The article discusses the development of anti-drunk driving technology, including the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) program, which was established in 2008 by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety. The program has developed sensors that can detect alcohol levels in a driver’s breath or skin and is set to be introduced in cars in the coming years. However, privacy concerns have been raised, as the technology has the potential to collect and share drivers’ private information. While privacy and safety are not necessarily mutually exclusive, privacy advocates have called for vigilance to ensure that the technology is designed to protect drivers’ privacy. Furthermore, some lawmakers have introduced legislation aimed at protecting drivers’ privacy by overturning the anti-drunk driving provision entirely. Despite the concerns, the advocates believe that the technology could be engineered to not pose any threats to privacy while still being effective in preventing drunk driving accidents.
Is Drunk Driving Coming to an End with Biden’s Infrastructure Bill?
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, signed by President Joe Biden in 2021, allocated $1.2 trillion to rebuild the country’s roads and bridges. While the bill has provisions to fund public transportation and national highways, a lesser-known section could potentially end drunk driving in the United States.
The bill requires the Secretary of Transportation to issue a rule by 2024 mandating new passenger cars to be equipped with technology that can “passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired” and “prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected.” In simpler terms, if a driver’s blood alcohol level is above the legal limit, they will be unable to start the car.
Drunk driving has been a persistent problem in the United States, causing 10,000 deaths every year, according to crash statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Advocates argue that this provision in the infrastructure bill could put an end to the problem once and for all.
Various technologies can be employed to meet the ambitious mandate of the law, including a touch sensor, breath sensor, or a camera to track eye movements. The common element among them is that they “passively” work to detect driver impairment, meaning that drivers will not have to blow into a tube. This technology also ensures that a designated driver will not be responsible for the passengers’ inebriation, and drivers will not be flagged for consuming mouthwash.
The new infrastructure bill is a promising step in ending drunk driving in the United States. However, there are costs associated with implementing the technology required to meet the provisions of the law. Moreover, the public is not entirely aware of the changes outlined in the bill, with only 24 percent of voters knowing that the bill passed, according to a report by Politico.
Although the law’s impact on drunk driving remains to be seen, advocates are optimistic about the potential to save thousands of lives each year. Stephanie Manning, Chief Government Affairs Officer at Mothers Against Drunk Driving, says, “We think that this is, in fact, what will eliminate drunk driving once and for all.”
Biden’s Infrastructure Bill: The Potential for Change and the Challenges Ahead
President Joe Biden’s infrastructure bill includes a provision that requires all new passenger cars to have technology that can detect and prevent drunk driving. While this could potentially change drivers’ behavior more directly than previous federal safety regulations, it could also face technological, bureaucratic, and privacy challenges.
The mandate could help stop drunk drivers before they make the dangerous decision to get behind the wheel. However, some people in areas without public transportation or ride-sharing apps might be stranded until they sober up. Moreover, implementing the technology will not be simple, and the auto industry has been notoriously slow in implementing safety standards. Privacy concerns also call into question the potential consequences of a car that tracks its driver’s behavior.
The fight over seat belts is a reminder of the slow pace of change. While Volvo engineer Nils Bohlin invented the three-point seatbelt in 1959, the US Department of Transportation did not require seat belts in new cars until 1968. Even then, people did not want to wear them. Seatbelt use only surpassed 90 percent nationwide in 2016.
Similarly, reducing drunk driving has been a gradual process. The public became more aware of the issue in 1980, when 13-year-old Cari Lighter was killed by a drunk driver while walking to a carnival in Fair Oaks, California. However, it wasn’t until the infrastructure bill’s provision that something significant could be done to curb the problem.
The new technology mandated by the infrastructure bill will be a promising step in ending drunk driving in the United States. However, it will face challenges in implementation, and privacy concerns must be addressed. Only time will tell if this provision in the infrastructure bill can end drunk driving in the United States once and for all.
The History of Drunk Driving Laws in the US and the Future of Anti-Drunk Driving Tech
In the past, drunk driving could only be charged as a felony if it resulted in injury or death. The punishments for drivers who killed their victims were relatively lax and didn’t always include license suspension. This inspired Candace Lightner to found Mothers Against Drunk Driving in 1980 and begin lobbying lawmakers for harsher punishments. Thanks to MADD’s efforts, the nationwide drinking age was raised to 21 in 1984, and the national legal limit was set at .08 blood alcohol content in 2000. These laws, along with the concept of a “Designated Driver,” contributed to a steep drop in drunk driving fatalities, from roughly 28,000 nationwide in 1980 to about 10,000 in 2010.
However, since then, the number of people killed in drunk driving crashes in the US has plateaued, with an uptick in 2020. Advocates believe that technology could bring the number of fatalities to zero, but no cars on the market currently promise to prevent drunk driving. While there are various theories about current technologies that could be adapted for that purpose, direct use to prevent drunk driving is not available to consumers yet.
The anti-drunk driving mandate in President Joe Biden’s infrastructure bill requires all new passenger cars to have technology that can detect and prevent drunk driving. However, implementing the technology will not be simple, and no cars on the market currently have the technology. According to John Mohr, a historian of technology at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, regulatory mandates in the past have spurred innovation, and it’s “very likely” that anti-drunk driving tech will be standard within the next few model years.
The push for anti-drunk driving tech has precedent in the emissions reduction requirements of the 1970s. While there was a big outcry from manufacturers because they had limited technology available to them at the time, the regulatory mandate spurred innovation. By the 1980s, cars were much more efficient. Similarly, the regulatory mandate for anti-drunk driving tech could spur innovation and help prevent fatalities in the future.
In conclusion, while the history of drunk driving laws in the US has been a gradual process, the future of anti-drunk driving tech looks promising. With the implementation of the anti-drunk driving mandate in President Biden’s infrastructure bill, we can hope to see significant progress in curbing drunk driving fatalities in the US.
The Race for Anti-Drunk Driving Technology
The Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) program was formed in 2008 as a partnership between the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS). Rob Strassburger, CEO of ACTS, spearheaded the program after being told about noninvasive blood glucose monitoring systems that could measure blood alcohol levels. Since then, DADSS has developed two types of sensors: one that can detect alcohol in a driver’s skin and another that passively monitors a driver’s breath.
The breath detection technology, which analyzes the concentration of alcohol using infrared light, is likely to be introduced in passenger cars first. However, DADSS technology has not yet been made available to consumers despite being tested in a fleet of livery cabs and semi trucks.
Despite DADSS’ efforts, some advocates believe that anti-drunk driving technology can be achieved through minor tweaks to existing technology. Ken Snyder, who lost his daughter to a drunk driver, believes that existing technologies could be applied to stop drunk driving.
Snyder, who runs an executive education program at Utah State University’s business school, believes that current technology is more than capable of preventing drunk driving. However, he believes that the auto industry is not interested in implementing it. “I started calling my friends, and they told me, ‘Oh, yeah, we could apply that [technology] to drunk driving. We just don’t. The car makers don’t want it,’” he says.
The Potential Impact of Anti-Drunk Driving Technology
Anti-drunk driving technology has the potential to revolutionize the way we view drunk driving. The technology could directly change drivers’ behavior, preventing drunk drivers from starting their cars and forcing them to find alternate ways to get home. While this would be a step forward, many parts of the country still lack access to public transportation or ride-sharing apps, which could create challenges for some drivers.
Implementation of anti-drunk driving technology will not be without its challenges, including technological hurdles and bureaucratic challenges. Additionally, privacy concerns have been raised, with some questioning not only the feasibility of broadly implementing the technology in the near future but also the potential consequences of a car that tracks its drivers’ behavior.
The Fight Against Drunk Driving
Reducing drunk driving has been a gradual process. Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), founded in 1980 by Candace Lightner after her daughter was killed by a drunk driver, lobbied lawmakers for harsher punishments for drunk drivers. MADD helped convince President Ronald Reagan to raise the nationwide drinking age to 21 in 1984 and helped get President Bill Clinton to set the national legal limit at .08 blood alcohol content in 2000.
These laws, along with the introduction of the concept of a “Designated Driver” to TV plot lines and advertising campaigns, contributed to a steep drop in drunk driving fatalities, from roughly 28,000 nationwide in 1980 to about 10,000 in 2010. However, the number of people killed in drunk driving crashes in the US has plateaued since then, with an uptick in 2020.
The Slow Implementation of Safety Standards
The auto industry has been notoriously slow in implementing safety standards. In 1959, Volvo engineer Nils Bohlin invented the three-point seatbelt. However, the US Department of Transportation did not start requiring seat belts in new cars until 1968. Even then, people did not want to wear them, and it was not until the 1974 model year that NHTSA mandated that cars be equipped with seat belt interlocks that would prevent a car from starting if the front seat belts were not buckled.
Although
How Technology Can Prevent Drunk Driving
Drunk driving has been a scourge on American society for decades. In the past, the punishment for driving under the influence was relatively lax and didn’t always include license suspension. However, with the establishment of organizations such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and their efforts to convince lawmakers for harsher punishments, we’ve seen a steep drop in drunk driving fatalities. But can technology bring the number of drunk driving fatalities to zero?
The Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) Program
The quest for a technology that could prevent drunk people from starting a car officially began in 2008 with the formation of the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) program, a public-private partnership between the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS).
DADSS has negotiated research and development contracts with two technology providers, one of which is working on a touch sensor that could detect alcohol in a driver’s skin, and another that’s developing a sensor to passively monitor a driver’s breath. The DADSS technology has been tested in a fleet of livery cabs and semi trucks, but it has not yet been made available to consumers.
Ken Snyder’s Idea
Rather than reinventing the wheel, so to speak, some advocates also suggest that drunk driving can be prevented through minor tweaks to existing technology. Ken Snyder, who was already deeply familiar with the auto industry, wondered why cars couldn’t be programmed to pull over when someone is driving erratically. Snyder runs an executive education program at Utah State University’s business school and has friends in the auto industry. After months of research, Snyder reached out to MADD and, with the organization’s help, began lobbying Congress to pass a law compelling automakers to act.
The Infrastructure Law
The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) and Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-NM) received bipartisan support and was enacted in November 2021 as part of the infrastructure law. The law requires automakers to have complied with the Secretary of Transportation’s rule two years after it’s issued. But the law also offers the Transportation Secretary the ability to push back its deadline if he or she submits a report to Congress explaining why.
Privacy Concerns
However, the idea of eyes being tracked or breath monitored while driving is fraught with privacy concerns, especially in an age of increasing surveillance in various aspects of our lives. Anti-drunk driving systems could collect myriad information about people’s bodies, in addition to data that cars already track, such as drivers’ location history and phone logs. This technology raises the question of whether increased safety comes at the expense of privacy.
Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, points out that anti-drunk driving systems could potentially gather information about people’s bodies in ways that cars don’t currently do. The list goes on and on, from smoking to kissing somebody while they’re parked, to eating while they’re driving.
The Future of Anti-Drunk Driving Technology
Although there are still concerns surrounding privacy, it is believed that anti-drunk driving tech will be standard within the next few model years. According to John Mohr, a historian of technology at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, the innovation spurred by regulation in the past gives us hope for the future.
The Intersection of Privacy and Safety in Anti-Drunk Driving Tech
As the rate of drunk driving accidents in the US continues to be a public health concern, there is growing interest in the development of anti-drunk driving technology. However, while the technology shows promise, there are concerns about the potential privacy violations that could come with its implementation.
The Quest for Anti-Drunk Driving Technology
The Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) program, a partnership between the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS), was established in 2008 to explore the development of technology to prevent drunk driving. The DADSS program has since contracted two technology providers, one of which is developing a breath sensor that uses infrared light to detect alcohol concentration in a driver’s breath.
Legislating the Implementation of Anti-Drunk Driving Tech
In November 2021, an infrastructure law sponsored by Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) and Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-NM) was enacted, requiring automakers to comply with the Transportation Secretary’s anti-drunk driving rule within two years of its issuance. This law has been instrumental in getting the auto industry on board with anti-drunk driving technology, but there are concerns about the potential privacy violations that could come with its implementation.
The Potential Privacy Concerns
Anti-drunk driving systems have the potential to collect personal information about drivers, raising concerns about privacy violations. Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, points out that anti-drunk driving systems could collect a myriad of information about people’s bodies, in addition to data that cars already track, such as drivers’ location history and phone logs.
The Need for Privacy-Protecting Anti-Drunk Driving Tech
Each advocate for anti-drunk driving tech stressed that the technology should not be designed to store private information or to report it to the police. Privacy and safety are not mutually exclusive, and the technology can be designed to use one technology or another to effectively identify seriously drunk drivers without retaining or allowing the sharing or accessing of any of the data that goes into the decision-making algorithm. There are several ways that the technology could be engineered to ensure effectiveness without posing any threats to privacy.
Repealing Anti-Drunk Driving Provision
Despite the need for privacy-protecting anti-drunk driving technology, some lawmakers have introduced legislation aimed at protecting drivers’ privacy by overturning the anti-drunk driving rule entirely. However, advocates have spoken out against this bill, stating that it would do more harm than good and compromise public safety.
The Role of Technology in Traffic Safety
While anti-drunk driving technology shows promise, it’s essential to recognize that technology is not the only solution to traffic safety. Instead, there is a need to reevaluate the car dependency status quo and seek other ways to ensure traffic safety, such as better pedestrian detection technology.
In conclusion, anti-drunk driving technology has the potential to significantly reduce the number of drunk driving accidents, but it’s important to address privacy concerns to ensure its successful implementation. By striking a balance between privacy and safety, we can achieve safer roads without violating drivers’ privacy rights.
Don’t miss interesting posts on Famousbio
