a growing array of tools for managing hardcore drinking drivers. It now appears possible to develop a comprehensive plan for controlling such drivers when they come to the attention of the local authorities, and also a system of laws and programs that can greatly reduce the risks posed by this dangerous group.

Embracing this research, MADD has developed a practical program for all 50 states. MADD's Higher Risk Driver Program calls for:

1. Restricting vehicle operation by these offenders by suspending their licenses for substantial periods, impounding or immobilizing their vehicles and requiring alcohol ignition interlock devices on their vehicles to prevent them from starting if the offenders have been drinking.
2. Requiring these offenders to make restitution to the community and drunk driving crash victims through fines and mandatory incarceration or community service and financial restitution to crash victims.
3. Promoting recovery programs for offenders with alcohol abuse problems through mandatory alcohol assessment and treatment, intensive probation and attendance at victim impact panels.

Although most of the remedies in MADD's plan are not new, they typically have been implemented on a piecemeal basis, producing a system full of loopholes. MADD's comprehensive approach should reduce the crashes by these high-risk drivers.

Return to Table on Contents

Highway Crashes Remain Leading Cause of Occupational Fatalities

Despite an increase in employment, the number of fatal work injuries in 1999 was 6,023, nearly the same number as the previous year, according to the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries, conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Highway crashes continued as the leading cause of on-the-job fatalities in 1999. Highway fatalities increased slightly over 1998 and reached the highest level since the BLS fatality census began in 1992. Slightly over two-fifths of the 1,491 people killed were truck drivers.

The number of workers who were killed in non-highway crashes and overturnings or those struck by a vehicle off-highway decreased in 1999. The number killed in air, water, and rail vehicle incidents stayed about the same from 1998 to 1999.

Occupations with large numbers of fatal injuries included truck driver, construction tradesman, and farm worker. Fatal injuries to truck drivers were at their highest level in the eight-year period.

Those who suffered fatal injuries most often were men, the self-employed, and older workers. This is due to the differences in the industries and occupations of these worker groups. Highway-related incidents were the leading cause of job-related fatalities among both men and women.

The states with the largest number of employees had the highest number of work-related fatalities. Four of the largest states - California, Texas, Florida, and New York - accounted for 2 percent of all work-related fatalities in the United States.

Highway/Motor Vehicle Crashes Lead List

In all four regions of the United States - the Northeast, Midwest, South, and West - highway-motor vehicle incidents were the leading cause of occupational fatalities.

About 44 percent of the fatal occupational highway incidents as well as almost half of the work-related homicides occurred in the South, which has 35 percent of total employment.

The census "provides the most complete count of fatal work injuries available," according to BLS. It uses diverse federal and state data sources to identify, verify, and profile work injuries.

For more information, contact BLS, (202) 691-6175; website http://stats.bls.gov/oshhome.htm.

This document was last updated on February 25, 2001.

Return to Table on Contents

Secretary Slater Announces Another Year of Progress for Highway Safety

U.S. Transportation Secretary Rodney E. Slater today announced that alcohol-related traffic fatalities dropped again to a new historical low and represented a smaller percentage of the total traffic fatalities, 38 percent in 1999 compared to 39 percent in 1998. Secretary Slater said that later today President Clinton will send a letter to Congress strongly urging them to adopt .08 blood alcohol content as the law of the land. Secretary Slater made the announcement with Members of Congress and the transportation industry in a salute to Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) for 20 years of accomplishment in helping to reduce alcohol-related crashes and fatalities.

"America's highways are safer than ever and I am encouraged by the progress we've made," Secretary Slater said. "These encouraging statistics reflect continuing, steady improvement in highway safety under the leadership of President Clinton and Vice President Gore, for whom safety is the highest transportation priority."

Secretary Slater also said that seat belt use has reached an all time high of 71 percent nationwide this year, another steady improvement on an upward trend from the 5 8 percent measured in the first national seat belt use survey completed in 1994.

In announcing results of a new seat belt survey and the 1999 Fatal Analysis Reporting System (FARS) assessment, Secretary Slater also said that President Clinton's goal of reducing fatalities among children five and under by 15 percent, set in 1997, was met in 1999, one year ahead of the President's target date. Fatalities in this group decreased to 555 in 1999 from 652 in 1996.

The 1999 FARS assessment by the U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) found that, while population, total registered vehicles, and miles traveled all increased in 1999, the fatality rate remained virtually unchanged from 1998. The fatality rate per I 00 million vehicle miles traveled was 1.6 in both 1998 and 1999. Total fatalities in 1999 were 41,611 compared to 41,501 in 1998. The total number of persons injured in crashes increased slightly from an estimated 3.19 million in 1998 to 3.24 million in 1999.

Secretary Slater credited the continuing hard work and support of the public-private partnerships for another year of progress. The USDOT is a partner with the Air Bag and Seat Belt Safety Campaign, a coalition of government, auto manufacturers, insurance companies, safety organizations, and professional associations who, in turn, work with state and local governments, law enforcement, health professionals, teachers and others to increase seat belt and child safety seat use.

The FARS for 1999 also indicates that:

• Seat belts and child safety seats clearly save lives. Fifty-seven percent of passenger car and light truck occupants killed in 1999 were unbelted.
• Seat belt use increased in all categories compared to the previous 1999 NOPUS study.
• Seat belt use increased in all geographic regions of the country. The largest increases were in the Midwest, which was up more than 8 percentage points.
• Seat belt use increased among occupants in all classes of vehicles: passenger cars, pickups, vans and SUVs.
• Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have primary seat belt laws; they averaged 77 percent seat belt use, while states without primary laws averaged 63 percent. This substantial difference shows dramatically the benefits of primary belt use laws.

Other recent seat belt use surveys have recorded dramatic increases in some states with new primary laws or highly visible law enforcement or both. Examples include:

• Michigan, which recorded seat belt use at 84 percent, an increase of nearly 14 percentage points in less than six months after the passage of its primary law.
• New York, where the State Police reported seat belt use at 86 percent, up 5 percent over a similar 1999 study, as a result of highly visible, state-wide enforcement of a primary law.

NHTSA collects crash statistics from the 50 states and the District of Columbia to produce the annual FARS assessment. The final report will be available later this year.

This document was last updated on February 25, 2001.

Return to Table on Contents

Safety in Airplanes

Airlines require luggage and carry-on items to be secured on flights. Adults must use safety belts, and infants and young children should be properly restrained as well. Any child under 40 pounds should be restrained in a child safety seat while flying. Turbulence during flights is common and can be dangerous.

• When you make your reservations, tell the airline that you are traveling with a child. Buy a ticket for your child. Most airlines offer half-price tickets for children age 2 and under.
• Make sure your child/infant safety seat is certified for use on aircraft and that the width does not exceed 16 inches
• Retrain children over 40 pounds in safety belts throughout the flight.
• Plan activities during the flight in 10-minute segments That is the approximate length of the average child's attention span. Plan extra activities to cover delays and time on the ground.

Whether traveling on the road or in the air, it is important to keep children safe. Following these simple guidelines can help ensure a pleasant and safe family trip.

To make sure children are properly secured, parents and caregivers can get a free copy of the SAFE KIDS BUCKLE UP SM brochure by calling (800) 441-1888

Source: National SAFE KIDS Campaign, 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 1000, Washington D.C. 20004-1707

Return to Table on Contents

Sharing the Road With Emergency Vehicles

Fire engines en route to a house fire. An ambulance transporting a hear-attack victim to the hospital. Police en route to stop a crime in progress. Everyday, drivers share the road with emergency vehicles and personnel engaged in public service and protecting human life. Though most drivers claim they know how to respond to the presence of an emergency vehicle (there's a question on most states' driver certification tests), few properly yield to an oncoming emergency vehicle.

Sirens and lights signal that an emergency vehicle is requesting the right of way. In such instances, it is a driver's legal responsibility to immediately yield the right of way to an authorized emergency vehicle. In most states, the law requires that drivers do this by pulling as far to the right as safely possible, while bringing their vehicle to a complete stop. Drivers may proceed again once certain all emergency vehicles are past.

Some estimates show that up to 60 percent of drivers do not properly yield the right of way to emergency vehicles. There are drivers who move right but don't slow down, or slow down without moving right, and there are even those who choose to ignore the emergency vehicle completely. Failure to yield can create potentially dangerous situations and cost emergency personnel precious moments required to arrive at their destination.

Tips for sharing the road with Emergency Vehicles:

• When an emergency vehicle is approaching from behind, carefully move your vehicle as far to the right as possible and come to a complete stop.
• If there is no room to the right - DO NOT PULL INTO ONCOMING TRAFFIC - emergency vehicles make every effort to pass on the left.
• At an intersection, stop before the line, do not block the intersection.
• Never proceed through a red light to get out of the way of an emergency vehicle.
• Emergency vehicles may stop several times as they proceed through an intersection. Do not pull forward until the emergency vehicle has completely cleared the intersection.
• If the emergency vehicle is coming from the opposite direction, pull to the right and, when possible, make eye contact with the driver.
• Emergency vehicles often travel in tandem. Be sure all emergency vehicles have passed before proceeding.

Return to Table on Contents

Return to Table on Contents