Commentary on Demand

                                    Editorials by Request

                                             Fuel your discussions

                       Reduce Car Accidents       28 Jan 10

I provide four links / titles to this article.  I'm taking a couple of big risks composing this article about car accidents and tying in the other four subjects.  For one thing it reminds me of "The Natural Law Party".  Back in the 90's the Natural Law Party was a political party that got some national publicity.  The face of the party had a PhD in physics so I was naturally drawn.  And maybe because the the position papers were written by a physicist I considered them very logical up until the time when they all wound up with the same solution - transcendental meditation.  I hope I didn't make that mistake when I conceived this article.  I hope nobody gets the impression I believe the suggestions mentioned here are the panacea to save society.  That's not really either of my main concerns though.  My two main concerns are: 1. I did no research on how much of our healthcare is due to car accidents but I'm suggesting these proposals will reduce the overall healthcare budget by as much as President Obama's health care overhaul and 2.  I make a calculated analysis of Car Accidents vice "The War on Terror", I'll lose a lot of credibility with the people that allow emotion to trump logic.  If I were smart I would take a couple of these distracters out of the article, but sometimes I just believe some things are relevant to a situation and I can't help but state them to see if there is anyone out there that can dissuade me from my belief (that's one of the reasons why I'll never be a successful politician).  Hopefully, the distracters don't keep many people from seeing the obvious point that we could relatively easily significantly reduce the number of car accidents and provide a great savings of life, health and property in the process.

Two recent events prompted me to finally sit down and write about the benefits of reducing car accidents.  I've thought for years the government should be investing in trying to prevent automobile accidents.  Up until last week I'd concentrated on technology solutions.  I still like a couple of the technology solutions I've dreamed up but that is a different article.  The two things that occurred this week to get me out of the "technology solution" paradigm were; 1. An article in the Feb 2010 edition of "Flying" magazine titled "Tough Training Rules Can Work" and 2.  I took a driving test.  Simultaneously thinking about these two items caused me to come to the conclusion we could save the lives of 1,500 Americans every month and prevent 100,000 debilitating injuries every year just by ensuring every driver knows how to drive.   

The Flying magazine article talks about a couple specific models of airplanes that had a track record of high accident rates.  According to the author the accident rate was so bad for one of these models (the MU-2) Congress was putting pressure on the FAA to ground the planes.  Instead, the FAA adapted a strict training program for anyone operating this model airplane.  The article goes on to say that in the three years prior to the implementation of the training requirements there were 14 reported accidents resulting in 10 deaths while the 3 years after the implementation there were 2 reported accidents.  Neither of the accidents resulted in anyone dying.  My take away from reading this article - When talking about airplanes poor training leads to unnecessary deaths or conversely good training helps eliminate unnecessary deaths and injuries.

A couple weeks ago I finally conceded I would not be allowed to take advantage of the Ohio statute that allows people who relocate to Ohio from another state to convert their licenses by just taking the written portion of the drivers exam.  My family and I originally moved to Ohio because of a military assignment.  Ever since we got our orders, its been our intention to stay after I retired.  Being here 4 years has only strengthen our belief in the wisdom of that choice.  This is just about the loveliest area in the country, cost of living is reasonable and most of all we have great neighbors and friends.  Just before I retired in September I went over to the licensing bureau to change my license over to Ohio.  Ohio has adapted rules for converting out of state license for people with a valid drivers license from another state.  The rules state all that is necessary is that person must pass the written test.  The person does not have to drive with an examiner.  I wanted to go through the process that every other out of state licensed driver went through in order to make the conversion.  NY State law states an active duty member of the armed forces only needs to mail in a form showing they are on active duty to extend their license.  Doing so will keep it valid and not expire until 6 months after they leave the active duty.  The result was the actual card I carried around showed an expiration date in the past.  In fact, by looking at that single piece of paperwork a person might come to the conclusion my license expired in 1999.  I had never run into another agency throughout the world that didn't understand the extension.  Police officers in every state know the license is not expired.  In fact, I had rented cars in the United Kingdom and Germany on my extended license.  So I was surprised when the Ohio license bureau informed me I would have to either take the driving portion of the exam, as if I had never had a license; or go to New York, stand in line at the department of motor vehicles, give NY $50 for a new license and return with a piece of paper with an expiration date in the future.  I didn't sign up to go through the full process of getting an Ohio license from scratch and I wasn't about to drive to NY or spend $50 bucks updating a license for one day, not when the licensing bureau's written guidance tells me I am entitled to the easier and cheaper procedure.  So I called Columbus and talked with a representative, I wrote to the legal department twice without response.  Though I still had a couple months where my NY license was valid I conceded I wouldn't be able to benefit from a correct interpretation of the statute; so I wrote my assemblyman and went and took my drivers test.  

At the completion of the driving portions of the test, the examiner got out of the car and said, "I'll meet you inside, congratulations you now have an Ohio drivers license".  He went right in, I put away my insurance card and grabbed my checkbook and followed a minute later.  Reflecting during the walk in I was pretty satisfied.  He said nothing about deficiencies so I assumed he did not mark any and I was gloating over a perfect score.  I went in filled out the last bit of paperwork, paid my fees, got my picture taken and left with a new Ohio license.  When I got home I was putting away the paperwork and noticed the score sheet was included. When I looked at it, it showed 20 points in deductions.  I had almost gotten to the limit.  Almost failed my drivers test!  Of course, the examiner must be a drug addict.  After all I've only ever had two traffic accidents and both occurred over twenty years ago.  One was clearly was the other guys fault. I was stopped making a left hand turn and the guy rear-ended me.  The other according to NY was "my fault".  You see NY State Thruway decided to do some work on one side of the expressway so they built a crossing over to the other through the median.  Well the engineers didn't think about drainage too well and even though it had stopped raining 30 minutes prior there was still 5 inches of water on the temporary part of the road when I came around the bend at the posted reduced speed limit of 35 miles an hour.  Needless to say my car hydroplaned into the back of another car already in the NYS thruway lake.  I went to court to fight the ticket they gave me for driving too fast for conditions and the citation was dropped.  Not only did I have a good driving record but I'm also a licensed pilot - with an instrument rating!  A person doesn't get an instrument rating if they can't maintain precise position not only left and right but also up and down.  This is a task much more difficult than keeping a car on a road.  After completing the typical human reaction of calling the other person names and a little reflection, I started to think "Even though I may be the best driver ever - perhaps I'm not a perfect driver.  Perhaps, I could be a better driver!"  As a pilot and a military member I expect to have to practice certain maneuvers in the airplane and to have an expert witness me performing those maneuvers on a regular basis.  I wondered how much better I would be at driving using the same standards.  At this point I decided I needed to apologize to the examiner for calling him names.  Of course, since I only called him names in my mind, I did a mental apology. 

I had already come to the conclusion of the benefit of my reading the drivers manual and thinking more about good driving techniques when I read the Flying Magazine article.  I began to wonder if better training for pilots can reduce an accident rate from 7 to 1 what kind of reduction could we reasonably expect if we did a good job training and testing automobile drivers?  The thought itself is just mind boggling.  In fact, proposing a logical extrapolation is so fantastic it could hardly be believed (perhaps 1 accident after the new standards in the same situations that now cause 10 accidents?).  So instead of using logic I decided to examine the numbers using something more believable.  Lets say good training and examination standards would reduce the number of accidents and injuries in half.  A web search tells us there are about 3 million accidents in the US every year that cause some type of injury.  On average about 40,000 Americans are killed in traffic accidents every year.  I didn't see a number that told me how many of the injuries are life changing.   I define life changing as one that causes moderate to severe brain damage, paralysis, burn scares, amputations or similar infirmities.  If there are 3 million injuries yearly and 40,000 deaths I would bet there are at least 200,000 life changing injuries each year.  The logical conclusion if we put in a good driver training and examination program we should easily save about 20,000 American lives and prevent 100,000 serious injuries every year!  I think a driver training and examination process capable of preventing these unnecessary deaths and injuries can be achieved by requiring about 40 hours of a well develop course for initial licensing and then 5 hours of annual instruction every year after.  

Yes, I can hear the wailing now.  After all for 4 months I've been fighting having to take my first driving re-examination since my initial license more than 30 years ago!  I can hear the cries as if you were right next to me - "You want me to sit through two hours of classroom instruction on driving techniques, then another hour of recent safety and product issues followed by two hours in a full motion simulator designed to give you practical experiences in emergency situations you most likely can't get without being in danger of serious injury?  This is were I invoke "The War on Terror".  Think about the numbers.  How much money have we spent on the war on terror?  How much time of your life has been spent trying not to be injured in a terrorist attack?  Have you stood in line at the airport?  Do you have a son, daughter, husband, wife or friend in the war zone?  Look at the numbers.  Has the time and money  you spent since 2003 on the war on terror saved the lives and prevented life changing injuries of nearly 1 million Americans?  Five hours a year of good driver training would have prevented the deaths of 140,000 Americans that died in traffic accidents since 1993.  Look at the numbers.  Tomorrow are you more likely to die from a terrorist attack or in a traffic accident?  Does it make sense for you to support the government imposing 5 hours of delays on individuals at the airport because of the war on terror but not support the government requiring drivers spend 5 hours a year reducing you or your loved ones likelihood of being injured or killed in a traffic accident?  Now don't misunderstand my point.  I am not saying in this article we should reduce our effort in the war on terror.  My point is if you are going to put the effort into reducing a potential threat where your efforts have almost no likelihood preventing or reducing your likelihood of being hurt then you should also support an effort where your actions will reduce your likelihood of  injuries and death experienced daily throughout the country.  True, if terrorist got hold of a nuclear bomb and get it into America, detonation in a city would bring the number of American causalities in the war on terror to a level near the devastation caused by traffic accidents.  But what are your individual efforts doing to prevent Iran or Korea from developing further nuclear capabilities?  It is infinitely easier for your actions to save American lives today by your learning how to drive and supporting the implementation of a plan requiring others to learn how to drive.

I also started to think about the health care issue as well.  In other writings I've proposed part of our health care crisis is due because of supply and demand.  Too many people looking for service, too few doctors and specialist.  I wonder how reducing the number of new paraplegics, traumatic brain injuries, and burn victims by 100,000 a year would impact the strain on our system?  100,000 has to be a measurable portion of the seriously injured people in this country.

I also promised I'd mention economic stimulus.  Beyond the benefit of having these 120,000 people still producing in their jobs, there is also the benefit of them not being a cost to the insurance companies.  Also, developing and administering the training and examination program will require some investment and manpower.  I especially like the concept of a full motion emergency procedure simulator.  It may be true nobody ever landed an airplane in a river prior to Sully landing in the Hudson, but for years everyday our airline pilots practiced that or similar emergency procedures in full motion simulators.  When the time came and an actual emergency occurred, the pilot was prepared.  We can have the same results for drivers.