The Impact of Primary Enforcement Laws on Seat Belt Use NCSL Injury Prevention Meeting Phil Haseltine Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers May 14, 2009
Overall Effectiveness of Seat Belts Fatality Reductions DOT HS 809 199 Dec. 2000 Passenger Cars Light Trucks Overall 45% 60% Frontal 50% 53% Near Side Impact 10% 41% Far Side Impact 39% 58% Rollover 74% 80% Rear Impact 56% 81%
Belt Use and Belt Use Laws Voluntary buckle up efforts throughout the world resulted in belt use < 30% Enacting laws in Australia, Europe and Canada raised usage to 50-80% levels depending on penalties and enforcement
Seat Belt Laws in the U.S. NY passed 1 st state law in 1984 U.S. belt use was ~ 13% 43 states had enacted belt use laws by the end of 1992
State Belt Laws Frequently Differ from Other Traffic Laws Belt use laws aren t t moving violations They may not cover all vehicles or all seating positions Lower fines than other offenses No penalty points (except DC and NM)
Common Differences Between Seat Belt Laws and Other Traffic Laws Violations may not go on driving record Insurers may be not be able to consider violations for rate-setting Failure to buckle up often can t t be used to reduce damages in civil suits
Common Differences Between Seat Belt Laws and Other Traffic Laws They only provide for secondary enforcement in 21 states In these states officers must observe another infraction to stop and cite an unrestrained driver This lowers the perceived risk of being stopped and ticketed
Secondary vs. Primary Enforcement While many of these characteristics may influence seat belt use, secondary enforcement is the only one that has been well-documented Observed belt use in states with primary enforcement laws is 88%, compared to 75% in secondary law states* *2008 NOPUS-NHTSA NHTSA
Secondary Enforcement First adopted in New Jersey in 1985 Introduced due to racial profiling concerns Became a popular compromise position 42 states passed secondary enforcement belt use laws
Upgrading Laws from Secondary to Primary CA upgraded to primary in 1993 SBU went from 71% to 82% in 1 year ½ of the 42 secondary law states have now upgraded to primary Currently: 28 states and DC have primary laws 21 have secondary laws NH has no adult belt use law
SBU Increases in States Passing Primary Studies have shown 10 16 16 point increases in states passing primary laws Increases frequently evolve over two or three years NHTSA 2003 report estimated an average 11 point > if remaining states upgraded
Estimated Annual Deaths Prevented In Seven Upgrades Enacted Since 1999 Lives Saved is in addition to Lives Saved at Baseline Levels of Usage 60 56 53 # Deaths Prevented 50 40 30 20 10 40 16 44 12 31 0 AL'99 MI '00 NJ '00 WA '02 DE '03 IL '03 TN '04 Estimated Lives Saved Based on Changes in FARS Use and NHTSA s BELT USE Software
Estimated Annual MAIS 2-52 5 Injuries Prevented by Seven Upgrades Enacted Since 1999 # Injuries Prevented 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 897 958 944 508 325 354 206 AL'99 MI '00 NJ '00 WA '02 DE '03 IL '03 TN '04 Estimated Injuries Prevented Based on Changes in FARS Use and NHTSA s BELT USE Software
Examples of Changes in SBU 2 nd Year After Primary Law 1997 2003 DC + 13.8* DE + 8.8 IN + 4.1 IL + 9.2 MD + 11.7 MI + 12.2 WA + 12.2 2004 2006 AK + 4.0 KY + 5.1 MS + 11.0 SC + 4.8 TN + 5.9 * Passed primary, doubled fine, added points at the same time.
NCHRP Report 601 on Primary Enforcement Laws Transportation Research Board - 2008 11 states passing primary from 1993 thru 2007 had a median > of 16 points Upgrades were associated with 7% to 8% reduction in fatalities Est. impact of upgrading remaining states is + 9.7 points
Highest and Lowest Belt Use States Observed Use in 2008 State Surveys 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 MI HI WA OR CA MD IA NJ DE IN TX MA NH WY AR MS SD RI KY WI LA Primary Secondary No Law Haseltine, 2009
Highest and Lowest Belt Use States Occupant Fatalities Where Belt Use Was Known 2007 FARS Haseltine, 2009
Other Approaches to Upgrading Secondary Enforcement Laws Ballot Initiatives Local Ordinances Can help state primary initiatives Primary up to age 18 Hard to enforce Incentive laws that < penalties for other infractions No demonstrated impact
Current Status Law Upgrades in 2009 Arkansas and Florida enacted primary laws Bills introduced in most other states Bills still active in MA, MN, WI Last year for Sec. 406 incentives
Primary Legislation in the Future Several states came closer in 2009 than ever before Federal incentive funding expired in 2009 Continuing concerns about profiling Crashes cost states a lot of money Debate over the proper role of government
Addressing Impediments to Passing Primary Laws Proper role of government? Legislators decided that when they passed secondary laws Racial profiling States with serious profiling issues should address them separately Primary laws have not been shown to increase profiling
Why We Still Need Primary Surveys are taken during the day, not at night when usage is lower and most crashes occur 54% of passenger vehicle occupant fatalities in 2007 were unrestrained 65% of 13 to 15 and 21 to 34 year olds were not restrained
Potential Annual Reductions with Primary Enforcement 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 CO GA KS MT ND NH SD UT Serious Injuries Fatalities
Why We Still Needs Primary Laws The Bottom Line 596 additional lives would be saved annually if all states had primary 9,078 additional serious injuries would be prevented annually if all states had primary
Contact Information Phil Haseltine Haseltine Safety Consulting, LLC phil@occupantsafety.org 703.328.2722