2006 ROADMAP TO STATE HIGHWAY SAFETY LAWS

Transcription

1 2006 ROADMAP TO STATE HIGHWAY SAFETY LAWS PLAYERS, POLITICS AND PROGRESS ADVOCATES FOR HIGHWAY AND AUTO SAFETY JANUARY 2006

2 MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT Welcome to the third annual Roadmap to State Highway Safety Laws, published by (Advocates). This report evaluates all 50 states and the District of Columbia on their progress in adopting critical highway safety laws in the previous year identified by Advocates as necessary to reducing the tragic toll of deaths and injuries caused by motor vehicle crashes. We, and others in the highway safety field, see effective laws as the foundation upon which law enforcement, community activists, families and motorists depend to improve driving behavior to save lives and avoid costly and debilitating injuries. What s the score for 2005? Almost no improvement over South Carolina was the only state to pass a primary enforcement seat belt law. No states adopted an all-rider motorcycle helmet law, despite record increases in motorcycling fatalities. Fortunately no repeals occurred. And only a handful of states in each category have moved forward by passing laws to curb impaired driving, improve teen driving and raise age requirements for child passenger restraint use. This year s Roadmap Report also takes a snapshot of how many bills were even introduced in key safety categories. The legislative process is long and laborious, but you can t pass a law if you don t first introduce a bill. Our conclusion is that not only were there few laws actually adopted, there was a dearth of legislative activity in the states in response to the number one killer of Americans between the ages of two and 33. Inaction by states imposes an unnecessary and unacceptable personal and financial burden on family and state budgets. Every American pays a crash tax of nearly $800 a year to pay for the $230 billion annual cost of motor vehicle crashes. Governors and state legislators need to emphasize and champion these basic laws, as outlined in this report, as a ready-made formula for cost containment and loss control. Their political leadership is essential, today, tomorrow and into the future. Anyone who has suffered a loss of a family member, a friend or a neighbor in a motor vehicle crash can tell you that becoming complacent about changing highway safety is a dangerous game, replete with costly risks that drain treasuries and ruin lives. As a society, we certainly know the legislative solutions to reducing highway deaths and injuries, we support adoption of these key laws in poll after poll, but we need to do a much better job of pushing and prodding elected officials to make this their political priority. Advocates is committed to helping change this picture so that the report for 2006 will show great improvement. Judith Lee Stone, President January

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Key Things to Know About This Report... 4 Some Progress Made... 5 Urgent Action Needed to Improve Road Safety: The Problem... 6 Public Policy Saves Lives: The Solution... 7 Americans Strongly Support State Laws: Lou Harris Polls Public Support v. Political Inaction. 9 Safety Laws Reduce Costs Annual Economic Cost of Motor Vehicle Crashes to States ADULT OCCUPANT PROTECTION s s Adult Occupant Protection Laws Rating Chart Adult Occupant Protection Laws Rating Map CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY Booster Seat Laws Booster Seat Laws Rating Chart Booster Seat Laws Rating Map TEEN DRIVING Teen Driving: Give Teens More Experience and Time to Learn Teen Driving: Provisions Of Advocates Optimal GDL Program Teen Driving Laws Rating Chart Teen Driving Laws Rating Map IMPAIRED DRIVING Impaired Driving Key Laws Help Stem the Tide s s Mandatory BAC Test Laws s That Meet Federal Requirements s That Meet Federal Requirements Sobriety Checkpoint Laws Impaired Driving Laws Rating Chart Impaired Driving Laws Rating Map STATES OVERALL RATING Definitions Of Advocates 14 Lifesaving Laws Advocates Criteria For States Overall Rating State Laws Rating Chart State Laws Rating Map ADVOCATES HELPING ADVOCATES EMERGING ISSUES

4 STATES AT A GLANCE Introduction to States at a Glance Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

5 KEY THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT THIS REPORT Changes from Last Year s Report: Includes overview of legislation introduced or enacted in state legislatures. Includes emerging trends in highway safety legislation. The report is divided into four issue sections: Adult Occupant Protection (2 laws); Child Passenger Safety (1 law); Teen Driving (4 laws); and Impaired Driving (7 laws). In Advocates judgment, the 14 laws that are listed in four sections are extremely important for states to have, although they do not comprise the entire list of effective public policy interventions states may take to reduce motor vehicle deaths and injuries. States are rated only on whether they have a certain law, not on how they enforce their laws or educate their citizens, or on the number of statewide fatalities. A definition of each law, as defined by Advocates for purposes of this report, can be found on pages 36 and 37. Within each issue section an explanation is provided about the law or provision. Each section has a state law chart in alphabetical order, with each state s rating. State ratings fall roughly into three groupings based on the number of laws in each section: Green: Good State is significantly advanced toward adopting all of Advocates recommended optimal laws; Yellow: Caution State needs improvement because of numerous gaps in Advocates recommended laws; and Red: Danger State falls dangerously behind in adoption of Advocates recommended laws. States are given an overall rating based on the total number of recommended highway safety laws, which can be found on pages Overall ratings maps are at the end of each section. Profiles of each state indicating laws enacted, laws needed, and the most recent data on fatalities and costs begin on page 46 Statistics used in this report are from the latest available data sources. 4

6 SOME PROGRESS MADE BUT THE NATION S YOUNGER GENERATIONS STILL AT HIGHEST RISK In January 2004, Advocates published its first State Roadmap Report to provide guidance to each state on where it stood relative to the rest of the nation in implementing highway safety laws. This year, with few new laws to report, Advocates urges states to set an aggressive highway safety legislative agenda to stem the tide of deaths and injuries on our nation s roadways. More than any other action, public policy interventions change behavior and have immediate impact on improving outcomes. The laws recommended by Advocates save lives and save money. Deaths from motor vehicle crashes changed very little this past year, (42,636 in 2004, from 42,643 in 2003) and motor vehicle crashes are still the leading cause of death for all Americans ages two to 33, killing 117 people every day. By any definition, this is truly a public health epidemic. If each highway safety law is considered a vaccine to inoculate our children, our friends, and our communities against a leading cause of death, every law listed in our Roadmap report should be at the top of each state s legislative agenda in ADVOCATES KEY HIGHWAY SAFETY LAWS PASSED IN 2005 Occupant Protection: Seat Belts: Only one state, South Carolina, adopted a primary enforcement seat belt law; 28 states still need to adopt this important law. Motorcycle Helmets: Currently, 30 states do not require all-rider helmet law protection. In most of the 20 states and DC with the optimal law, anti-helmet groups battle each year to repeal the allrider helmet requirement. Booster Seats: While five states passed booster seat laws (CT, ID, NM), only two of the states enacted Advocates recommended booster seat law that covers children up to age eight (WA, WV). Out of 33 states and the District of Columbia (DC) with booster seat laws, only 11 states and DC have the recommended optimal booster seat law. Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) Minimal improvement occurred in the enactment of laws to improve teen driver safety. A total of 15 new laws, covering four major GDL provisions, were passed nationwide. Only one nighttime restriction (NV), nine passenger restriction (CO, CA, CT, HI, MD, MT, OK, RI, WY), four hours supervised driving (MD, MT, OK, WY), and four 6-month holding period provisions (HI, MD, MT, NV) were passed nationwide. Only one state, Nevada, has adopted all four of Advocates optimal GDL provisions. Impaired Driving Only seven impaired driving laws recommended by Advocates were passed among all 50 states: two Child Endangerment (MA, MT); two High BAC (MA, TX); three Open Container (CO, IN, MT); and, one Repeat Offender law (MA). 5

7 URGENT ACTION NEEDED TO IMPROVE ROAD SAFETY The The Problem Problem Every day, millions of American families leave their homes to travel by car to work, school, medical appointments, soccer practice and shopping malls. Yet, despite the increased mobility offered by our nation s highway system, the morbidity and mortality rate is far too high. Motor vehicle crashes still remain the leading cause of death for ages two to 33. With 117 deaths occurring each and every day, there is no question that this is a leading and costly public health epidemic. With minimal improvement since 2004, our roads are still far too deadly and much work lies ahead to reduce the tragedy that occurs everyday on our nation s roadways. This report looks at the progress each state has made in enacting certain key life-saving laws. Advocates urges governors and other state leaders to use this report as an action plan to make changes and improve highway safety in their state. The Burden in Human Costs In 2004, little progress was made, and the 6.2 million motor vehicle crashes claimed the lives of more than 42,000 Americans and caused nearly three million injuries. Of great concern are those areas where no improvements were made: Children under age four saw no improvement, with over 500 deaths; Injuries for those under age four increased by two percent, with 47,000 injuries reported; Occupant deaths of children ages four to seven increased by nearly three percent, to 487. Deaths of children ages eight to 15 saw no noticeable improvement, with more than 1,600 deaths; Occupant rollover deaths continue to climb, with 10,553 fatalities; SUV rollover deaths increased by nearly ten percent; Motorcycle deaths have increased by 89 percent since 1997 and eight percent since last year; and More than half of those killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2004 were not protected by a seat belt. The Burden in Economic Costs Motor vehicle crashes place a huge economic burden on society. The 6.2 million motor vehicle crashes cost an estimated $230 billion annually in property and productivity loss, medical and emergency bills and other related costs. This adds up to a crash tax of $792 on every American every year. Every American effectively pays a crash tax of $792 each year to cover the cost of motor vehicle crashes. 6

8 PUBLIC POLICY SAVES LIVES The The Solution Solution Just as we vaccinate against polio and other diseases, public policy vaccines in the form of effective laws are immediately available, providing proven solutions and strategies, backed by research, ready to be implemented. In fact, many states and communities already employ these ideas and programs, realizing important reductions in deaths and injuries on their roadways. Unfortunately, as this report will demonstrate, when viewed as a whole, state traffic safety laws have gaping holes in need of repair. Even at a glance, the maps and charts included in this report show that most American families live in states that could With the stroke of a pen, legislators and governors save more lives than I can in my entire career. Stephen W. Hargarten, M.D., MPH, Professor and Chair, Department of Emergency Medicine, and Director of the Injury Prevention Center, Medical College of Wisconsin, and Board Member of do much more to ensure their safety in neighborhoods and on roadways. In contrast, every person flying on every airplane, in every state, is subject to nationally uniform safety laws and regulations set by the federal government. This uniformity in air travel has been the foundation for achieving an exemplary aviation safety record in the United States. Were this the case for motor vehicle travel, and nearly every state had the same essential and effective traffic safety laws, thousands of deaths and millions of injuries could be prevented. There is a far greater chance of dying in an automobile crash on the way to the airport than in the airplane we are rushing to catch. ROAD WORK AHEAD 28 states still need a primary enforcement seat belt law; 30 states still need an all-rider motorcycle helmet law; 17 states still need a booster seat law; 39 need an optimal booster seat law; 49 states do not protect new teen drivers with Advocates optimal graduated driver licensing (GDL) program; Many states are missing critical impaired driving laws. 7

9 AMERICANS STRONGLY SUPPORT STATE LAWS TO IMPROVE HIGHWAY SAFETY A Lou Harris Poll conducted for Advocates in May, 2004 showed strong support by the American public for improving highway safety through public policy interventions Public Support Sobriety Checkpoints Drunk Driving Prevention All-Rider Motorcycle Helmets Booster Seats Primary Enforcement Seat Belts 8

10 PUBLIC SUPPORT VERSUS POLITICAL INACTION In 2004, an Advocates Lou Harris Poll showed that 80 percent of Americans support All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet laws All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Legislative Activity Bills to New Laws Enact New Enacted Law Bills to Repeal Existing Law Repeals Enacted In 2004, an Advocates Lou Harris Poll showed that 80 percent of Americans support Primary Enforcement Seat Belt laws Seat Belts - Primary Enforcement Legislative Activity Bills to Enact New Law New Laws Enacted Bills to Repeal Existing Law Repeals Enacted According to a 2001 Lou Harris Poll, when questioned about teen driving, 74 percent of Americans supported both limiting the number of passengers and limiting nighttime driving by teens. Graduated Driver Licensing Legislative Activity In 2004, an Advocates Lou Harris Poll showed that 84 percent of Americans support Booster Seat laws. Booster Seat Legislative Activity Nighttime Restriction Bills to Enact New Law Passenger Restriction New Laws Enacted 1 0 Bills to Enact New Law New Laws Enacted 9

11 SAFETY LAWS REDUCE COSTS Motor vehicle crashes cost the United States over $230 Billion every year. -- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration In addition to the emotional toll, motor vehicle crashes impose a significant financial burden on society. According to NHTSA, the cost of motor vehicle crashes exceeds $230 billion annually. The costs to society are dramatic. Motor vehicle crashes: cost each American an average of $792 annually; result in a total of $81 billion annually in lost productivity; create approximately $32.6 billion in medical expenses; result in $52 billion in property damage; and cause each critically injured crash survivor approximately $1.1 million in crash-related costs over his or her lifetime. At a time when state budgets are squeezed, enactment of effective highway safety laws is a wise and fiscally responsible strategy. Judith Lee Stone President, 10

12 ANNUAL ECONOMIC COST OF MOTOR VEHICLE CRASHES TO STATES STATE (Billions $) STATE (Billions $) AL $2.788 MT $.621 AK $.475 NE $1.629 AZ $4.272 NV $1.873 AR $1.965 NH $1.014 CA $ NJ $9.336 CO $3.278 NM $1.413 CT $3.596 NY $ DE $.706 NC $8.270 DC $.732 ND $.290 FL $ OH $ GA $7.850 OK $2.593 HI $.655 OR $1.948 ID $.856 PA $8.170 IL $8.984 RI $.767 IN $4.346 SC $3.335 IA $2.105 SD $.498 KS $1.884 TN $4.628 KY $3.114 TX $ LA $4.000 UT $1.594 ME $.912 VT $.221 MD $4.237 VA $5.203 MA $6.276 WA $5.310 MI $8.069 WV $1.268 MN $3.065 WI $3.756 MS $2.106 WY $.424 MO $4.737 Total $ Source: The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes 2000, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Dollars not adjusted for inflation. 11

13 ADULT OCCUPANT PROTECTION s s 12

14 When it comes to protecting occupants of motor vehicles from injury and death, some laws rise to the top of the list of effective ways to reach the goal. Primary enforcement of seat belt use is one such law. Twenty-eight (28) states have yet to enact primary enforcement seat belt laws, including New Hampshire, which has no law for occupants 18 and older. Only 22 states (AL, CA, CT, DE, GA, HI, IL, IN, IA, LA, MD, MI, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OK, OR, SC, TN, TX, and WA) and the District of Columbia (DC) have enacted primary enforcement seat belt laws that allow a law enforcement officer to stop a motorist simply because a seat belt is not used. A 2004 Lou Harris Poll found that four out of five Americans believe that seat belt use should be enforced like any other traffic violation. PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT SEAT BELT LAWS Primary Laws Save Lives According to NHTSA, seat belts are credited with preventing 11,900 deaths and 325,000 serious injuries annually. If all passengers were to use their seat belts, an additional 9,200 deaths and 143,000 serious injuries could be prevented each year. In 2004: 55 percent of passengers who were killed were unbelted; and 62 percent of teens killed were unbelted. When adults buckle up, 87 percent of children are buckled up; but when adults are not buckled, only 24 percent of children are buckled up. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Most Wanted Transportation Safety Improvements Needless deaths and injuries that result from non-use of seat belts cost society an estimated $26 billion annually in medical care, lost productivity and other injury-related costs. A 1996 NHTSA study found that the average inpatient costs for crash victims who did not use seat belts were 55 percent higher than for those who were belted. States with primary enforcement have better seat belt use rates that are 10 to 15 percentage points higher than states with secondary enforcement. Primary enforcement is important not only to boost adult seat belt use, but also to raise seat belt use for children. When adults buckle up, 87 percent of children are buckled up; but when adults are not buckled, only 24 percent of children riding with them are buckled up. When Louisiana upgraded its seat belt law from secondary to primary enforcement, child passenger restraint use jumped from 45 to 82 percent even though there was no change in the state s child passenger safety law. 28 States Need Primary Enforcement Advocates Recommendation: States should enact primary enforcement seat belt laws to increase the number of people, including children, who use seat belts and other restraints in order to save thousands of lives and prevent costly injuries each year. 13

15 ALL-RIDER MOTORCYCLE HELMET LAWS Helmets Save Lives and Prevent Brain Injuries 30 States Need All- Rider Helmet Laws In 2004, 4,008 motorcycle riders were killed, an eight percent increase from 2003 and a staggering 89 percent increase since Today, only 20 states and the District of Columbia (DC) require all motorcycle riders to wear a helmet. 27 states have laws that cover only some riders (i.e., up to age 18 or 21) these types of laws are nearly impossible to enforce and the result is much lower helmet use. Three states (CO, IL and IA) have no motorcycle helmet use law. Helmet use is close to 100 percent in states with all-rider motorcycle helmet laws, compared to 34 to 53 percent in those states with no helmet laws or with age-specific helmet laws. All-rider laws significantly increase helmet use because the law is much easier to enforce than age-specific laws. It is virtually impossible for an officer to ascertain an unhelmeted motorcyclist s age. According to NHTSA, an estimated $13.2 billion was saved from 1984 to 1999 because of motorcycle helmet use. An additional $11.1 billion could have been saved if all motorcyclists had worn helmets. It is estimated that nearly 50 percent of motorcycle riders do not have private health insurance. The Maryland Department of Legislative Services estimated that a repeal of its current all-rider helmet law would result in an increase in state Medicaid expenditures. In 1992, California s all-rider law went into effect resulting in a 40 percent drop in its Medicaid costs and total hospital charges for treatment of motorcycle riders. MOTORCYCLE DEATH RATES in 5 STATES BEFORE AND AFTER HELMET LAW REPEALS Motorcycle Death rates per 10,000 Vehicles AR Repealed Aug FL Repealed July 2000 KY Repealed July 1998 LA Repealed Aug TX Repealed Sep Motorcycle death rate for the year before the helmet law was repealed Motorcycle death rate for 2001 Source: Data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration s Fatality Analysis Reporting System, A 2004 Lou Harris Poll showed that eight of ten people believe their state should have an all-rider helmet law. In 2004, Louisiana voted to reinstate its all-rider helmet law after seeing a 100 percent increase in motorcycle fatalities and a 50 percent drop in helmet usage since repealing its all-rider law in Advocates Recommendation: States should require that all motorcycle riders wear helmets that are U.S. DOT certified, with no exceptions. 14

16 ADULT OCCUPANT PROTECTION s and s Number of new Adult Occupant Protection laws since January 2005: One Primary Enforcement Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Adult Occupant Protection Law Rating Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Adult Occupant Protection Law Rating AL MT AK NE AZ NV AR NH CA NJ CO NM CT NY DE NC DC ND FL OH GA OK HI OR ID PA IL RI IN SC IA SD KS TN KY TX LA UT ME VT MD VA MA WA MI WV MN WI MS WY MO One state adopted an adult occupant protection law since January 2005: South Carolina now has primary enforcement. Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law -- gives police authority to stop a motorist simply for not using a seat belt. No other citation need be issued first in order to write such a ticket. 28 states do not have primary enforcement of seat belt laws. -- protects all riders from death or serious injury by requiring helmet use. No credit was given to states with any exceptions in their helmet laws. 30 states do not have all-rider helmet laws. 20 states have neither law. (AK, AZ, AR, CO, FL, ID, KS, KY, ME, MN, MT, NH, ND, OH, PA, RI, SD, UT, WI and WY). 12 states and DC have both laws (AL, CA, DC, GA, LA, MD, MI, NJ, NY, NC, OR, TN and WA). = Optimal law = Good = Caution = Danger 15

17 Rating Of States Based On Number Of Adult Occupant Protection Laws WA CA OR NV ID UT MT WY CO ND SD NE KS MN IA MO WI IL MI OH IN KY WV PA VA NY VT NJ MD DE DC ME NH MA RI CT AZ NM OK AR TN NC SC AK TX LA MS AL GA FL HI State has both a primary enforcement seat belt law and an all-rider motorcycle helmet law State has either a primary enforcement seat belt law or an all-rider motorcycle helmet law State has neither a primary enforcement seat belt law nor an all-rider motorcycle helmet law 16

18 CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY Booster Seat Laws 17

19 39 States Need An Optimal Booster Seat Law BOOSTER SEAT LAWS For Children Ages 4 to 8 Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for children. Almost half of children ages four to seven who died in motor vehicle crashes in 2004 were not appropriately restrained. To date, 33 states and the District of Columbia (DC) have enacted booster seat laws. Only 11 of those and DC have laws that provide protection for children up to age 8, as recommended by Advocates. Twenty-three states with booster seat laws cover children only up to age five, six or seven, or are not subject to primary enforcement. Ironically, nearly every state (48) and DC have laws requiring children to wear life jackets while boating to protect them from A 2004 Harris Poll conducted for Advocates shows that 84 percent of Americans support extending booster seat laws to children up to eight years old. the third leading cause of preventable death drowning. Advocates gives only partial credit to those states whose laws do not cover children up to age eight. Numerous studies have shown that booster seats can substantially reduce the risk of injury or death to children by lifting them up higher off the seat so that the adult seat belt system fits correctly. According to Partners for Child Passenger Safety (PCPS), a joint project of the Children s Hospital of Philadelphia and State Farm Insurance Companies, restraining a child inappropriately in an adult seat belt results in a 3.5-fold increased risk of significant injury and a more than four-fold increased risk of significant head/brain injury Unrestrained Seat Belt Only Booster Seat INJURY RISK TO CHILDREN WITH AND WITHOUT BOOSTER SEATS The use of belt-positioning booster seats lowers the risk of injury to children in crashes by 59 percent compared to the use of vehicle seat belts. Among children restrained in belt-positioning booster seats there were no reported injuries to the abdomen, neck/spine/back or lower extremities. Children who were restrained in seat belts alone suffered injuries to every body region. Partners For Child Passenger Safety, 2003 Advocates Recommendation: States should enact booster seat laws that cover children up to age eight and are subject to primary enforcement. Injury Risk 18

20 BOOSTER SEAT LAWS For Children Ages four to eight Number of new laws since January 2005: Five booster seat laws Booster Seat Law Rating Booster Seat Law Rating AL MT AK NE AZ NV AR NH CA NJ CO NM CT NY DE NC DC ND FL OH GA OK HI OR ID PA IL RI IN SC IA SD KS TN KY TX LA UT ME VT MD VA MA WA MI WV MN WI MS WY MO = Optimal law Five states adopted booster seat laws since January 2005: Washington and West Virginia adopted the recommended optimal law; Connecticut, Idaho, and New Mexico adopted laws that cover up to ages four, five, six or seven. 11 states and DC have an optimal booster seat law. 22 states have a booster seat law that does not cover all children up to age states have yet to adopt any booster seat law. = Good = Caution = Danger = Law does not satisfy Advocates recommendations 19

21 Rating Of States Based On Booster Seat Laws WA MT ND ME CA OR NV ID UT WY CO SD NE KS MN IA MO WI IL MI OH IN KY WV PA VA NY VT NJ MD DE DC NH MA RI CT AZ NM OK AR TN SC NC AK TX LA MS AL GA HI FL State has an optimal booster seat law State has a booster seat law, but does not meet Advocates optimal provisions State does not have a booster seat law 20

22 TEEN DRIVING Optimal Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) Program Provisions Learner s Stage: 6-Month Holding Period Learner s Stage: Hours Supervised Driving Intermediate Stage: Nighttime Driving Restriction Intermediate Stage: Passenger Restriction 21

23 TEEN DRIVING Give Teens More Experience and Time to Learn 49 States and DC Still Need An Optimal GDL Program Motor vehicle crashes are the number one killer of American teenagers. Teen drivers are far more likely than other drivers to be involved in fatal crashes because they lack driving experience and tend to take greater risks due to their immaturity. According to NHTSA, young drivers (16 to 20 years old) were involved in approximately 1.8 million, or 29 percent of all automobile crashes (6.2 million) in Additionally, 8,535 people were killed in crashes involving young drivers. Of that number, 3,523 of those killed (41 percent) were the young driver. Graduated driver licensing (GDL) programs introduce teen drivers to the driving experience gradually by phasing in full driving privileges over time and in lower risk settings, and have been effective in reducing teen driver crash deaths. In this report, Advocates has defined what it believes to be the optimal GDL program, making specific recommendations for each of the four components of GDL. Researchers at Johns Hopkins University and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) have found that passenger restrictions for young drivers could save hundreds of lives each year. If 100 percent of teen drivers drove alone, rather than driving with other young passengers in the vehicle, 275 lives could be saved each year. One example of the success of GDL programs is in California. Its program includes a complete learner s stage and a passenger restriction law. Teenage passenger deaths and injuries resulting from crashes involving 16-year-old drivers declined by 40 percent statewide from 1998 through 2000, the first three years of the program. Also, Oregon s GDL program, which includes the optimal learner s stage and a passenger restriction law, has been effective for male teen drivers. According to NHTSA, those who completed the GDL program experienced 16 percent fewer crashes during their first year of driving than those male teens who had not received their license under the GDL system. A 2001 Lou Harris Poll showed 92 percent of the public supported a 6-month holding period and 95 percent supported at least hours of practice driving with an adult. Seventyfour percent supported passenger restrictions and supervised driving at night. Support for these provisions was surprisingly high among year-old respondents. On the following page, the four major provisions of a GDL program are explained. In this report, each provision is counted as its own law. To date, only one state, Nevada, has all four optimal provisions recommended by Advocates. Advocates Recommendation: All four of the optimal GDL provisions listed on the following page should be adopted by every state to reduce teen deaths and injuries. 22

24 TEEN DRIVING Provisions of Advocates Optimal Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) Program LEARNER S STAGE 1. Six (6)-Month Holding Period Advocates optimal learner s stage graduated driver licensing (GDL) program includes a 6-month holding period during which an adult licensed driver must supervise a new driver at all times. If the new driver remains citation free for 6 months, s/he may progress to the intermediate stage. In this report, Advocates has not credited states if their 6-month holding period law allows a reduced holding period for those who take a driver's education course. 11 states do not have an optimal six-month holding period Hours of Supervised Driving The second requirement of Advocates optimal learner s stage GDL program requires a new driver to complete hours of behind-the-wheel training with an adult licensed driver. Advocates has not given credit to States if their law requiring hours of supervised driving includes a reduction in the required hours of supervised driving for those who take a driver's education course. INTERMEDIATE STAGE 3. Nighttime Restriction Advocates optimal intermediate stage GDL program restricts teen driving at night. Under this program, unsupervised driving is prohibited from at least 10:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. Half credit is awarded for nighttime restrictions that do not fully meet Advocates optimal criteria. 42 states and DC do not have an optimal nighttime restriction. 4. Passenger Restriction A passenger restriction law under the intermediate stage of Advocates optimal GDL program limits the number of teenage passengers that may accompany a teen driver without adult supervision to one nonfamilial teenager. Half credit is awarded for passenger restrictions that do not fully meet Advocates optimal criteria. 22 states have no optimal passenger restriction. 24 states do have an optimal hours of supervised driving requirement. Motor vehicle crashes are the #1 killer of American teenagers. 23

25 TEEN DRIVING Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) Program Number of Optimal Laws Adopted Since January 2005: One Nighttime Restriction, four hours supervised driving provisions, four 6-month holding period provisions, six Passenger Restriction provisions 6-Month Holding Period Hrs. Supervised Driving Nighttime Restriction Passenger Restriction Teen Driving Law Rating AL MT AK NE AZ NV AR NH CA NJ CO NM CT NY DE NC DC ND FL OH GA OK HI OR ID PA IL RI IN SC IA SD KS TN KY TX LA UT ME VT MD VA MA WA MI WV MN WI MS WY MO 6-Month Holding Period Hrs. Supervised Driving Nighttime Restriction Passenger Restriction Teen Driving Law Rating One state has all four provisions of Advocates optimal GDL program. Two states have none of Advocates optimal provisions. 14 states have only one of the optimal provisions. 16 states have two of four optimal provisions. 18 states and DC have three of four optimal provisions. Holding Period - three states have no holding period; 39 states and DC have optimal provisions. Supervised Driving - 12 states have no provision; 26 and DC have optimal provisions. Nighttime Restriction - seven states have no restrictions; eight have optimal provisions. Passenger Restriction - 17 states have no provision; 28 and DC have optimal provisions. = Optimal law = Law does not satisfy Advocates recommendations = Good = Caution = Danger 24

26 Rating Of States Based On Teen Driving Laws WA MT ND ME CA OR NV ID UT WY CO SD NE KS MN IA MO WI IL MI OH IN KY WV PA VA NY VT NJ MD DE DC NH MA RI CT AZ NM OK AR TN NC SC AK TX LA MS AL GA FL HI State has all four optimal provisions of Advocates recommended graduated driver licensing program State has made progress by enacting laws in most of the four component areas of GDL State has only one or none of the optimal provisions of graduated driver licensing program 25

27 IMPAIRED DRIVING Child Endangerment High BAC Mandatory BAC Test for Drivers Who Survive Fatal Crashes Mandatory BAC Test for Drivers Killed in Fatal Crashes Open Container Repeat Offender Sobriety Checkpoint Laws 26

28 IMPAIRED DRIVING Key Laws Help Stem the Tide In 2004, 40 percent of all fatal crashes were alcohol-related. Clearly, more needs to be done to reduce the number of impaired drivers on our roadways. Impaired driving laws target a range of behavioral issues associated with alcohol consumption and operation of a motor vehicle on public roads. Federal leadership in critical areas, such as impaired driving, has resulted in the rapid adoption of life-saving laws in states across the country. As a result of federal laws enacted, all 50 states have adopted.08 percent blood alcohol concentration (BAC), a national 21 minimum drinking age and zero tolerance BAC laws for youth. 87 percent of Americans feel that more attention should be given to drunk driving. Lou Harris Poll, May 2004 The chart on page 34 shows which states have open container and repeat offender laws that meet federal requirements, and which states lag behind. and laws penalizing impaired drivers who have one or more children in the car. Seven laws that Advocates considers crucial to reducing impaired driving are: Child Endangerment High BAC Mandatory BAC Test Killed Mandatory BAC Test Surviving Open Container Repeat Offender Sobriety Checkpoint In the chart, states have been rated as: Good for having at least six of the seven laws necessary for reducing drunk driving. Caution for having four or five of the optimal laws. Danger for having fewer than four of these lifesaving laws. Additionally, documented successes in reducing drunk driving have resulted from the enactment of high BAC laws; laws requiring mandatory BAC testing for those drivers killed in or drivers who are involved in, yet survive, a crash in which deaths occur; laws requiring sobriety checkpoints; 27

29 11 States and DC Need Child Endangerment Laws CHILD ENDANGERMENT LAWS Protect Children from an Adult s Wrong Decision Child endangerment laws either create a separate offense or enhance existing Driving While Intoxicated (DWI)/Driving Under the Influence (DUI) penalties for someone who drives under the influence of alcohol or drugs with a minor child in the vehicle. These drivers create a hazardous situation for themselves and for others on the road and they put a child who rarely has a choice in who gets behind the wheel in potential serious danger. Currently, 39 states have enacted child endangerment laws that increase penalties for people who drive while impaired with children in their vehicles. Eleven (11) states and DC need to enact these laws. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) studied crashes involving impaired drivers and found that in over 5,000 child passenger deaths, more than 60 percent of the children who were killed were riding in the car driven by the impaired driver. Impaired drivers who transported a child who died in a crash were more likely to have had a prior license suspension or had been previously convicted for driving while intoxicated. These problem drivers continue to take risks with their own lives, as well as with a child s. Although it is the choice of the driver to drink and drive, minor children often have no choice in whether they ride with the intoxicated driver. Mothers Against Drunk Driving Additionally, the CDC study found that only 18 percent of children who were killed in a crash while riding in the impaired driver s vehicle were properly restrained. In comparison, nearly 31 percent of children killed in a crash while riding with a nonimpaired driver were properly restrained. Child endangerment laws are put in place to encourage people to consider the consequences before they get behind the wheel while impaired with a child in their vehicle. When properly enforced, child endangerment laws act as strong deterrents that protect children. Advocates Recommendation: All states need to adopt child endangerment laws that protect children from impaired drivers. 28

30 HIGH BAC LAWS Stop Super Drunk Drivers According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the median blood alcohol concentration (BAC) for drivers involved in a fatal crash is.16 percent. This far exceeds the limit set by federal law at.08 percent, and statistics indicate that drivers with such high BACs are an even greater danger on the road. The National Hardcore Drunk Driver Project estimates that one percent of drivers on a normal weekend night are driving with a BAC of.15 percent or more. Shockingly, these super drunk drivers account for approximately 50 percent of all fatal crashes during this period. In fact, 22 percent of the alcohol-related deaths in 2003 were caused by a driver with a.15 percent BAC or higher. A high BAC statute provides for stiffer penalties for drivers Times More Likely to be Involved in a Fatal Crash 200 x 13 States convicted of a Driving While Impaired Need High (DWI)/Driving Under the Influence BAC Laws (DUI) offense when their BAC is over a certain threshold. For example, conviction under a high BAC law could result in longer, more intense compulsory alcohol education or treatment, stronger driver penalties jail, license revocation or fines, or stronger vehicle sanctions plate impoundment or ignition interlock. Most states have enacted some form of a high BAC law. Advocates regards an optimal high BAC law to be one that sets the threshold at.15 percent BAC or lower. High BAC laws are an important deterrent, especially for drivers likely to repeat an impaired driving offense. Currently, 460 x 37 states and the District of Columbia (DC) have high BAC laws in place. Thirteen states have not enacted these important, lifesaving statutes..15 % BAC.20 % BAC Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Advocates Recommendation: All states should adopt high BAC laws that set the threshold BAC at.15% BAC or lower. 29

31 MANDATORY BAC TEST LAWS For Drivers Killed in Fatal Crashes and For Drivers Who Survive Fatal Crashes 13 States and DC Need Mandatory BAC Test Laws Driver Killed 11 States Need Mandatory BAC Test Laws Driver Who Survives The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration s (NHTSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) contains data on all reported fatal crashes that occur in the United States each year. This data helps formulate public policy and initiate legislative reform of traffic safety laws. Unfortunately, data on deaths in crashes involving an impaired driver are incomplete because state laws have different requirements for testing drivers involved in crashes in which a fatality occurs. According to NHTSA, only 24,389 (42 percent) of the drivers who were involved in a fatal crash in 2001 had blood alcohol concentration (BAC) test results reported in FARS. In Texas, which only requires testing of surviving drivers involved in a fatal crash, only 1,175 (23 percent) of the 5,138 drivers involved in fatal crashes in 2001 had BAC its reported to FARS. These statistics are far too low, and state laws are far too inconsistent on this subject to ensure accurate reporting. There are generally two provisions of law that are needed for accurate and full reporting to FARS on impaired driving and crash fatalities: mandatory BAC testing for rivers who are killed in a fatal crash, and mandatory BAC testing for drivers who survive a crash in which there is a fatality. In this report, Advocates reviews both of these laws. Currently, 37 states require that drivers who are killed in a fatal crash be tested for the presence of alcohol. Thirteen (13) states and DC do not have a law. Thirty-nine (39) states and DC require that surviving drivers of a crash involving a death have their BACs tested. Eleven (11) states have no such provision. In total, 29 states require that both killed and surviving drivers be tested, and three states (RI, TN and VA) do not require BAC testing in either instance. These laws require the collection of important data that can serve to increase awareness of drunk driving issues by improving the integrity of the data that are collected. They ensure a high level of testing, increase the likelihood of prosecution of impaired driving offenders, decrease the use of hospitals as safe havens for offenders to avoid prosecution, and increase the deterrent to drink and drive by making detection increasingly likely. All of these benefits allow officials to determine the best policies and strategies to reduce impaired driving. Advocates Recommendation: All states In this should report, Advocates adopt laws reviews that require both of mandatory BAC testing for drivers who are killed these in a laws. fatal crash, Currently, and 37 mandatory states require BAC that testing for drivers who survive a crash in which there is a fatality. 30

32 OPEN CONTAINER LAWS That Meet Federal Requirements The 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21) included a program designed to encourage states to adopt laws that ban the presence of open containers of any kind of alcoholic beverage in the entire passenger area of a motor vehicle. To comply with the provisions set forth by TEA-21, the state s open container law must: Prohibit both possession of any open alcoholic beverage container and consumption of any alcoholic beverage in a motor vehicle; Cover the entire passenger area of any motor vehicle, including unlocked glove compartments, etc.; Apply to all alcoholic beverages including beer, wine, and spirits; Apply to all vehicle occupants except for passengers of buses, taxi cabs, limousines or persons in the living quarters of motor homes; Apply to vehicles on the shoulder of public highways; and Require primary enforcement of the law. On the impaired driving chart in this report, Advocates gives credit only to states with an open container law that is in compliance with the provision in TEA-21. Currently, 39 states and the District of Columbia (DC) are in compliance with the TEA-21 provisions. Eleven (11) states do not comply with the federal statute. 111 States Need Open Container Laws Advocates Recommendation: All states should adopt open container laws that ban the presence of open containers of any kind of alcoholic beverages in the entire passenger area of a motor vehicle and comply with the provisions of TEA

33 REPEAT OFFENDER LAWS That Meet Federal Requirements 11 States Repeat offender laws apply to Need impaired drivers with previous Repeat impaired driving convictions. They Offender generally include stiffer penalties for Laws individuals that are convicted of an impaired driving offense for the second, third, or fourth time. Stiffer penalties are an important deterrent to a repeat impaired driving offense. This deterrent is especially important as repeat offenders are increasingly likely to be driving with a higher blood alcohol concentration (BAC) and are 40 percent more likely to be involved in a fatal crash. In fact, one third of those arrested or convicted of an impaired driving offense are repeat offenders. In 1998, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21) included a provision that required states to enact repeat offender laws that required the following: A minimum one year license suspension for repeat intoxication; All motor vehicles of the offender be impounded for a specified period or require the installation of an ignition interlock system; Mandatory assessment of alcohol abuse and referral to treatment; and, Establishment of a mandatory minimum sentence for repeat offenders of at least five days of imprisonment or 30 days of community service for the second offense, and at least ten days of imprisonment or 60 days of community service for the third or subsequent offense. States that fail to meet these requirements are penalized by having to transfer a portion of their highway construction monies to their state highway safety program. This federal requirement is known as redirection. In this report, Advocates has acknowledged those states that have submitted their repeat offender law to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for review and have been found to be in compliance with the provision in the federal highway bill, TEA-21. Some states have one or more provisions of the repeat offender law requirements under TEA-21, but only those states that fully comply with all provisions of the federal law are listed as in compliance in this report. To date, 39 states and DC get credit for having this law. Eleven (11) states are not in compliance with the federal repeat offender language. Advocates Recommendation: All states should adopt repeat offender laws that fully comply with the provisions of TEA

34 SOBRIETY CHECKPOINT LAWS Increase the Visibility of Impaired Driving Enforcement Sobriety checkpoints are an important provision of any state s program to reduce impaired driving. Law enforcement officers use sobriety checkpoints as a highly visible tool for deterring impaired driving. A 2004 Lou Harris poll shows strong public support 80 percent for police checkpoints to spot drunk drivers. Checkpoints have a predetermined set of rules as to who an officer may stop in order to identify impairment. Publicized, frequent and long-term checkpoints create a convincing threat for drivers not to get behind the wheel impaired. This tool has proven to deter drunk or drugged people from driving under the influence and has removed impaired drivers from the roads. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), studies indicate that large-scale sobriety checkpoint programs alone can reduce alcohol-related crashes by 20 percent. In this report, Advocates has given credit to states that have enacted laws 11 States with guidelines for enforcement Need officials to run sobriety checkpoints Sobriety throughout the state. To date, 40 states Checkpoint and the District of Columbia (DC) have laws on their books that authorize them Laws to run checkpoints. Of those, only 12 states and DC conduct sobriety checkpoints twice a month. Advocates encourages all states that have laws allowing for sobriety checkpoints to make them a key part of their efforts to reduce impaired driving, and urges those 11 states without these laws to enact them. Sobriety checkpoints reduce impaired driving, lower the incidence of fatal crashes and garner a great deal of support from the public. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), sobriety checkpoints at 23 locations across the nation resulted in an average decline of fatal crashes by 22 percent. Advocates Recommendation: All states should adopt laws allowing sobriety checkpoints and make them a key part of their efforts to reduce impaired driving. 33

35 IMPAIRED DRIVING Optimal Drunk Driving Safety Laws Number of new laws since January 2005: Two Child Endangerment; One High BAC; Three Open Container; One Repeat Offender. Mandatory BAC Test - Killed Mandatory BAC Test - Survived (TEA-21) (TEA-21) Sobriety Checkpoint Law Impaired Driving Laws Rating AL MT AK NE AZ NV AR NH CA NJ CO NM CT NY DE NC DC ND FL OH GA OK HI OR ID PA IL RI IN SC IA SD KS TN KY TX LA UT ME VT MD VA MA WA MI WV MN WI MS WY MO Mandatory BAC Test - Killed Mandatory BAC Test - Survived (TEA-21) (TEA-21) Sobriety Checkpoint Law Impaired Driving Laws Rating = Good = Caution = Danger 34

36 Rating Of States Based On Impaired Driving Laws WA MT ND ME CA OR NV ID UT WY CO SD NE KS MN IA MO WI IL MI OH IN KY WV PA VA NY VT NJ DE MD DC NH MA RI CT AZ NM OK AR TN SC NC AK TX LA MS AL GA HI FL State has at least 6 out of 7 impaired driving laws State has 4 or 5 of 7 impaired driving laws State has 1-3 out of 7 impaired driving laws 35

37 DEFINITIONS OF 14 LIFESAVING LAWS Advocates has determined the following traffic safety laws to be priorities in reducing motor vehicle deaths and injuries. States were given full credit for having a particular law only if their legislation meets the optimal provisions as described below. Partial credit was given to states with booster seat and teen driving laws that were deficient. ADULT OCCUPANT PROTECTION Allows law enforcement officers to stop and ticket someone when they see a violation of the seat belt law. No other violation need occur first to take action. Requires all motorcycle riders, regardless of age, to wear a U.S. Department of Transportation certified helmet or face a fine. CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY Booster Seat Law Requires children between the ages of four and eight to be placed in a U.S. DOT-approved child restraint system, or booster seat. States were given only partial credit if their booster seat law does not cover up to age 8. TEEN DRIVING Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) systems allow teenagers to learn to drive under lower risk conditions and consist of a learner's stage, an intermediate stage and an unrestricted driving stage. The learner s stage requires a teenage driver to complete a minimum amount of supervised driving before application for a full license. The intermediate stage restricts teens from driving in high-risk situations for a specified period of time after receiving a full license. Optimally the intermediate stage should continue until age 18. However, states have been given credit in this report for having both a nighttime and passenger restriction for any length of time, even if it doesn t continue until age 18. Learner s Stage: Six Month Holding Period Provision A beginning teen driver must be supervised by an adult licensed driver at all times. If the learner remains citation-free for six months, he or she may progress to the intermediate stage. In this chart, states have not been given credit if there is a reduction in the holding period for drivers who take a driver's education course. Learner s Stage: Hours of Supervised Driving Provision A beginning teen driver must receive at least hours of behind-the-wheel training with an adult licensed driver. States have not been given credit if there is a reduction in the required hours of supervised driving for drivers who take a driver's education course. 36

38 Intermediate Stage: Nighttime Driving Restriction Provision Unsupervised driving should be prohibited from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. Half credit is awarded for nighttime restrictions that do not fully meet Advocates optimal criteria. Intermediate Stage: Passenger Restriction Provision This provision limits the number of teenage passengers who ride with a teen driving without adult supervision. The optimal limit is no more than one non-familial teenage passenger. Half credit is awarded for passenger restrictions that do not fully meet Advocates optimal criteria. IMPAIRED DRIVING Child Endangerment- This law creates a separate offense or enhances an existing penalty for an impaired driving offender who endangers a minor. High-BAC This law creates a separate, more severe offense or enhances the existing penalties for impaired drivers that are found to have a Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) well over the maximum legal BAC level. An optimal statute is one that adds additional penalties for drivers above a.15 percent BAC. Mandatory BAC Testing for Drivers Killed in Fatal Crashes These statutes require any driver killed in a car crash to have his or her BAC tested. Mandatory BAC Testing for Drivers who Survive Fatal Crashes These statutes require any driver who is involved in a crash that causes serious injury or death to have his or her BAC tested. Open Container This law prohibits open containers of alcohol in the passenger area of a motor vehicle. To comply with federal requirements in Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), the law must: prohibit both possession of any open alcoholic beverage container and consumption of any alcoholic beverage; cover the entire passenger area of any motor vehicle, including unlocked glove compartments, etc.; apply to all alcoholic beverages including beer, wine, and spirits; apply to all vehicle occupants except for passengers of buses, taxi cabs, limousines or persons in the living quarters of motor homes; apply to vehicles on the shoulder of public highways; and require primary enforcement of the law. State laws are counted in this report only if they are in compliance with the federal law. Repeat Offender This law applies to impaired drivers with previous impaired driving convictions. The state law must comply with federal requirements in TEA-21 which requires: a minimum one-year license suspension for repeat intoxicated drivers; that all motor vehicles of the offender be impounded for a specified period or require the installation of an ignition interlock system; mandatory assessment of alcohol abuse and referral to treatment; the establishment of a mandatory minimum sentence for repeat offenders of at least five days of imprisonment or 30 days of community service for the second offense and at least 10 days of imprisonment or 60 days of community service for the third or subsequent offense. States in non-compliance with the federal requirements are not labeled in this report as having a repeat offender law. Sobriety Checkpoints Under this statute, law enforcement officials can set up checkpoints to evaluate drivers for signs of alcohol or drug impairment. 37

39 STATES OVERALL RATING BASED ON TOTAL NUMBER OF LAWS, PLUS OCCUPANT PROTECTION LAWS On the following page, Advocates has given an overall rating to the states based on the number of laws each state has that are recommended in this report. Full credit was given only when the law met Advocates optimal law recommendations; half credit was given for booster seat and teen driving laws that partially met Advocates recommendations. The overall rating takes into consideration whether or not a state has a strong occupant protection rating. No state without a primary enforcement seat belt law is eligible for a Green rating, no matter how many other laws they have. The weighting of occupant protection laws is to highlight the significance of these laws in saving lives and reducing injuries. Ratings Chart Color Number of Laws Definition Green Ten to 14, with primary enforcement law, or nine, including both primary enforcement and all-rider helmet laws State is significantly advanced toward adopting all of Advocates recommended optimal laws Yellow Six to nine, with primary enforcement law, or seven to 13, without primary enforcement law State is advancing but has numerous gaps in its highway safety laws. Red Less than seven, without primary enforcement law State falls dangerously behind in adoption of key laws. 38

40 OVERALL RATING BASED ON NUMBER OF SAFETY LAWS Booster Seat Law GDL: 6 Mo. Holding Period Provision GDL: hrs. Supervised Driving GDL: Nighttime Restriction Provision GDL: Passenger Restriction Provision Mandatory BAC Test - Killed Mandatory BAC Test - Surviving Sobriety Checkpoint Law Total Credit for Number of Laws 2004 Alabama Alaska Arizona 7 7 Arkansas California Colorado 9 11 Connecticut Delaware 9 9 District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana 9 10 Iowa Kansas 8 8 Kentucky 8 8 Louisiana 9 9 Maine Maryland Massachusetts 7 10 Michigan Minnesota 7 7 Mississippi 7 7 Missouri 7 8 Montana = Optimal law = Half credit given because law does not satisfy Advocates recommendations Total Credit for Number of Laws 2005 Overall Safety Rating 39

41 OVERALL RATING BASED ON NUMBER OF SAFETY LAWS Booster Seat Law GDL: 6 Mo. Holding Period Provision GDL: hrs. Supervised Driving GDL: Nighttime Restriction Provision GDL: Passenger Restriction Provision Mandatory BAC Test - Killed Mandatory BAC Test - Surviving Sobriety Checkpoint Law Total Credit for Number of Laws 2004 Total Credit for Number of Laws 2005 Overall Safety Rating Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma 8 10 Oregon 9 9 Pennsylvania Rhode Island 6 7 South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont 8 8 Virginia 9 9 Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Total Number With Optimal Law DC DC DC DC DC DC DC DC DC DC DC Total Number Missing Optimal Law DC DC DC = Optimal law = Half credit given because law does not satisfy Advocates recommendations 40

42 Overall Rating Of States Based On Number Of Safety Laws WA MT ND ME CA OR NV ID UT WY CO SD NE KS MN IA MO WI IL MI OH IN KY WV PA VA NY VT NJ DE MD DC NH MA RI CT AZ NM OK AR TN NC SC TX LA MS AL GA AK FL HI 10 to 14, with primary enforcement law, or nine, including both primary enforcement and all-rider helmet laws Six to nine, with primary enforcement law, or 7 to 13, without primary enforcement law Less than 7, without primary enforcement law 41

43 ADVOCATES HELPING ADVOCATES One of Advocates primary goals for 2006 is to work with the states to accelerate adoption of the highway safety laws discussed in the 2006 Roadmap to Highway Safety Laws. To assist states in their efforts, Advocates has launched an E-Advocacy website from our homepage that can facilitate state advocacy efforts. Join NOW by visiting ACTION NETWORK TO PROMOTE HIGHWAY AND AUTO SAFETY LEGISLATION Becoming a member of Advocates Action Network gives you: Direct access to your elected officials Sample letters and talking points that can be ed directly Access to your local, state, and national media Our e-advocacy network is a tool for you to facilitate passage of important highway safety laws in your state. This coming year, Advocates will be: Working at the state level on primary enforcement seat belt laws, booster seat laws, graduated driver licensing for teen drivers, unattended children, and all-rider motorcycle helmet laws; Improving the highway safety community's networking capabilities in each state; Increasing the number of contacts made to legislators by their constituents; Providing direct links to your state's newspapers and TV and radio stations to facilitate your media presence; and, Advocacy seeks to increase the power of people and groups and to make institutions more responsive to human needs. It attempts to enlarge the range of choices that people can have by increasing their power to define problems and solutions and participate in the broader social and policy arena. Lawrence Wallack, DrPH (Doctor of Public Health) Providing key lobbying materials that highlight many of the laws listed in this report. Participating is as simple as entering your address and zip code in order for the system to access elected officials who serve the district where you reside. When we send Alerts and Messages advising you of legislative opportunities and asking for letters to be sent, the system will send your letter directly to the selected elected officials. Talking points and statistics will be provided, but you will be able to write the letter in your own words. Letting your elected officials know how you feel about important, life-saving motor vehicle and highway safety legislation is essential to improving our chances of success and this system makes it quick and easy. This list is a private list and will not be shared with any other organization unless permission is given. Growing our network is a big part of what will make us successful. Highway and motor vehicle safety affects everyone! 42

44 The number of deaths from motor vehicle crashes nationwide changed very little this past year, (42,636 in 2004, from 42,643 in 2003). As states realize that annual fatality reductions have hit a plateau in recent years, many local legislators are beginning to introduce new legislation that addresses driver behavior. Advocates recognizes the need to explore innovative ways to encourage safe driver behavior to reduce the number of annual fatalities. The following legislation, either introduced or enacted, represents a sample of approaches state legislatures have taken up in the past year. None of these issues are included in Advocates ratings. Adult Occupant Protection Pickup Truck Exemptions Pickup trucks have become increasingly popular in the United States, with registrations up by over five percent between 1997 and Fewer than 50% of the states restrict transport of passengers in the cargo area. Compared with restrained cab occupants, the risk of death for those in the cargo area is eight times higher. No two states have identical laws, and only one state fully prohibits travel in cargo areas. Restrictions in other states vary according to age groups, and presence of an enclosed cargo area. In 2005, only one state, Arizona, introduced legislation to restrict travel in the cargo area of pickup trucks. The legislation was not adopted. In 2004, five states introduced similar legislation, all of which failed. In 2003, pickup trucks accounted for nearly 40% of rural fatal vehicle ejections. Of those fatal pickup truck ejections, 92% of the occupants were unbelted. Several states have seat belt exemptions for pickup trucks, and in 2005, Georgia introduced, but did not adopt, legislation that would remove this exemption. Child Passenger Safety EMERGING ISSUES STATES BEGIN TO FOCUS MORE ON HIGHER RISK POPULATIONS Unattended Children According to Kids And Cars, a national non-profit that works to protect children from being injured or killed when left alone in or around motor vehicles, in 2004, there were at least 169 child fatalities due to such circumstances (i.e., left in vehicle during hot weather, power window strangulation, car set in motion by child, backed over by vehicle, etc.). The number of documented cases of unattended child deaths, as of December 2005, is over 200. Motor vehicle trauma remains a leading cause of death to children. What further complicates this issue is the fact that NHTSA does not collect fatality and injury data for non-crash related vehicle incidents. One approach to curbing these kinds of needless deaths has been to make the act of leaving a child unattended in a vehicle a crime. In 2005, two states (NV, LA) passed such legislation and joined 9 other states with existing laws (CA, CT, FL, IL, MD, NE, PA, TX, WA). In 2006, Kids And Cars, together with other organizations, will be lobbying for enactment of similar legislation in Hawaii, Michigan, Minnesota, Virginia, and Wisconsin. 43

45 Teen Driving Teen Cell Phone Use (While Driving) Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for 15- to 20 year-olds. This same age group represents 6.3% of all licensed drivers, yet accounts for 13.6% of all annual fatal crashes. This group s overrepresentation in fatalities highlights the need for legislative restrictions on beginning teen drivers. One such restriction that has gained traction in 2005 is limiting the use of cell phones by beginning teen drivers. According to a recent survey by Liberty Mutual Group and SADD (Students Against Destructive Teenage Cell-Phone Restrictions Distracted Driving: Existing Laws and Legislation Introduced in 2005* AK HI OR CA WA NV ID AZ UT Existing Age Specific Restriction Existing Provisional Restriction MT WY CO NM Existing Provisional And Age Restriction Introduced in 2005 (Age or Provisional) ND SD NE KS TX OK MN IA MO AR LA WI IL MS MI PA OH IN WV VA KY TN AL GA SC NC FL NY ME VT NH MA RI CT NJ DE MD DC Source: (As of August 2005) Decisions), 62 percent of high school drivers say they talk on a cell phone while driving, and approximately half of high school teens who do not yet drive (52 percent) and middle school students (47 percent) expect they will engage in this behavior when they begin driving. Legislators have begun to address this issue by passing either age-specific or provisional license restrictions (instructional permit and provisional license holders) on cell phone use by drivers. While talking on the cell phone when driving is distracting for all drivers, the political climate in 2005 has warmed to the idea of initially addressing the highest risk population, namely beginning teen drivers. Impaired Driving Breathalyzer Test Refusal There are nearly 1.5 million arrests for driving while intoxicated (DWI) in the U.S. each year. DWI arrests and convictions are based on the amount of alcohol in the driver s bloodstream, the blood alcohol concentration (BAC). Each state sets a BAC limit above which it is illegal for a driver to operate a motor vehicle. In order to determine whether a person has violated the law, states have replaced indirect testing methods (walking a straight line, nose touching, etc.) with tests that directly measure the BAC of a driver suspected of violating the DWI law. States now use hand-held breathalyzer devices that compute the BAC by measuring the alcohol content in the driver s breath instead of, or in addition to, blood tests. When these more direct methods of testing BAC began to be used, some violators refused to submit to the tests in an effort to frustrate enforcement and to withhold evidence of their crime. In order to ensure that drivers take the BAC test, every state has adopted an implied consent law that 44

46 requires drivers to submit to a breath test (and, if necessary, a blood test) when requested by a law enforcement officer. These laws assume the driver s consent to be tested and drivers are generally given notice of the implied consent law at the time they obtain or renew their license. While the specifics of state implied consent laws vary, these laws generally impose enhanced penalties for the refusal to take a BAC test, including the imposition of longer periods of license suspension than would be the case if the driver were to take the test and fail. Nevertheless, many offenders still find that the risk of longer license suspension for their refusal to take the BAC test is more advantageous than failing the test and providing the prosecution with direct evidence of their illegal BAC level, evidence that can be used to obtain a criminal DWI conviction. In 2001, which is the most recent data available, about 25% of all drivers arrested for DWI in the U.S. refused to take breath tests. Some states, like Rhode Island, had refusal rates upwards of 85%, while other states, like California, had refusal rates as low as 5%. Legislative examples in 2005 include Alaska, which passed a law that limits the court s ability to suspend execution of sentence for breath test refusals. Other states including Florida, Illinois, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Rhode Island introduced similar legislation in Vehicle Impoundment Administrative License Revocation is a sanction often used in DUI offenses. However, 50 to 75 percent of offenders continue to drive without a license during their revocation period. In fact, according to NHTSA, over 60 percent of thirdtime offenders who have their license suspended or revoked commit some form of traffic violation during their suspension/revocation period. An obvious and successful response to this problem is to impound the offender s vehicle. Studies have consistently shown that vehicle impoundment reduces driving offenses during and after sanction periods by offenders. At present, there are 24 states without vehicle impoundment laws for repeat offenders. Automated Enforcement The most frequent and costly collisions, both in lives lost and property damage, occur at intersections. The use of automated enforcement technologies has grown significantly in the past few years to curb growing red light and speeding violations. In 2005, no fewer than 60 communities nationwide considered the use of automated enforcement technologies. States vary on when and where these technologies can be used, and not all states have laws pertaining to automated enforcement. 45

47 STATES AT A GLANCE Each state and the District of Columbia (DC) are graphically represented in alphabetical order with the following information: A listing of the 14 key life-saving laws that the state has or does not have based on the laws defined and discussed in this report. The number of people killed in each state for the year 2004, as reported in the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The annual economic cost of motor vehicle crashes to the state, as reported by The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes 2000 (NHTSA) report. The state s background color represents its overall rating based on the rating chart on page 41 of this report. States are credited with having laws only if their laws meet Advocates optimal criteria. Only 16 states and DC received a Green rating, showing significant advancement toward adopting all of Advocates recommended optimal laws. 30 states received a Yellow rating, showing advancement but with numerous gaps still in its highway safety laws. 4 states received a Red rating, indicating key laws dangerously lacking. ALABAMA 1,154 Killed $2.79 Billion ALABAMA: CURRENT OPTIMAL HIGHWAY SAFETY LAWS: 46

48 ALASKA 101 Killed $475 Million ALASKA : ARIZONA 1,150 Killed $4.27 Billion ARIZONA : 47

49 ARKANSAS 704 Killed $1.97 Billion ARKANSAS : CALIFORNIA 4,120 Killed $20.66 Billion CALIFORNIA: 48

50 COLORADO 665 Killed $3.28 Billion COLORADO: GDL Passenger Restriction Provision CONNECTICUT 291 Killed $3.6 Billion CONNECTICUT: 49

51 DELAWARE 134 Killed $706 Million DELAWARE: DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 43 Killed $732 Million DC: 50

52 FLORIDA 3,244 Killed $14.4 Billion FLORIDA: GEORGIA 1,634 Killed $7.85 Billion GEORGIA: ] 51

53 HAWAII 142 Killed $655 Million HAWAII: IDAHO 260 Killed $856 Million IDAHO: 52

54 ILLINOIS 1,356 Killed $8.98 Billion ILLINOIS: INDIANA 947 Killed $4.35 Billion INDIANA : 53

55 IOWA 390 Killed $2.11 Billion IOWA: KANSAS 461 Killed $1.88 Billion KANSAS : 54

56 KENTUCKY 964 Killed $3.11 Billion KENTUCKY : LOUISIANA 904 Killed $4 Billion LOUISIANA: 55

57 MAINE 194 Killed $912 Million MAINE: MARYLAND 643 Killed $4.24 Billion MARYLAND: GDL 6-Month Holding Period Provision 56

58 MASSACHUSETTS 476 Killed $6.28 Billion MASSACHUSETTS: MICHIGAN 1,159 Killed $8.07 Billion MICHIGAN : 57

59 MINNESOTA 567 Killed $3.07 Billion MINNESOTA: MISSISSIPPI 900 Killed $2.11 Billion MISSISSIPPI: 58

60 MISSOURI 1,130 Killed $4.74 Billion MISSOURI: MONTANA 229 Killed $621 Million MONTANA: 59

61 NEBRASKA 254 Killed $1.63 Billion NEBRASKA: NEVADA 395 Killed $1.87 Billion NEVADA: 60

62 NEW HAMPSHIRE 171 Killed $1.01 Billion NEW HAMPSHIRE: NEW JERSEY 731 Killed $9.34 Billion NEW JERSEY: 61

63 NEW MEXICO NEW MEXICO: 521 Killed $1.41 Billion NEW YORK 1,493 Killed $19.49 Billion NEW YORK : 62

64 NORTH CAROLINA 1,557 Killed $8.27 Billion NORTH CAROLINA: NORTH DAKOTA 100 Killed $290 Million NORTH DAKOTA: 63

65 OHIO 1,286 Killed $11.09 Billion OHIO: OKLAHOMA 774 Killed $2.59 Billion OKLAHOMA: GDL Hours Supervised Driving Provision 64

66 OREGON 456 Killed $1.95 Billion OREGON: PENNSYLVANIA 1,490 Killed $8.17 Billion PENNSYLVANIA: 65

67 RHODE ISLAND 83 Killed $767 Million RHODE ISLAND: SOUTH CAROLINA 1,046 Killed $3.34 Billion SOUTH CAROLINA: 66

68 SOUTH DAKOTA 197 Killed $498 Million SOUTH DAKOTA: TENNESSEE 1,288 Killed $4.63 Billion TENNESSEE: 67

69 TEXAS 3,583 Killed $19.76 Billion TEXAS: UTAH 296 Killed $1.59 Billion UTAH: 68

70 VERMONT 98 Killed $221 Million VERMONT: VIRGINIA 925 Killed $5.2 Billion VIRGINIA: 69

71 WASHINGTON 563 Killed $5.31 Billion WASHINGTON: WEST VIRGINIA 411 Killed $1.27 Billion WEST VIRGINIA: 70

72 WISCONSIN 792 Killed $3.76 Billion WISCONSIN: WYOMING 164 Killed $424 Million WYOMING: 71