U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

53–146 PDF 2009

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM OF 

DISTRACTED DRIVING 

(111–74) 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

TRANSPORTATION AND 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

October 29, 2009 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

( 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota, Chairman 

NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia, Vice 

Chair 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon 

JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

BOB FILNER, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa 

TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania 

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

MICHAEL A. ARCURI, New York 

HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona 

CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania 

JOHN J. HALL, New York 

STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

LAURA A. RICHARDSON, California 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas 

PHIL HARE, Illinois 

JOHN A. BOCCIERI, Ohio 

MARK H. SCHAUER, Michigan 

BETSY MARKEY, Colorado 

PARKER GRIFFITH, Alabama 

MICHAEL E. MCMAHON, New York 

THOMAS S. P. PERRIELLO, Virginia 

DINA TITUS, Nevada 

HARRY TEAGUE, New Mexico 

VACANCY 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina 

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois 

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

LYNN A WESTMORELAND, Georgia 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

ANH ‘‘JOSEPH’’ CAO, Louisiana 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

(II) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon, Chairman 

NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

BOB FILNER, California 

TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania 

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

MICHAEL A. ARCURI, New York 

HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona 

CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

LAURA A. RICHARDSON, California 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

JOHN J. HALL, New York 

STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin 

SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas 

PHIL HARE, Illinois 

JOHN A. BOCCIERI, Ohio 

MARK H. SCHAUER, Michigan 

VACANCY 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota 

(Ex Officio) 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina 

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois 

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois 

(III) 

(V) 

CONTENTS Page 

Summary of Subject Matter .................................................................................... vii 

TESTIMONY 

Betkey, Jr., Vernon F., Chairman, Governors Highway Safety Association ....... 30 

Dingus, Dr. Tom, Director, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute ................... 2 

Franklin, Bobby, Executive Vice President, CTIA - The Wireless Association .. 30 

LaHood, Hon. Ray, Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation .................... 6 

McCarthy, Hon. Carolyn, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

New York .............................................................................................................. 4 

Mullett, Randy, American Trucking Associations, Vice President of Government Relations and Public Affairs ...................................................................... 30 

Strassburger, Robert, Vice President of Safety & Harmonization, Alliance 

of Automobile Manufacturers .............................................................................. 30 

Ulczycki, John, Group Vice President - Research, Communications & Advocacy, National Safety Council ............................................................................. 30 

Wytkind, Edward, President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO ... 30 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 

Bishop, Hon. Tim, of New York .............................................................................. 41 

DeFazio, Hon. Peter A., of Oregon ......................................................................... 43 

Oberstar, Hon. James L., of Minnesota ................................................................. 45 

Richardson, Hon. Laura, of California ................................................................... 47 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY WITNESSES 

Betkey, Jr., Vernon F. ............................................................................................. 51 

Dingus, Dr. Tom ...................................................................................................... 61 

Franklin, Bobby ....................................................................................................... 71 

LaHood, Hon. Ray .................................................................................................... 78 

McCarthy, Hon. Carolyn ......................................................................................... 89 

Mullett, Randy ......................................................................................................... 93 

Strassburger, Robert ............................................................................................... 104 

Ulczycki, John .......................................................................................................... 116 

Wytkind, Edward ..................................................................................................... 128 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Betkey, Jr., Vernon F., Chairman, Governors Highway Safety Association, 

responses to questions from the Subcommittee ................................................. 58 

Dingus, Dr. Tom, Director, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, responses 

to questions from the Subcommittee .................................................................. 68 

Franklin, Bobby, Executive Vice President, CTIA - The Wireless Association, 

responses to questions from the Subcommittee ................................................. 76 

LaHood, Hon. Ray, Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation: 

Response to question for the Record from Rep. Arcuri, a Representative 

in Congress from the State of New York ................................................. 26 

Response to question for the Record from Rep. Brown, a Representative 

in Congress from the State of South Carolina ........................................ 20 

Response to question for the Record from Rep. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the State of Oregon .............................................. 11 

Responses to questions from the Subcommittee ......................................... 82 

Mullett, Randy, Vice President of Government Relations and Public Affairs, 

American Trucking Associations, responses to questions from the Subcommittee .............................................................................................................. 100 

Page

VI 

Strassburger, Robert, Vice President of Safety & Harmonization, Alliance 

of Automobile Manufacturers, responses to questions from the Subcommittee .............................................................................................................. 109 

Ulezycki, John, Group Vice President - Research, Communications & Advocacy, National Safety Council, responses to questions from the Subcommittee .............................................................................................................. 122 

Wytkind, Edward, President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO, 

responses to questions from the Subcommittee ................................................. 133 

ADDITIONS TO THE RECORD 

Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, Jacqueline S. Gillan, Vice President, 

written testimony ................................................................................................. 136 

Senate of Maine, Hon. Bill Diamond, Senator, written testimony ...................... 148 

vii 


Insert offset folio 1 here 53146.001
viii 


Insert offset folio 2 here 53146.002
ix 


Insert offset folio 3 here 53146.003
x 


Insert offset folio 4 here 53146.004
xi 


Insert offset folio 5 here 53146.005
xii 


Insert offset folio 6 here 53146.006
(1) 

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM OF DISTRACTED 

DRIVING 

Thursday, October 29, 2009 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:30 a.m., in Room 

2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Peter A. DeFazio 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. The Subcommittee on Highways and Transit will 

come to order. Today, we are going to begin to delve into the issue 

of distracted driving, not a new issue, but an issue recently complicated by the proliferation of technology. We do know that 6,000 

people died in 2008 where there were reports of one form of driver 

distraction or another, and that is not necessarily a comprehensive 

number. That is a statistic that we want to bring down, way down. 

And there were also a large number of injuries and, obviously, a 

tremendous amount of property damage due to distracted driving. 

It seems to be most problematic among young and inexperienced 

drivers, but it is a problem for drivers of any age, depending upon 

the technology. 

So today we are going to hear from the Secretary of Transportation, who has taken on this cause and is determined to make it 

part of his legacy, to help reduce the deaths and the injuries, and 

we will hear from other experts. There is not unanimity yet on 

what steps to take, but we hope to find our way to a path to deal 

with this issue through the hearing. And with that, I will turn to 

the honorable Mr. Duncan. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for calling this hearing. It is not a new problem. In May of 2001, when 

Mr. Petri was Chairman of the Subcommittee, I attended a Subcommittee hearing that addressed the same issue and, of course, 8 

years later we are still faced with some of the challenges we discussed in 2001, except the problem has grown tremendously since 

that time because so many people today are addicted to the BlackBerry and other gadgets. 

In fact, I remember reading a few months ago where a young 

woman in New York City was so intensely involved with her BlackBerry that she walked into an open manhole cover in New York 

City. And then just yesterday, in the Politico newspaper, they had 

a story about a man who was almost hit by a car in Georgetown 

because he was trying to read his BlackBerry as he crossed the 

street. 

2 

And so with all advances in technology, we have witnessed an increase in the number of devices and gadgets that can take our eyes 

and our minds off the road. I remember walking, a few years ago, 

walking up the street just from the Rayburn Garage to the Capitol 

Hill Club, and six vehicles passed me, and four of those six drivers 

were talking on their cell phone. 

Most people agree that drivers should not type e-mail messages 

on their BlackBerrys or text their friends on their cell phones while 

they are driving. 

And I want to say that, you know, I certainly, first of all, want 

to commend Secretary LaHood for convening the Summit on Distracted Driving and bringing this issue to the forefront of the administration’s agenda. We certainly all need to do everything we 

can to discourage people from using these new gadgets while they 

are driving and to keep their eyes on the road. 

And I certainly look forward to hearing from Secretary LaHood 

and our other witnesses and all the experts on this problem. It is 

a difficult one because there is a problem about enforcement and 

so forth. But we need to emphasize that, unfortunately, we have 

more people killed in 3-1/2 or 4 months on the Nation’s highways 

than in all U.S. aviation accidents combined since the Wright 

brothers’ flight, and that shows how dangerous our highways still 

are. And in this Subcommittee we need to do, and certainly try to 

do, everything we can to make our roads and highways safer. So 

thank you for calling this hearing, and I look forward to hearing 

from the witnesses. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. I thank the gentleman for his statement and his 

concern with the issue. 

With that, we will begin with a video presentation by Dr. Tom 

Dingus, Director, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute. 

VIDEO PRESENTATION BY D. TOM DINGUS, DIRECTOR, 

VIRGINIA TECH TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE 

Mr. DINGUS. Mr. Chairman, I have been asked today to show 

some videos from a series of studies that we have done that we 

refer to as naturalistic driving studies. These are large-scale studies where we collect a variety of sensor data and video data using 

sophisticated instrumentation. This instrumentation is in drivers’ 

own cars and trucks. They are not given any specific instructions. 

They just drive as they normally do. 

Thus far we have collected data from over 600 drivers. Each driver was driving their vehicle, either car or heavy truck, between 4 

and 18 months. So we have collected 100,000 hours of continuous 

driving data and over 7 million miles. This is an important methodology because it allows us, for the first time, to get detailed information on driver behavior just prior to crash and near-crash 

events. 

Human performance and behavior, it is well known, account for 

over 90 percent of vehicle crashes. A subset of these behaviors really create most of the crash risk. This is impairment due to alcohol 

primarily. Inattention and distraction is a big one, drowsiness, and 

then judgment-related error. 

This study provides a new opportunity to get real-world data in 

the larger context of driving and get detailed pre-crash information. 

3 

So what I am going to do is show you some examples of the data 

that we have collected from a variety of different studies. This 

study is called the ′′Hundred Car study.′′ What you are going to see 

here in a minute is a teen driver, 18 years old, who is driving 

through a neighborhood, who is lost and pulls out her cell phone 

and begins to dial. What this little graph here shows you is that 

she makes a very hard-braking maneuver and that is what allowed 

us to find the event. 

But if you look in this screen right here, you will see a child on 

a tricycle come out in front of her and she just barely misses that 

child. So in the lower left she takes out her cell phone, she begins 

to dial and then you see the tricycle right there. 

Research has shown that drivers look back and forth between 

their cell phones and the forward roadway. If her sequence of eye 

scanning had been opposite of what it was she probably would have 

hit the child. I will play it one more time. 

This next case is a teen driver talking on a cell phone, and this 

is also a very common occurrence of what we see. This is a newly 

licensed teen driver, 16 years of age. And she essentially runs off 

the road and hits the curb on the right and misses a sign by about 

12 inches—so I will play it for you—and continues to talk. Now, 

teens aren’t very good at controlling their vehicles. Talking with 

one hand on the phone and being engrossed in the conversation 

created a near-crash event in that case. 

For this one I have to ensure that there is no video being recorded. Some of these are sensitive for privacy reasons. This is a 

driver, teen driver, newly licensed teen driver, texting on his 

phone. It is a little hard to see, but in the lower left, he doesn’t 

have either hand on the steering wheel for most of the time. He 

is driving with his knees and he hits the left curb and barely 

misses trees and signs. So he is not in good control of his vehicle. 

He is going about 45 miles an hour. We see this kind of behavior 

all the time. 

This is a semi-tractor-trailer driver. He is using a mobile data 

terminal which includes a full keyboard and a display screen. He 

has got it sitting on his steering wheel. He runs off on the right 

shoulder of the road and then corrects back as a truck is passing, 

but fortunately keeps it in the lane without overcorrecting a little 

bit, or he would have hit the truck. But you can see him looking 

down, typing a message, barely able to control his 18-wheel truck. 

His eyes are off the road for somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 

or 5 seconds while he is doing this task. 

Here is a driver who is a truck driver again, semi-tractor-trailer. 

He is going to text while he drives. As you see, neither hand on 

the wheel. He is driving on a road with no shoulder. And he just 

shifted and now he is going to essentially run off the road to the 

right, just off the pavement. Two-lane road. 

This is a driver that is reaching for a ringing wireless device. It 

looks like, it is hard to tell, but it looks like he is trying to pull 

it out of a jacket pocket. But you see he nearly has a head-on collision while he is trying to get to the wireless device. Right there. 

I am going to show you a crash. There is not—I can’t show you 

many crashes because the subjects have to agree to release the 

data and, particularly in the case of trucks, truck drivers are not 

4 

willing to do that very often. But this one is blurred to the point, 

with no video playing, that I can show you. You are going to see 

a truck roll over in the median. Now, this is a reading task. But 

it is an external task. As he passes this bobtail tractor, he is fascinated by the writing on the side of it and he is looking, trying 

to read what it is. He takes his eyes off the road for 5 seconds, 

comes across a stopped line of cars, luckily misses that minivan, 

but rolls over in the median. An interesting aspect of this data is 

the police report said that he was following too closely or tailgating, 

and that a distraction wasn’t mentioned as a cause in the police report. He didn’t even remember it until he was interviewed after the 

crash. And that is a shoe. 

So those are the videos, Mr. Chairman. Can I answer any questions at this point? 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Dr. Dingus, we have you on a subsequent panel, 

so I think we will reserve our questions, if that is okay, so we can 

move ahead with the other—with the Secretary and with the Member panel. So thank you. We will call you back up. 

We would ask the Honorable Carolyn McCarthy from New York’s 

Fourth District to come forward and testify for 5 minutes to the bill 

she has introduced on this issue. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HON. CAROLYN McCARTHY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW 

YORK 

Mrs. MCCARTHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I thank Ranking Member Duncan for having me here today. And I appreciate 

the Members being here also. I commend the Chairman and certainly the Members for recognizing the importance of distracted 

driving in our Nation. 

Our former colleague—and now Secretary LaHood—has done a 

terrific job in bringing this matter to the attention of Congress as 

well as nationwide. But much like the Department of Transportation’s recent Distracted Driving Summit, hearings such as this 

serve as a great opportunity to vet plausible and effective solutions 

to this growing problem. 

Having had surgery during July, I could not drive, so I had a lot 

of people driving me around to different appointments. And every 

one of them was text messaging. And I tell you, I was scared for 

my life, mainly because of the way they were driving, anything 

that was going to hit was going to hit on my side, and I didn’t appreciate that. So it is banned for anyone in the car that is driving 

myself. 

Along those lines, I certainly thank President Obama, who in 

signing an executive order, effectively banned all Federal employees from texting behind the wheel. 

Both initiatives represent important steps toward cultivating 

safety on our Nation’s roadways, but fall short of applying these 

safety precautions to each and every driver. This is why I am here 

today to testify. 

The dangers of distracted driving are not limited just to Federal 

employees. Several studies, including one conducted by Virginia 

Tech Transportation Institute, recently concluded that drivers are 

23 times more likely to get into an accident while texting and drivVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:42 Feb 03, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\53146 JASON
5 

ing. With smart devices that provide access to e-mail, text messaging, the Internet and more, individuals are becoming more increasingly reliant upon mobile technology in their everyday lives. 

Unfortunately, as these devices continue to evolve and become 

more affordable, their inappropriate and unsafe use continues to 

grow as well. 

Almost as rapidly as these devices have developed, so too have 

hands-free and voice-activated technologies, each of which is designed to give individuals increased mobility and attentiveness 

while communicating. But even with the best technology many 

manufacturers are coming out with, driver attention is taken away 

from what you are supposed to be doing, and that is driving. 

We, as Members of Congress, should seek out ways to encourage 

the use of these technologies in an effort to lower the risks 

throughout our transportation system. Recent surveys suggest 

large majorities, regardless of political affiliation, believe irresponsible use of hand-helds behind the wheel should be illegal. 

Most recently, a New York Times-CBS poll shows that 90 percent 

of adults agree that sending a text message while driving should 

be illegal. Our goal should be to facilitate effective changes that 

keep more drivers’ hands on the wheels and eyes on the road. 

You saw with what we had just seen as far as some of the videos, 

I have seen many people driving with their knees and doing 60 to 

70 miles an hour, and it is only by the grace of God that they did 

not cause an accident or cause someone else’s injury. 

H.R. 3535, the Alert Drivers Act, which I was proud to introduce 

with my colleague, Nita Lowey, I believe represents a strong first 

step toward combating preventable roadway accidents. My bill directs the Secretary of Transportation to establish minimum 

texting-while-driving standards of protection that State legislators 

must meet; and will also allow States to establish stricter standards as they see fit. And much like the laws that establish the legal 

age to consume alcohol and blood alcohol concentration limits for 

drivers, the bill would withhold a percentage of Federal highway 

funding to States that do not comply. 

The bill has garnered the support of consumers and affected industries to create a solution to distracted driving. 

While some States like New York State, my home State, have 

taken it upon themselves to ban the practice within its borders, 

others still lack effective and prudent measures to curb their behavior. What makes a nationwide ban so important is the fact that 

distracted driving is a practice that is not isolated within particular 

States. Moreover, inconsistent laws across our country serve only 

to confuse and embolden drivers who text and drive. 

Let me finish up with saying that we have an opportunity here, 

obviously, to strengthen highway safety. But we also have an opportunity to cut down on accidents and deaths which also cost this 

Nation a great deal of money. 

There are many solutions out there. I certainly am willing to 

work with the the Committee and Secretary LaHood to come to a 

solution down the road. With that, I am open to any questions. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Excellent. Thank you. And thanks for your advocacy and your initiative and leadership on this issue. 

6 

Anyone have any questions? If not, thank you for your testimony. 

Appreciate it. Look forward to working with you on this issue. 

With that, we would move on to the next panel, which would be 

the Honorable Ray LaHood, Secretary of the Department of Transportation. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. The Secretary 

called because he wanted to indicate his extraordinary interest in 

being at this hearing and asked if I would reschedule so he could 

be here personally. Normally Secretaries don’t testify before Subcommittees, and so we are particularly honored to have him here. 

But when he was calling to ask me to reschedule, I happened to 

be turning onto my street and driving. And so I had to say please, 

Mr. Secretary, could you hold on for a minute until I can pull over 

so we can continue the conversation? I thought that particularly 

embarrassing to have that conversation while driving and I didn’t 

have a hands-free unit with me. So thank you for your indulgence, 

then, and thank you for being here today. 

TESTIMONY OF HON. RAY LaHOOD, SECRETARY, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Secretary LAHOOD. Mr. Chairman, thank you for changing the 

time to make it convenient for me to be here. And as I told you 

in our phone conversation, this is a very, very important issue for 

me and to you and Ranking Member Duncan, to all the Members 

that are here. Thanks for your interest, and the opportunity to appear to discuss what I believe is one of the most important issues 

that we can really address, and that is distracted driving. 

Transportation safety is the Department’s highest priority. Distracted driving is a dangerous practice that has become a deadly 

epidemic. Our research shows that unless we take action now, the 

problem is only going to get worse, especially among our Nation’s 

youngest drivers. I think it really is an epidemic among our youngest drivers. This trend distresses me deeply, and I am personally 

committed to reducing the number of injuries and fatalities caused 

by distracted driving. 

Four weeks ago the Department of Transportation hosted a summit to help us identify, target, and tackle the fundamental elements of this problem. We brought together over 300 experts in 

safety, transportation research, regulatory affairs and law enforcement. More than 5,000 people from 50 States and a dozen countries 

also participated via the Web. 

We heard from several young adults who had engaged in distracted driving and who discussed the terrible consequences of 

their actions. We also heard from several victims of this behavior 

whose lives have been changed forever. Mothers and fathers who 

lost children and children who lost a parent told us their stories. 

And I want you to know that I promised these families I would 

make this issue my cause. 

The unanimous conclusion of the summit participants is that distracted driving is serious and an ongoing threat to safety. This conclusion is born out by the facts. Our latest research shows that 

nearly 6,000 people died last year in crashes involving a distracted 

driver and more than half a million people were injured. This is not 

a problem caused by just a few negligent drivers. 

7 

To the contrary, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, a nonprofit 

educational and research organization, reports that 67 percent of 

drivers admitted to talking on their cell phone within the last 30 

days while behind the wheel. And 21 percent of drivers indicated 

they had read or sent a text or e-mail message, a figure that rose 

to 40 percent for those drivers under the age of 35. 

As shocking as these numbers are, it is clear that this problem 

is only getting worse. And the youngest Americans are most at 

risk. While the worst offenders may be the youngest, they are not 

alone. On any given day last year, an estimated 800,000 vehicles 

were driven by someone who used a hand-held cell phone at some 

point during the drive. 

People of all ages are using a variety of hand-held devices such 

as cell phones, personal digital assistants, navigation devices, and 

they are behind the wheel. 

However, the problem is not just confined to vehicles on our 

roads. It affects all modes of transportation. Experts agree that 

there are three types of distractions: number one, visual; taking 

your eyes off the road; Number two, manual; taking your hands off 

the wheel; and number three, cognitive; taking your mind off the 

road. 

While all distractions can adversely impact safety, texting is the 

most troubling because it involves all three types of distractions. In 

the words of Dr. John Lee of the University of Wisconsin, this produces the perfect storm. 

For all these reasons, at the conclusion of the summit I announced a series of concrete actions that President Obama’s Administration and DOT are taking to put an end to distracted driving. The President’s Executive Order banning texting and driving 

for Federal employees is the cornerstone of these efforts and sends 

a strong, unequivocal signal to the American public that distracted 

driving is dangerous and unacceptable. 

The Executive Order prohibits Federal employees from engaging 

in text messaging while driving government-owned vehicles; when 

using electronic equipment supplied by the government while driving; and while driving privately owned vehicles when on official 

government business. This ban takes effect government-wide on 

December 30, this year. However, I have already advised all 58,000 

DOT employees that they are expected to comply with this Order 

immediately. 

DOT is also working internally to formalize compliance and enforcement measures, and we are in close consultation with the General Services Administration and the Office of Personnel Management, providing leadership and assistance to other executive 

branch agencies to ensure full compliance with the Executive Order 

by all Federal departments and agencies no later than December 

30. 

DOT is also taking other concrete actions to reduce distracted 

driving across all modes. For instance, 1 year ago we began enforcing limitations on texting and cell phone use throughout the rail 

industry. 

We are taking the next step by initiating three rulemakings. 

Number one, to codify restrictions on the use of cell phones and 

other electronic devices in rail operations. Two, to consider banning 

8 

texting messages and restricting the use of cell phones by truck 

and interstate bus operators while operating vehicles. And three, to 

disqualify school bus drivers, convicted of texting while driving, 

from maintaining their commercial driver’s licenses. We will work 

aggressively and quickly to evaluate regulatory options and initiate 

rulemaking as appropriate. 

Moreover, our State and local partners are key to any success we 

have in addressing distracted driving. I have encouraged our State 

and local government partners to reduce fatalities and crashes by 

identifying ways that States can address distracted driving in their 

strategic highway safety plans and commercial vehicle safety plans. 

And to assist them in their efforts, I have directed DOT to develop 

model laws with tough enforcement features for all modes of transportation. 

There are other affirmative measures that States can take immediately to reduce the risk of distracted driving. For example, we are 

encouraging the installation of rumble strips along roads as an effective way to get the attention of distracted drivers before they deviate from their lane. 

Education, awareness, and outreach programs are essential elements of the action plan. These measures include targeted outreach 

campaigns to inform key audiences about the dangers of distracted 

driving and take high visibility enforcement actions. 

We are still researching the effectiveness of combining high-visibility enforcement with outreach campaigns in the distracted driving context, but we are hopeful that such efforts may prove effective in the same way that we have been able to use them to reduce 

drunk driving and increase seatbelt use. All of these measures are 

the beginning, not the end, in solving the problem with distracted 

driving. 

DOT will continue to work closely with all stakeholders to collect 

and evaluate comprehensive distracted driving-related data needed 

to better understand the risks and identify effective solutions. And 

the administration will continue to work with Congress, State and 

local governments, industry and and the public to end the dangers 

posed by distracted driving and encourage good decisionmaking by 

drivers of all ages. We may not be able to break everyone of their 

bad habits, but we are going to raise the awareness and sharpen 

the consequences. 

And I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and your Subcommittee 

for the interest you have shown in this issue, and I am looking forward to any questions that anyone might have about this. Thank 

you very much. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

I first turn to John Mica. I was remiss in not giving John time 

for his opening remarks. So you can do opening remarks and any 

questions you have for the Secretary, John. 

Mr. MICA. Thank you. I will try to be brief. And first I want to 

thank you, Peter, for holding this hearing, along with our Ranking 

Member, Mr. Duncan, and the Secretary for being here and focusing attention on this issue. Mr. Duncan and I have not had a 

chance on our side to sit down and talk about legislative proposals 

and our support or opposition—at least from the Republican side— 

9 

or what we favor, but I wanted to come this morning for just a 

minute. 

First of all, usually when the Secretary of the administration 

comes on, they get, you know, boxed by the—no matter what you 

say or do you get criticized by the opposition. And I want to do just 

the opposite. I want to take a minute to praise my colleague, 

former colleague and now our Secretary, for taking a very positive 

initiative. 

I know he was criticized—not enough, or not legislative or tough 

enough, or something—by some folks, but I think he did exactly the 

right thing. He called attention to a growing problem and a growing issue. And I think he did it; he started in his own back yard, 

which is with Federal employees and others we have jurisdiction 

over, and he outlined a very comprehensive approach. 

I think he has touched on all the things that he can do from an 

executive standpoint and from the administration’s standpoint, and 

we are encouraged to work with him on rail, trucks, buses, all of 

the things that you mentioned here today, I think we will be very 

supportive of from our side of the aisle. So I came not to criticize, 

but to praise. 

I do, however, want to say that distracted drivers is one part of 

the problem. There are many types of distractions, and we know 

now we are up to around 6,000 fatalities, as you cited, from distraction. 

I remember one ride my wife and I took down a road in Tallahassee, and I thought our life was over when a young lady coming in 

the opposite direction was putting her makeup on and drove us off 

the road into a ravine. We were not injured, fortunately, but it was 

a distracted driver. Cell phones and textings are other forms of distraction. 

Now, one of the things I would ask is that—well, let me lead up 

to this. First, sometimes like one administration ends and the next 

administration begins, I think we need some continuity of efforts 

to try to improve situations. If you do this on a risk-based approach, you just look at the statistics. And first of all, 12,865 people 

died last year not using seatbelts. I remember when Norm 

launched that effort with the administration. You know, seat belts, 

that is nice. And then I looked at the number of people that were 

killed. That is one of the highest numbers right there. In fact, it 

is higher than speeding. Speeding is second. It is 11,674. 

And then, of course, one that I happened to see—after I left you 

all last night, and we went home after a wonderful dinner and the 

Historical Society had honored our Committee last night, and Ray 

LaHood addressed them. I saw yesterday’s hearing in the Senate 

and it was pretty interesting to hear that. And I heard Dorgan lost 

his mother to a drunken driver. That was pretty dramatic commentary from the Senator. But alcohol still is an incredible killer; 

11,773 last year were killed by alcohol. 

I say all this, that we need the continuum of the seatbelt proposal, we need tough enforcement, and tough enforcement does 

work. 

Let me just say in conclusion here, we had a huge problem in 

central Florida and Florida with big trucks and deaths. I mean, it 

10 

was—some of the nightly news displays of the carnage on the road 

was horrible. And this is about 2003, I think, I took an interest. 

So we looked at a couple of things in enforcement. And then I 

found—and we have made some simple suggestions like you are 

doing here for improvements—and we found out that Florida had 

not passed laws compliant with what the Federal Government required. And we went to the legislature. They changed the law and 

they got twice as much money and twice as much enforcement. I 

just got the statistics on the last year and it is absolutely dramatic, 

the lives that haven’t been lost through tough enforcement. And 

the Secretary did mention enforcement. So I know, in a cooperative 

effort of enforcing laws—and that Senate hearing and this hearing 

will probably talk about carrot-and-stick approaches, getting the 

right balance of carrot and stick from us. But I just say we will 

work with you and try to make the rest of what you started work, 

because it is important in lives saved and lost and tragedies. Lives 

lost is one thing, but the disruption in human—just society. 

I have been getting text messages all week from one of my close 

friends who rode off the highway last week and his wife was in intensive care all last week, on the verge of death—so far she is coming out of it—in an automobile accident on 95. So these are important issues. And I thank you all again for approaching this today. 

I apologize. I am distracted by another Committee meeting, so I 

have to speak and run. But thank you. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. I thank the gentleman for his remarks and his concern. 

Mr. Secretary, if I could ask a few questions. And you may not 

be intimately familiar with this program, you have got a big Department, but there is something called the Future Strategic Highway Research Program which apparently includes a large-scale 

naturalistic driving study. And I am wondering when we might expect to hear or see results from that program and recommendations 

that might come from it. 

Secretary LAHOOD. You know what? I don’t know, Mr. Chairman. I will have to get back to you on that. 

[Information follows:] 

11 


Insert offset folio 7 here 53146.007
12 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Sure. I am sorry. We should have given you a 

heads-up. But if you can let us know, that would be helpful. Because if you were able to stay to listen to the later panel you would 

find there is some difference of opinion, and I am certain perhaps 

you have heard some of that at your summit. It seems like everybody agrees texting is, by far and away, the most dangerous activity. 

And then you get down to hand-held cell phones. But there are 

some studies that portray even hands-free, voice-activated devices 

as distracting as a hand-held cell phone, which personally I find a 

little bit difficult to believe. But I don’t know if much of that came 

up at your summit and if you had any opinion on hand-held versus 

hands-free cell phones. 

Secretary LAHOOD. Well, I just spent 2 days in Detroit and I 

rode in a new Taurus. And they have a program where you can put 

your BlackBerry in a little device and it will sync all of your numbers. So all you have to do is talk. They have the technology, then, 

where you just say, dial such a number and it automatically does 

it. The epidemic is with people texting while driving. 

But I will tell you this, Mr. Chairman, I think any distraction is 

a problem. I think eating a hamburger, putting your make-up on, 

shaving, texting, talking on a cell phone, these are all distractions. 

But the epidemic is really with people texting. But all of these 

other things are distractions, too. 

I met a young man from Chicago at the summit whose mother 

was riding a motorcycle, and she was sitting at a stop light and another person came up, a woman, and plowed into the back of her, 

going 35 miles an hour. The woman that plowed into his mother, 

who was killed, was painting her fingernails. And now he has an 

organization called the Black Nail Brigade where he paints one 

hand, the fingernails on one hand, and wears a T-shirt called the 

Black Nail Brigade and travels all over the country trying to persuade people not to text, not to paint your nails, not to shave, not 

to put on make-up, not to eat a McDonald’s hamburger while you 

are driving. These are all distractions. 

And as much as I like driving the Taurus and as much as I like 

their sync system where you put your BlackBerry in and it syncs 

all of your numbers and you talk to it, it is a distraction. Texting 

while driving is the biggest distraction. I think all these things are 

a distraction. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Yes. And I wonder, and I don’t know. I remember 

when I was learning to drive they had what in those days were 

movies and they would show crashes to try and sort of put a little 

reality on you as a kid. And I did see one YouTube video clip of 

a bunch of kids in a car crash due to distracted driving, very dramatic. I wonder if we are looking at either disseminating or developing some materials that could be used in schools and in drivers’ 

ed programs around the country. It is clear distracted driving is a 

particular problem for young drivers because of the combination of 

inexperience and use of these devices. It seems to me that would 

be a useful educational tool. 

Secretary LAHOOD. I think there are three solutions for texting, 

and I think education is one of them. I think we have to get into 

driver education programs and really teach children, 16-year olds 

13 

when they are learning how to drive, that you need to put your 

seatbelt on. And they do teach that. 

And we need to teach them the second thing you need to do is 

put your BlackBerry in the glove compartment, put your cell phone 

in the glove compartment, so that you are not distracted from what 

you are supposed to be doing. 

So I think education. I think personal responsibility. I think we 

need to teach the idea that you have a personal responsibility for 

people, your friends that are in the car, and people around you. 

And I also think enforcement—.08 and seatbelt laws prove that enforcement works. Everybody in America knows what .08 means 

now when they see it. Ten years ago they probably did not. Everybody knows click it or ticket, what that means. It means that when 

you click it, you are putting your seatbelt on and you are going to 

avoid a ticket. 

Enforcement is important. And I know there are not enough police to enforce all these things. That is why I talk about personal 

responsibility, and I also talk about education. But enforcement is 

very important, too, and that is what all of you are going to have 

to get into when you write your bill. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. This will be my last question then I will turn to 

Mr. Duncan. There are proposals to require the States to move forward with some restrictions or sanctions and/or enforcement, 

under—as Mrs. McCarthy has in her legislation—under penalty of 

loss of Federal funds. Do you think we should go that far, or do 

you have a particular opinion on that? 

Secretary LAHOOD. Well, I do think the States are the incubators. I am proud of our State of Illinois, where Mr. Lipinski and 

Mr. Schock and I come from. They have passed a very, very good 

law. But 17 other States have passed good laws, too. But I believe 

in the carrot-and-the-stick approach, and I am not going to sit here 

and tell all of you what bill you ought to be supporting. 

But we are going to work with you and we will work with Senator Schumer and Senator Rockefeller. We will work with you, Mr. 

Chairman, and anybody else that wants to put legislation together. 

We need legislation. And we are willing to work with you on this. 

And we have got to look at what the States have done, because 

they are the incubators for these things. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you. I turn now to Mr. Duncan. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Secretary, I commended you during my opening statement for your recent summit. And I will tell you today that I will support you as 

strongly as I can on anything that you want to do on this. 

This is not a Republican or Democratic thing. It is a very serious 

and growing problem, as you have said. And I know all of us have 

personal stories. And I frequently have used a cell phone while 

driving myself. I have never sent a text message. 

But I will say this: If this hearing had been held last week, as 

scheduled, I probably wouldn’t have felt as strongly about it as I 

do now. But Friday afternoon when I flew home to Knoxville, I was 

driving on the interstate connector on a road where the people go 

65 and 70 miles an hour. And I have an XM radio in my car and 

I—you know, you can push buttons and go from AM, FM and back 

to the XM and a lot of different stations. And I took my eyes off 

14 

the road, and then I looked up after a few seconds and I saw the 

pickup truck up in front of me had come almost to a stop. I had 

to suddenly jerk my wheel. I went across from the left lane to the 

right lane and into the emergency lane and went into a spin, came 

back and whammed into the concrete median. Did a complete 360- 

degree turn in heavy traffic when cars were zipping by me right 

and left. And I still can’t believe that I wasn’t hit or that I didn’t 

hit somebody else in all that heavy traffic. It is just miraculous. 

But it was because I was distracted, and I learned my lesson in a 

very dramatic way. And I am very fortunate that it wasn’t much 

much worse. 

But I thank you for this effort you are making. Education is important, calling attention to the problem in every way that you can, 

as you are doing here this morning, that is important. 

I do have a question about, and you alluded to it, in that sometimes the police and the law enforcement say that they are overloaded trying to handle the rapes and the murders and all that. 

And they really, in the past, haven’t had as much interest maybe 

as they should have about trying to enforce laws against the use 

of a cell phone and things like that. What do you think we can do 

to get more support from the law enforcement community on this? 

Secretary LAHOOD. Well, I think we will have it, Mr. Duncan. I 

think that law enforcement is very concerned about this. They 

know that this is a serious issue and they are the ones that investigate serious accidents and see people that are injured. And so I 

think we will have their support. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Did you have good participation in your summit 

from the law enforcement? 

Secretary LAHOOD. Law enforcement are very interested in this 

and they are very concerned about it. And I believe that when 

States pass laws, State police and others will enforce them, and 

have done that. And I think it will be true at the Federal level. 

I think that the example of that is, you know as well as I do, 

in the old days maybe when there weren’t .08 laws and there 

wasn’t as much attention on drunk driving, maybe law enforcement 

didn’t look at it as seriously. But I can tell you now that when a 

policeman comes up on somebody whose blood alcohol level is above 

the legal limit, they are arrested. 

They take these things seriously because it is in the law, and 

they are charged with the responsibility of really enforcing these 

laws. And I believe they will take that responsibility seriously. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Well, you made a good point about the .08. When 

I first started practicing law in the early seventies, the limit in 

Tennessee and in most States was .15. And then because of action 

by this Committee, all the States lowered their thresholds, and 

that is important. But we have met success with those types of actions, and so I will support those types of actions in regard to this 

problem as well. And I thank you very much for taking time out 

of your busy schedule to be with us this morning. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Coble, do you want to recognize your guests? 

And then we will go on with questions. 

Mr. COBLE. Well thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, good to have you with us. Mr. Chairman, and the 

gentleman from Tennessee, we are blessed, we are honored today 

15 

to have friends from the Danish Parliament who will be visiting in 

our country I think for another week. I say to you, my friends from 

Denmark, you will be another week, will you, in this country? Well, 

it is good to have you. 

And, Mr. Chairman, I invited them to sit in on our transportation hearing. And we have a member who sits on the Transportation Committee in Copenhagen, and she especially was interested. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all for being with 

us. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you, Howard. Welcome here to the hearing. 

Mr. Bishop, I recognize you, but I would also like to recognize 

that I understand you have a bill that deals in particular with the 

issues of novices and distracted driving, and I want to recognize 

your work in that area and recognize you for your questions. 

Mr. BISHOP. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I had wanted to make an opening statement, but out of deference to Secretary LaHood’s time—and if you would prefer if I 

could wait till the third panel to make that opening statement, that 

is fine with me. 

But if I may, just to Secretary LaHood, thank you very much for 

being here. I just wanted to commend you on your comments with 

respect to drivers’ ed. And that is one of two bills that I am working on, an effort to standardize and modernize our drivers’ ed curriculum. 

And it really is, I found, shocking to learn that 15 States do not 

require any form of basic driver education for teen drivers; nineteen States don’t require any form of classroom training before licensing. And we have not updated our drivers’ ed curriculum since 

the 1940s. 

So I welcome your comments. I look forward to working with you 

and I, as I say, I am working on legislation that would address 

these issues. 

Mr. Chairman, also if I may request unanimous consent to place 

into the record testimony on this subject from Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Without objection. 

Mr. BISHOP. Thank you. I yield back the balance of my time, and 

I will make my opening statement before the third panel. Thank 

you. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Okay. On the Republican side now, Mr. Latta. 

Mr. LATTA. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman. I don’t have an 

opening statement, but if I could ask just some questions of the 

Secretary. 

Mr. Secretary, thanks very much for being with us today and for 

your passion on the subject. You know, I think that all of us in 

elective office, we put a lot of miles on our car, and I think you told 

me the age of one of your cars is about the age of one of mine. And 

I am sure that I have seen everything that you have seen, everything from people now watching television driving down the road 

at night, to reading books, newspapers; of course all the things you 

mentioned about eyelashes, lipstick, hair. 

Years ago my uncle, with a carload of kids, dropped his cigarette 

lighter underneath him when he was driving and so that was 

catching the seat on fire at the same time. 

16 

But you know—and then probably topping them all off, several 

years ago my wife and I were on the interstate and a car zipped 

by. And as it was going by, I thought, boy, they are going by quickly. It was a young lady driving the car, changing her clothes while 

driving. And at that time she had her sweater off the top of her 

head driving down the road about 70-plus miles an hour. 

And I have also been trying to instill in our kids—my daughters 

are 17 and 16, and the one has been driving for about a year and 

a half. Our youngest daughter, who is 16, is finishing up her driver’s education right now in Ohio. And in Ohio, several years ago 

when I was in the legislature, we changed the law that you had 

to have 50 hours with your parent in the car before you could get 

that license. I voted for that bill. I helped the sponsor on it. I was 

on the Committee. And let me tell you something. I never realized 

how long 50 hours is with your kids in the car. It is a long time. 

But it really shows to me that, you know, younger kids need that. 

Because I remember when I got my driver’s license license years 

ago, I drove home. I mean, I went down and took the test and that 

was the beginning of driving. 

But we are all very, very concerned about distracted driving, especially now when we are talking about what could be happening 

with folks using texting or their cell phones. Because one of the 

things I have tried to do, and I hope my kids have listened to me, 

because I said there are two things in their first year of driving, 

they are not allowed to listen to the radio in car. And, of course, 

there’s no cell phones to be used at all. But you know, and I have 

tried to trick them to figure out if they are listening to the radio 

in the car, because I put it on a station I know they wouldn’t have 

been listening to. And if I get in the car and they are listening to 

a different station, I have a talk with them. 

But you know, when we are talking about on the distracted driving end, would you agree that from the studies, especially the one 

that we saw a little bit earlier, that with texting and talking on 

the phone there is a difference between that and reading and different things right now? I know how passionate you are about all 

distractions, but would you say that the one, especially just on the 

texting right now and speaking on phones, might be a little more 

different than some of the other ones right now? 

Secretary LAHOOD. Well, Mr. Latta, you probably don’t want to 

hear this, but I think all of these things are a distraction. I really 

do. I am not going to give up on this idea. Texting is an epidemic, 

particularly among young people. But in Washington, D.C., talking 

on a cell phone is illegal. Now, when I drive around Washington, 

which I do in my 1998 Buick, I see everyone, just about everyone 

on a cell phone. And I know that they can’t be driving safely when 

they are doing that. 

Mr. LATTA. Just to follow up with that, Mr. Secretary, I guess 

one of the things that—and you mentioned that you have been up 

in Detroit and seen the vehicles and how they are being produced, 

that you can use more hands-free. But it is almost to the point anymore, are we going to even be able to stop it? I doubt it, because 

even though we have passed very restrictive drunk driving laws— 

I served as the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the Ohio 

Senate when I was in the legislature. I served as a criminal justice 

17 

in the House. Year after year, we had bill after bill after bill dealing with drunk driving, but we haven’t been able to get that under 

control. But hopefully we are instilling folks with the major penalties. 

But at the same time, you know, if we are able to get vehicles 

out there that can allow people to use some of these devices, handsfree, in my opinion that is a much better thing to do because, 

again, folks are still playing with their radios, they are still playing 

with their CDs, and there are a lot of things in the car that they 

are still doing. 

But I think, in my opinion, and I know where you are coming 

from, that any distraction—but I don’t think that we are ever going 

to prevent that. You know, we can put all the laws on the book, 

because I did in my Judiciary Committee when I was in the Ohio 

Senate. I had 141 bills in one session. 

But I just think that—and I understand that what you are saying, that you believe they are all a distraction. But would you just, 

again, though, if you could make something safer, wouldn’t you 

agree that is the way to go? 

Secretary LAHOOD. Well, I will say this. I will say that 10 years 

ago I am sure people never thought we would get to where we are 

at with .08, because you know as well as I do, in the old days police 

used to put somebody in a police car and drive them home or give 

them a pat on the back and say, you know, go on home. But we 

have, because of strong advocacy groups, because of good laws by 

Congress, because of very good enforcement. 

And the same is true of click it or ticket. Somebody that works 

at DOT told me recently they got a ticket in Washington, D.C. for 

not having their seatbelt on, and I think it is like a $50 ticket. 

So, Mr. Latta, I am not going to give up on the idea that all of 

these things are a distraction. I am not. And I think they are. 

Mr. LATTA. I appreciate that, and maybe we can hear more discussion later on. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. Thank you, 

Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Boccieri. 

Mr. BOCCIERI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do not have an opening statement but I would like to ask the Secretary a question. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. That is the point we are at, go right ahead. 

Mr. BOCCIERI. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, or Mr. Secretary, you 

had suggested that in a recent hearing that you were not going to 

equivocate on any kind of distraction, whether it is trains, planes 

or automobiles, distractions were to figure out a way to get cell 

phones, texting and all other laptops out of the hands of people 

who were delivering the public somewhere safely. 

And in light of what happened with respect to the pilots who 

overflew their checkpoints, are you advocating for a ban of cell 

phone use or operators of planes and trains? I think there was a 

train in Los Angeles that the driver or the operator was texting 

while driving. Is this the goal of—— 

Secretary LAHOOD. We have put out a restriction now that—an 

enforcement that train drivers are not allowed to use cell phones 

or BlackBerrys. They are not allowed to. Absolutely. 

The two pilots that flew the plane from San Francisco and 

overflew Minneapolis, their licenses have been revoked by the FAA. 

18 

They have an appeal process that they can follow. Pilots who are 

flying hundreds of people, over 100 people from one point to another, when those people get on the plane, they think they are 

going to get there safely. The last thing they want to hear is that 

the pilot had their laptop, checking their schedules, trying to figure 

out when the next time is they were going to work. And that is 

why their licenses were revoked. 

There are three investigations going on: one by the FAA, one by 

Delta, and one by the NTSB. We cannot allow this to happen. 

People who drive school buses, light rail, trains, automobiles, 

should not be distracted by anything. 

Mr. BOCCIERI. It is already illegal to drink and drive. It is already illegal to be distracted while you are driving. How do you 

propose the mechanisms to enforce these types of regulations? 

Secretary LAHOOD. Personal responsibility, education, and enforcement. Good laws with tough penalties, and .08 proves we can 

get there. We are not there yet; but it is not perfect. People are still 

killed by drunk drivers and injured by drunk drivers. But we have 

made progress. 

Click it or ticket. If you don’t have a seatbelt on, you get a ticket. 

If you do have it on, you probably have a pretty good chance of not 

being injured or killed if you get in an accident. 

So I say let’s really upgrade driver education particularly for 

first-time drivers, 16-year-olds. You know, I have four grown children. When they started driving, they all took driver education. I 

lived in fear. I think every one of them had an accident. Fortunately, it wasn’t serious. But they never talked, even back in those 

days, about fastening a seatbelt. Now they do. We need to get them 

to talk about putting their cell phones away. 

There are ways to do these things, .08 and click it or ticket 

proves that we can do it. It is not perfect. But we are going to get 

there. We are at the starting point. 

Mr. BOCCIERI. There are quite a few people tragically that are 

killed by folks who get behind the wheel or get behind a train or 

whatever other public transit vehicle and they are tired. They 

haven’t had enough sleep. Can you speak to that. 

Secretary LAHOOD. After the Colgan Air crash in Buffalo, we 

conducted 12 safety summits around the country looking at regional jets, which I know many of you fly. For 14 years I flew one 

from Peoria to Chicago in order to get out here. And during those 

hearings, we talked about having regional jet pilots fly from one 

part of the country to the other part of the country and then start 

their job and the fatigue involved in that. 

We talked about training, and we are going to put out a report, 

and we are looking at this very seriously. We also look at that in 

terms of hours of service for truck drivers. And we are addressing 

that issue. That comes under our purview. 

So we are trying to address these issues. 

Mr. BOCCIERI. My time is about to expire. 

Just one commitment from you, Mr. LaHood, that this will be 

based on sound research. I trust that you are going to make certain 

that all of this will be based on sound research and that every decision that we will make regarding public transit will be made from 

that data. 

19 

Secretary LAHOOD. Absolutely. We have one of the best research 

departments at DOT. We have just brought some great people on. 

We do a lot of research. Our safety organization, called NHTSA, 

does a lot of good research. It will be based on sound research, yes, 

sir. 

Mr. DeFazio. Mr. Brown. 

Mr. BROWN OF SOUTH CAROLINA. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for 

being here today. I enjoyed being with you last night. 

I appreciate your interest in this particular safety issue, and I 

know some of the States have already addressed it. 

Are you encouraging the States to pass some kind of restrictive 

law, or are you looking for Congress to pass a Federal law? 

Secretary LAHOOD. We don’t have to give much encouragement 

to States. Eighteen States have done it in all different forms and 

fashions. And as I said earlier, they are the incubators for good 

ideas. Our work will really be with Congress working with all of 

you on the way forward for finding the right legislation, and we 

can do some things on our own. The President did sign an executive order. We have told all of our people from this day forward, 

starting a few weeks ago, that they can’t use their cell phones and 

BlackBerries and text, particularly since many of those devices are 

government-issued. 

So we can do some things in the Department. We want to work 

with Congress, and the States will be doing their own thing. 

Mr. BROWN OF SOUTH CAROLINA. I noted that Washington, D.C. 

already has a ban on that. And do we have any statistics to prove 

that before and after the ban whether there is a significant drop 

in fatalities? 

Secretary LAHOOD. I don’t have those figures, but I will get them 

to you. 

[The information follows:] 

20 


Insert offset folio 8 here 53146.008
21 

Mr. BROWN OF SOUTH CAROLINA. I think the Ranking Member 

was quoting some statistics about number of fatalities based on different actions, and I would just like to bring your attention—I 

know you already know this—that 22,000 Americans every year 

are killed because of unsafe highway conditions. And I know that 

we have been talking about the reauthorization bill and where we 

are going to move on that. 

Could you give us some ideas about when we could expect another highway reauthorization bill? 

Secretary LAHOOD. Well, as you know, we have recommended an 

18-month extension. Not many people around Capitol Hill paid 

much attention to that, since now it looks like there will be an extension through maybe December 12th or something like that. That 

is what we have been hearing. 

The President wants a very strong, comprehensive, robust transportation bill. He believes in it. We believe in it. We believe it can 

make a difference. We believe it will put people to work. But we 

also believe we have got the find $400 or $500 billion to pay for 

it, because that is probably what it takes to have the kind of bill 

that we all want, that you want and we need. We need some time 

to do that, to put together a good bill and to find the money to do 

it. 

So from our end, we are pushing for an 18-month extension. 

Mr. BROWN OF SOUTH CAROLINA. I would hope that we could 

close that gap some. In my State of South Carolina I know we have 

got almost 12 percent unemployment. I think we are approaching 

10 percent unemployment around the Nation, and we all know that 

building roads has a direct effect of putting people to work. So I 

would hope somehow that we could all work together. 

Secretary LAHOOD. Mr. Brown, I know that there is probably not 

a person on this Committee that agrees with us on this. Mr. 

DeFazio reminds me of that every time I see him. So does Chairman Oberstar. But it is not because we don’t want a strong bill, 

a comprehensive bill. We want that. 

We think the bill that Mr. Oberstar and all of you have written is a pretty darn good bill. But we need to find the $400 or $500 

billion to pay for it. And we would like some time to do that. 

Mr. BROWN OF SOUTH CAROLINA. I understand. And I am grateful that you talk about 400 or 500 billion so we can really solve 

some of the problems. 

Thank you for your service. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Ms. Napolitano. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good morning, Secretary LaHood. Good to see you, sir. 

And I am glad that Mr. Bishop is looking at adding to the driving 

school curriculum, that section, to be able to educate youngsters. 

Are you, by chance, working with the automobile industry to try 

to develop some technology or mechanisms to be able to address 

some of the things that have been discussed here, including the 

Breathalyzer, something to the effect that the automobile would 

sense any electronic waves going on and warn the driver about 

texting or phone usage, something that would help and add to and 

enhance the ability for that driver to remember that it is illegal to 

do so? 

22 

And when you talk about the issue of distracted driving, I think 

that should be part of some of the States being able to ask their 

law enforcement agencies to include not necessarily putting on lipstick. Smoking is also a distraction. I had an individual that 

worked with me that dropped a cigarette, and as he was reaching 

for it down below his feet, he ended up hitting another car. So 

there are many things that cause accidents. 

And how do we get the information disseminated—whether it is 

to the public, whether it is to the car users—should it be in manuals that they are given when they purchase a car? All of those 

areas that if we are really going to be serious about this, we need 

to be sure we hit every single area that we can. 

Secretary LAHOOD. Well, I just spent 2 days in Detroit, Congresswoman, and I spent a half a day with each of the American 

car manufacturers, Chrysler, Ford, and GM. And I just had the 

CEO, Mr. Henderson, from GM, in our office a few days ago. Every 

chance I got I asked them for their help on distracted driving. We 

need your help either in advertising that you do or in technology 

that you are looking at. Many of them already have technology for 

hands-free types of opportunities. 

But I will tell you this, as I have said earlier, I think it is a distraction. But they are committed to working with us on this, and 

they are committed to safety and it is one of their top priorities. 

So we have had lots of discussions with them, and I know they will 

continue. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Even a pamphlet or some kind of an indicator 

inside of a packet when they purchase an automobile to remind 

people that these are things that can conceivably lead them to an 

unfortunate accident. 

The other area is in regards to statistics that might be available 

from the States that have bans on utilization of handheld devices. 

Do you get stats back from them, from law enforcement so that we 

have a better picture of whether it is working, those bans are working? Are they being enforced? 

Secretary LAHOOD. At the summit that we held, the day-and-ahalf summit, we had State legislators from around the country. 

Eighteen States have passed laws with respect to distracted driving. Some are different than others, but as I said, the States are 

the incubators. We are going to look at what States have done. We 

are going to provide that information to Congress as a way to say 

this is what States have done and work with all of you on the way 

forward for legislation. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Do you have any future concept of working 

with the cable industry to be able to do it as a public service announcement to remind people, especially youngsters and families 

who have youngsters, about some of these distractions that they 

are not even thinking about? The only thing they can think of is 

a cell phone. 

Secretary LAHOOD. All of the safety groups were at our summit. 

We are working with the National Safety Council and a number of 

other groups who have a great deal of interest in distracted driving. They are going to be very helpful to us when we figure out exactly what we want to say. 

23 

There is a public service message that has been put up already 

that is running and on the air about distracted driving, but we 

have to say it often enough that people really begin to understand 

it. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Repetition. Thank you, sir. 

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Coble. 

Mr. COBLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary, good to have had you at the transportation dinner last 

night. It was good to see and visit with you there. 

Mr. Secretary, are cell phone bans common among operators of 

mass transit systems? 

Secretary LAHOOD. Yes. 

Mr. COBLE. I have heard that discussed pro and con. I am glad 

to hear an affirmative answer to that. 

Secretary LAHOOD. We are developing a rule for trucks, but we 

have put out an enforcement that people who drive trains are prohibited from using cell phones. 

Mr. COBLE. I thank you for that. 

Mr. Chairman, in the film that was shown to us earlier, it indicated that 90 percent of the accidents are a direct result of human 

performance or lack of proper performance. And I think that figure 

alone, Mr. Chairman, indicates the sorely needed attention that 

needs to be directed to this issue. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Ms. Richardson. 

Ms. RICHARDSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I just have one question for the Secretary. 

As I read your testimony and you talked about the summit, and 

I believe in here it says together with over 300 experts in safety, 

transportation research, regulatory affairs and law enforcement, all 

participated, and it said that young people kind of gave their stories. I would like to take a little different spin than some of the 

comments that I have heard today. 

Realistically we live in the 21st century and I don’t think—I 

could be wrong—but I don’t think we are not going to have GPS 

systems, I don’t think we are not going to have BlackBerries and 

phones. I think we are kind of there. 

And so my question would be slightly different. What can we do 

to work with the various industries to say okay, if we are going to 

have some of these devices, how can we have them be more safer 

or in a better environment while we drive or while we do the 

things that we do? Because I personally—you know, being of the 

younger generation, I don’t see us where everyone is going to put 

their BlackBerry and put it in the glove compartment. I think that 

would be great, but I don’t know if that is really realistic of what 

is going to happen. 

So I would like to suggest another alternative of what can we 

do—and I think some industries are going to talk today—to be 

more proactive and to say as you develop these systems, how can 

we have them make more sense? Because pilots do multitask, you 

know, vessels, everyone is multitasking. We have Members who are 

listening in hearings and texting messages at the same time. So 

what do you think about that theory? 

24 

And I do support all of the enforcement and how we can do 

things better. So I am not in opposition to that. I am just saying 

what about that other piece. 

Secretary LAHOOD. Let me just first say when people started 

working on .08 and seatbelt laws, people said it couldn’t be done, 

you are not going to get drunk drivers off the road, you are not 

going to get people to wear seatbelts. It is a way of life for us now, 

though. 

I think we can get there. I do think it takes a while to get this. 

But the specific answer to your question is that the wireless industry participated in our safety summit. I was with the Chairman 

of the FCC yesterday at the Senate hearing. They are committed. 

He and I agreed that we are going to get a group of people together 

to figure out how to make these devices maybe not as usable, if 

that is possible. 

But I do think if we use the model of .08 and seatbelt enforcement, personal responsibility, education, particularly in our driver 

education programs and with the industry, we will get there. 

Ms. RICHARDSON. I look forward to that effort. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Schock. 

Mr. SCHOCK. I am not sure what can be added other than to say 

I think it is important that aside from all of the votes that we take 

here in Congress and the legislation we could push, probably one 

of the most powerful things that we each have is our respective 

bully pulpits. And as demonstrated by States and as demonstrated 

by the District of Columbia and other municipalities that have 

passed bans on texting, but also the longest bans that I am aware 

of are on cell phone usage. And I would argue many of them have 

not been too effective in getting people to stop using their cell 

phones. 

And I think what is essential—and I am glad to hear the Secretary talk about it this morning—is education. Because as you 

mentioned, Chairman DeFazio, the YouTube video, anyone who has 

seen that of the crash with young people there, you can’t help but 

be affected. And I think it really makes you reflect on your own 

habits and your own decisions that you are making by allowing 

yourself to be distracted whether it is texting, eating, talking to 

your kids, or whatever it might be that is diverting your attention. 

So I would just say I commend the Secretary for making this an 

issue. Certainly more people are talking about it because of your 

leadership, because of the work of your department. I commend you 

for that. I want to work with you. We will support legislation here 

to do something similar to what other municipalities have done. 

But I really believe the most important component is for all of 

us to become missionaries for the cause, but also that there be a 

public awareness campaign of the true risk so that young people 

understand—all people, actually. I would argue, as one of the 

younger Members, one of the reasons why young people are at risk 

is because they tend to like their technology and use it more frequently. But I think as some of our more senior members of the 

population get comfortable with the technology, they will begin 

multi-tasking as well with text messaging. 

But to your point, it is putting down your makeup, it is not eating a hamburger, and we still need a strong public awareness camVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:42 Feb 03, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\53146 JASON
25 

paign to help drill that into the minds of the people to make wise 

choices. 

So I look forward to working with you on it, and I thank the 

Chairman for having this meeting. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Arcuri. 

Mr. ARCURI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for being here and your 

leadership in this area. 

Forgive me if this question was already asked, but are there any 

national statistics out there with regard to the number of automobile accidents caused as a result of texting as opposed to DWI 

or alcohol-related? 

Secretary LAHOOD. We will get those for you. 

[The information follows:] 

26 


Insert offset folio 9 here 53146.009
27 

Mr. ARCURI. Thank you. 

And the second point that I want to make is it has been a few 

years since I was a prosecutor, but one of the things that I recognized was that as a result of the public outcry, the law enforcement 

agencies did much more with respect to law enforcement and the 

prosecutors did much more with respect to the prosecution. That 

happened not only with DWI where there was also the incentive, 

with respect to the fines, and then the prosecutors would look at 

additional fine money for the police agencies to put more police on 

the street, more prosecutors. 

But additionally, as the outcry developed, we would never think 

twice about not trying to get the maximum for somebody that 

passed a school bus. And yet, you know, there was this idea that 

well, it is just a cell phone or it is just texting. And it has been 

a few years, so I know things have changed. But I think your idea 

about pushing to get the idea out there, that this is a major cause, 

will be critically important. 

And my other suggestion is get the prosecutors on board as well 

because they are the ones that make—we could have the police 

doing all of the things that they need to, but without tough fines 

by the prosecutors, you know, they are just not going to stick on 

the other end. 

Secretary LAHOOD. I really agree on that, particularly on .08. 

When the laws were passed and it became the standard, prosecutors really have made the difference because that really gets in the 

newspaper then because people really see it is being taken seriously. It is not just a slap on the hand or a slap on the back and 

see you later or whatever. 

Mr. ARCURI. And the last thing, just from an ex-prosecutor’s perspective, the last thing a prosecutor wants is to have let somebody 

go on a prior texting offense with a slap on the wrist and then they 

cause an accident on it in the future. 

So I think as that message gets out to prosecutors as well as law 

enforcement, I think that will greatly strengthen it and any incentive you can put in there for prosecutors to get tough I think will 

strengthen it as well. 

So thank you, sir. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Platts. 

Mr. PLATTS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, good to see you. Thanks for your leadership on 

this issue, especially your summit. 

I was grateful for one of my State representatives, Eugene De 

Pasqually, being allowed to attend, and I know it helped him in his 

work in the general assembly back home. 

I want to especially commend the focus on younger drivers. 

When I was in the State House and we adopted similar State laws, 

as my colleague referenced, about 50 hours with an adult and 

things, it was staggering to see that the greatest threat to a 16- 

or 17-year-old losing his or her life was in a car accident. 

So the focus here, and combine that stat that already existed 

prior to texting and cell phones, add the challenge of being a good 

driver with texting, cell phones with a young, inexperienced driver, 

and we truly have a great threat to our youth out there. 

28 

Is there any consideration to supporting Federal legislation as a 

starting point to follow the lead of some States where we do ban 

any cell phone use or texting by 18 and under? I know some have 

said 21 or under 21. And the reason I suggest that specifically is 

because of the data about young drivers and that we all have 

learned behavior. 

And my boys are 10 and 13 now. They have never been in a car 

that they weren’t strapped in, starting with their baby seat, then 

their booster, car seat, now a regular seatbelt. So they get in the 

car and it is automatic, and it is great because they get in the car 

with my mom—different generation—and if she doesn’t immediately put her seatbelt on, I guarantee you one of them makes 

sure she does. 

So they learned the behavior, and it is going to stay with them 

the rest of their lives. So if we target that younger group that we 

know is at risk to begin with and they know it is a learned behavior to not do something, in essence, would the administration consider supporting that? 

Secretary LAHOOD. I think your point is a good point. It is not 

one I have heard—it is not one I have heard during these hearings, 

but I know exactly what you are saying about your own children 

because I have been admonished by my grandchildren, who have 

been in seatbelts all of their lives, that you need to put your seatbelt on. And that is a great example, one I am going to continue 

to use from here on out, because I do think these learned behaviors 

at a young age really can make a difference. And so I think that 

is a great point. 

As far as what we are going to support, we are going to work 

with all of you and figure out what the best way forward is, trying 

to see what the States have done that really has worked and then 

incorporate it in what you all want to do in the House and Senate. 

Mr. PLATTS. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and again, appreciate you 

taking the lead on a very challenging and life and death issue. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Bishop has one more question, I am told. 

Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Secretary, you said a few moments ago—perhaps it seems like a lot longer ago—that you said you would never 

have thought we would get to where we are now on .08 percent on 

blood alcohol content. 

Do you believe that it was the imposition of sanctions that got 

us to that point? 

Secretary LAHOOD. Well, I believe it was education, educating 

people that drunk drivers injure and kill people. I think it was 

tough penalties. In our State, if you get picked up for drunk driving 

they don’t send you home. They, the police, don’t give you a ride 

home. They put you in jail, they take away your license for 3 

months, and you have to pay tough penalties, and you have to go 

to counseling. That is like for the first offense. 

Now, you know, when I was growing up or, you know, even a few 

years ago, you know, what would happen. The police would throw 

you in the back of their car, take you home, give you a pat on the 

back. And that doesn’t happen any more. 

So it is a combination of a lot of things, Mr. Bishop. And that 

is why I say solving this texting is a combination—will take a comVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:42 Feb 03, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\53146 JASON
29 

bination of good education, personal responsibility, and strong enforcement. 

Mr. BISHOP. If I may—I am in full agreement with what you just 

said. If I may, it does appear, though, that there is a very clear 

track record that when we impose sanctions as opposed to incentives that we get the kind of compliance we were hoping for. 

I mean, for example, the minimum drinking age, every State 

complies as a result of sanctions. Zero alcohol tolerance in 1995, 

every State complies. Commercial driver’s license law, every State 

complies. Yet when we do something like child safety and booster 

seat incentive grants, so far only five States have come into compliance beyond those that were already in compliance. When we did 

primary seatbelt law incentive, so far only 10 States have come 

into compliance in addition to the 19 States that were already in 

compliance. 

So it seems to me that we have a pretty clear history that sanctions are more effective at bringing about the kind of behavior we 

all find desirable than incentives are. 

Secretary LAHOOD. I think you have answered your own question. 

Mr. BISHOP. That was one of the reasons I wanted to pose it. 

Secretary LAHOOD. You got it on the record very well. 

Mr. BISHOP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. I have no further questions. Unless Mr. Duncan 

has further questions, we will thank you for your testimony. 

Secretary LAHOOD. Thank you. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. And you notice I did not raise the issue of the reauthorization with you today. 

Secretary LAHOOD. You got a Republican to do it. Very bipartisan. 

Mr. DeFazio. You will find there is some substantial unanimity 

among Members of this Committee that we need a long-term authorization. 

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Secretary LAHOOD. I am glad you didn’t pass up the opportunity. 

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Chairman, I want to remind the Secretary that 

neither did I mention the Yadkin River bridge again, Mr. Secretary. 

Secretary LAHOOD. I have heard from every Member of your delegation, Mr. Coble. Now you twice. 

Mr. DeFazio. We will now ask for the next panel to come forward. 

Mr. Vernon Betkey, Jr., Chairman, Governors Highway Safety 

Association; Mr. Tom Dingus, Director, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute will make a second appearance; Mr. Bobby Franklin, Vice President of CTIA - the Wireless Association; Mr. John 

Ulczycki, Group Vice President - Research, Communications & Advocacy, National Safety Council; Mr. Randy Mullett, Vice President 

of Government Relations and Public Affairs, Con-way Inc.; Mr. 

Robert Strassburger, Vice President of Safety & Harmonization, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers; and Mr. Edward Wytkind, 

President of Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO. 

30 

TESTIMONY OF VERNON F. BETKEY, JR., CHAIRMAN, GOVERNORS HIGHWAY SAFETY ASSOCIATION; TOM DINGUS, DIRECTOR, VIRGINIA TECH TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE; 

BOBBY FRANKLIN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, CTIA - THE 

WIRELESS ASSOCIATION; JOHN ULCZYCKI, GROUP VICE 

PRESIDENT - RESEARCH, COMMUNICATIONS & ADVOCACY, 

NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL; RANDY MULLETT, VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS; 

ROBERT STRASSBURGER, VICE PRESIDENT OF SAFETY & 

HARMONIZATION, ALLIANCE OF AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURERS; AND EDWARD WYTKIND, PRESIDENT, TRANSPORTATION TRADES DEPARTMENT, AFL-CIO 

Mr. DEFAZIO. We will start in the order I read your names. So, 

Mr. Betkey, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

I have read your all of testimony, and I know the Members have 

as well, so I am going to ask you to summarize your best points. 

If you are familiar with other members of the panel and their position—in particular, I would note there is disagreement over gradations of problems with the distracted driving and electronic devices. And one member of the panel asserts quite definitively that 

even voice actuated cell phones are as bad as handheld cell phones 

and others. And anybody who wants to address that because that 

will be an ongoing concern to the Committee. 

So thank you. You will each be recognized for up to 2 minutes 

to summarize, and then we will try to get into questions and a little interaction with the members on the panel. 

Mr. Betkey. 

Mr. BETKEY. Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Duncan and 

Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify 

today to discuss the important issue of distracted driving, and I 

thank you for giving national attention to distracted driving and 

also to highway safety in general. It is very important to all of us. 

I am Vernon Betkey. I am the Chairman of the Governors Highway Safety Association, and I am Maryland’s Highway Safety Coordinator as well. 

The Governors Highway Safety Association is a nonprofit organization that represents State highway safety agencies. The GHSA is 

very concerned about distracted driving and believes that the problem is only going to worsen in the future, particularly as new technologies are developed and brought into the vehicle. 

While we are grateful for the attention being paid to this serious 

highway safety problem, we submit that the problem cannot be 

solved by the enactment of legislation alone. We adamantly suggest 

a comprehensive approach that includes data and research, legislation, education, enforcement, and adjudication, employer policies, 

technology, and funding. 

Further, we suggest that both the Federal and State governments have a strong role to play in each of these areas. The Federal Government can ensure that States take action based on solid 

research and data, best practices and model policies. And they can 

also ensure that they develop appropriate training for law enforcement and the judiciary, construct media campaigns that can be implemented by the States and evaluate technology that will control 

or manage distractions in the vehicles. The States can enact and 

31 

enforce appropriate legislation, implement community-based education campaigns, and work with employers and the judiciary. 

Together, and with adequate funding, Federal and State governments can work to minimize distractions, maximize public safety 

and reduce crashes, deaths, and associated injuries on the Nation’s 

highways. 

That concludes my testimony, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to be with you here today, and I look forward to answering your questions. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you for being succinct. 

Dr. Dingus. 

Mr. DINGUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Duncan, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on this important topic. 

My name is Tom Dingus. I am from Virginia Tech. I am testifying before you today as a 25-year veteran of driving safety research for several important points that must be carefully considered in determining an appropriate action to this growing problem. 

First, our research has shown that the distraction issues that we 

face today are much different than those we faced just a few years 

ago, and consequently are resulting in a growing number of crashes. Texting, typing, reading, and dialing are much, much worse 

than eating, tuning a radio or talking. 

Second, our driving distraction problem is particularly time critical because the number of crashes involving complex tasks is 

growing exponentially. 

Third, while safety benefits can be realized with the deployment 

of electronic devices, these benefits can only be attained in vehicles 

engineered to minimize driver distraction. 

Fourth, teen drivers by far represent the largest population of 

those who engage in complex tasks while they drive and, consequently, are at a greatest risk. 

Fifth, the problem of driver distractions associated with electronic devices is multi-dimensional, requiring multiple solutions. 

Specifically, major differences exist between devices that are designed to be used in the vehicle and portable devices that are carried by consumers in the vehicles. 

In conclusion, driving distractions associated with electronic devices is creating a serious, rapidly growing public health risk. However, measured action is warranted so that solutions enacted with 

good intent do not stifle improvements in traffic safety. Therefore, 

I recommend the following approach: 

One, a national primary law banning the use of handheld wireless devices in a moving vehicle; two, regulations limiting 

functionality of visually demanding in-vehicle devices in a moving 

vehicle, including trucks; third, broadly applied standards for testing of potentially distracting devices prior to market introduction. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Franklin. 

Mr. FRANKLIN. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of CTIA and our wireless industry members, 

thank you for the opportunity to be here. 

With more than 280 million subscribers connected just about 

anywhere at any time, the wireless industry recognizes that being 

32 

always available can have a downside when irresponsible drivers 

manually text and e-mail while behind the wheel. When a driver 

takes their eyes off the road and their hands off the wheel to send 

or read a text or e-mail, their actions are not compatible with safe 

driving. 

To help solve this problem, CTIA advocates for three components: 

Legislation, technology, and education. We believe this strategic 

combination is most likely to deliver the results we all desire: safer 

drivers and safer roads. 

First on legislation, CTIA has been working with the National 

Conference of State Legislators to create model legislation that 

could be adopted across the country that prohibits manual texting 

and e-mailing while driving. However, as Secretary LaHood has 

noted, we won’t make this problem go away simply by passing 

laws. 

Second, we believe technology will continue to improve safety 

through new apps, changes in cars, even the roads themselves. It 

is important technology be effective and consumer friendly, but also 

that legislation not freeze innovation in place with inflexible mandates. 

Finally, third—and we believe the most important component to 

changing behavior—is education. Earlier this year, CTIA partnered 

with the National Safety Council to develop the on-the-road off-thephone campaign, educatingteen drivers and their parents about the 

dangers of distracted driving. We believe this PSA is impactful and 

are proud that so many have already viewed this TV spot. 

Thanks again for the opportunity to be here. As we have just 

seen, the wireless industry continues to demonstrate our attempt 

to change this behavior. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you. 

Mr. Ulczycki. 

Mr. ULCZYCKI. I am Vice President of Research, Communications 

& Advocacy for the National Safety Council. 

Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Duncan, thank you for the 

opportunity to speak about the dangers of distracted driving and 

the use of cell phones. 

Earlier this year, the NSC became the first national organization 

to call for a ban on all cell phone use while driving. As an employer 

organization, we did that based on the risk and on the exposure. 

We estimate there are 100 million people in the United States who 

engage in this risky behavior. 

More than 75 research studies have shown that using a phone 

while driving is dangerous. Multiple studies have established that 

the risks of using a cell phone while driving increases the risk of 

a crash by four times. More than 30 research studies have shown 

that there is no safety benefit from hands-free devices. 

There are three principal distractions from cell phone use. The 

first two are visual, taking your eyes off the road, and mechanical, 

taking your hands off the wheel. And that is clearly what happens 

when people are texting or reading or sending e-mail, and those are 

of great concern to us. 

The third cognitive distraction, taking your mind off the road, is 

also of great concern. Brain scan imagery shows that 30 percent of 

the brain that should be engaged if driving is lost while you are 

33 

talking on a cell phone. So one effect is that people on cell phones 

can have their eyes straight ahead on the road but they truly do 

not see vehicles or pedestrians. 

We are taking a multi-faceted approach to this problem, including legislation, enforcement, education, technology, and employer 

policies. We know that strong laws visibly enforced are the most effective method to change behavior. We know a total ban on cell 

phone use is necessary because cell phone conversations are causing the largest number of crashes. 

We are reaching out to law enforcement to encourage enforcement pilots that will demonstrate that cell phone laws can be enforced. We are developing educational initiatives, such as the one 

that my associate from CTIA just showed you, to reach teens and 

their parents. We are working with companies to develop technologies that manage incoming and outgoing calls and messages. 

We have called on employers to act on more than 460 of our 

member companies, including commercial carriers, bus companies, 

and some of the world’s largest and smallest companies have put 

in total bans on cell phone use by all of their employees, covering 

1.5 million employees today. 

We encourage the Congress to enact or encourage States to pass 

strong laws banning cell phone use while driving. We also encourage the Congress to support research that will quantify the number 

of deaths and injuries that are being caused by both handheld and 

hand-free conversations. 

Thank you again for this opportunity to discuss this issue. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you. 

Mr. Mullett. 

Mr. MULLETT. Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Duncan, 

Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 

testify on behalf of the American Trucking Associations on distracted driving. 

ATA recognizes that a driver’s ability to perform multiple cognitive tasks simultaneously is extremely limited. Our membership 

agrees that the use of some technologies, particularly handheld 

electronic devices, has increased the potential for driver distraction 

beyond the benefits derived from their use. In fact, the majority of 

fleets, including Con-way, have policies and procedures in place to 

limit their use while the truck is moving. 

We believe that a systematic approach is necessary to ensure 

that the use of these devices does not contribute to crashes. 

ATA supports legislation to ban the practices of reading, writing, 

or sending text messages on a handheld mobile device while driving. Specifically, we support the anti-texting provisions contained 

in the Alert Drivers Act in 2009, as introduced in the Senate. I believe that the companion is Mrs. McCarthy’s bill that she spoke 

about this morning. 

However, other strategies are needed to bolster Federal and 

State law. Public attitudes and perceptions will need to change, 

and any legislation will have to apply to all drivers on the highway. 

In addition to effective legislation and regulation, we need a significant public education effort, exploration into the use of technology 

to reduce distractions caused by technology, tough penalties and efVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:42 Feb 03, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6602 Sfmt 6602 P:\DOCS\53146 JASON
34 

fective enforcement of the laws, and proper funding of these initiatives. 

ATA believes that efforts to regulate the use of vehicle communication devices other than handheld units used for texting should 

be done through regulation, not legislation. 

In-cab fleet communication systems have been used in the trucking industry for many years. These systems help drivers perform 

their jobs safely, effectively, and efficiently. Because of the special 

characteristics of in-cab communication and the way these technologies are used in the trucking industry today, detailed analysis 

and public comment is required if restrictions are being considered. 

The efficiency and safety benefits of in-cab communication technologies should not be lost, but they can be reasonably restricted. 

Mr. Chairman, ATA looks forward to working with Congress and 

the administration to ensure that in-cab communications technology is used safely and responsibly. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Mr. Strassburger. 

Mr. STRASSBURGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Turning directly to the matter at hand, Alliance members are 

committed to advancing motor vehicle safety, and we take concerns 

about driver distractions seriously. From step one, we engineer new 

vehicle information and communication systems, telematic systems, 

to help the driver perform their primary task: the safe operation 

of their car or truck. 

We do this by engineering these systems according to our driverfocused telematics guidelines. These guidelines address the essential safety aspects of driver interaction with visual/manual interfaces with the goal being to maximize eyes on the road. 

It is a rare crash that occurs while a driver’s eyes are on the 

roadway. When a driver’s eyes are not, the risk of a crash increases. Looking away from the road scene is the principal contributor to crashes and near misses. But we are not stopping there. 

Automakers are working on important safety enhancements right 

now that use wireless communications. In the near future, cars will 

be linked wirelessly to other cars near them and with their surroundings to further enhance safety by informing drivers of hazards and situations they can’t see. Realtime navigation will also be 

provided, which will be critical to advancing how we manage congestion and even further reducing C02 emissions. 

So what should be done? 

We need appropriate laws with high visibility enforcement. We 

need consumer education about these laws and to support law enforcement activities and, further, to educate drivers about the risks 

of driving distracted. 

Finally, we need continued research so that we can further understand driving behaviors to enable the development of ever safer 

systems. And all of this should be done without severing the wireless communication link to vehicles, which enables tomorrow’s safety and environmental benefits. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you. 

Mr. Wytkind. 

35 

Mr. WYTKIND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Duncan and 

the Subcommittee, for inviting Transportation Labor to testify. 

No one wants to improve the safety of our highways more than 

the men and women who drive for a living. And to truly combat 

distracted driving, we believe we must ban text messaging and 

limit the use of other communication devices. 

However, new policies must strike the balance between safety 

and the unique concerns and working environment of transportation workers. For many of our members, the vehicle is their 

workplace and communications devices are critical to performing 

their functions. Transportation workers need access to communication devices for everything from emergency situations to communicating with an employer, and first responders rely on communication devices to respond effectively and efficiently. 

The reason we are here today is because our roads are far too 

dangerous. We concur with that. And because of the sheer time 

that drivers that I represent spend on the road, they witness accidents all the time. They are often the first or only person available 

to alert the authorities so we must be sure they are able to help 

to perform that function, and this requires access to a cell phone 

or other device. 

Clear policies are needed. Let me give you an example: In some 

States bus drivers are allowed to use cell phones in emergencies as 

long as the driver is stopped and off the bus. But a competing policy forbids bus drivers from leaving the bus even in the event of 

an emergency. These two directives are obviously at odds, and that 

is bad public policy. 

But setting that question aside, it illustrates the need to examine 

the real world consequences of policy making and to make sure 

that you enlist the employees of this industry and their unions in 

advancing any ideas you might put forward. 

Employees and other sectors of the economy can use the phone 

for occasional personal use and family emergencies, but of course 

for transportation workers whose workplace is their vehicle, the situation is different. Because they are required to be in their vehicle 

all day, the ban would prevent drivers from making calls that you 

and I take for granted. So while this may not be a policy concern 

for policy leaders, employers must take notice of this problem. 

Bus drivers, taxi cab drivers, vehicles for hire and others rely on 

citizens band radio, GPS devices, and other technologies to do their 

jobs. And if limits are imposed, the implications for workers must 

be understood. 

Because workers are required by their employers to use these devices, any penalties for using devices on the job must be directed 

at the employers, not the employees. And for firefighters and paramedics, cell phones and PDAs are essential. The last thing we want 

to do is take away a tool for these emergency responders when they 

are en route to an emergency. We want to be sure that regulators 

understand these unique situations. 

Lastly, as you move forward, we ask that you recognize the role 

that mobile communications play in our sector. We must look very 

carefully at public policy ideas and understand the real world implications for workers and hopefully through their unions we can 

advocate the right balance. 

36 

Thank you for inviting us today, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Thank you. We will proceed to questions. 

The one major issue in contention I would like any and all members of the panel to address is this disagreement over the issue of 

cognitive distraction just by engaging in a conversation on a cell 

phone even if it is voice-activated and hands-free. Obviously, the 

manufacturers feel—and it was earlier described by someone the 

device in a Ford vehicle where you could voice activate a BlackBerry and conduct a conversation. 

But Mr. Ulczycki would say that a hands-free cellphone is as 

dangerous as a hand-held cell phone. I don’t know if it goes so far 

as to say it is as dangerous as texting. So anybody want to jump 

in on that? 

Dr. Dingus, you have done a lot of work. You have done what 

they call naturalistic studies. They have done some cognitive MRIbased studies. I am having trouble relating to Mr. Ulczyki’s position that hands-free cell phones are as dangerous as hand-held 

phones. 

Could you address that? 

Dr. DINGUS. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

There is a big difference. If your eyes are off the road, for example, some of these tasks require your eyes to be off the road for 4 

or 5 seconds. If you are engaged in an intense cell phone conversation, the best data we have is your reaction time is delayed by 

three-tenths of a second. So it is an effect but it is about one-tenth 

the effect of taking your eyes off the road for some of the video that 

I showed. So it is not that there is no effect, but it is much, much 

less. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Anybody else want to jump in on that issue? 

Mr. ULCZYCKI. Yes, sir, I would like to address that. 

While the risk shown from Dr. Dingus’s studies, while the risk 

associated with taking your hands off the wheel and your eyes off 

the road are significant, the duration of those activities is much 

shorter than the duration of conversations. A conversation, people 

may be engaged in a conversation during most of a 1-hour commute, for example, yet the actual time they spent dialing the phone 

or taking their eyes off the road would be much smaller. And we 

think it is the duration of the conversation and the total exposure 

that actually causes the conversations to cause more crashes rather 

than the taking the eyes off the road and the hands off the wheel. 

It is really the combination of risk and exposure. 

Mr. STRASSBURGER. If I could, Mr. Chairman, let me just follow 

up with what both John and Dr. Dingus talked about. 

The real world studies that Dr. Dingus has conducted and other 

studies that we are aware of are consistent and they are not showing as great an effect from cognitive distraction as we once thought 

from other studies, epidemiological studies, or simulator-based 

studies. 

With respect to one study that I am aware of, it was a study conducted by OnStar, published in a peer reviewed journal, called Risk 

Analysis that looked at 3 million drivers and 91 million minutes of 

cell phone usage. There the average conversations was on the order 

of 2 minutes where the carrier rounded up by 1 minute. So drivers 

37 

are able to self-regulate, and it appears from the studies, the naturalistic studies, that that is exactly what they are doing. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. If I could, to follow up on. 

If it is the intensity of the conversation and the duration that is 

a factor, I really don’t understand how having a passenger sitting 

next to you and having an intense conversation or argument with 

them wouldn’t be equally dangerous. 

Mr. ULCZYCKI. Yeah, and the science has shown that they are 

clearly very different because in fact the passenger very often is a 

co-driver and an adult passenger in particular is seeing the road 

in front of them and helping the driver manipulate and navigate 

those situations. That is not the case when you are talking on a 

cell phone, and there have been numerous studies that have shown 

the difference. 

In fact, adult passengers are a safety benefit. People get in fewer 

crashes—adults get in fewer crashes with adult passengers. That 

is not the case with teenagers where passengers are clearly a distraction. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Anybody else have an opinion? 

Okay. With that, Mr. Duncan stepped out for a moment. There 

is a vote, but they are delaying this vote for some period of time. 

So I am going to recognize Mr. Bishop now, and I will have to 

step out to answer questions with my staff. 

So you are in charge. 

Mr. BISHOP. [Presiding.] I am not sure I am up to this, Mr. 

Chairman. 

I have some questions for Mr. Betkey, if I may. 

Mr. Betkey, did the Governors Association support the 21 drinking age sanction? 

Mr. BETKEY. No, they did not. 

Mr. BISHOP. Now that it is in place, does the Governors Association recognize that this was good public policy? 

Mr. BETKEY. It has shown that it has been, yes. 

Mr. BISHOP. Did the Governors Association support the .08 percent blood alcohol content sanction? 

Mr. BETKEY. No, they did not. 

Mr. BISHOP. And now that that is in place, does the Governors 

Association recognize that that is good policy? 

Mr. BETKEY. It is shown that it has. 

Mr. BISHOP. You know I have a bias here obviously. 

Is it reasonable to think that those laws would have been in 

place and fully compliant across our 50 States had we not imposed 

the sanctions? 

Mr. BETKEY. That is a good question, Mr. Bishop. 

I guess that with the sanctions imposed, it accelerated the time 

frame. Given time, the States probably would have probably come 

into compliance with incentives. 

Mr. BISHOP. Has any State ever lost Federal highway dollars as 

a result of their failure or inability to comply with a sanction-imposed requirement? 

Mr. BETKEY. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. BISHOP. So if that is the case, are—this is an honest question—are we dealing with a philosophical issue or are we dealing 

with an issue that is practical? I mean, if we agree that the public 

38 

policies that the Federal Government has tried to put in place has 

had the kind of outcomes that any reasonable person would support, and if we agree that States have never lost dollars as a result 

of sanctions being imposed, what is the antipathy to the sanction? 

Mr. BETKEY. I would say it is a philosophical difference from the 

Association. The Association has never approved of sanctions. We 

were always more from an incentive side than the sanctions side. 

And remembering, too, Mr. Bishop, that we work for the States 

that would be sanctioned. So it would be very hard for us to take 

a position against our own State. 

Mr. BISHOP. Understood. 

One last question. Does the Association have any statistics on 

how many lives either have been lost or would have been saved as 

a result of sanctions—I mean that have been lost as a result of 

States not accepting the incentives associated with the child booster seat law, for example, or the primary seatbelt law? 

Mr. BETKEY. I don’t have those statistics with me, but we can 

certainly research them and get back to you. 

Mr. BISHOP. Thank you. 

I will yield to my friend from California. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Thank you, Mr. Bishop. And I am sitting here 

listening with great interest. 

Most of you deal with adults, and yet it is the children or the 

youngsters aged 18 I would imagine that have the highest rate of 

accidents or possibility of getting into accidents because of their 

ability to multitask. 

What are your suggestions? Not any of you are under 18. You 

have children. You have youngsters that you know. What do they 

tell you? What is it that we can do to convince these youngsters 

the importance of their ability to be cognizant that they are in a 

death machine, if you want to call it that? I am not talking about 

it will kill somebody, but it is a possibility. It is a vehicle. It can 

maim, kill-- themselves and somebody else. 

How do we get that important message to the youngsters in the 

different areas that you are in? 

Mr. ULCZYCKI. Congresswoman, I would like to address that. 

A couple of things. First of all, there is no good substitute for 

good parenting, and I must tell you that parents play an important 

role in managing the risks of their teens. And we have seen this 

in graduated licensing, because even if a State doesn’t have a perfect graduated licensing law in their State, a parent can have a 

perfect graduating license law in their home. 

And we think parents are critical. And a lot of parents of teenagers—and I have had six myself—know or believe that the kids 

aren’t listening to them but the research is clear that they are, that 

kids do listen to parents. So that certainly is the first, is parent 

education. 

And one of things that we did with CTIA in the PSA you saw, 

it is really targeting parents to engage in that conversation. So 

that is the first part. 

The second part is that it is difficult—and we have seen no evidence that general communications to teens, which are risk takers, 

telling them about the risks by itself is enough to change their behavior. Risk takers do not—education awareness doesn’t make risk 

39 

takers change their risk levels. What does work, though, are a couple of things. We have seen that when teens get together in working groups, in what is called peer-to-peer programs, that those can 

be effective in peer groups and in some high schools where that has 

been done. And we have seen that. That has indeed been very effective. 

We think there are in fact some kinds of online and some viral 

programs that we are testing that we are very optimistic about in 

terms of not messages necessarily coming from adults but messages 

coming from the teens themselves, sharing among them and really 

establishing culture, what we could call social norms among teen 

groups, where it is simply not cool to text while driving. And if the 

teens are sharing that message among themselves, we think it has 

a much higher likelihood of success. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. That is a great video. 

But have you considered having youngsters develop a peer program, interactive virtual reality-type thing to where they understand their concept of what it means? 

Mr. ULCZYCKI. Yes. As a matter of fact we just gave out some 

awards this past weekend to a group of kids from Minnesota who 

did exactly that, and there are groups around the country in high 

schools and kids who are doing programs among themselves and 

their own peer groups. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. I would hope you share them. 

Mr. ULCZYCKI. Be happy to. 

Mr. FRANKLIN. Congresswoman, if I may, John just mentioned 

working with CTIA and we did the PSA which, as he noted, was 

directed at parents. We think parents have a lot of sway over their 

teen drivers in setting the rules. 

But just before the hearing started, I hadn’t seen John in a couple of weeks because of some of his meetings, and we caught up 

because we have been e-mailing back and forth about other components of our campaign, meaning we are trying to develop viral videos that would show up where teens are online, on YouTube, places 

like that, that, as he says, can have teens talking directly to teens 

to try to make it very uncool to do what it is that they are doing 

that is so dangerous. 

Mr. DeFazio. [Presiding.] I just want to warn you the votes are 

picking up now, so this vote will probably close out pretty quickly. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Okay. 

Sometimes unfortunately parents are not there. It is either a 

dysfunctional family or they don’t have somebody. 

But the last question very quickly is following the metro derailment in California, there was an intense debate about putting 

video cameras on the rail, the train, and that was opposed. But 

how do you feel—and I know that it is an invasion of privacy—but 

would that help being able to keep people from doing things they 

are not supposed to, especially if they are banned? 

Mr. DEFAZIO. I am going to leave you with the gavel because the 

votes are running down here. 

And I have additional questions. I will submit them in writing, 

particularly to Dr. Dingus, regarding commercial applications. 

Thanks very much. I appreciate it. Sorry about the abrupt ending here. I appreciate your testimony in this matter. 

40 

[Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

41 


Insert offset folio 10 here 53146.010
42 


Insert offset folio 11 here 53146.011
43 


Insert offset folio 12 here 53146.012
44 


Insert offset folio 13 here 53146.013
45 


Insert offset folio 14 here 53146.014
46 


Insert offset folio 15 here 53146.015
47 


Insert offset folio 16 here 53146.016
48 


Insert offset folio 17 here 53146.017
49 


Insert offset folio 18 here 53146.018
50 


Insert offset folio 19 here 53146.019
51 


Insert offset folio 20 here 53146.020
52 


Insert offset folio 21 here 53146.021
53 


Insert offset folio 22 here 53146.022
54 


Insert offset folio 23 here 53146.023
55 


Insert offset folio 24 here 53146.024
56 


Insert offset folio 25 here 53146.025
57 


Insert offset folio 26 here 53146.026
58 


Insert offset folio 27 here 53146.027
59 


Insert offset folio 28 here 53146.028
60 


Insert offset folio 29 here 53146.029
61 


Insert offset folio 30 here 53146.030
62 


Insert offset folio 31 here 53146.031
63 


Insert offset folio 32 here 53146.032
64 


Insert offset folio 33 here 53146.033
65 


Insert offset folio 34 here 53146.034
66 


Insert offset folio 35 here 53146.035
67 


Insert offset folio 36 here 53146.036
68 


Insert offset folio 37 here 53146.037
69 


Insert offset folio 38 here 53146.038
70 


Insert offset folio 39 here 53146.039
71 


Insert offset folio 40 here 53146.040
72 


Insert offset folio 41 here 53146.041
73 


Insert offset folio 42 here 53146.042
74 


Insert offset folio 43 here 53146.043
75 


Insert offset folio 44 here 53146.044
76 


Insert offset folio 45 here 53146.045
77 


Insert offset folio 46 here 53146.046
78 


Insert offset folio 47 here 53146.047
79 


Insert offset folio 48 here 53146.048
80 


Insert offset folio 49 here 53146.049
81 


Insert offset folio 50 here 53146.050
82 


Insert offset folio 51 here 53146.051
83 


Insert offset folio 52 here 53146.052
84 


Insert offset folio 53 here 53146.053
85 


Insert offset folio 54 here 53146.054
86 


Insert offset folio 55 here 53146.055
87 


Insert offset folio 56 here 53146.056
88 


Insert offset folio 57 here 53146.057
89 


Insert offset folio 58 here 53146.058
90 


Insert offset folio 59 here 53146.059
91 


Insert offset folio 60 here 53146.060
92 


Insert offset folio 61 here 53146.061
93 


Insert offset folio 62 here 53146.062
94 


Insert offset folio 63 here 53146.063
95 


Insert offset folio 64 here 53146.064
96 


Insert offset folio 65 here 53146.065
97 


Insert offset folio 66 here 53146.066
98 


Insert offset folio 67 here 53146.067
99 


Insert offset folio 68 here 53146.068
100 


Insert offset folio 69 here 53146.069
101 


Insert offset folio 70 here 53146.070
102 


Insert offset folio 71 here 53146.071
103 


Insert offset folio 72 here 53146.072
104 


Insert offset folio 73 here 53146.073
105 


Insert offset folio 74 here 53146.074
106 


Insert offset folio 75 here 53146.075
107 


Insert offset folio 76 here 53146.076
108 


Insert offset folio 77 here 53146.077
109 


Insert offset folio 78 here 53146.078
110 


Insert offset folio 79 here 53146.079
111 


Insert offset folio 80 here 53146.080
112 


Insert offset folio 81 here 53146.081
113 


Insert offset folio 82 here 53146.082
114 


Insert offset folio 83 here 53146.083
115 


Insert offset folio 84 here 53146.084
116 


Insert offset folio 85 here 53146.085
117 


Insert offset folio 86 here 53146.086
118 


Insert offset folio 87 here 53146.087
119 


Insert offset folio 88 here 53146.088
120 


Insert offset folio 89 here 53146.089
121 


Insert offset folio 90 here 53146.090
122 


Insert offset folio 91 here 53146.091
123 


Insert offset folio 92 here 53146.092
124 


Insert offset folio 93 here 53146.093
125 


Insert offset folio 94 here 53146.094
126 


Insert offset folio 95 here 53146.095
127 


Insert offset folio 96 here 53146.096
128 


Insert offset folio 97 here 53146.097
129 


Insert offset folio 98 here 53146.098
130 


Insert offset folio 99 here 53146.099
131 


Insert offset folio 100 here 53146.100
132 


Insert offset folio 101 here 53146.101
133 


Insert offset folio 102 here 53146.102
134 


Insert offset folio 103 here 53146.103
135 


Insert offset folio 104 here 53146.104
136 


Insert offset folio 105 here 53146.105
137 


Insert offset folio 106 here 53146.106
138 


Insert offset folio 107 here 53146.107
139 


Insert offset folio 108 here 53146.108
140 


Insert offset folio 109 here 53146.109
141 


Insert offset folio 110 here 53146.110
142 


Insert offset folio 111 here 53146.111
143 


Insert offset folio 112 here 53146.112
144 


Insert offset folio 113 here 53146.113
145 


Insert offset folio 114 here 53146.114
146 


Insert offset folio 115 here 53146.115
147 


Insert offset folio 116 here 53146.116
148 


Insert offset folio 117 here 53146.117
149 

Æ 


Insert offset folio 118 here 53146.118