Backup Camera Mandate Part of National Debate
November 25, 2011 11:37 AM
comment(s) - last by
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
The Detroit News
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: You people shock me
11/28/2011 5:22:46 PM
Lame Liberal talking point responses?
Yeah, cause that's all I said.
My bad, thought I was having a discussion with a person interested in a rational discussion. So, yes, guess I lose.
Yawl take care now.
RE: You people shock me
11/29/2011 1:46:40 AM
"If one child a year is saved, (massive sweeping national regulations) are worth it."
Did you not say that? It's not hard to get where I'm coming from. Seriously, ONE life?
I find it comical that you believe I'm the one not being rational in this. You provide the reasoning of a fourth grader!
RE: You people shock me
11/29/2011 4:58:39 AM
Yeah, cause that was the only thing I said.
OK, let me try to say the same thing again in a different way. Perhaps it'll make more sense for you.
Mandated cameras could easily cost absolutely nothing to anybody, as reversing cameras would have a greater saving through a reduction in fender benders than the cost of fitting the cameras.
Here's a little equation for you that puts the idea in another way:
Camera_costs < Camera_savings
Camera_costs = Total cost of mandated cameras (including production costs and government time in enacting the law)
Camera_savings = Total savings through reduced fender benders (including reduced panel shop work and insurance premiums)
Hopefully that idea is clear enough for you at this stage.
Moving on to the next part of my suggestion...
Assuming I'm correct in guessing that mandated cameras are effectively for free, and it saves one life per year, then of course I'm all for it.
Mind you, I'm pretty sure you're just happily trolling along at this stage and aren't really interested in the debate as such. Anyway, it's been fun, so thanks for all the laughs.
"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings
NHTSA Requests Extension for 2014 Backup Camera Mandate
March 1, 2011, 3:24 AM
Government Regulations Could Require Backup Cameras on All New Vehicles by 2014
December 3, 2010, 7:44 AM
Report: Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communications Could Make New Cars, Trucks Costly
March 13, 2014, 7:19 PM
BMW: Demand for i8 Hybrid Sports Car Outpaces Production
March 13, 2014, 10:08 AM
Toyota's Takeshi Uchiyamada Says Hybrids Will Soon Have 20% Global Share
March 13, 2014, 9:24 AM
Tesla Loses Out in New Jersey's Vote for Direct Auto Sales Ban
March 12, 2014, 12:44 PM
Bids Sought to Build New Presidential Limo
March 12, 2014, 10:21 AM
Audi Traffic Light Recognition System Hopes to Save Fuel
March 11, 2014, 9:54 AM
Most Popular Articles
Bitcoin King Pt. II: Mt. Gox's Dictator Karpelès Proves Tragically Flawed
March 7, 2014, 1:12 PM
Hack Reveals Fallen Bitcoin CEO's Posh Tokyo Penthouse
March 10, 2014, 4:28 PM
Tesla Motors Calls New Jersey Out on New Rule Against Its Direct Sales Model
March 11, 2014, 12:01 PM
NASA Considering SpaceX "Red Dragon" for Returning Mars Samples to Earth
March 10, 2014, 2:43 PM
India Could Rock Google With Its Biggest Antitrust Fine Yet -- $5B USD
March 10, 2014, 8:12 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Tesla vs. BMW: Who Has the Safer EV?
Feb 1, 2014, 2:56 PM
Justice Leaks Details of Next HTC One Two Flagship Phone
Dec 5, 2013, 4:04 PM
Global Cyber Espionage Concerns Reveal Growing Cyber Armies
Nov 29, 2013, 11:04 AM
Is The Period Becoming an Expression of Anger?
Nov 26, 2013, 2:02 PM
NSA and Congress -- You Will Never Kill the Constitution, It's an Idea
Nov 10, 2013, 2:00 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information