Print 66 comment(s) - last by InCarExperts.. on Dec 12 at 9:37 AM

NHTSA pushes for the mandate to save lives while opponents such as the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers reminds it of costs associated with implementing the rule

New regulations that require automakers to improve rear visibility in all new models by 2014 were proposed in December 2010, and now, the backup camera rule is part of the national debate about safety, federal regulations, and jobs.

The backup camera rule would require the installation of backup cameras in all new vehicles by 2014. It was proposed by President Barack Obama, and is a response to the Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Act, which is a 2008 law named after a young boy who was accidentally ran over by his father's car.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), about 292 people die from back-over accidents per year. By implementing the backup camera rule, half of those lives would be saved annually.

While the backup cameras could clearly be beneficial, the topic is up for debate because opponents say the requirement would be too costly and would result in job losses.

According to an August 30 letter the president sent to House Republican leaders, the backup camera mandate is in the top five list of the five most costly rules under consideration at this time.

The backup camera rule could cost as much as $2.7 billion, and would equate to about $18.5 million per life saved. Adding the cameras to vehicles would tack on an extra $58 to $203 per vehicle.

"Congress built flexibility into this law to balance safety and cost, and unfortunately NHTSA has ignored Congress by mandating an expensive, one-size-fits-all solution for rearview cameras," said Gloria Bergquist, spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

So far, individual automakers have not said anything negative about the rule despite these costs. In fact, Ford plans to have backup cameras in all Ford and Lincoln models by the end of this year.

The backup camera plan calls for 10 percent of the United States' new fleet to meet standards by 2012, 40 percent to meet the standards by 2013, and all new vehicles to comply by 2014.

Source: The Detroit News

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

dumber drivers
By vapore0n on 11/25/2011 11:55:22 AM , Rating: 2
NHTSA should be pushing for stricter driving tests rather than dumbing down the drivers.

Things that should be included in such tests:
- how to add gas to car
- how to replace tires
- how to look on all your mirrors before you start going reverse

Things that should not be part of test:
- how to put on makeup and drink coffee while driving down the highway

One day there will be a law that mandates car drives themselves. God knows were too dangerous to do it ourselves

RE: dumber drivers
By lagomorpha on 11/25/2011 1:20:15 PM , Rating: 2
My girlfriend's ex-boyfriend ran into a parked car during his driving test. He passed. He's probably not among the worst drivers in the Chicago area.

RE: dumber drivers
By Camikazi on 11/25/2011 5:17:08 PM , Rating: 2
Wait a min... how does that even happen? How can you hit a parked car during your driving test and still pass? That doesn't make any sense :(

RE: dumber drivers
By lagomorpha on 11/25/2011 8:49:37 PM , Rating: 2
He put the car into drive instead of reverse when he got in the car and hit the car in front of him. Illinois cops dont want to have to deal with it and just pass people.

"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki