Levinson and Stefani Injury Lawyers

Client-first legal representation for injury victims. Injured? Free Consultation:

(312) 376-3812

highway safety

Republican Senator Requests Bipartisanship for Highway Legislation

by Leave a Comment

Currently, federal policymakers are considering potential comprehensive highway policy legislation. In this case, bipartisanship is key, explained the top Republican on the United States Senate transportation committee, Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia.

Moore Capito also currently serves as the ranking member on the Environment and Public Works Committee.

According to her, the panel will only be able to come up with an effective and efficient multi-year highway policy bill that serves everyone involved if it has the necessary input from both republicans and democrats. The current premier highway law in place will expire in September of this year.

For support in the updating of the current law in place, republicans would need to see cooperation from lawmakers in regards to policy and funding belief differences. For example, House and Senate majority democrats have explained that the modernization of all transportation systems would have to come at the hands of particular transportation legislation that focuses strongly on helping to ease the effects of climate change. For Republicans, surface transportation corridor repair-focused legislation is the most important subject needing legislation consideration.

In terms of transportation program funding, neither republicans nor democrats have approved any potential method or strategy.

“We need the give and take of this bipartisan process to produce legislation that can make it to the president’s desk,” explained Moore Capito earlier in Spring. “It will take work from all levels of government and the private sector to meet the nation’s transportation infrastructure needs. We will have to take an all hands on deck approach.”

Moore Capito is looking to find the securement of long-term funding for highway systems across the nation, and plans to back the allocation of resources for infrastructure technology enhancement across all areas of the sector. Additionally, she is currently proposing a potential highway bill that would boost connectivity along freight corridors, enhance transportation project safety and capacity, and boost commuter mobility options for all methods of travel.

Republicans and democrats alike have been concerned about the overall longevity of the Highway Trust Fund, which relies on federal fuel tax revenue and aims to help state transportation agencies in regards to construction, repairs, and upgrades among bridges, transit, and roads. For what is currently needed in these regards, the 24.4 cents-per-gallon diesel tax and 18.4 cents-per-gallon gas tax revenue will not be enough. 

The general fund has had to cover shortages from the trust fund’s revenue since 2008.

“Funding our infrastructure should not be a political battle,” said House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee ranking member, Sam Graves. “It’s time to set a definitive path toward the long-term sustainability of the Highway Trust Fund, a path that is totally funded by all users of the system and not by insufficient gas taxes and deficit spending. This is how we realize the transformative projects everyone wants to accomplish.”

Moore Capito is also receiving support from other senators, especially for the updates needed in the United States’ highway legislation. Senator Tom Carper of Delaware noted that he plans to set in place a potential highway bill that would likely be implemented sooner than later. Carper also currently serves as the panel’s chairman.

“We’re told that the average number of years a vehicle has on the road is about 15 years, so we’re going to be using gas and diesel for some time, but by less going forward,” Carper explained. Because of this, the panel has been looking to implement alternative revenue streams that would be user-based and able to bring in further transportation program funding.

The trust fund’s shortcomings are only getting worse, many stakeholders have claimed. This deficit could even lead to late payments for completed work in many states.

“Unless additional revenues or transfers are authorized, the [Highway Trust Fund] could diminish to the point that the U.S. Department of Transportation may have to delay payments to states for completed work,” explained National Conference of State Legislatures transportation program director, Douglas Shinkle. “Late payments or reduced federal transportation spending to accommodate for the shortfall is not an option for states.”

To fund portions of his $2.25 trillion infrastructure plan, President Joe Biden has proposed a corporate tax rate raise from 21% to 28%. This kind of funding would hopefully eradicate the need for a potential national vehicle miles travel fee that would charge motorists for each mile they drive.

“Fundamentally, he does not believe that paying for this historic investment in rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure and creating millions of jobs should be on the backs of Americans.” said Jen Psaki, White House Press Secretary.

Safety Policymakers Aim to Pass Highway Bill for Safer Mobility Grid

by Leave a Comment

Highway safety policies are coming to the forefront as Congress has assured that it will be prioritizing comprehensive highway legislation throughout 2021.

The latest research regarding roadway fatalities is concerning, according to Peter DeFazio, House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman. DeFazio has made clear his commitment to the upgrading of overall passenger corridor and freight safety and has promised to pursue programs working to find these methods of improvement.

The reason–in 2019, the United States saw 36,096 fatalities in motor vehicle traffic crashes, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s data. Although this number has indeed been on the decline, it hasn’t been declining nearly enough, DeFazio explained.

“Some may point to the fact that the rate of traffic fatalities per vehicle miles traveled has decreased during our lifetime and say we’ve done our job,” DeFazio said. “I say that’s unacceptable. To put it in context for you: In 1994, we lost 40,716 lives on our roadways; in 2019, we lost 36,096. I’d say we have a lot more work to do.”

The most frustrating fact, DeFazio noted, is that the majority of deaths occurring in these accidents should be perfectly avoidable.

“We still lose an average of 100 lives per day due to motor vehicle crashes,” he continued. “What’s worse, the majority of these crashes are entirely preventable. Year after year, the leading cause of car crashes is human behavior: excessive speed, drunk driving, and distraction.”

In order to boost road safety in as widespread a way as possible, many additional tools will need to come into play, added Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who currently serves on the Highways and Transit Subcommittee as its chairwoman.

“Targeting resources is necessary to ensure that we actually move the needle on traffic safety,” she explained.

Pete Buttigieg, the new U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary, has made it clear that the Biden administration will be focusing heavily on improving the safety of America’s roadways. Buttigieg has explained his intention to bring enhanced safety to both transportation workers and travelers alike.

“We must ensure all of our transportation systems–from aviation to public transit, to our railways, roads, ports, waterways, and pipelines–are managed sagely during this critical period, as we work to defeat the virus,” said Buttigieg in a recent statement to senators.

Additionally, a multi-year highway policy measure is expected to be discussed by the transportation panel during the first half of 2021. All methods of transit and the strategies pertaining to increasing their safety are likely to be a main focus for policymakers, who have also expressed their intention to bring about a “complete street” proposal, which would consist of enhancement strategies regarding pedestrian and cyclist safety. Leaders within Congress have also indicated their expectation for the approval of a highway law update to be implemented before the current law expires later in the year.

American Trucking Associations has expressed its support for safety-boosting regulations and updates, especially those that would directly help the trucking industry as a whole through training and resource investments–particularly regarding equipment and technology. A prioritization ATA hopes to see among lawmakers would be that of funding distributed to programs dedicated to helping alleviate the plethora of challenges the trucking industry has seen regarding parking ease and availability. When parking is scarce, truckers can often end up leaving their vehicles in risky areas or decide to continue driving, even when they may be overtired, ATA explained.

“ATA looks forward to working with the committee to develop a long-term, well-funded surface transportation reauthorization bill that addresses highway safety, maintenance, and mobility needs,” said the agency.

Additionally, stakeholders are in agreement with the desire for a heavy focus on roadway safety–including the National Safety Council, which mentioned the Road to Zero Coalition’s efforts to collaborate with other industry members and safety advocates to urge both Buttigieg and President Biden to push forward new policies that would aim to reach zero roadway fatalities–complete elimination–by 2050.

“We can no longer stand by while 100 people die every day on our roadways,” said CEO and president of the National Safety Council, Lorraine Martin, in a message to lawmakers.

Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety Plans and Updates Required in Final FRA Rule

by Leave a Comment

A final rule mandating states update or develop highway-rail grade crossing action plans has been issued by the Federal Railroad Administration.

The FRA recently released data showing that 94% of fatalities related to rail transit take place at railroad crossings and/or are results of trespassing. A highway-rail grade crossing is the point where railroad tracks intersect with a roadway on the same grade or level. There are more than 250,000 of these crossings across the country, and more than 400 related deaths occur each year in these areas due to trespassing.

The Federal Register released its final ruling in mid-December requesting highway-rail grade crossing action steps to be planned out by 40 different states and the District of Columbia. The remaining 10 states, which already have plans in place, must also update these plans while indicating exactly what they have done thus far to take action on them.

These outlined plans are required to identify all crossings that have seen safety issues and incidents, and specific strategies must be indicated for improving the overall safety of these crossings. According to the Federal Register announcement, these strategies could include grade separations or closures, and each state must identify one official manager to ensure that the indicated action plan comes to fruition.

“The actions states must take to develop action plans and, more specifically, to develop specific strategies for improving grade crossing safety can, if done properly, significantly improve safety and complement other efforts by states to improve transportations safety generally,” said the document.

The FRA was urged to implement regulations requiring highway-rail grade crossing action plans by 2015’s Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, from which this most recent rule is derived. The provision in FRA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking detailing said action plans was initially published near the end of 2019.

Prior to those regulations, 2008’s Rail Safety Improvement Act pushed a number of states to make such safety plans, which led to 10 particular states with the largest number of highway-rail grade crossing incidents between 2006 and 2008 to be identified by the Secretary of Transportation at that time. Those states were then required to create specific action plans aiming to lead toward major safety improvements. The states required to make such plans after analysis of agency data regarding crossing collisions were Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Ohio, and Texas.

Because the necessary safety action plans proved to be costly, many members of the public urged the FRA to allocate funding to these specified states–especially as Delaware’s Department of Transportation explained that its needed costs were going to make or break the state’s ability to make important–and potentially life-saving–safety upgrades.

“DelDOT noted that the state of Delaware currently experiences an extremely low number of train-related crashes and asserted that developing an action plan would draw resources away from other ongoing efforts to make a positive safety impact on the state and its communities,” said the Federal Register document. “Accordingly, DelDOT recommended that FRA establish guidelines that, if met, would exempt a state from the requirement to develop an action plan.”

Currently, states are able to utilize the Federal Highway Administration’s Railway-Highway Crossings Program funding to develop needed action plans, although the final rule’s mandate has yet to provide any provision allocating specific federal funds for said plans.

Once plans are formed, the FRA must, as stated in the FAST Act, review and, upon approval, publish the state’s plan publicly on an official website. If a submitted plan is determined to be inadequate, the agency must notify the state of deficiencies and allow the state 60 days to correct or add what may be missing.

If the two-month deadline is missed, the FRA must then publish online that the state in question has not completed a proper action plan. As states continue to work on their action plans and updates, DRA representatives and inspectors are available to help those with questions. DRA will also provide highway-rail grade crossing incident data to states when requested.

This final ruling is officially in place as of January 13th, and states are required to submit their plans or updates to the FRA by at least 14 months after the publication date of the final rule.

Collaboration is Key for Countrywide Highway Safety, NHTSA Says

by Leave a Comment

Successful trucking operations rely on substantial traditional and non-traditional partnerships within the industry, said National Highway Traffic Safety Administration representatives.

Recently, NHTSA hosted a virtual panel discussion entitled “Where the Rubber Meets the Road: NHTSA’s Regional Operations and Program Delivery,” which was part of the agency’s 50th anniversary celebration focusing on road safety.

The agency, which operates 10 offices around the country to help states identify and find methods of training and improvement for highway safety issues, counts on its partnerships with various programs, organizations, and groups, said NHTSA’s regional administrator, Susan DeCourcy. These partners include child passenger safety campaigns, hospital staffers working on safety campaigns, and organizations like Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

DeCourcy noted one particular annual campaign held throughout Region 7, which includes five Midwestern states and the entire metropolitan area of Kansas City, in which law enforcement and other regional representatives work to lower drug-impaired driving numbers each April.

“[Our] greatest accomplishment is regional partnership,” DeCourcy said. “Our unity has really made it more effective.”

Following data as safety trends train is also of the utmost importance, she explained. As safety campaigns have varied over the years from focusing on the need for regular seat belt use, to the dangers behind allowing children to ride in the front seat, to the realities of driving under the influence, organizations have worked with law enforcement to follow data and determine what certain regions need to focus on most.

“Not only have the regional offices experienced a transformation over time,” [but] so has the development, collection, and use of data,” said Decourcy.

These kinds of research will also guide the adoption of technology into various vehicle development, said James Owens, Deputy Administrator of NHTSA.

“It’s no secret that we’re in the midst of a revolution of automotive technology,” he said. “Some of these developments may make our cars cleaner than ever, and others may make them safer than before.”

In particular, automated vehicle technology is expected by many industry professionals to boost overall road safety and also bring more options of mobility to those with any transportation difficulties, said Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao.

“Today, we are so fortunate because new driver assistance technologies are making exciting contributions to improving vehicle safety,” Chao said.

The four-day panel discussion included conversations from Robert Ritter, the director of the Office of Impaired Driving and Occupant Protection; Mary Byrd, a highway safety specialist; DeReece Smither, a research psychologist; Stephen Ridella, Director of the Office of Defects Investigation; Jenny Dang, the Division Chief of new car assessment; and many others.

While preliminary conversations focusing on initiatives promoting seat belt and child passenger restraint usage, discussions continued into looking at vehicle and equipment defect investigations and recalls–including the recent Takata airbag recall–as well as focusing on law enforcement and EMS partnership importance, NHTSA Safety Ratings, consumer education efforts, grant administration, and program delivery.

Overall, it was clear throughout the event that continued partnership and collaboration with a variety of groups and organizations is the key to seeing safety efforts flourish, expand, and improve drastically.

Regional program manager Brian Huynh pointed out yet another vital partnership–a collaboration with the Girl Scouts. Girl Scouts have helped to promote pedestrian safety via presentations and a special patch given for those participating in the program, which was implemented in Hawaii, part of NHTSA’s Region 9. 

According to Huynh, regional program managers like himself work specifically in collaboration with government officials, court officers, and prosecutors. 

“We work on programs, priorities, and partnerships, and we take to heart that collaboration gets the work done,” he explained “We work with other people. We take on the role of Swiss Army diplomat.”

Although the virtual panel discussion for “50 years of advances in road safety and the challenges ahead” has concluded, there are benefits to it having been a virtual event–all six individual discussions that took place over the four days, as well as the secretary’s remarks and deputy administrator’s keynote, were recorded and are available for viewing online here.

Pedestrian Traffic Deaths Are At A Ten Year High – Too Much Screen Time Could Be A Cause

by Leave a Comment

A newly published study by the Governor’s Highway Safety Association, a not-for-profit comprised of the highway safety offices of the 50 states, better known as the organization behind the click-it or ticket campaign, is suggesting that pedestrian deaths in motor vehicle incidents are at a ten year high. The numbers seem to match the claim. Incidents of pedestrian deaths in car crashes are up while other traffic deaths are declining. Therefore, the percentage of traffic fatalities involving pedestrians now comprises a larger percentage than before. These are the worst numbers since 1990. 

Bigger Cars Means More Damage

The study links the fact that there are more SUVs on the road now than before as a possible cause of the increase in fatalities. A heavier vehicle has the potential of causing greater damage than a smaller passenger car like a sedan. Pedestrian deaths involving SUVs went up 50% between 2013 and 2017. 

Vehicle trends are definitely changing. People want bigger cars. Automakers are responding in kind, limiting their offerings for smaller cars in the US. For people with families, purchasing a small car or a sedan is an unlikely choice. People also feel safer in bigger cars. The perception is that larger vehicles offer greater crash safety protection. As other categories of motor vehicle crash deaths decrease, it gets harder to argue against that conclusion. 

There Are More Nighttime Crashes Too

The study points to other factors as well. Nighttime crash deaths are increasing. Pedestrian deaths seem to be increasing in numerous categories. When the publishers looked at nighttime vs. daytime fatalities, instances at night were up 45% from 2008 to 2017, whereas daytime instances went up by 11%. 

Any premature loss of life is tragic. Pedestrians and drivers alike would be well served by keeping an eye out for one another as both groups certainly have the right to travel using surface streets. It’s common sense that anyone who goes anywhere should try and take proper safety precautions. However, the study also looks at population growth as a factor contributing to these alarming statistics. With increasingly bigger cars and more people in a given town, there could be more opportunities where drivers and people on foot will encounter one another, meaning the more that people proceed with caution when going from place to place, the better. 

We Need to Pay Attention to Distracted Driving

One more possible factor contributing to this increase in pedestrian traffic deaths is people not paying attention to the road or where they are going. We certainly have an increasing number of big cars out on the road, but we also have more electronic devices. Screen time has significantly increased since 2008. 

Consumers were first introduced to the iPhone in June of 2007. Since then, the image of a person with their eyes glued to a tiny screen has become ever present. If you ever look around at the drivers next to you when you’re stopped at a red light, unfortunately, it won’t be uncommon for one of those people to be holding up a smartphone.

The evidence against allowing drivers to use handheld electronics is mounting. Illinois, among other states, has passed stricter rules regarding the use of mobile devices behind the wheel. Some researchers have equated using a smartphone while driving as similar to being drunk and getting behind the wheel. Both have been shown to slow down reaction times and decrease our ability to focus on what’s going on outside our windshields. Just think of your own experiences. If you have ever missed a turn because you were having a conversation with a passenger, imagine how poorly you drive trying to send a text message. 

The one thing we all have control over is the use of our phones. Whether you are a pedestrian or a driver, there can be no debate – if you’re looking at a screen, you are not looking where you are going. If you need to check your phone, the best thing to do is go to a safe place. If you’re driving, find a safe place to pull over. If you’re walking, find a safe place to stop. When it comes to injuries or death, none should be the result of smartphone distraction. 

How Dangerous is Your Car? Safety Institute Unveils Watch List

by Leave a Comment

2007 Toyota Camry. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
2007 Toyota Camry. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

Buyer beware.

The Safety Institute, a Massachusetts-based not-for-profit investigating injury prevention and product safety, has released its quarterly Vehicle Safety Watch List, featuring the top 15 potential vehicle defects to look out for in 2015. It’s the third consecutive report since the Institute began rolling out its influential catalog in June 2014.

Topping this quarter’s list is the 2012 Ford Focus (steering); the 2008 Chevrolet Cobalt (electrical); the 2008 Toyota Sienna (power train); the 2011 Chevrolet Cruz (service brake), and the 2007 Toyota Camry (speed control). The Safety Institute’s assessment describes these designations as “areas that need more investigating,” as opposed to defects. The report is largely intended as a frame of reference for “lawyers, researchers and analysts,” who mine data as a way of studying persistent problems of motor vehicle flaws.

Still, according to the Safety Institute, none of these designations have been investigated by the National Highway Safety Administration or fixed by the original manufacturer.  By ignoring the data collected by the Safety Institute, carmakers and the regulatory bodies designed to protect drivers and passengers are potentially leaving consumers in a precarious position.

Toyota alone has suffered through very public recalls with model years 2005-2011, resulting in class action lawsuits and settlements related to accelerating motor pedals. The suit claimed that Toyota knowingly failed to correct a dangerous problem that could have led to fatalities. In Ford’s case, the NHTSA has long been involved in a process that involves the stalling and surging of engines in the Ford Escape model. The Ford Focus produced in model years 2012-2014 was recalled recently for stall-like conditions and unexpected losses in power.

The Safety Institute’s analysis is based on death and injury claims of the early warning reports system designed by the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration. The analytics aim to identify “continuing potential failures to effectively fix issues that are already known,” says the report.

“The Vehicle Safety Watch List is an example of leveraging already available data to help prioritize investigative resources,” Sean Kane, The Safety Institute’s founder and president of the board, said in a statement. “This type of tool can help identify and potentially prevent costly safety crises that not only cause harm to consumers, but take extra resources to manage.”

Perhaps the most interesting thing about the Institute’s report is the extent to which several commonly owned vehicles go unchecked by federal regulators. Granted, some of this information functions more as a watchdog than an objective presentation of facts. But a takeaway from this list and for potential victims of recall-related injuries is that they have recourse as consumers, especially when a defect is known and goes unaddressed.

Many of the listed defects have resulted in class action lawsuits against car manufacturers like Toyota and Ford. Whether your vehicle’s problems – and perhaps your injuries – are the result of a defect like those described in the report,  and whether you may be part of a class, are questions often more easily answered with the guidance of a lawyer. An assessment can help determine if a class action or another lawsuit is the route for you. If you’ve been injured due to a faulty product and you believe there are others in a similar situation, a class action might be appropriate, and you should consider consulting with an attorney.

Your particular accident may not result in significant injuries, but collectively, the value of a class action suit is that it carries weight in the courtroom by consolidating resources. If you’re a victim of a faulty or recalled product, you may qualify for a class action claim. By offering free, one-on-one consultations, we can help you determine if this might be the route for you.