Category Archives: Truck Safety

World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety,

Detlef Alwes, an engineer from Germany, suggested to me that the U.S. should discuss underride protection with the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations. I had never heard of it before. Apparently, the U.S. has not had much involvement with it in the past–at least not as far as underride protection.

But doesn’t it make sense to collaborate with other countries and come up with the safest possible vehicle regulations?

Most countries, even if not formally participating in the 1958 agreement, recognise the UN Regulations and either mirror the UN Regulations’ content in their own national requirements, or permit the import, registration, and use of UN type-approved vehicles, or both. The United States and Canada are the two significant exceptions; their UN regulations are generally not recognised and UN-compliant vehicles and equipment are not authorised for import, sale, or use in the US, unless they are tested to be compliant with US car safety laws, or for limited non driving use (e.g. car show displays).[4]

“The World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations is a working party (WP.29)[1] of the Inland Transport Division of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). It is tasked with creating a uniform system of regulations, called UN Regulations, for vehicle design to facilitate international trade.

WP.29 was established on June 1952 as “Working party of experts on technical requirement of vehicles”; the current name was adopted in 2000.

The forum works on regulations covering vehicle safety, environmental protection, energy efficiency and theft-resistance.”  World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations

Other links:

Negotiated Rulemaking

Interesting article on need for more consumer participation in federal rulemaking process.

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety,

I am glad to see that the federal rulemaking has become more open to participation by those upon whom it has the most impact. I only hope that our Vision Zero goals will be genuinely considered and implemented to the benefit of us all.

Along that line, I just found this interesting article from 2013 which outlines the history of participation in the federal rulemaking process.

As a policymaking process, rulemaking is a civic paradox in two senses:

1. It often has substantial direct effects not only on industry but also on individuals (including small business owners), state and local government entities, and non-governmental organizations. Yet relatively few people know about rulemaking, and even fewer understand how it works.

2. Rulemaking’s formal legal structure is an open government ideal: it has broader transparency requirements and public participation rights than any other form of federal decision-making. Yet only a limited range of stakeholders—principally, large corporations and trade and professional associations—take advantage of their right to review the information on which an agency is making its decision, or effectively exercise their right to comment on the merit of the proposed rule.

Rulemaking 2.0: Understanding What Better Public Participation Means, And Doing What It Take to Get It1 by Cynthia R. Farina2 & CeRI3, March 1, 2013

And I am looking forward to the upcoming publication of the article on Visual Rulemaking by two law professors, with the inclusion of the story of AnnaLeah and Mary and our efforts to impact truck safety rulemaking. Elizabeth Porter & Kathryn Watts, Visualizing Rulemaking, N.Y.U. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2016).

Responsibility

 

 

Important Follow-up to the Underride Roundtable, June 24 at IIHS: The Work Continues

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , ,

We have scheduled a follow-up meeting to the Underride Roundtable on Friday, June 24, at 10:00 a.m. at the IIHS offices in Arlington, VA. Further details will be shared when available.

We will mainly be discussing the proposed Australian underride rule with a presentation by Raphael Grzebieta from Australia. It is our hope that this will help the United States assess the relevancy of Australia’s progressive work to the future of underride rulemaking for improved protection in our country.

News of this proposed rule:

Other topics — relevant to our goal of reducing underride crashes, fatalities, and severe injuries — will be addressed to some extent, including side and front underride/override, retrofitting, SUTs/exempt trucks, conspicuity, parking.  Future meetings are anticipated in order to continue working on the preventable underride problem.

In addition to the underride rule from Australia, comments from Detlef Alwes of Germany should be carefully reviewed by anyone who holds responsibility for advancing underride protection. This is the most important point which he has made to me over & over in his communication with me via email:

Real energy absorbing underrun protection crash structures or deformation zones on commercial vehicles should become standard, as they have been on passenger cars for decades.

Here is a presentation on underride protection prepared by Detlef: Proposal for an Energy Absorbing Underrun Protection System for Commercial Vehicles

After observing the webcast of the Underride Roundtable, Detlef also made the following recommendations which he would like shared with interested parties in the United States who bear responsibility for the advancement of underride protection.

“In my opinion the following points should be addressed for rulemaking:
  • real energy absorbing underrun protection system design (the current UP systems are rigid structures to be avoided).
  • lateral proof loads to be considered in design and testing.
  • instead of dot-like test loads, the test loads should be defined area-like distributed.
  • the test collision speed should be higher (just in Germany, the collision velocities are much higher than these of the current crash tests because most highways have no speed limitation).
  • the ‘Follow-up Underride Roundtable’ should develop Underrun Protection Guidelines and discuss them on UN/ECE level (WP29). “

Detlef’s last recommendation should be given serious consideration, as underride protection is not unique to one country or another. Saving lives is saving lives.

The UN/ECE level (WP29) aims for worldwide technical harmonization of vehicles: The worldwide technical harmonisation of vehicles is governed by two international agreements – the 1958 Agreement and the 1998 parallel Agreement. These agreements establish harmonised requirements at global level to ensure high levels of safety, environmental protection, energy efficiency, and theft protection. Both agreements help eliminate existing technical barriers to trade and prevent the creation of new ones. The involvement of the EU enables easy access to non-EU markets for manufacturers.

This is Detlef’s experience with this kind of collaborative process:

This suggestion is based on my experience in another field: I was the German representative in an international committee for space debris mitigation (IADC: Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee). The 11 members of the space leading nations have developed the so-called ‘Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines’.

These Guidelines have been presented to the UN, to the Scientific Subcommittee of UNCOPUOS (UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space). In this Committee the UN Guidelines for Space Debris Mitigation have been worked out and ratified. It was confirmed by the Committee that this process was very effective and very fast – exemplary. The initiative was started by US (NASA), Europe (ESA) and Russia.

It would be great, if we could establish also such an international committee to develop underrun protection guidelines, which we present to the UN/ECE WP 29. The Proposal to the WP 29 can be put on the agenda by the heads of delegation of the represented nations. Maybe such a process can be started by the initiative of you, the IIHS, the NHTSA and others. According my experience, the German governmental authorities will not be initiative to start. They will follow if it works no longer differently.

His reaction to the Virginia Tech team was this:

Yes, I followed this presentation. At the beginning, I thought that there are good concepts but than I was a little bit disappointed about the chosen reference concept, which is near the conventional barriers with small energy absorbing struts. It is a pity that a more effective underride protection system is owed the opinion that it gets too expensive. My suggestion is to start with a realistic energy absorbing underride protection system, and when effective, one can continue with mass and cost saving measures.

I asked Detlef what he thought of crash testing at higher speeds:

Me: I don’t know if you noticed in the webcast, but I raised the question multiple times about why we were not testing at higher speeds and could we please do so. 

Detlef: Yes, I noticed that, and I fully agree. I am wondering that the ADAC in Germany is testing also at 56 km/h, corresponding to 35 mph. That is not very realistic,  just were in Germany on most highways is no speed limitation, and therefore in most cases the collision velocities are much higher, although if a braking action in the last moment has been taken.

Detlef: Some organisations require higher proof loads, to which bumpers have to withstand. This means that the bumpers of the trucks become stiffer and stiffer. Actual bumpers have to withstand these static dot-like proof loads in longitudinal direction and may break if they are exceeded. This should not be the intention for a crash compatible partnership between the trucks and passenger cars. Decades of discussions in international committees have failed to develop bumper technology beyond what it was in the 1950s. The message should be: Energy absorbing underrun protection structures on commercial vehicles should become standard, as they are on passenger cars for decades.

Detlef watched the Underride Roundtable livestreaming and had submitted a question about oblique impact to the panel discussion:

 

I hope the sketch will express what I mean. In the case of an oblique impact on the reaqr side of a truck, the lateral test loads/forces are not defined, only the longitudinal loads/forces in P1, P2 and P3. The damage in the case of an oblique impact can be higher than in the case of an impact in the direction of the longitudinal axes.

Oblique Impact Drawing Detlef Alwes

Offset tests show that the passenger car is turning due to the offset of the Center of Gravities of both cars. But also in this case, the lateral loads/forces are not considered in the regulations.

Underride is a decades-old problem. I look forward to a future less plagued by such preventable tragedies.

Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 034 Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 080Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 032 Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 024

Underride Roundtable Timeline Victim families by Underride Timeline Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 169 Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 141 Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 008 Roundtable Display Table Nurenberg, Paris, Heller & McCarthy ALMFTS facebook banner

All of these crashes share one thing in common – a FedEx truck was involved.

Truck Safety,

The Truck Safety Coalition has pointed out a disturbing trend:

FedEx Crashes:

We wanted to bring to your attention several disturbing crashes that have occurred recently. There are several contributing factors that caused these crashes, such as double tractor-trailers, fatigue, and failure to stop in time. But all of these crashes share one thing in common – a FedEx truck was involved.

Pennsylvania: FedEx truck hits Wayne Valley H.S. school bus on class trip to Dorney Park. . .  http://newjersey.news12.com/news/fedex-truck-hits-wayne-valley-h-s-school-bus-on-class-trip-to-dorney-park-1.11886818

Texas: I-30 Reopens After FedEx Truck Crashes, Spills Fuel. . .  http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/FedEx-Truck-Crashes-Shuts-Down-I-30-in-Dallas-381080171.html

 Mississippi: FedEx [double trailer] truck involved in Highway 78 crash. . .  http://www.wdam.com/story/31961768/fedex-truck-involved-in-highway-78-crash

California: CHP Details Deadly Big Rig Crash on I-10 in Cabazon (FedEx double tractor trailer). . . http://patch.com/california/banning-beaumont/least-one-killed-cabazon-big-rig-crash-i-10-chp-0

Tennessee: FedEx [double tractor trailer] driver issued fatigue citation after 8-vehicle crash on I-24. . . http://wkrn.com/2016/05/05/crash-on-i-24-w-near-ohb-causing-significant-delays/

 Texas: 18-wheeler crash shuts down I-35 in Salado (FedEx double tractor-trailer). . .  http://www.newswest9.com/story/31556016/18-wheeler-crash-shuts-down-i-35-in-salado

Tennessee: Answers sought after FedEx [double trailer] truck captured swerving for 60 miles on I-40 (no crash, but watch video). . . http://wkrn.com/2016/06/08/answers-sought-after-fedex-truck-captured-swerving-for-60-miles-on-i-40/

Vision Zero GoalTraffic Safety Ombuds

Obama (6/1/16): “We used to have really bad auto fatality rates. . .” And we don’t NOW?!

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety,

Dear President Obama,

I sat at my computer the other day and listened to you speak at a Town Hall on PBS News Hour (recorded June 1, 2016).

You said that crash fatalities were a major public health problem — as if they no longer are. You implied that we have already done, or are already doing, everything possible to prevent 33,000 people from dying on the roads of our country every year.

In fact, your attitude brushes off my daughters’ deaths as inevitable rather than potentially preventable.  It sounds like, to you, their deaths — their lives —  weren’t worth enough to put out the additional effort needed to decrease the fatality rate to the fullest extent possible. And not once have you acknowledged our petition for Vision Zero action.

Let me tell you, that makes me mad! Would you be any less so were your family in our shoes?! Would that change your tune about the acceptability of the current crash fatality rate? Would you suddenly speak out against the decades of political tug-of-war which delay — over and over — needed safety measures?

Would you go beyond talking about it and do what no one else can do: lead the way in setting our entire nation (and not just some programs in the USDOT or scattered efforts in states, cities, and communities) on a course of aggressively moving toward zero crash deaths & serious injuries?

Would you, in fact, make Traffic Safety a national priority–placing it on the list of important issues listed on whitehouse.gov and then do something about it, e.g.,:

  1. Set a National Vision Zero Goal?
  2. Establish a White House Vision Zero Task Force?
  3. Sign a Vision Zero Executive Order to allow Vision Zero Rulemaking?
  4. Get We the People involved in the action and the solution by promoting the development of a nationwide network of Traffic Safety/Vision Zero Community Groups?
  5. Appoint a Traffic Safety Ombudsman who would oversee all of this and be an  Advocate for vulnerable road users (which includes us all) —untainted by political pressures?

President, Obama, don’t be misled by DOT’s commitment to the TZD (Toward Zero Deaths) initiative. It is obviously not enough. I should know; I have spent endless hours engaged in a battle for safer trucking, and others have spent many more years doing so.

Take the bull by the horn, make use of the authority invested in you as the leader of this country, and end this public health travesty. And please, talk to me about this; show me that you are not ignoring our heartfelt, data-driven pleas.

On behalf of AnnaLeah & Mary (and countless others), who can no longer speak for themselves,

Marianne Karth

p.s. What is stopping you from taking this action which would benefit us all?

On the PBS News Hour, June 1, 2016, starting at 1:57 to about 3:05 on this video,  hear President Obama speak about the crash fatality rate:

https://www.facebook.com/newshour/videos/10154247237078675/

Obama: “We can’t accept this carnage” Let’s apply that sentiment toward preventable highway carnage.

CBA Victim Cost Benefit Analysis Victim

On D-Day, Monday, June 6, 2016, STARTING at NOON (EST), help me flood the media with this message in reply to President Obama (see the sharing links below):

Last night, Pres. Obama referred in the past tense to crash fatalities as a public health problem.

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , , ,

Apparently, President Obama is okay with the current state of traffic fatalities. Anyway it sounds as if he thinks that we have already done all we can to reduce crash deaths.

At least that is what it sounds like to me from last night’s PBS News Hour video of President Obama speaking at a Town Hall (June 2, 2016):

“We used to have really bad auto fatality rates. The auto fatality rate has actually dropped precipitously, drastically since I was a kid. Why is that? We decided we had seat belt laws. We decided to have manufacturers put air bags in place. We decided to crack down on drunk driving and texting. We decided to redesign roads so that they were less likely to have a car bank.

“We studied what is causing these fatalities using science and data and evidence. And then we slowly treated it like the public health problem it was. And it got reduced.”

See President Obama talking about this, starting at 1:57 on this video:  https://www.facebook.com/newshour/videos/10154247237078675/

Interesting. This is what I noticed about what he said:

  1. He identified auto fatalities as a public health problem.
  2. He referred to it in the past tense.
  3. He did not acknowledge that there is still a long ways to go and that there are still way too many preventable crash deaths occurring every year.
  4. He did not mention that 33,000 people — like AnnaLeah and Mary, real people, whom someone will miss — are still dying every year and that we should make it a national priority to work on them.
  5. He also did not mention that more than 2 million people are seriously injured in crashes each year.
  6. He did not take that opportunity to say let’s set a national vision zero goal and work on this together.

President Obama, are you aware that over 20,000 people have asked you to set a Vision Zero Goal and to sign a Vision Zero Executive Order. We need a Vision Zero Task Force to address specific traffic safety issues and we need Vision Zero Rulemaking policies and we need a Traffic Safety Ombudsman to over see this ongoing public health problem–in ways that are not now being done.

Could we please sit down and talk about this so we can get on the same page?

Marianne

p.s. I, for one, daily face the loss of my two daughters, AnnaLeah (17) and Mary (13). And I know for a fact that more could have been done — but wasn’t — to prevent their deaths.

President Obama

I got an email from President Obama this week.

AnnaLeah and Mary, Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , ,

I received an email from President Obama this week in response to a message I sent to him in March on the whitehouse.gov Contact Form–asking him to read the Vision Zero Petition Book 3rd Edition which we had delivered to him.  This is what he said:

Dear Marianne,

Thank you for writing. There are no words to ease the pain of losing a loved one, but I hope fond memories help temper the grief you must feel.
 
At this difficult time, please know I will keep fighting for people like you every single day I hold this office. You and your loved ones will be in my thoughts and prayers in the days ahead.
 
Thank you, again, for taking the time to write. I wish you all the best.
 
Sincerely,
Barack Obama

Email from Barack Obama White House.gov

On D-Day, Monday, June 6, 2016, STARTING at NOON (EST), help me flood the media with this message in reply to President Obama (see the sharing links below):

President Obama,

Thank you for your sympathy and kind words. But what I, and over 20,000 Vision Zero Petition signers, want is for you to do what no one else in this country can do: Make Traffic Safety a National Priority!

  1. Set a National Vision Zero Goal to move us toward zero crash deaths.
  2. Establish a White House Vision Zero Task Force.
  3. Sign a Vision Zero Executive Order; and
  4. Appoint a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman to oversee our progress in making our  roads safer.

Looking forward to hearing from you again soon,

Marianne Karth

Please share this Traffic Safety Virtual Flash Mob Game Plan with others before Monday, June 6, D-Day:

  1. Read this post.
  2. Put this Virtual Event on your calendar.
  3. Share this blogpost with others who you think might want to help.
  4. On Monday, June 6, 2016, D-Day starting at noon EST, post this vital message –using every form of social media at your disposal:

 

On Monday, June 6, we will remember the sacrifice of the armed forces as they fought to bring an end to WWII.

On June 6, 1944, more than 160,000 Allied troops landed along a 50-mile stretch of heavily-fortified French coastline, to fight Nazi Germany on the beaches of Normandy, France. Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower called the operation a crusade in which, “we will accept nothing less than full victory.”  https://www.army.mil/d-day/

President Obama, we will accept nothing less than a full-fledged, national effort to move toward zero crash deaths & serious injuries. Lead the way!

Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Prayer on D-Day, June 6, 1944

Traffic Safety OmbudsmanPresident Obama Adopt Vision Zero

President Obama

In memory of AnnaLeah & Mary, precious ones whose lives were cut far too short:

Stay tuned for a D-Day Vision Zero Virtual Flash Mob calling for a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety,

Next Monday, June 6, we will remember the sacrifice of the armed forces as they fought to bring an end to WWII.

On June 6, 1944, more than 160,000 Allied troops landed along a 50-mile stretch of heavily-fortified French coastline, to fight Nazi Germany on the beaches of Normandy, France. Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower called the operation a crusade in which, “we will accept nothing less than full victory.”  https://www.army.mil/d-day/

On June 6, 2016, let us also remember the countless victims of traffic crashes in our country. Michael Lemov has written an eye-opener, Car Safety Wars: One Hundred Years of Technology, Politics, and Death in which he tells us that in the more than 110 years since the first traffic crash in 1898, more than 3.5 million Americans have been killed and more than 300,000,000 injured in motor vehicle crashes [p.9]. This, I learned, is 3x the number of Americans who have been killed and 200x the number wounded in all of the wars fought by our nation since the Revolution [p.10]. Imagine.

And, beyond that, let us seize the moment to send out a loud message to President Obama and members of Congress:

Move Us Toward Zero Crash Deaths: Create an Office of National Traffic Safety Ombudsman (Advocate)

Despite the 33,000 people who die annually on the roads each year, our country does not currently have a reliable means of addressing the problem. These people cannot cry out in protest. And there is no one who has been granted the responsibility and authority to speak on their behalf.

I think I have a way to change that unfortunate oversight.

Let’s appoint an ombudsman to stand in the place of vulnerable road users (each one of us). Let’s create a National Office of Traffic Safety Ombudsman (or Advocate or Ombuds), who would serve to advance a National Vision Zero Goal–acting to oversee the process of moving us toward zero crash deaths and serious injuries.

An indigenous Danish, Swedish and Norwegian term, ombudsman is etymologically rooted in the Old Norse word umboðsmaðr, essentially meaning “representative” (with the word umbud/ombud meaning proxy,attorney, that is someone who is authorized to act for someone else, a meaning it still has in the Scandinavian languages).  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman

Stay tuned for a way to participate in a Virtual Flash Mob on June 6, 2016, to send this life & death message to our country’s leaders.

Let this be, a crusade in which, “we will accept nothing less than full victory.”

CBA Victim Cost Benefit Analysis Victim

More here:  Move Us Toward Zero Crash Deaths: Create Office of National Traffic Safety Ombudsman (Advocate)

Traffic Safety Ombudsman (Advocate); Missing piece of Vision Zero Strategy

Move Us Toward Zero Crash Deaths: Create Office of National Traffic Safety Ombudsman (Advocate)

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, ,

Despite the 33,000 people who die annually on the roads each year, our country does not currently have a reliable means of addressing the problem. These people cannot cry out in protest. And there is no one who has been granted the responsibility and authority to speak on their behalf.

I think I have a way to change that unfortunate oversight.

Let’s appoint an ombudsman to stand in the place of vulnerable road users (each one of us). Let’s create a National Office of Traffic Safety Ombudsman or Advocate or Ombuds to advance a National Vision Zero Goal–acting to oversee the process of moving us toward zero crash deaths and serious injuries.

An ombudsman or public advocate is usually appointed by the government or by parliament, but with a significant degree of independence, who is charged with representing the interests of the public by investigating and addressing complaints of maladministration or a violation of rights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman

In fact, in October 2015, Congress created just such an office for small businesses:

WASHINGTON – Administrator Maria Contreras-Sweet, head of the U.S. Small Business Administration, announced today that Earl L. Gay will serve as SBA’s National Ombudsman and Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Enforcement Fairness.

In Gay’s new role he will oversee an office created by Congress that is responsible for the reporting and review of Federal regulatory actions that impact small business. He will also serve as a liaison between Federal agencies and those small businesses facing regulatory and compliance issues. Additionally, he will lead regional roundtables and public hearings and manage a national network of 10 regional regulatory fairness boards charged with advising SBA on Federal regulations unduly burdening small businesses.

Small businesses have a National Ombudsman. Why not do the same for the victims of tragic, preventable traffic crashes?

What are we waiting for?! This would be the perfect complement to our Vision Zero Petition requests for a National Vision Zero Goal, a White House Vision Zero Task Force, and a Vision Zero Executive Order. In fact, the Traffic Safety Ombuds(man) (Advocate) would fit in extremely well with this plan and, now that I think about it, is actually probably the missing piece of the puzzle for making Vision Zero a viable goal:

  1. The Traffic Safety Ombuds would develop, refine, and monitor the pursuit of a National Vision Zero Goal.
  2. The Traffic Safety Ombuds would oversee the White House Vision Zero Task Force.
  3. The Traffic Safety Ombuds would be the watchdog to make sure that the Vision Zero Executive Order and Vision Zero rulemaking were carried out appropriately on behalf of travelers on the road.

Makes sense to me. Because, really, who would be given the responsibility and authority to oversee these things otherwise?! This could be the turning point in our drive to see a Vision Zero policy adopted. (Hallelujah Chorus).

Now all we have to do is get the ear of President Obama and persuade him to appoint this very important person.

Traffic Safety Ombudsman

I don’t particularly care what the position/Office ends up being called (Ombudsman, Advocate, Ombuds). Just create it, Congress or President Obama or whoever has the authority to do so!

 

Traffic Safety Ombudsman (Advocate); Missing piece of Vision Zero Strategy

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety,

I can’t believe I didn’t think of this before!

This morning, as I was waking up, I was thinking about a facebook post which I had read before I went to bed last night. It was a comment by the aunt of a truck crash victim who was thanking the mother of another truck crash victim for her many years of advocating for truck safety.

I was thinking, “There’s something wrong with that picture!” I’ve only been involved for three years in this battle for safer roads and already I am thoroughly aghast at the inhumane way safety issues are at the mercy of a political tug-of-war. Why on earth is it such a struggle to get this country to make saving lives a priority?! Year after year. After year.

The simple, obvious answer, of course, is that the political sway of industry lobby ($) has power far greater than the voice of those advocating for the victims, or, in this case, advocates trying to prevent people from becoming victims!

Supposedly, Congress did something about that back in 1966 with the National Traffic & Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Out of that has come DOT with its agencies like NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) and FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration). But somehow these, too are caught up in the throes of a battle, along with members of Congress, which hardly ever results in truly safer roads.

Well, as I was reflecting on this, suddenly an idea popped into my head.  Ombudsman! We need a Traffic Safety Ombudsman (or Ombuds)–an independent advocate to promote safety interests and defend travelers on the road.

I know why the idea popped into my head. Back in 1977, when I was newly-married and newly-graduated from college, I took a job as a VISTA Volunteer (meaning a Peace Corps-like volunteer who worked dirt-cheap in the U.S. for a non-profit). In this case, I worked as Director of a local chapter of a statewide patient advocacy organization for nursing home patients–Citizens for Better Care.

So I was basically a Patient Advocate at the local level–speaking up on behalf of nursing home patients. Family members could bring complaints to us and we would help to resolve the problem.

I was supported by a local board but also by the state office of CBC and by the Long Term Care Ombudsman at the State level (Doug Roberts at the time). And this is what, today, made me think: Ombudsman! Traffic Safety Ombudsman (or Advocate) ! Eureka!

I don’t know why I didn’t think of it before, but this seems to me to be the perfect solution to the political tug-of-war over traffic safety: Create an Office of Traffic Safety Ombudsman to oversee traffic safety issues. Why? Because currently no one holds such an unadulterated role.

Before I got my day too far underway (I was getting ready to go help with another crash test of Aaron Kiefer’s side/rear guard prototype), I looked up the term ombudsman online and I discovered that it has a rich history. And one of the important features of the role is that it is established as an independent position. It is specifically designed to be immune to political pressure!

An ombudsman or public advocate is usually appointed by the government or by parliament, but with a significant degree of independence, who is charged with representing the interests of the public by investigating and addressing complaints of maladministration or a violation of rights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman

What are we waiting for?! This would be the perfect complement to our Vision Zero Petition requests for a National Vision Zero Goal, a White House Vision Zero Task Force, and a Vision Zero Executive Order. In fact, the Traffic Safety Ombuds(man) (Advocate) would fit in extremely well with this plan and, now that I think about it, is actually probably the missing piece of the puzzle for making Vision Zero a viable goal:

  1. The Traffic Safety Ombuds would develop, refine, and monitor the pursuit of a National Vision Zero Goal.
  2. The Traffic Safety Ombuds would oversee the White House Vision Zero Task Force.
  3. The Traffic Safety Ombuds would be the watchdog to make sure that the Vision Zero Executive Order and Vision Zero rulemaking were carried out appropriately on behalf of travelers on the road.

Makes sense to me. Because, really, who would be given the responsibility and authority to do so otherwise?! This could be the turning point. (Hallelujah Chorus).

Now all we have to do is get the ear of President Obama and persuade him to appoint this very important person.