by Neil Schuster. president and CEO, American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators

How we handle risk is complicated, to say the least. And people do not all view and respond to risk in the same way. Malcolm Gladwell, who wrote The Tipping Point, wrote that we assume that identifying and eliminating a risk will improve safety. Possibly, but not always, partly because we have a “seemingly fundamental tendency to compensate for lower risks in one area by taking greater risks in another.”

An experiment with a fleet of taxis in Munich bears this out. Part of a fleet was equipped with antilock brakes (ABS), the remainder was left alone. Three years of observation showed that drivers with ABS became poorer drivers – they drove faster, they made sharper turns, they tailgated more often and they merged poorly. As a group, these drivers were in more near-collisions. ABS didn’t lead to safer taxi drivers, it led to inferior driving and a willingness to take more chances because they had ABS to back them up.

Similarly, Gladwell writes, more pedestrians are killed at marked crosswalks than at unmarked crossings. He concludes that pedestrians compensate for the safe environment of a marked crossing by being less vigilant about traffic (though I wonder if part of the reason is that more pedestrians use marked crosswalks). The same is true of childproof medicine bottle lids – the safer lids led to adults being more careless about leaving bottles within the reach of children, and more children died as a result.

Gladwell gives us another interesting example, this about how increased risk led to increased safety. In the late 1960’s, Sweden changed from driving on the left-hand side of the road to driving on the right. Logically, that brings with it the potential for more serious accidents. Instead, people compensated for this increased risk by driving more carefully. During the first year under right-hand-side drive, Sweden saw its road deaths drop 17 percent. Unfortunately, the rate slowly rose to previous levels, possibly as drivers became more familiar – and less cautious – with driving on the right.

So what does it mean for motor vehicle agencies in North America? AAMVA members must test new drivers on their ability to park a car, make turns and drive in traffic. Driver's license applicants also need to prove they understand traffic laws and the rules of the road to ensure safe driving. But how well do we know a new driver’s preference to adopt more risky behavior in less risky situations? Or a driver’s perception when he or she is in a higher-risk situation and should become a more careful driver?

As we acquire more safe driving technologies, will we take more risks when behind the wheel and become poorer drivers? If that is so, safety advocates, legislators and the public will look to motor vehicle administrators to solve the problem.

by Jason D. King, ABC

I recently had the pleasure of being interviewed on the KoJo Nnamdi Show on WAMU 88.5. But no KoJo. However, his substitute interviewer, the Washington Post's Marc Fisher , was there. Sure, I wanted to meet KoJo. But Marc Fisher didn't disappoint. And in the "media matters" category of Behind the Wheel, we celebrate the good and not so good in journalism. Today we celebrate the good.

We discussed the controversial chooselife specialty license approved last July in Virginia and now available in 23 states. The impetus for this interview was the recent application for a "pro choice" specialty plate in Virgina. The "choose life" plate has been a huge revenue generator for the causes supported by the Choose Life organization. And now, an opposing organization, is hoping to capitalize on peoples' "passion for plates" and generate revenue for their cause too. Sounds fair enough, right?

The conundrum with these plates is that as "poetic" and "expressive" as they are, they put state government, and sometimes, state DMVs, in the position of deciding what is and isn't an appropriate message for the roads. Luckily for Virginia DMV this decision falls to the legislature.

But let's get back to the interviewer.

Fisher treated me, and the other guests; Melanie Stokes, manager, Communications, Virginia DMV and Stefan Lonce, author, LCNS2ROM:Vanity License PL8S and the GR8 Stories They Tell  to a very (excuse the pun) fair and balanced interview. He asked relevant questions, listened and treated us with respect.

It was an informative discussion and we even got to talk about the AAMVA/LCNS2ROM 2007 survey of vanity license plates.

Until next time, stay safe behind the wheel.

Jason D. King, ABC
Director, Communications & Public Relations
American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA)
jking@aamva.org

 

By Neil Schuster, president and CEO, AAMVA

The Colossus of Rhodes, a statue of the Greek god Helios, is considered one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. Today, we’re more apt to look in wonder at a colossus of roads – the large, powerful highways and streets that vex us most when we’re behind the wheel of our cars.

The Daily Beast used GPS data to determine the 75 worst commutes in the U.S. (The top five are the Hollywood Freeway in Los Angeles, Lunalilo Freeway in Honolulu, the Capital Beltway in Washington, DC, I-35 in Austin, and the James Lick Freeway in San Francisco.) Most people equate “worst” with “most-congested,” and on the surface (sorry for that pun), almost all of the 75 seem to suffer from too much demand for too little road capacity. However, one component of the problem you may not see in the headlines about the list is the role of safety in putting those commutes on the list. Delve into the information and it is easy to see that it is about safety as much, or more, as it is about road capacity.

A traffic reporter notes, “If there’s a car crash it can take people forever to get home,” in discussing I-95 in Bridgeport, Connecticut, one of the top 75. A trooper in Nevada said, “Some people aren't paying attention and have to take evasive action to slow down or make a quick lane change so they don't rear-end somebody," in describing the problem on a Las Vegas highway on the list. A police sergeant in Detroit notes that I-94, another commute on the list, is “flat and straight and people like to fall asleep out there." And these weren’t the only safety-related comments. The safety theme weaves itself prominently through the full list.

The list should be more appropriately named the scariest 75 commutes in the U.S.

Now a personal note. I thought about driving on DC’s Beltway (unfortunately one of the top five), particularly in terms of congestion and safety. Maybe it’s because I’m a part of the AAMVA community, but my thoughts and concerns turn more to safety than congestion when I’m on that road. I can usually see about 20 or 30 cars in my field of vision, and while I used to think about how many of them could slow me down (and which lane might prove to be the fastest), now I think about who is behind each of those wheels.

My guess is at least a few are very likely driving impaired (drunk, drugged, suffering unrealized effects of a new prescription medicine or just plain tired). Some are unlicensed (never trained and tested, possibly suspended or maybe revoked). I’m sure a few are uninsured. And I’ll bet some of the vehicles I see don’t belong on the road (Katrina-damaged and unwittingly sold as a used vehicle advertised in excellent condition).

If the 75 worst commutes were a matter of congestion alone, the solution would be straightforward – find the money to build new roads and add lanes to existing roads. But the problem isn’t that easy. There is a huge safety component at play. The solution to that is likely to be more complex. Yes, it will require some money, but it also requires research, education and awareness, enhanced enforcement, and driver testing and training. The partners and interests needed to achieve this is likely to be broader than if the solution were only about building roads. One thing is certain – the AAMVA community will be a vital part of the solution.

 

By Neil Schuster, AAMVA President and CEO

The media hasn’t yet figured out what to call the closing decade. It may be the oughts, the naughts, or the zeroes, but whatever name applies, it was a time of great challenge and change to many, including the AAMVA community.

We began the decade with a potential crisis – Y2K – that turned out, for the most part, to be needless worry. And less than two years later, we faced a very real crisis – a terrorist attack on U.S. soil that took several thousand lives, including 72 law enforcement officers.

That attack changed our lives in many ways, and made ID security a top priority for our community. By mid-decade, we were helping to develop and then implement federal rules to strengthen DL/ID security. That effort continues, as legislators and policy-makers consider what will work best to meet our nation’s security needs.

The last part of the decade saw a rapid and serious economic downturn that affected us all, with a recovery that most economists predict will be slower than usual. State and local governments have suffered sharp declines in revenue, and AAMVA members now face the challenges of serving the public with perhaps fewer dollars and less staff than ever before.

The economic situation appears to be a defining moment as we begin the new decade. Also, about a week before New Year’s, we learned of a nearly-successful attempted terrorist attack in the U.S. which may well cause legislators and policymakers to look at DL/ID security with renewed interest and scrutiny.

On the safety front, the dangers associated with distracted driving and texting while driving gained great attention recently and will be on the minds of lawmakers and policymakers when they tackle highway legislation in the new decade.

The motor vehicle and law enforcement community will be called to many tables in the “teens” (if that is what the new decade will be called). It will likely be a time of great challenge for all of us, but also an opportunity for us to help overcome those challenges.

Mother Theresa said “Life is a challenge; meet it.” I have no doubt the AAMVA community will do just that.

 

By Amanda Mesones

On Wednesday, Dec. 9, 2009, Nevada Governor Gibbons signed emergency driver’s license regulations allowing the DMV to meet the Department of Homeland Security’s Dec. 31 REAL ID Act compliance deadline.

As the Governor requested, specific language prohibiting the use of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips or other technology used to track individuals was included in the regulations, as well as a definition of how the DMV will store and restrict access to personal identification data. (Read the press release.)

“We included the language recommended by the Governor in the regulations,” DMV Director Edgar J. Roberts said, “to reassure our customers. Rumors on the blogosphere about RFID chips and national databases of driver information have been widely circulated despite being false.”

But despite these transparent efforts on the part of the Nevada DMV, it seems the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is at it again with their campaign of misinformation. The ACLU addressed a Dec. 7 letter to the Governor that was wrought with inaccuracies, misinformation and misunderstanding of Nevada’s current and future DL/ID issuance process.

Roberts responded to the ACLU letter with a letter of his own (on behalf of the Nevada DMV) to the Governor:

“The ACLU is providing a disservice to the citizens of Nevada by repeating misinformation about changes to the Nevada driver’s license and identification (DL/ID) card issuance process both in the cited letter and during the last legislative process,” said Roberts. “The ACLU is promoting fear, rather than facts about the state meeting minimum standards of issuing a DL/ID.”

In his letter, Roberts goes on to include responses to each of the false pieces of information contained in ACLU’s letter.  (Read the letter.)

“…the Department would be doing the citizens of Nevada a disservice by not correcting the misinformation and misunderstandings that are the basis of the ACLU’s opinion on the REAL ID Act.”

Sometimes it is best to let sleeping dogs lie. But this dog bites. And rather than be defined by the dog’s teeth marks, the Nevada DMV opted to define itself, and its policies, rather than allowing opposition voices to define it. Well said, Roberts! Kudos to you and your Department for the taking the extra step to set the record straight!

by Amanda Mesones

Next week (Dec. 6-12, 2009) is Older Driver Safety Awareness Week. AAMVA, along with the American Public Transportation Association, Association for Driver Rehabilitation Specialists, Easter Seals Project ACTION, National Association of Area Agencies on Aging, National Center on Senior Transportation, and The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., is endorsing this important event sponsored by the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA).

 

The issue of older driver safety hits a cord with me, because I’ve seen first-hand how the accompaniments of aging can affect one’s ability to drive safely.  

 

My family moved to Vermont after my father retired from the military so that we could be close to my grandmother (my grandfather had passed away not too much earlier).  As my three brothers and I got older, we’d spend weekends at Grandma’s every now and then to help out with chores around the house.  We would be rewarded with a home-cooked meal, a few dollars in our pockets and a trip to the beach at Lake Champlain for a cool dip after a hard day’s work.

 

But as we grew older, so did Grandma. It was clear Grandma’s reflexes were not as good as they used to be. She would no longer trek up the steep stairs to our rooms to put fresh linens on our beds, she would drop things in the kitchen and most prominent−the drives to the Lake became frightening.

 

After hearing the horror stories of riding in the car with Grandma at the wheel, my parents began the difficult task of determining exactly how to keep us kids, grandma and the rest of the driving public safe on the road. It took years of convincing and gentle discussions from my parents to finally get grandma to transition to alternate transportation options. (Read:  Keeping Loved Ones Safe on the Road, by Elinor Ginzler, AARP; Getting Around: Alternatives for Seniors Who No Longer Drive, a report by AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety; Family Conversations with Older Drivers, developed by The Hartford.)

 

This was in the ‘80s when there really weren’t a lot of resources to help my parents approach this very emotional subject. Today education, evaluation, modifications and training are available from many sources, including occupational therapy. And of course education is core because with so few transportation options available today, our best option is to educate folks on how to continue driving for as long as safely possible. (AARP’s CarFit Program is designed to help older drivers find their best fit in their vehicle.)

 

Older Driver Safety Awareness Week aims to promote understanding of the importance of mobility and transportation to ensuring older adults remain active in the community—shopping, working or volunteering—with the confidence that transportation will not be the barrier to strand them at home.

 

The day finally came when Grandma got used to “ordering her chariot” when she needed to get to a hair appointment, doctor appointment, grocery store, etc. The depression she experienced when she lost those keys eventually was replaced by a renewed sense of self, though if you knew her as we did, her independence was never fully realized again.

 

So, if you have a loved one who may be experiencing changes in physical, mental and sensory abilities that can challenge his or her ability to drive safely, know that now there are a variety of options for safe mobility for people of all ages—and it begins with conversation now!

 

Throughout the week, AOTA will bring attention to different aspects of older driver safety. Learn more about Older Driver Safety Awareness Week and older driver safety issues online at www.aota.org/OlderDriverWeek

 

AAMVA also provides information and resources that may be helpful in addressing the issue online at www.aamva.org/KnowledgeCenter/Driver/At-Risk/AgingandtheMedicallyAt-RiskDriver.htm

 
Amanda Mesones
Electronic Communications Specialist
AAMVA
amesones@aamva.org

If you can earn some positive media (get the press to accurately pick up your news) in an age of shrinking newsrooms, particularly when you are a state motor vehicle agency, you get an "A plus."

And, if you are a media outlet and you find it within your news judgment to grant "space" to the "good deeds" and "progress" of a state motor vehicle agency, then the teacher gives you an "A plus" as well.

So, who are the two kids that recently nabbed an "A plus" in my opinion?

The Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles and Mary Beth Schneider, reporter, Indianapolis Star.  Read it all here!

Nice work; both of you.

Until next time, stay safe behind the wheel.

Jason D. King,
VP, Public Relations and Info. Serv.
AAMVA
jking@aamva.org

Last Saturday the New York Times published an op-ed, written by Stefan Lonce that illustrates the challenges motor vehicle administrators face in managing both vanity and specialty license plate programs.

Lonce successfully distinguishes between the two types of plates.  And he even recommends a solution to the vanity plate conundrum:  a national database of offensive terms and alpha numeric combinations.  He suggests this would serve as a national clearinghouse for motor vehicle agency employees to vet potentially offensive terms and perhaps prevent state agencies from being sued for denying a potential plate's message.

The verdict is still out on whether or not his suggestion could be implemented, or even funded.  But, while it may have its own set of problems, it's actually the ONLY potential solution on the table.  (Personally getting rid of both vanity and specialty plates altogether just isn't tenable.)  You can rest assured he'll bring this topic to the AAMVA Motor Vehicle Traffic Law Institute in a few weeks.

What do you think about a national database of offensive terms?

Until next time, stay safe behind the wheel.

Jason D. King
VP, Public Relations & Info. Services
AAMVA
jking@aamva.org

By Jason D. King

Ok, so maybe I should explain some of the "racing" motif I have inserted into the blogs about the soon-to-hit-the- road "I Believe" religious specialty plate in South Carolina.

It's simple.  South Carolina is located in the heart of NASCAR country and is home to the "Darlington International Raceway."  Nuff said.

Now, it is my understanding Gov. Sanford has, or will soon have, the bill on his desk to either approve or veto the "I Believe" plate.

Surprise!  The issue is percolating up and out to the mainstream press.

I see the green flag.  And I hear the American Jewish Congress is urging the Gov. for the caution flag.

Until next time, stay safe behind the wheel.

Jason D. King
VP, Public Relations and Info. Services
AAMVA
jking@aamva.org




Top Stories

On May 7, 2008, I predicted the ACLU would sue the State of South Carolina over the proposed "I BELIEVE" plate currently buoyed in the S.C. House of Representatives.

Well, I'm almost right.  The ACLU is already weighing in on the matter.  Of course, I have not seen the lawsuit...yet.

Again, stay tuned!  And I welcome your thoughts on the plate.

Until next time, stay safe behind the wheel.

Jason D. King
VP, PR & Info. Serv
AAMVA
jking@aamva.org