I have nothing against U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood personally but the fact that a chucklehead like LaHood has a job with any kind of legal authority makes me despair for the republic.
The man talks out of both sides of his mouth with seemingly no sense of self-awareness. In comments made while announcing a “blueprint” to end distracted driving, Sec. LaHood’s biggest hobby horse, the federal transportation secretary said he was calling on automakers to increase “voluntary” efforts to reduce distracted driving. “We think voluntary is the better way to go now,” “We’re not considering a rule,” and “I don’t have a bill to hand to Congress,” were LaHood’s talking points. The mailed fist inside that voluntary velvet glove was made clear in his other remarks, “We’re looking at things that have worked. We think good laws work. We think good enforcement works.” LaHood also urged Congress to enact stricter laws on distracted driving, perhaps a nationwide ban on cell phone use behind the wheel. Just to keep things “voluntary” LaHood said those proposed laws were only his personal preference.
What Washington does not accomplish with rules and laws, or voluntary compliance, it accomplishes with bribery and extortion. If states hope to get back some of the money their residents pay to Washington in the form of fuel and other taxes, they have to dance to Washington’s tune. As LaHood was laying out his blueprint for a future filled with voluntary compliance, his department announced $2.4 million in federal funding for California and Delaware to increase enforcement of local and state ordinances concerning distracted driving. LaHood has made distracted driving a major focus of his job as transportation secretary. He started this campaign three years ago and his devotion to “voluntary” efforts have, in the words of the Automotive News, “prompted 39 states and the District of Columbia to ban texting while driving.”
Ronnie Schreiber edits Cars In Depth, a realistic perspective on cars & car culture and the original 3D car site. If you found this post worthwhile, you can dig deeper at Cars In Depth. If the 3D thing freaks you out, don’t worry, all the photo and video players in use at the site have mono options. Thanks for reading – RJS
What I have against Ray LaHood is his own creation. He seems clueless and has an extreme lack of knowledge about the details of what he speaks.
Ray LaHood is the kind of person who… I tried to think of some clever nazi or prohibition analogy here, but I just couldn’t. They guy is just so stupid and evil that he has become his own stupid, evil thing. Future stupid, evil people will be compared to Ray. Maybe there will be a lesser “Godwin’s law” for LaHood analogies on the internet.
Ray LaHood – doing Illinois proud!
School teacher turned politician.
Served some time on a House “transportation” committee.
Yes he’s totally qualified, LOL.
Let me ask just one question.
Does anyone have data comparing crash frequency in the 39 states that have no-texting laws vs. the ones that don’t?
That sort of comparison would be very difficult because states often have very different driving conditions generally.
It would be interesting to make such a comparison within a state, before and after the ban, but only if there were a serious enforcement effort. But here in the Boston suburbs, I haven’t noticed any less texting in traffic since Massachusetts recently banned it, although some kid who killed another driver while texting has been given a year in jail. ***maybe*** publicity for that will reduce texting here. But I’m not holding my breath.
Seriously? Do “the best and brightest” really think that texting while driving is safe?
The post was about LaHood talking out of both sides of his mouth about “voluntary” efforts while simultaneously endorsing more laws and rules, not about how dangerous texting behind the wheel is or isn’t.
Texting while driving is undoubtedly distracting. However, if politicians and government employees are going to ban the use of electronic devices behind the wheel (as they’ve made quite clear that’s their intention) I say that those same restrictions should apply to government employees across the board as well. NHTSA says that it’s “inherently dangerous” to use PEDs while driving. That means that if it’s unsafe for me to text back “Yes” to someone while driving, it’s also unsafe for a police officer to check his LEIN computer to run my plate while he’s driving and it’s also unsafe for a police officer to use her radio while driving. Goose… gander. Inherently dangerous is inherently dangerous.
Does anyone think that the few times that LaHood drives himself, rather than when he’s got a driver, and his cellphone rings and it’s the Oval Office on the other end, that he wouldn’t answer the call and talk to his boss while driving?
“The post was about LaHood talking out of both sides of his mouth about “voluntary” efforts while simultaneously endorsing more laws and rules, not about how dangerous texting behind the wheel is or isn’t.”
Except that there is no “double talk.” Since traffic laws are a state matter, he can attempt to use a carrot like this (handing out money for pilot programs, etc.), or a stick such as what was used for the 55 mph speed limit or the 21-year old drinking age (taking away highway money.)
I know that you’re looking for endless opportunities to make yet another one of your anti-Washington rants, but do try to keep your facts straight. And I say that as someone who isn’t particularly pleased or impressed by Mr. LaHood’s pet project.
We have this thing called the Constitution. If there is any American exceptionalism, it is exemplified by the men who designed the document to protect citizens of the US from government itself. The protection is meant to thwart the unwarranted power grabs by the sort of individual who gravitates to politics and government. The states can test all the laws they want as allowed by the Tenth Amendment. LaHood shouldn’t be able to use a carrot and stick in the manner of the 55MPH limit and the 21 legal age for drinking. All these may worth consideration in context, but none are the responsibility of or a legitimate power of the Federal government. By letting the federal genie out of the bottle over the past several decades, we have opened ourselves to unacceptable federal intrusions at financial and personal costs we can’t sustain.
Aaron Deveau of Haverill MA was sentenced to 2 1/2 years with 1 year to serve for texting while driving, resulting in the death of a father of three. He was prosecuted under a state law passed without intervention or even suasion by the Federal government. The only disagreement I have is the sentence is too short.
“We have this thing called the Constitution.”
We do. Article 3 Section 1: “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”
In South Dakota v. Dole, the Supreme Court, which is empowered by Article 3 Section 1 to decide such things, found the withholding of highway funds to be constitutional: http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1986/1986_86_260
That being said, LaHood hasn’t talked about withholding highway funds. I gather from his comments that he actually opposes doing that and would prefer using carrots over sticks in order to encourage the states to participate.
The Constitution has been eroded over the past several decades by all three branches. It is hard to undo the mistakes, so the next best thing is to starve the Feds of the funds necessary for further mistakes. As for carrots vs sticks, the absence of a carrot is itself a stick. Take away the ability to grant or not grant carrots.
One of the most egregious recent decisions of the Supremes is Kelo. Adding insult to injury, the former neighborhood remains a wasteland as the big pharma corp that was slated for highest and best use backed out.
“The Constitution has been eroded over the past several decades by all three branches.”
Translation: “When I don’t like something, I like to say that it’s ‘unconstitutional’, even when it is constitutional.”
You can dislike the policy — personally I’m not crazy about it, either — but you don’t have the constitution on your side. You’ll need to make a better argument, because the one that you’re making now doesn’t hold any water.
There might be real and compelling reasons to work on reducing “distracted” driving. But “..proposed lawsshould be were only his personal preference.” is the height of arrogance.
Let’s mimic the German process for getting a license.
As someone that deals a little bitty bit with the US, what I hear His Excellency doing is ‘speaking softly.’
Tell me again why we have a Department of Transportation?
I see what he’s trying to get at, but his going at it the way he is isn’t how to go about it.
He simply comes across as an idiot, and a clueless one at that.
That said, some kind of incentive to GET people themselves to rethink their cell phone use while driving (IE, using a corded earphone, voice commands, or using some kind of Bluetooth hands free device along with voice commands and ignoring text messaging until they are not driving) would help, but his methods, not so much. It just makes people want to dig in deeper and go against his stupidity. And it’s this “need” to hold your phone and gab while driving is ruining it for the rest of us who try to minimize our distractions WHILE driving.
A case in point, I recently upgraded my head unit in my car with a nice JVC head unit with BT, USB mass storage and an Aux jack. I utilize the BT for all phone convo when I DO have them (which is rare), I utilize the voice commands, though I need to figure out how to push my phonebook to the unit manually, if I can do that since I recently bought the Motorola Droid Razr, which does not automagically upload the contacts to the unit :-(.
Anywhoo… I have been migrating the 30 or so CD’s I listen to the most in the car to a thumb drive and it’s SOO much nicer to simply press the menu button, migrate to a new “CD” and press enter, done. The issue is, tagging isn’t a permanent thing if I build the file on my HD, copy to the thumb drive, I have to retag everything. I need to learn to use Robocopy and see if that maintains all the tags too.
Yesterday, I drove some 238 miles on a small road trip to the rural town of Sedro Woolley Washington from my apt in Seattle and then drove ALL the way to Tacoma when done, even making a side trip to the even smaller town of Concrete, about 30 mins East of Sedro Woolley before turning back and beginning the journey back to “civilization”. :-)
All the time, I either let it just go to the next folder, or accessed the menu and moved to a particular folder I wanted instead and let it play it in its entirety, again, much simpler and easier than manhandling CD’s while driving solo. When I went to call my Mom (whom I’m visiting for the weekend as we have a major family celebration tomorrow in Olympia, 30 minutes south of Tacoma) to let her know I was on Cook’s Road, on the way to I-5, I told the HU to look on the phone for my contacts, and via voice command, made the call and I never touched the phone. Worked like a charm.
AND, I can stream my music off the phone via BT or using a feature called Drive Change, I can, when connected via USB cable, control my phone’s music files as if a mass storage device too if I want.
So what’s going to happen to those of us who try to make it easier to utilize these new technologies to reduce additional distractions, but at the same time, need to utilize the phone to answer or make quick calls while on the freeway?
That’s my concern with Ray, he’s an all or nothing kind of guy, no middle ground here it seems.
“We think voluntary is the better way.” BUT if you don’t “voluntarily” fight distracted driving we’ll withhold your state highway funds…. consider that an incentive.
“if you don’t “voluntarily” fight distracted driving we’ll withhold your state highway funds…. consider that an incentive.”
Has LaHood claimed that distracted driving laws be tied to highway funding? If he has, then I’d like to see an example of it.
LaHood may not have, but Senator Chuck Schumer introduced a bill called the `Avoiding Life-Endangering and Reckless Texting by Drivers Act of 2009′ or the `ALERT Drivers Act’ that would
“amend title 23, United States Code, to reduce the amount of Federal highway funding available to States that do not enact a law prohibiting an individual from writing, sending, or reading text messages while operating a motor vehicle.”
…much in the same way that the current administration “asks” us to donate more tax money.
“We” have a Department of Transportation because how can you leave ONE AREA of our lives unregulated and free ? It just wouldn’t seem right.
Sounds like a national security threat to me…
Secy of Transportation away! I am so serial!
LaHood reminds me of Ed Meese, a “conservative” who can’t stop sticking his nose in other peoples’ business. I’m all for the government weighing costs and benefits when it is considering regulations, but the BENEFITS have to be weighed. People text and answer their phone because it is useful. The call that tells Johnny to go to school with Mrs. Smith means Ms. Jones doesn’t have to drive home then drive to school then back again to pick up Johnny. Let’s see him hold down the role of a working parent with kids going in different directions, and let’s see how long he goes before using his cellphone behind the wheel.
I know I brought it up before, but Cirrus (a maker of personal airplanes) announced an option for 2012 models to have texting built into the airplane, so you don’t need to fumble with your iPhone while flying an approach to minimums. The price of texting option is $14,000. Texts are to be enterered and displayed using the standard Flight Management Computer that is already installed in the airplane.
Now, two things:
– It’s a good thing that La Hood does not yet know about it
– Why is it ok for pilots but not ok for drivers
As an aside, the $14k for the privilege of texting in flight has to do with using Iridium as the carrier (so that you can text while over an open ocean), plus the usual expense of having avionics engineered and certified. I understand that it would laughed at if GM offered a $14k option of texting for Escalade.