- :ur-N . . . M. I 1?7: I El. . cu' 4.1" TkwRd'vl'(.1, ~t Laws .- . . 14 ANNUAL ROADMAP OF STATE HIGHWAY SAFETY LAWS TH “Have We Forgotten What Saves Lives?” Legislative Amnesia is Thwarting Efforts to Advance Laws to Reduce the Mounting Death and Injury Toll on our Streets and Highways The 2017 Roadmap of State Highway Safety Laws is being released by Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) as our nation ends two consecutive years of rising deaths on our highways. In 2015, 35,092 people were killed in motor vehicle crashes – the largest percentage increase in nearly 50 years. Unfortunately, early data for 2016 appears to be even worse. Preliminary information for the first nine months of 2016 shows an eight percent uptick in fatalities compared to the same time period in 2015. Final 2015 data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) showed that there were steep increases in fatalities for nearly every crash category including unbelted vehicle occupants (five percent), motorcyclists (eight percent), pedestrians (10 percent), teen drivers (10 percent), impaired and distracted drivers (three and nine percent) and children (six percent). These numbers are both alarming and unacceptable. The problem is clear – too many lives are lost, serious injuries sustained and needless costs incurred because of motor vehicle crashes. But, the solutions are also clear. Unlike other public health challenges our country faces, there are effective solutions available today. We all must work together now to stem the growing death and injury toll, and we cannot forget that state adoption of comprehensive traffic safety laws is the most effective countermeasure to avert crashes, save lives, prevent injuries and reduce economic costs to the public and to the government. This is the reason Advocates entitled our 14 th annual Roadmap of State Highway Safety Laws, “Have We Forgotten What Saves Lives?” Too many states are still lacking too many safety laws and this is contributing to the problem. Advocates urges governors and state lawmakers to remember that state laws will save lives and spare families the loss of loved ones. We know what needs to be done – enact state laws to require vehicle occupants to buckle up in every seating position, motorcyclists to always wear a helmet when riding, children to be seated in age appropriate child restraints, new teen drivers to gain necessary experience behind the wheel, and to address impaired and distracted driving. This year’s report shows that across the country, states are missing 376 traffic safety laws. While the death and injury toll was increasing these past two years, enactment of new state safety laws was decreasing. This must change if we are serious about reversing the upward trend of highway deaths and injuries. Roadside memorials such as the one on the cover of this report have become too commonplace. We need legislative action and not legislative amnesia to solve this public health epidemic. Jacqueline S. Gillan, President TABLE OF CONTENTS Glossary of Acronyms ................................................................................................................. 4 Urgent Action Needed to Improve Highway Safety ...................................................................... 5 Sharp Increases in Fatalities in 2015………………………………………………………………..6 Safety Laws Reduce Crash Costs ................................................................................................. 7 Legislative Activity in 2016 ......................................................................................................... 8 Key Things to Know about this Report ........................................................................................ 9 Important Changes to Ratings in this Report……………………………………………………...10 Definitions of 15 Lifesaving Laws ............................................................................................ .11 Speeding and Automated Enforcement………………………………………………………...13 Occupant Protection ................................................................................................................ 14 Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Laws (Front and Rear) .............................................................. 15 All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Laws ........................................................................................... 17 Occupant Protection Laws Rating Chart ..................................................................................... 19 Child Passenger Safety ............................................................................................................ 20 Booster Seat Laws ..................................................................................................................... 22 Booster Seat Laws Rating Chart................................................................................................. 23 Teen Driving: Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) Programs ............................................... 24 Teen Driving Laws .................................................................................................................... 25 Teen Driving Laws Rating Chart................................................................................................ 27 Impaired Driving ..................................................................................................................... 28 Impaired Driving Laws .............................................................................................................. 29 Ignition Interlock Device (IID) Laws ......................................................................................... 30 Child Endangerment Laws ......................................................................................................... 31 Open Container Laws That Meet Federal Requirements ............................................................. 31 Impaired Driving Laws Rating Chart ......................................................................................... 32 Distracted Driving ................................................................................................................... 33 All-Driver Text Messaging Restrictions ..................................................................................... 34 All-Driver Text Messaging Restrictions Rating Chart………. .................................................... 35 Overall State Ratings Based on Total Number of Laws ......................................................... 36 Overall State Ratings Chart ........................................................................................................ 38 States at a Glance (See Individual State Index on Page 3) ........................................................... 40 Source Information .................................................................................................................. 52 Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 57 About Advocates ...................................................................................................................... 57 January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 2 STATES AT A GLANCE Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 40 Alabama ................................................................................................................................................. 41 Alaska .................................................................................................................................................... 41 Arizona ................................................................................................................................................... 41 Arkansas ................................................................................................................................................. 41 California................................................................................................................................................ 42 Colorado ................................................................................................................................................. 42 Connecticut............................................................................................................................................. 42 Delaware ................................................................................................................................................ 42 District of Columbia................................................................................................................................ 42 Florida .................................................................................................................................................... 43 Georgia ................................................................................................................................................... 43 Hawaii .................................................................................................................................................... 43 Idaho . .. .................................................................................................................................................. 43 Illinois .................................................................................................................................................... 43 Indiana.................................................................................................................................................... 44 Iowa….................................................................................................................................................... 44 Kansas .................................................................................................................................................... 44 Kentucky ................................................................................................................................................ 44 Louisiana ................................................................................................................................................ 44 Maine .................................................................................................................................................... 45 Maryland ................................................................................................................................................ 45 Massachusetts ......................................................................................................................................... 45 Michigan ................................................................................................................................................ 45 Minnesota ............................................................................................................................................... 45 Mississippi.............................................................................................................................................. 46 Missouri ................................................................................................................................................. 46 Montana ................................................................................................................................................. 46 Nebraska................................................................................................................................................. 46 Nevada ................................................................................................................................................... 47 New Hampshire ...................................................................................................................................... 47 New Jersey ............................................................................................................................................. 47 New Mexico ........................................................................................................................................... 47 New York ............................................................................................................................................... 47 North Carolina ........................................................................................................................................ 48 North Dakota .......................................................................................................................................... 48 Ohio….................................................................................................................................................... 48 Oklahoma ............................................................................................................................................... 48 Oregon.................................................................................................................................................... 48 Pennsylvania ........................................................................................................................................... 49 Rhode Island ........................................................................................................................................... 49 South Carolina ........................................................................................................................................ 49 South Dakota .......................................................................................................................................... 49 Tennessee ............................................................................................................................................... 50 Texas . . ................................................................................................................................................... 50 Utah... . ................................................................................................................................................... 50 Vermont ................................................................................................................................................. 50 Virginia .................................................................................................................................................. 50 Washington............................................................................................................................................. 51 West Virginia.......................................................................................................................................... 51 Wisconsin ............................................................................................................................................... 51 Wyoming ................................................................................................................................................ 51 January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 3 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AAA - American Automobile Association Advocates - Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety BAC - Blood Alcohol Concentration CDC - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention DC - District of Columbia DUI - Driving Under the Influence DWI - Driving While Intoxicated FARS - Fatality Analysis Reporting System FAST Act - Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (Public Law 114-94) GAO - Government Accountability Office GDL - Graduated Driver Licensing IID - Ignition Interlock Device IIHS - Insurance Institute for Highway Safety LATCH - Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children MADD - Mothers Against Drunk Driving NHTSA - National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB - National Transportation Safety Board U.S. DOT - United States Department of Transportation January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 4 URGENT ACTION NEEDED TO IMPROVE HIGHWAY SAFETY The Problem All across the nation people greatly depend on the safety of our transportation system. Whether walking, biking, driving or riding, Americans are afforded a significant degree of mobility. Yet this comes with an enormous social cost – 6.3 million crashes in 2015 resulting in more than 35,000 fatalities and 2.44 million injuries. This is a major public health epidemic by any measure. Further, motor vehicle crashes impose a significant cost to society of $836 billion, based on 2010 data. Every day approximately 96 people are killed on America’s streets and highways, and nearly 6,700 are injured. While federal action and safety requirements can address part of the problem, state laws have a direct effect on promoting safer behavior by drivers and occupants. Unfortunately, state action is lacking and far too many state legislatures are not taking proactive steps to reduce these numbers by enacting effective and proven highway safety laws. Key Facts About This Leading Public Health Epidemic:  35,092 people were killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2015. This is a 7.2% increase from the previous year and the largest percentage increase in nearly 50 years. Further, early estimates for the first nine months of 2016 show an 8% increase in fatalities over the same period in 2015.  Automobile crashes remain a leading cause of death for Americans aged five to 34.  An estimated 2.44 million people were injured in motor vehicle crashes in 2015.  In 2015, almost half (48%) of passenger vehicle occupants killed were unrestrained.  A total of 4,976 motorcyclists died in 2015. This death toll accounts for 14% of all fatalities.  1,132 children aged 14 and younger were killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2015.  279 children aged four through seven were killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2015.  Crashes involving young drivers (aged 15 - 20) resulted in 4,702 total fatalities in 2015.  There were 10,265 fatalities in crashes involving a drunk driver in 2015.  In crashes involving a distracted driver, 3,477 people were killed in 2015.  Motor vehicle crashes are estimated to have an annual societal impact in excess of $836 billion. Nearly 30% of this figure ($242 billion) is economic costs including property and productivity losses, medical and emergency bills and other related costs. Dividing this cost among the total population amounts to a “crash tax” of $784 for every person, every year. An additional 376 laws need to be adopted in all states and DC to fully meet Advocates’ recommended optimal safety laws in this report. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 5 SHARP INCREASES IN FATALITIES IN 2015 In 2015, there were 35,092 people killed in traffic crashes -- an increase of 7.2% from the previous year and the largest percentage increase in nearly 50 years. This ends a trend of decline and is the highest number of motor vehicle crash fatalities in seven years. Increases were seen in every major segment. The chart below shows the increases in fatalities by category from 2014 to 2015. January 2017 Alcohol-Impairment Up 3% Excessive Speed Up 3% Unbelted Vehicle Occupants Up 5% Occupants Under 16 Up 6% Motorcyclists Up 8% Distraction Up 9% Teen Drivers Up 10% Pedestrians Up 10% Cyclists Up 12% Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 6 SAFETY LAWS REDUCE CRASH COSTS Motor vehicle crashes impose a significant financial burden on society. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the annual economic cost of motor vehicle crashes is $242 billion, based on 2010 data. This essentially means each person living in the U.S. pays a $784 annual “crash tax.” Motor vehicle crashes amount to $836 billion annually in costs to society:  Economic costs of $242 billion:  $77.4 billion in lost workplace and household productivity;  $23.4 billion in present and future medical costs;  $76.1 billion in property damage costs; and,  $65.1 billion in other costs.  Comprehensive costs to society of almost $600 billion, which includes valuation for lost quality-of-life. Annual Economic Cost of Motor Vehicle Crashes to States STATE AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE DC FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS MO (Millions $) STATE $4,473 $592 $4,183 $2,386 $19,998 $4,173 $4,880 $684 $859 $10,750 $10,787 $577 $886 $10,885 $6,375 $2,188 $2,445 $4,363 $5,691 $1,303 $4,476 $5,835 $9,599 $3,057 $2,718 $5,560 MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI WY Total (Millions $) $898 $1,295 $1,978 $1,374 $12,813 $1,769 $15,246 $7,909 $706 $10,125 $2,910 $1,768 $5,851 $1,599 $4,045 $720 $5,667 $17,044 $1,725 $538 $4,998 $4,469 $1,482 $4,546 $788 $241,988 Source: The Economic and Societal Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2010, NHTSA (2015). January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 7 LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITY IN 2016 In 2016, there were only five laws passed in four states and DC that meet the criteria for the 15 basic safety laws included in this report. While there was other legislative activity throughout the states, for purposes of this report only those laws that meet the optimal law criteria, as defined on pages 11 and 12 are considered. Laws that do not meet the optimal law criteria, including laws subject only to secondary enforcement, are not included in the legislative activity summary. Highway Safety Laws Enacted in 2016, in All State Legislatures Primary Enforcement of Seat Belts: None All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Laws: None adopted, but none repealed Booster Seats: None Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL): None Impaired Driving: Ignition Interlock Devices for All Offenders—District of Columbia, Maryland, Rhode Island, Vermont; Child Endangerment—Connecticut All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction: None States are failing to close important safety gaps because they have not adopted the lifesaving safety laws listed below. While a number of highway safety laws have been enacted during the last few years, many considered to be fundamental to highway safety are still missing in many states. Based on Advocates’ safety recommendations, states need to adopt 376 laws:        16 states need an optimal primary enforcement seat belt law for front seat passengers; 32 states need an optimal primary enforcement seat belt law for rear seat passengers; 31 states need an optimal all-rider motorcycle helmet law; 39 states and DC need an optimal booster seat law; 213 GDL laws need to be adopted to ensure the safety of novice drivers, no state meets all the criteria recommended in this report; 35 critical impaired driving laws are needed in 33 states; and, 9 states need an optimal all-driver text messaging restriction. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 8 KEY THINGS TO KNOW ABOUT THIS REPORT The Report is Divided into Five Issue Sections:  Occupant Protection: Primary Enforcement Seat Belts Front Seat Occupants; Rear Seat Occupants; and, All-Rider Motorcycle Helmets  Child Passenger Safety: Booster Seats  Teen Driving (GDL): Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit; 6-Month Holding Period; Supervised Driving Requirement; Nighttime Driving Restriction; Passenger Restriction; Cell Phone Use Restriction; and, Age 18 for Unrestricted License  Impaired Driving: Ignition Interlock Devices (IIDs) for All Offenders; Child Endangerment; and, Open Container  Distracted Driving: All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction The 15 state laws that are listed in the five sections are essential to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce health care and other costs. These 15 laws do not comprise the entire list of effective public policy interventions states should take to reduce motor vehicle deaths and injuries. Background information about each law is provided in the respective sections throughout the report. The statistical data on crashes, fatalities and injuries are based on 2015 Fatal Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data, except as otherwise indicated. States are rated only on whether they have adopted a specific law, not on other aspects or measures of an effective highway safety program. A definition of each law as used by Advocates for purposes of this report can be found on pages 11-12. No state can receive the highest rating (Green) without having primary enforcement seat belt laws for both the front and rear seats. Additionally, no state that has repealed its all-rider motorcycle helmet law within the previous ten years can receive a green rating in this report. Each issue section has a state law chart, in alphabetical order, with each state’s rating. The section ratings result in an overall rating, and overall state ratings on pages 40-51 fall into three groupings: Good—State is significantly advanced toward adopting all of Advocates’ recommended optimal laws. Caution—State needs improvement because of gaps in Advocates’ recommended optimal laws. Danger—State falls dangerously behind in adoption of Advocates’ recommended optimal laws. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 9 IMPORTANT CHANGES TO RATINGS IN THIS REPORT Child Passenger Safety - The optimal definition for a booster seat law has been changed. Starting in this year’s report, a state law must now include a requirement that the booster seat be used until the child reaches 57 inches in height, in addition to reaching eight years of age. The addition of the height requirement was included in previous reports as a recommendation. See page 11 for the new optimal definition. Graduated Driver Licensing  Supervised Driving Requirement has been increased from 30-50 hours of supervised driving to at least 50 hours of supervised driving, 10 of which must be at night. This update reflects incentive grant criteria passed in the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. 114-94). See page 12 for the new optimal definition.  Passenger Restriction has been changed to limit passengers to one non-familial passenger younger than age 21, rather than one non-familial “teenage” passenger. This update reflects incentive grant criteria passed in the FAST Act. See page 12 for the new optimal definition.  Age 18 for Unrestricted License has been changed to require that at a minimum, one of the intermediate phase restrictions, either the nighttime or passenger restriction, must last until age 18, and meet the definition for an optimal law. See page 12 for the new optimal definition. Note: Removal of Open Circles - In previous reports, open circles (with no shading) were included for informational purposes only to indicate the existence of a law that did not meet the optimal criteria of this report. These have been removed from the ratings charts. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 10 DEFINITIONS OF 15 LIFESAVING LAWS Based on government and private research, crash data and state experience, Advocates has determined the traffic safety laws listed below are critical to reducing motor vehicle deaths and injuries. For the purposes of this report, states are only given credit if the state law meets the optimal safety provisions as defined below. No credit is given for laws that fail to fully meet the criteria in this report. Also, no credit is given for laws that are subject to secondary enforcement or for GDL laws that permit an exemption based on driver education programs. Occupant Protection Primary Enforcement Front Seat Belt Law - Allows law enforcement officers to stop and ticket the driver for a violation of the seat belt law for front seat occupants. No other violation need occur first. (Ratings are based on front seat occupants only.) A state that does not have this law, in addition to a primary enforcement rear seat belt law, cannot receive a green overall rating. Primary Enforcement Rear Seat Belt Law - Requires that all occupants in the rear seat of a vehicle wear seat belts and allows law enforcement officers to stop and ticket the driver for a violation of the seat belt law. No other violation need occur first. (Ratings are based on rear seat occupants only.) A state that does not have this law, in addition to a primary enforcement front seat belt law, cannot receive a green overall rating. All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law - Requires all motorcycle riders, regardless of age, to use a helmet that meets U.S. DOT standards or face a violation A state that has repealed an existing all-rider motorcycle helmet law in the previous 10 years cannot achieve a green overall rating. Child Passenger Safety Booster Seat Law - Requires that children who have outgrown the height and weight limit of a forward facing safety seat be placed in a booster seat. The booster seat should be certified by the manufacturer to meet U.S. DOT safety standards, and should be used until the child can properly use the vehicle’s seat belt when the child reaches 57 inches in height and age eight. Teen Driving GDL programs allow novice teen drivers to learn to drive under lower risk conditions, and consist of a learner's stage, then an intermediate stage, before being granted an unrestricted license. The learner’s stage requires teen drivers to complete a minimum number of months of adult-supervised driving in order to move to the next phase and drive unsupervised. The intermediate stage restricts teens from driving in high-risk situations for a specified period of time before receiving an unrestricted license. Advocates recommends that the three-phase GDL program be no less than one year in duration, though this is not considered in the ratings. Advocates rates state GDL laws on seven key safety components identified in research and data analysis: Learner’s Stage: Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit - A beginning teen driver is prohibited from obtaining a learner’s permit until the age of 16. States have not been given credit if the law allows for a beginning driver to obtain a learner’s permit before the age of 16. Learner’s Stage: Six-Month Holding Period Provision - A beginning teen driver must be supervised by an adult licensed driver at all times during the learner’s stage. If the learner remains citation-free for six months, he or she may progress to the intermediate stage. States have not been given credit if the length of the holding period is less than six months, or if there is a reduction in the length of the holding period for drivers who take a driver education course. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 11 DEFINITIONS OF 15 LIFESAVING LAWS (CONT.) Teen Driving (cont.) Learner’s Stage: 50 Hours of Supervised Driving Provision - A beginning teen driver must receive at least 50 hours of behind-the-wheel training, 10 of which must be at night, with an adult licensed driver during the learner’s stage. States have not been given credit if the number of required supervised driving hours is less than 50, does not require 10 hours of night driving, or if there is a reduction in the required number of hours of supervised driving (to less than 50 hours) for drivers who take a driver education course. Intermediate Stage: Nighttime Driving Restriction Provision - Unsupervised driving should be prohibited from at least 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. States have not been given credit if the nighttime driving restriction does not span the entire 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. minimum time range for all days of the week. Intermediate Stage: Passenger Restriction Provision - This provision limits the number of passengers who may legally ride with a teen driver without adult supervision. The optimal limit is no more than one non-familial passenger younger than age 21. Cell Phone Restriction - This restriction prohibits all use of cellular devices (hand-held, hands-free and text messaging) by beginning teen drivers, except in the case of an emergency. States are only given credit if the provision lasts for the entire duration of the GDL program (both learner’s and intermediate stages). Age 18 for Unrestricted License - A teen driver is prohibited from obtaining an unrestricted license until the age of 18, and either the nighttime or the passenger restrictions, or both, must last until age 18 and meet the definition for an optimal law. States have not been given credit if teen drivers can obtain an unrestricted license before age 18. Impaired Driving Ignition Interlock Devices (IIDs) - This law mandates the installation of IIDs on the vehicles of all convicted drunk driving offenders. Without an optimal IID law, a state is deemed red for the impaired driving rating. Child Endangerment - This law either creates a separate offense or enhances an existing penalty for an impaired driving offender who endangers a minor. No credit is given if this law applies only to drivers who are under 21 years of age. Open Container - This law prohibits open containers of alcohol in the passenger area of a motor vehicle. To comply with federal requirements, the law must: prohibit both possession of any open alcoholic beverage container and the consumption of alcohol from an open container; apply to the entire passenger area of any motor vehicle; apply to all vehicle occupants except for passengers of buses, taxi cabs, limousines or persons in the living quarters of motor homes; apply to vehicles on the shoulder of public highways; and, require primary enforcement of the law. State laws are counted in this report only if they are in compliance with the federal law and regulation. Distracted Driving All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction - This law prohibits all drivers from sending, receiving, or reading a text message from any handheld or electronic data communication device, except in the case of an emergency. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 12 SPEEDING AND AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT One of the most challenging issues contributing to traffic crashes is speeding, which is driving in excess of the posted legal limit. According to NHTSA, in 2015, almost 30% of all fatal crashes involved speeding as a contributing factor. Speed-related crashes took 9,557 lives in 2015 alone, an increase of 3% from the previous year. Speed-related crashes caused $52 billion in economic costs and $203 billion in comprehensive costs, based on 2010 data. Higher speeds contribute to more frequent and more deadly crashes. Unfortunately, it is commonplace for drivers to exceed the posted speed limit. Thus, if a speed limit is raised, people will likely still travel faster than the posted maximum. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), when speed limits are raised, both speed and fatal crashes increase. Six states now have maximum speed limits of 80 miles per hour (mph), and Texas allows speeds as high as 85 mph. An increase in speed from 75 mph to 78 mph would raise the rate of fatal crashes by 17%, according to research. An IIHS study showed that increases in speed limits over two decades have cost 33,000 lives in the U.S. In 2013 alone, the increases resulted in 1,900 additional deaths, essentially canceling out the number of lives saved by frontal airbags that year. Speeding can have many consequences, such as an increased stopping distance, decreased time for the driver to react to emergencies and other roadway hazards, and higher levels of crash energy. Further, other common contributing factors to crashes such as alcohol, seat belt use, and inexperienced novice drivers go hand-in-hand with, or are exacerbated by, speeding to produce deadly and dangerous situations.  In 2014, 41% of speeding drivers had blood alcohol concentration (BAC) levels above the legal limit in fatal crashes, compared to only 17% of non-speeding drivers involved in fatal crashes, according to NHTSA data.  Speeding was involved in over one-third of teens’ fatal crashes, compared to less than one-fifth for drivers aged 30 to 59, according to IIHS.  In 2014, only 51% of passenger vehicle drivers who were speeding and involved in fatal crashes were restrained at the time of the crash, compared to 78% of non-speeding drivers.  Of all motorcycle riders involved in fatal crashes in 2015, one-third were speeding. A common policy solution to reduce crashes involving excessive speed is automated enforcement, specifically speed cameras. These have been shown to reduce both speed and crashes, according to IIHS. A study comparing similar roads in Maryland and Virginia found that a speed camera program resulted in a 19% reduction in the likelihood that a crash involved a fatal or incapacitating injury. Currently, speed cameras are in use within almost 150 localities throughout the U.S., including in AL, AZ, CO, DC, IL, IA, LA, MD, MO, NM, NY, OH, OR, TN and WA. Seven states have explicitly banned the use of speed cameras (ME, MS, NH, NJ, TX, WV and WI). While Advocates does not rate states on their use of speed cameras, we encourage states to authorize localities to use automated enforcement to combat speeding and we urge their use. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 13 OCCUPANT PROTECTION Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Laws (Front) Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Laws (Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Laws WA MT ME ND VT OR ID MN SD NH WI NY WY MI RI CT IA CA PA NE NV IL UT CO KS OH IN WV MO MA VA NJ MD DE DC (green) KY AR TX AK NC TN OK NM AZ SC MS AL GA LA FL HI State has all 3 laws, a primary enforcement seat belt law (front), primary enforcement seat belt law (rear) and an all-rider motorcycle helmet law. (4 states and DC) State has 2 of the 3 laws. (23 states) State has 1 or none of the 3 laws. (23 states) Note: No credit is given for laws that are subject to secondary enforcement. Please refer to page 11 for law definitions. See “States at a Glance”, beginning on page 40 to determine which laws the yellow and red states lack. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 14 PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT SEAT BELT LAWS Seat belt use, most often achieved by effective safety belt laws, is a proven lifesaver. In 2015, NHTSA data shows that nationwide seat belts saved an estimated 13,941 lives of passengers age five and older in all seating positions. An additional 2,804 lives (age five and older) could have been saved if all passenger vehicle occupants had worn seat belts. 22,441 occupants of passenger vehicles were killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2015, an increase of nearly 5% over 2014. Of the passenger vehicle occupant fatalities for which restraint use was known, 48% were not wearing seat belts. States with primary enforcement laws have higher seat belt use rates. In 2016, states with primary enforcement seat belt laws for front seat passengers had a 92% belt use rate, while states with secondary enforcement laws had an 83% belt use rate, according to NHTSA data. A study conducted by IIHS found that when states strengthen their laws from secondary to primary enforcement, driver death rates decline by an estimated 7%. The chart below indicates the number of lives saved by seat belt use in 2015, along with the additional number of lives that could have been saved if the seat belt use rate in the state had been 100%. Needless deaths and injuries that result from non-use of seat belts cost society approximately $10 billion annually in medical care, lost productivity and other injury-related costs, according to NHTSA. Unfortunately, as the chart below indicates, 16 states (in red) have failed to upgrade either their front or rear seat belt laws to primary enforcement. Lives Saved in 2015 vs. Lives that Could Have Been Saved by 100% Seat Belt Use—By State, Age 5 and older (NHTSA, 2016) States in red have laws that are subject only to secondary enforcement; NH has no law. AL Lives Saved Could have been saved Lives Saved Could have been saved Lives Saved 319 50 IL 420 39 MT Could have been saved Lives Saved Could have been saved 64 39 RI 10 3 AK 28 6 IN 391 57 NE 75 38 SC 361 56 AZ 240 68 IA 167 21 NV 132 18 SD 40 24 AR 212 90 KS 143 52 NH 30 21 TN 377 109 CA 1,342 67 KY 287 79 NJ 202 32 TX 1,712 269 CO 199 60 LA 248 73 NM 99 15 UT 107 27 CT 92 24 ME 56 16 NY 443 55 VT 19 5 DE 35 7 MD 253 27 NC 590 109 VA 287 113 DC 5 0 MA 72 41 ND 48 22 WA 269 23 FL 962 187 MI 441 53 OH 394 126 WV 100 23 GA 657 37 MN 227 22 OK 253 75 WI 231 61 HI 18 3 MS 296 121 OR 219 16 WY 34 21 ID 78 33 MO 286 129 PA 369 137 Total 13,941 2,804 This death toll has significant emotional and economic impacts on American families, but there are solutions at hand to address this public health epidemic—effective primary enforcement safety belt laws covering passengers in all seating positions. All states except New Hampshire have a seat belt law, but only 34 states and DC allow primary enforcement of their front seat belt laws. Among the states that have primary enforcement seat belt laws, only 18 and DC cover occupants in all seating positions (front and rear). January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 15 PRIMARY ENFORCEMENT SEAT BELT LAWS            Lap-shoulder belts, when used, reduce the risk of fatal injury to front seat car occupants by 45% and the risk of moderate-to-critical injuries by 50%. For light truck occupants, seat belts reduce the risk of fatal injury by 60% and moderate-to-critical injury by 65%. In fatal crashes in 2015, 80% of passenger vehicle occupants who were fully ejected from the vehicle were killed, according to NHTSA data. Further, only 1% of the occupants reported to have been using restraints were fully ejected, compared with 30% of the unrestrained occupants. From 1975 to 2010, over 360,000 lives could have been saved and 5.8 million injuries could have been prevented if all occupants had worn seat belts, according to a NHTSA report. Over this same time period, nearly $1.1 trillion in economic costs have been needlessly incurred due to seat belt non-use. In 2015, the proportion of unrestrained passenger vehicle occupants killed who were seated in the front seat was 47%, compared to 56% of unrestrained passenger vehicle occupants killed who were seated in the rear seat, according to NHTSA. Rear seat passengers are three times more likely to die in a crash if they are unbelted. The majority of passengers in the rear seats of vehicles are teens and children, and studies have shown that seat belt usage by teens is the lowest of any segment of society. If every state with a secondary seat belt law upgraded to primary enforcement, about 1,000 lives and $4 billion in crash costs could be saved every year, as reported by NHTSA. NHTSA reports that the average in-patient costs for crash victims who don’t use seat belts are 55% higher than for those who use them. Seat belt use rates increase from 10 to 15 percentage points when primary laws are passed, as experienced in a number of states. Opponents often assert that highway safety laws violate personal choice and individual rights, overlooking the impact on society. In response, the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts stated in a decision, affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court, that “from the moment of injury, society picks the person up off the highway; delivers him to a municipal hospital and municipal doctors; provides him with unemployment compensation if, after recovery, he cannot replace his lost job; and, if the injury causes disability, may assume the responsibility for his and his family’s continued subsistence.” According to a NHTSA study of the relationship between primary enforcement belt laws and minority ticketing, the share of citations for Hispanics and African Americans changed very little after states adopted primary enforcement belt laws. In fact, there were significant gains in seat belt use among all ethnic groups, none of which were proportionately greater in any minority group. Note: Unless otherwise indicated, the occupant protection data specifically refers to front seat occupants. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 16 ALL-RIDER MOTORCYCLE HELMET LAWS According to NHTSA, motorcycles are the most hazardous form of motor vehicle transportation. 4,976 motorcyclists were killed in 2015, an increase of more than 8% from the previous year. Additionally, 88,000 motorcyclists were injured on our nation's roads in 2015. The number of motorcycle crash fatalities has more than doubled since a low of 2,116 in 1997. In 2015, where helmet use was known, 40% of all motorcyclists killed were not wearing a helmet. However, more than half (58%) of the fatally injured motorcycle riders were not wearing a helmet in states without all-rider helmet laws, compared to only 8% of fatally injured riders in states with an all-rider helmet law. NHTSA estimates that helmets saved the lives of 1,772 motorcyclists in 2015 and that 740 more lives in all states could have been saved if all motorcyclists had worn helmets. All-rider helmet laws increase motorcycle helmet use, decrease deaths and injuries, and save taxpayer dollars. States Without All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Laws & Lives that Could Have Been Saved in 2015 by 100 Percent Helmet Use (NHTSA, 2016) AK 2 ID 8 MN 16 RI 1 AZ 29 IL 40 MT 7 SC 48 AR 18 IN 33 NH 6 SD 8 CO 25 IA 12 NM 7 TX 88 CT 12 KS 11 ND 1 UT 7 DE 2 KY 23 OH 42 WI 24 FL 108 ME 9 OK 23 WY 6 HI 6 23 PA 33 Total 678 MI When crashes occur, motorcyclists need adequate head protection to prevent one of the leading causes of crash death and disability in America - head injuries. Studies have determined that helmets reduce head injuries without increased occurrence of spinal injuries in motorcycle crashes. NHTSA data shows that helmets reduce the chance of fatal injury by 37% for motorcycle operators and 41% for passengers. According to a 2012 GAO report, “laws requiring all motorcyclists to wear helmets are the only strategy proved to be effective in reducing motorcyclist fatalities.” Today, only 19 states and DC require all motorcycle riders to use a helmet. Twenty-eight states have laws that cover only some riders (i.e., up to age 18 or 21). These age-specific laws are nearly impossible for police officers to enforce and result in much lower rates of helmet use. Three states (IL, IA and NH) have no motorcycle helmet use law. In 2016, there were attempts in 13 states to repeal existing all-rider helmet laws, all of which were unsuccessful. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 17 ALL-RIDER MOTORCYCLE HELMET LAWS           According to NHTSA, in 2015, there were 11 times as many unhelmeted fatalities (1,777) in states without a universal helmet law compared to the number of fatalities (161) in states with a universal helmet law. These states were nearly equivalent with respect to total resident populations. In 2010, the economic cost of motorcycle crashes was $12.9 billion and the total amount of societal harm was $66 billion, according to NHTSA. Additionally, helmets are currently saving $2.7 billion in economic costs and preventing $17 billion in societal harm annually. Per vehicle mile traveled, motorcyclists fatalities occurred almost 27 times more frequently than passenger car occupant fatalities in 2014. In 2014, motorcyclists represented 14% of the total traffic fatalities, yet accounted for only 3% of all registered vehicles in the United States. Economic benefits of motorcycle helmet use laws are substantial. In states that have an all-rider helmet use law, cost savings to society were $725 per registered motorcycle, compared to savings of just $198 per registered motorcycle in states without a mandatory helmet use law, according to the CDC. A poll conducted by Lou Harris showed that by an overwhelming majority (80%), Americans favor state laws requiring all motorcyclists to wear helmets. Motorcycle helmets reduce the risk of head injury by 69% and reduce the risk of death by 42%. A recent study in the American Journal of Surgery reported that after Michigan repealed its all-rider helmet law in 2012, the percentage of non-helmeted crash scene fatalities quadrupled. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, in states with only youth-specific helmet laws, helmet use has decreased and youth mortality has increased. Serious traumatic brain injury among young riders was 38% higher in states with only age-specific laws compared to states with all-rider helmet laws. There is no scientific evidence that motorcycle rider training reduces crash risk and is an adequate substitute for an all-rider helmet law. In fact, motorcycle fatalities continued to increase even after a motorcycle education and training grant program included in federal legislation took effect in 2006. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 18 OCCUPANT PROTECTION LAWS RATING CHART Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Laws (Front) Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Laws (Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Laws Number of new occupant protection laws since January 2016: None. Rating All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front) Rating All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front) STATUS OF STATE LAWS 16 states do not have primary enforcement seat belt laws for passengers, regardless of seating position. No state adopted an all-rider motorcycle helmet law in 2016. AL  AK    AZ AR  CA    CO CT  DE   DC   FL  GA  HI     ID  MT   NE    NV    NH  NJ   NM   NY     NC     ND   OH   OK   OR   PA                   RI IN    SC IA   SD KS   TN  KY    TX    LA    UT    ME    VT   MD    VA     WA     WV     WI    WY   Total MA MI  MN  MS  MO January 2017  10 states have none of the three optimal laws. (AZ, CO, ID, MT, NH, ND, OH, PA, SD and WY). 13 states have only one of the three laws. (AR, CT, FL, IA, KS, MA, MI, MO, NE, NV, OK, VT and VA). 4 states and DC have all three laws (CA, LA, OR and WA).  IL  There were unsuccessful attempts to repeal all-rider motorcycle helmet laws in 13 states.        = Optimal law  = Good (3 optimal laws)  = Caution (2 optimal laws)  = Danger (1 or 0 optimal laws) (No credit is given for laws that are secondary enforcement)  34+ DC 18+ DC 19+ DC Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 19 CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY Booster Seat Laws WA MT ME ND VT OR ID MN SD NH WI NY WY MI RI CT IA NV PA NE IL UT CA MA CO KS OH IN WV MO VA NJ MD DE DC (red) KY AR TX AK NC TN OK NM AZ SC MS AL GA LA FL HI State has an optimal booster seat law. (11 states) State does not have an optimal booster seat law, or the law is subject to secondary enforcement. (39 states and DC) Note: No credit is given for laws that are subject to secondary enforcement. Please refer to page 11 for law definition. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 20 CHILD PASSENGER SAFETY Motor vehicle crashes are a leading cause of death for American children age five to 14. An average of three children under age 14 were killed and nearly 500 were injured every day in motor vehicle crashes in the U.S. in 2015 -- amounting to a total of 1,132 fatalities and 178,000 others injured. The best way to protect children from risks posed by air bags is to place them in the back seat, restrained by a child safety seat, booster seat or safety belt, as appropriate. When children are properly restrained in a child safety seat, booster seat or safety belt, as appropriate for their age and size, their chance of being killed or seriously injured in a car crash is greatly reduced. According to NHTSA, when used properly, child safety seats reduce fatal injury by 71% for infants and 54% for toddlers in passenger cars. Across all age groups, injury risk is lowest (less than 2%) when children are placed in an age-appropriate restraint in the rear seat. More than 260 lives were saved in 2015 by restraining children four and younger in passenger vehicles. In this report, Advocates rates states only on enactment of an optimal booster seat law. However, it is recommended that states have a three component child passenger safety law that, in addition to the booster seat law, includes the following laws to adequately protect younger children:   Rear Facing Through Age Two: Requires that infants and toddlers remain in rear facing child restraint safety seats in the rear seat, certified by the manufacturer to meet U.S. DOT safety standards, until age two at minimum. To date, 4 states (CA, NJ, OK, PA) have enacted laws. Forward Facing Harness and Tether Seat: After the child reaches the maximum weight and height limit for their rear facing safety seat and is age two or older, they may be turned forward facing in a harness-equipped child restraint. Use of the top tether and LATCH system, when available, is preferred. Children should remain in a harness-equipped restraint, certified by the manufacturer to meet U.S. DOT safety standards, until they meet the height and weight limit of the child restraint. To date, only NJ has enacted this law. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 21 BOOSTER SEAT LAWS Booster seats are intended to provide a platform that lifts the child up off the vehicle seat in order to improve the fit of the child in a three-point adult safety belt. The seat should also position the lap belt portion of the adult safety belt across the child's hips or pelvic area. An improper fit of an adult safety belt can cause the lap belt to ride up over the stomach and the shoulder belt to cut across the neck, potentially exposing the child to serious abdominal and neck injury. Additionally, if the shoulder strap portion of the lap/shoulder belt is uncomfortable, children will likely place it behind their backs, defeating the safety benefits of the system.    Using a booster seat with a seat belt instead of a seat belt alone reduces a child's risk of injury in a crash by 59%, according to Partners for Child Passenger Safety, a project of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and State Farm Insurance. A Lou Harris public opinion poll found that 84% of Americans support all states having booster seat laws protecting children age four through seven. According to IIHS, expanded child restraint laws covering children through age seven were associated with:  5% reduction in the rate of children with injuries of any severity;  17% reduction in the rate of children with fatal and incapacitating injuries;  Children being three times as likely to be in appropriate restraints;  6% increase in the number of booster-seat aged children seated in the rear of the vehicle where children are better protected. Advocates’ optimal booster seat law requires that children who have outgrown the height and weight limit of a forward facing safety seat be placed in a booster seat. The booster seat should be certified by the manufacturer to meet U.S. DOT safety standards, and should be used until the child can properly use the vehicle’s seat belt when the child reaches 57 inches in height and age eight. To date, 48 states and DC have enacted primary enforcement booster seat laws. However, only 11 states have laws that provide protection for children until at least age eight and 57 inches tall. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 22 BOOSTER SEAT LAWS RATING CHART Number of new booster seat laws since January 2016: None. Rating Booster Seat Law Rating Booster Seat Law AL  MT  AK  NE  AZ  NV  AR  NH  CA  NJ CO  NM  CT  NY  DE  NC  DC  ND  FL  OH     OK HI  OR  ID  PA  IL  RI IN  SC  IA  SD  KS  TN  KY  TX   LA  UT   ME  VT   GA    11 states have an optimal booster seat law. 38 states (AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, TN, VT, VA, WI and WY) and DC have a booster seat law that does not cover children until they reach 57 inches tall and at least age 8. SD has yet to adopt any booster seat law.  MD   VA MA   WA   MI   WV   MN   WI  MS  WY  MO  Total January 2017 STATUS OF STATE LAWS  = Optimal law  = Good  = Danger (No credit is given for laws that are secondary enforcement) 11 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 23 TEEN DRIVING: GRADUATED DRIVER LICENSING (GDL) PROGRAMS Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit 6-Month Holding Period Supervised Driving Requirement Nighttime Driving Restriction Passenger Restriction Cell Phone Restriction Age 18 for Unrestricted License WA MT ME ND VT OR ID MN SD NH WI NY WY MI RI CT IA PA NE NV IL UT CA MA CO KS OH IN WV MO VA NJ MD DE DC (yellow) KY AR TX AK NC TN OK NM AZ SC MS AL GA LA FL HI State has at least 5 of 7 optimal GDL provisions. (6 states) State has 2 to 4 of the 7 optimal GDL provisions. (36 states and DC) State has less than 2 of the 7 optimal GDL provisions. (8 states) Note: No credit is given for laws that are subject to secondary enforcement. Please refer to pages 11-12 for law definitions. See “States at a Glance”, beginning on page 40, to determine which laws states lack. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 24 TEEN DRIVING LAWS Motor Vehicle Crashes are the Number One Killer of American Teenagers Teen drivers are far more likely than other drivers to be involved in fatal crashes because they lack driving experience and tend to take greater risks. According to NHTSA, 4,702 people were killed in crashes involving young drivers (age 15 - 20) in 2015. Of that number, 1,886 were young drivers and 975 were passengers of young drivers. The remaining 1,841 victims were pedestrians, pedalcyclists, and the occupants of the other vehicles involved in crashes with young drivers. According to NHTSA, the estimated annual economic cost of police-reported crashes involving young drivers is $40.8 billion. GDL programs, which introduce teens to the driving experience gradually by phasing in full driving privileges over time and in lower risk settings, have been effective in reducing teen crash deaths. In this report, each of the seven optimal GDL provisions is counted separately in rating the state effort. No state has all of the optimal GDL provisions recommended in this report. The map below shows the number of fatalities caused by motor vehicle crashes involving drivers age 15 to 20 from 2006 to 2015. WA 752 92 MT OR 467 198 ID 359 IL CO KS 648 700 OK 1049 NM AZ 1208 491 1554 MO 1450 PA 2013 OH IN 1685 1261 1059 WV 443 KY 5007 AR MD 701 DE 170 DC 19 SC 1215 MS LA VA 1146 NH 157 MA 492 RI 86 CT 344 NJ 775 NC 1987 1502 TN 817 TX AK 102 MI 605 NE UT NY 1534 1540 IA 450 4414 944 190 NV 411 WI 663 187 401 VT MN SD WY CA ME 223 ND 308 1051 AL 1477 GA 1875 1175 FL 3823 HI 147 January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 25 TEEN DRIVING LAWS             In states that have adopted GDL systems, studies have found overall crash reductions among teen drivers of about 10 to 30%. The fatal crash rate per mile driven is nearly twice as high for 16- to 17-year-olds as it is for 18to 19-year-olds. Teenage motor vehicle crash deaths in 2013 occurred most frequently during the periods of 3 p.m. to 6 p.m., 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., and 9 p.m. to midnight (17% each). The midnight to 3 a.m. is a close fourth accounting for 15% of teenage motor vehicle crash deaths. States with nighttime driving restrictions show crash reductions of up to 60% during restricted hours. Fatal crash rates are 21% lower for 15- to 17-year-old drivers when prohibited from having any teenage passengers in their vehicles, compared to when two or more passengers were permitted. For 16- and 17-year-old drivers, research has identified a 15% reduction in fatal crash rates was associated with a limit of no more than one teen passenger for 6-months or longer, when compared to no limit on the number of passengers. Delaying the minimum age for obtaining a learner’s permit was associated with lower fatal crash rates for 15- to 17-year-olds combined; a 1-year delay (e.g., from age 15 to 16) reduced the fatal crash rate by 13%. Research has found that a minimum holding period of at least five months reduces fatal crash rates. Extending the holding period to nine months to a year results in a 21% reduction in fatal crash rates. More than 80% of teens said they use their smartphones while driving, according to a 2016 report by State Farm. A 2010 survey conducted by IIHS shows that parents favor GDL laws that are as strict or even stricter than currently exist in any state. More than half think the minimum licensing age should be 17 or older. Almost three-quarters (74%) of teens approve of a single, comprehensive law that incorporates the key elements of GDL programs, according to a 2010 survey by the Allstate Foundation. Studies have shown that GDL programs have contributed to a decline in teen driver crashes over the past decade (2005 – 2014). However, older teen novice drivers are missing out on, yet still very much need, the safety benefits of GDL programs. A recent study reported that the improvements are not as strong for 18 – 20 year olds who have aged out of GDL. Research from Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Center for Injury Research and Prevention (CIRP) and the American Automobile Association (AAA) shows that, “about one-third of all drivers are not licensed by age 18, and by age 21, about 20% of all young adults still are not licensed.” GDL programs that extend beyond the mid-teen years cover a broader population and may experience additional safety benefits. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 26 TEEN DRIVING LAWS RATING CHART Number of new teen driving laws since January 2016: None.                          Total                                                       8+ DC 46+ DC 26 11 17+ DC 31 Rating     Age 18 Unrestricted License              Cell Phone Restriction     Passenger Restriction     Nighttime Restriction      Supervised Driving Requirement    MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI WY 6-Month Holding Period                            Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit  Rating  Age 18 Unrestricted License  Cell Phone Restriction                    Passenger Restriction    Nighttime Restriction       Supervised Driving Requirement MO 6-Month Holding Period Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE DC FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS                          2  = Optimal law  = Good (At least 5 optimal provisions)  = Caution (Between 2 and 4 optimal provisions)  = Danger (Less than 2 optimal provisions) (No credit is given for laws that are secondary enforcement) January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 27 IMPAIRED DRIVING Ignition Interlock Device Laws Child Endangerment Laws Open Container Laws WA MT ME ND VT OR ID MN SD NH WI NY WY MI RI CT IA NV CA PA NE UT MA IL CO KS OH IN WV MO VA NJ MD DE DC (green) KY AZ AR TX AK NC TN OK NM SC MS AL GA LA FL HI State has all 3 optimal impaired driving laws. (17 states and DC) State has optimal IID law in addition to one of either child endangerment or open container laws. (11 states) State has 1 or 0 optimal impaired driving laws. Further, any state without an optimal IID law is red, regardless of the number of other laws. (22 states) Note: No credit is given for laws that are subject to secondary enforcement. Please refer to page 12 for law definitions. See “States at a Glance”, beginning on page 40, to determine which laws states lack. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 28 IMPAIRED DRIVING LAWS Impaired driving remains a substantial and serious safety threat, accounting for nearly a third of all traffic deaths in the U.S. More than 10,000 people died in crashes involving drunk drivers in 2015. According to NHTSA data from 2010, alcohol-involved crashes (where the highest BAC was over .08%) resulted in $44 billion in economic costs and $201 billion in comprehensive costs to society. Clearly, more still needs to be done to reduce the number of impaired drivers on our roads.     An average of one alcohol-impaired driving fatality occurred every 51 minutes in 2015. This means that each day in America, 28 people are killed in drunk driving crashes on average. A common misconception is that most people who are convicted of their first drunk driving offense are social drinkers who made one mistake. However, studies show that the average first offender will have driven drunk 87 times before getting arrested for the first time. According to the CDC, adult drivers drank too much and got behind the wheel approximately 121 million times in 2012, which equates to more than 300,000 incidents of drinking and driving each day. NHTSA reports that drivers with a BAC of .08% or higher involved in fatal crashes were seven times more likely to have a prior conviction for driving while intoxicated (DWI) than were drivers with no alcohol. Impaired driving laws target a range of behavioral issues associated with alcohol consumption and operation of a motor vehicle on public roads. Federal leadership in critical areas such as impaired driving has resulted in the rapid adoption of lifesaving laws in states across the country. As a result of federal laws enacted with strong sanctions, all 50 states and DC have adopted .08% BAC laws, a national minimum drinking age of 21, and zero tolerance BAC laws for youth. A developing issue in the states is the legalization of marijuana in some form. To date, eight states and DC have adopted laws legalizing marijuana for recreational use. A variety of marijuana-impaired driving laws have now been passed in 18 states. Yet, definitive research linking impairment to specific blood levels of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the pharmacologically active ingredient in marijuana, remains inconclusive. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 29 IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE LAWS A breath alcohol ignition interlock device (IID) is a mechanism similar to a breathalyzer which is linked to a vehicle’s ignition system. Its purpose is to deter an individual who has a drunk driving conviction from driving the vehicle with a BAC that exceeds a specified level set by the state IID law. Before the vehicle can be started, the driver must breathe into the device, and if the analyzed result is over the specified legal BAC limit, commonly .02% or .04%, the vehicle will not start. In addition, at random times after the engine has been started, the IID will require another breath sample. This prevents cheating where another person breathes into the device to bypass the system in order to enable an intoxicated person to get behind the wheel and drive. If the breath sample is not provided, or the sample exceeds the ignition interlock's preset BAC, the device will log the event, warn the driver and then set off an alarm (e.g., lights flashing, horn honking, etc.) until the ignition is turned off.       Nearly eight in ten Americans support requiring ignition interlocks for all convicted driving under the influence (DUI ) offenders, even if it is their first conviction, according to AAA. According to Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), nationally, current IID laws have stopped more than 1.77 million attempts to drive drunk. A recent study from the University of Pennsylvania found that IIDs have reduced alcohol-involved crash deaths by 15%, and notes that the findings likely underestimate the effect of all-offender IID laws. 82% of offenders themselves believe the IID was effective in preventing them from driving after drinking. According to the CDC, when IIDs are installed, they are associated with a reduction in arrest rates for impaired driving of approximately 70%. NHTSA research shows that IIDs reduce recidivism among both first-time and repeat DWI offenders, with reductions in subsequent DWI arrests ranging from 50% to 90% while the interlock is installed on the vehicle. Credit is given only if a state’s IID law applies to all offenders. Currently, IIDs are mandatory for all offenders, including first time offenders, in 28 states and DC. Maryland, Rhode Island, Vermont and DC passed optimal IID laws in 2016. These state laws offer the most effective means for denying drunk drivers the opportunity to get behind the wheel after having been convicted of a drunk driving offense. As such, if a state does not have an optimal IID law, it receives a red rating for impaired driving. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 30 CHILD ENDANGERMENT LAWS In 2015, 181 children age 14 and younger were killed in crashes involving an alcohol-impaired driver. A national telephone survey sponsored by NHTSA in 1999 estimated that 46 million to 102 million drunk driving trips are made each year with children under the age of 15 in the vehicle. Child endangerment laws either create a separate offense or enhance existing DWI and DUI penalties for people who drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs with a minor child in the vehicle. Drivers who engage in this conduct create a hazardous situation for themselves and for others on the road. They also put a child, who rarely has a choice as to who is driving, at risk of serious danger. Child endangerment laws are enacted to encourage people to consider the consequences for younger passengers before they drive while impaired with a child in their vehicle. When properly defined and enforced, child endangerment laws act as a strong deterrent to protect children. Currently, 47 states and DC have enacted child endangerment laws that create a separate offense or increase penalties for people who drive while impaired with children in their vehicle. In 2016, Connecticut passed a child endangerment law. OPEN CONTAINER LAWS THAT MEET FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS Studies have shown that open container laws are effective at deterring excessive drinking by drivers getting behind the wheel. States have also shown a significant decrease in hit-and-run crashes after adopting open container laws. Federal legislation enacted in 1998 established a program to encourage states to adopt laws that ban the presence of open containers of any kind of alcoholic beverage in the entire passenger area of motor vehicles. To comply with the provisions in the law, a state open container law must:  Prohibit both possession of any open alcoholic beverage container and consumption of any alcoholic beverage in a motor vehicle;  Cover the entire passenger area of any motor vehicle, including unlocked glove compartments and accessible storage areas;  Apply to all alcoholic beverages including beer, wine, and spirits;  Apply to all vehicle occupants except for passengers of buses, taxi cabs, limousines or persons in the living quarters of motor homes;  Apply to vehicles on the shoulder of public highways; and,  Require primary enforcement of the law. In an effort to encourage states to comply with the federal law, those states that are non-compliant have 2.5% of certain federal highway construction funds diverted to highway safety programs that fund alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures and law enforcement activities. This federal requirement is known as “redirection,” and provides that states do not lose any funding, but some federal funds are diverted to other designated safety programs. Redirection has been largely ineffective as an incentive for encouraging lagging states to enact strong open container laws. Currently, 40 states and DC are in compliance. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 31 IMPAIRED DRIVING LAWS RATING CHART Number of new impaired driving laws since January 2016: Four all-offender ignition interlock laws (DC, MD, RI, VT); One child endangerment (CT); and, No open container. AZ   AR   CA MT  NE  NV  NH       NJ   NM   Rating   Open Container   Child Endangerment AK Ignition Interlocks  Rating Child Endangerment  Open Container Ignition Interlocks AL                     CO   CT    NY DE    NC    DC     ND    FL    OH    GA    OK       OR       PA       RI       SC       SD        HI  ID IL  IN IA KS  KY     TX      UT       LA   ME     VT  MD     VA   MA    WA     MI    WV     MN    WI     MS   WY MO    Total January 2017 28+ DC 47+ DC 33 states are missing one or more critical impaired driving law. 28 states and DC have optimal IID laws; 22 states do not.  = Optimal law  = Good (3 optimal laws)  = Caution (2 optimal laws)  = Danger (1 or 0 optimal laws; no IID) (No credit is given for laws that are secondary enforcement)  TN   STATUS OF STATE LAWS   40+ DC Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 32 DISTRACTED DRIVING All- Driver Text Messaging Restrictions WA MT ME ND VT OR ID MN SD NH WI NY WY MI RI CT IA PA NE NV IL UT CA MA CO KS OH IN WV MO NJ MD DE DC (green) VA KY OK NM AZ TX AK NC TN AR SC MS AL GA LA FL HI State has an optimal all-driver text messaging restriction. (41 states and DC) State does not have this law, or the restriction is secondary enforcement. (9 states) Note: No credit is given for laws that are subject to secondary enforcement. Please refer to page 12 for law definition. See “States at a Glance”, beginning on page 40, to determine which states are restricted to secondary enforcement. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 33 ALL-DRIVER TEXT MESSAGING RESTRICTIONS According to NHTSA, in 2015 there were 3,477 people killed and 391,000 injured in crashes involving a distracted driver. Additionally, crashes in which at least one driver was identified as being distracted imposed an economic cost of $40 billion in 2010. However, issues with underreporting crashes involving cell phones remain because of gaps in police crash report coding, database limitations, and other challenges. It is clear from an increasing body of research, studies and data that the use of electronic devices for telecommunications (such as mobile phones and text messaging), telematics and entertainment can easily distract drivers from the driving task.  Research has shown that because of the degree of cognitive distraction these devices cause, the behavior of drivers using mobile phones (whether hand-held or hands-free) is equivalent to the behavior of drivers at the threshold of the legal limit for alcohol (0.08% BAC).  Crash risk increases dramatically – as much as four times higher – when a driver is using a mobile phone, with no significant safety difference between hand-held and hands-free phones observed in many studies.  According to NHTSA data, almost 10% of fatal crashes and 15% of injury crashes in 2015 were reported as distraction-affected crashes; however, as noted above, there are problems with underreporting due to police crash report coding and other challenges.  The AAA Foundation reported in 2013 that more than two out of three drivers indicated that they had talked on a cell phone while driving within the past 30 days. Additionally, more than one of three drivers admitted to reading an email or text message while driving, and one of four drivers admitted to typing or sending an email or text message.  In 2015, The Wireless Association reported that there were more than 1.89 trillion text messages sent or received in the U.S.  According to a survey by Nationwide Insurance, four out of ten respondents claimed to have been hit or nearly hit as a result of a distracted driver.  Ten percent of all drivers 15 to 19 years old involved in a fatal crash were reported as distracted at the time of the crash, according to NHTSA. This age group has the largest proportion of drivers who were distracted.  Sending or receiving a text message causes the driver’s eyes to be off the road for an average of 4.6 seconds. When driving 55 miles per hour, this is the equivalent of driving blind the entire length of a football field.  At a typical daylight moment in 2015, almost 542,000 vehicles are being driven by people using hand-held cell phones in 2015.  According to NHTSA, the percentage of drivers visibly manipulating hand-held devices while driving increased by 267% between 2009 and 2015. In order to get people to pay attention while operating a vehicle and to adopt safer behaviors, education must be combined with strong laws and appropriate enforcement. This is the tried and true method to change behavior and improve safety. Advocates has given credit to states that have primary enforcement of an all-driver text messaging restriction. To date, 41 states and DC ban text messaging for all drivers. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 34 ALL-DRIVER TEXT MESSAGING RESTRICTIONS RATING CHART Number of new texting laws since January 2016: None Rating All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction Rating All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction AL   MT  AK   NE   NV   AR   NH   CA   NJ   CO   NM   CT   NY   DE   NC   DC   ND    OH AZ FL   OK   HI   OR   ID   PA   IL   RI   IN   SC    SD  KS   TN KY   TX LA   UT   ME   VT   MD   VA   MA   WA   MI   WV   MN   WI   MS   WY   Total 41+ DC MO January 2017  41 states and DC have an optimal alldriver text messaging restriction. 4 states have yet to adopt an all-driver text messaging restriction (AZ, MO, MT and TX), and 5 states have laws that are only subject to secondary enforcement (FL, IA, NE, OH and SD).  GA IA STATUS OF STATE LAWS    = Optimal law  = Good  = Danger (No credit is given for laws that are secondary enforcement)  Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 35 OVERALL STATE RATINGS BASED ON TOTAL NUMBER OF LAWS On the following pages, Advocates has given an overall rating to the states based on the number of laws in each state that are recommended in this report. Credit is given only when the law meets Advocates’ optimal law recommendations (see pages 11-12 for law definitions). No credit is given for laws that are subject to secondary enforcement or have a driver education exemption. The overall rating takes into consideration whether a state has certain occupant protection laws. No state without a primary enforcement seat belt law covering passengers in all seating positions (front and rear) or that has repealed an existing all-rider motorcycle helmet law within the previous 10 years, is eligible for a green overall rating, no matter how many other laws it may have. This weighting is to emphasize the significance of comprehensive primary enforcement seat belt laws and all-rider motorcycle helmet laws in saving lives and reducing injuries. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 36 OVERALL STATE RATINGS BASED ON TOTAL NUMBER OF LAWS WA MT ME ND VT OR ID MN SD NH WI NY WY MI RI CT IA PA NE NV IL UT CA MA CO KS IN OH WV MO VA NJ MD DE DC (green) KY AR SC MS TX AK NC TN OK NM AZ AL GA LA FL HI RATINGS CHART Color (5 states and DC) (28 states) Number of Laws Definition 11 to 15, with both primary State is significantly advanced toward enforcement seat belt laws, or 9 or adopting all of Advocates’ more, with both (front and rear) recommended optimal laws primary enforcement laws and all-rider helmet law 6 to 10, with both primary enforcement seat belt laws, or 7 and above, without both (front and rear) primary enforcement seat belt laws State needs improvement because of gaps in Advocates’ recommended optimal laws Fewer than 7, without both (front and rear) primary enforcement seat belt laws State falls dangerously behind in adoption of Advocates’ recommended optimal laws (17 states) January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 37 OVERALL RATING BASED ON NUMBER OF SAFETY LAWS Teen Driving Laws  California     Colorado Connecticut  Delaware   District of Columbia   Florida  Georgia  Hawaii                  Idaho       7    8       7   4  7      7       11     10           8    9    6    9     9       9         9  9       7          Overall Safety Rating 2017  Arizona Arkansas   Total Number of Laws 2017   All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction   Open Container Law  Child Endangerment Law  Ignition Interlocks for All Offenders Age 18 Unrestricted License Cell Phone Restriction Passenger Restriction Nighttime Restriction Supervised Driving Requirement  6 Mo. Holding Period Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit  Booster Seat Law Alaska All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law  Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front) Alabama Impaired Driving    Illinois     Indiana     Iowa   Kansas    Kentucky      Louisiana        Maine          10 Maryland         10     8     10     8  6   4  4  Massachusetts Michigan  Minnesota  Mississippi  Missouri Montana                       5             5   = Optimal law January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 38       OVERALL RATING BASED ON NUMBER OF SAFETY LAWS Teen Driving Laws   North Carolina            Rhode Island   South Carolina            5     11      10    8  3    11   9    11     10     6        8    9    6    12    7           Tennessee  Texas    Utah       Vermont  Virginia   5 6   2               9      6  Washington  West Virginia  Wisconsin          34+ DC 18+ DC 19+ DC 11 8+ DC 46+ DC 26 16 32 31 39+ DC 42 4 24+ DC     11 17+ DC 31 2 28+ DC 47+ DC 40+ DC 41+ DC 39+ DC 33 19+ DC 48+ DC 22 3 10 9  9 8   Wyoming Total Number Missing Optimal Law       South Dakota Total Number with Optimal Law    6         Oregon     Ohio Pennsylvania        6   North Dakota Oklahoma     = Optimal law January 2017 Overall Safety Rating 2017 New York     Total Number of Laws 2017   All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction New Mexico  Open Container Law  Child Endangerment Law                          New Hampshire New Jersey Ignition Interlocks for All Offenders  Age 18 Unrestricted License  Cell Phone Restriction Nevada Passenger Restriction  Nighttime Restriction  Supervised Driving Requirement 6 Mo. Holding Period Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit Booster Seat Law All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front) Nebraska Impaired Driving Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 39 STATES AT A GLANCE Each state and DC are graphically represented in alphabetical order with the following information: • The number of people killed in motor vehicle crashes in each state for the year 2015, as reported by NHTSA. • The total number of fatalities over the past 10 years, as reported by NHTSA. • The annual economic cost of motor vehicle crashes to the state, as reported in The Economic and Societal Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2010 (NHTSA). (See chart on page 7) • The state’s background color represents its overall rating (Green, Yellow or Red) based on the chart on pages 38 and 39 of this report. • A list of the 15 optimal lifesaving laws that the state has not enacted, based on Advocates’ definitions on pages 11 and 12 as discussed in this report. States are credited with having laws only if their laws meet Advocates’ optimal criteria (definitions on pages 11 and 12).  Only 5 states and DC (DE, LA, OR, RI and WA) received a Green rating, showing significant advancement toward adopting all of Advocates’ recommended optimal laws.  28 states (AL, AK, AR, CA, CO, CT, GA, HI, IL, IN, KS, KY, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OK, SC, TN, TX, UT, WV and WI) received a Yellow rating, indicating that improvement is needed because of gaps in Advocates’ recommended optimal laws.  17 states (AZ, FL, ID, IA, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, ND, OH, PA, SD, VT, VA and WY) received a Red rating, indicating these states fall dangerously behind in adoption of Advocates’ recommended optimal laws. Abbreviation Key (Explanation for Laws Needed): S = Highway Safety Law is Secondary Enforcement (Advocates gives no credit for any law that is subject to secondary enforcement.) DE = Driver Education exemption included in the GDL provision (Advocates gives no credit for any GDL provision that is exempted based on driver education.) Note: States without a primary enforcement seat belt law covering passengers in all seating positions (front and rear) or that have repealed an existing all-rider motorcycle helmet law within the previous 10 years are not eligible for a green rating, no matter how many other optimal laws they may have. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 40 ALABAMA 2015 Fatalities: 849 10-Year Fatality Total: 10,406 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.473 Billion ALASKA 2015 Fatalities: 65 10-Year Fatality Total: 732 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $592 Million ARIZONA 2015 Fatalities: 893 10-Year Fatality Total: 10,200 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.183 Billion ARKANSAS 2015 Fatalities: 531 10-Year Fatality Total: 6,294 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $2.386 Billion Highway Safety Laws Needed in Alabama: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Stronger Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in Alaska: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Open Container Law Highway Safety Laws Needed in Arizona: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Nighttime Restriction GDL - Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 Unrestricted License All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction Highway Safety Laws Needed in Arkansas: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction (Without S) Open Container Law S = Secondary Enforcement January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 41 CALIFORNIA 2015 Fatalities: 3,176 10-Year Fatality Total: 36,692 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $19.998 Billion COLORADO 2015 Fatalities: 546 10-Year Fatality Total: 5,590 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.173 Billion CONNECTICUT 2015 Fatalities: 266 10-Year Fatality Total: 2,905 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.880 Billion DELAWARE 2015 Fatalities: 126 10-Year Fatality Total: 1,296 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $684 Million DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 2015 Fatalities: 23 10-Year Fatality Total: 324 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $859 Million S = Secondary Enforcement January 2017 Highway Safety Laws Needed in California: Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction (Without S) GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Colorado: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in Connecticut: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - 6-Month Holding Period (Without DE Exemption) GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Open Container Law Highway Safety Laws Needed in Delaware: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Open Container Law Highway Safety Laws Needed in Washington, D.C.: Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License DE = Driver Education Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 42 FLORIDA 2015 Fatalities: 2,939 10-Year Fatality Total: 30,776 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $10.750 Billion GEORGIA 2015 Fatalities: 1,430 10-Year Fatality Total: 15,275 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $10.787 Billion HAWAII 2015 Fatalities: 94 10-Year Fatality Total: 1,285 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $577 Million IDAHO 2015 Fatalities: 216 10-Year Fatality Total: 2,428 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $886 Million ILLINOIS 2015 Fatalities: 998 10-Year Fatality Total: 11,532 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $10.885 Billion Highway Safety Laws Needed in Florida: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction (Without S) Highway Safety Laws Needed in Georgia: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Hawaii: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in Idaho: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Illinois: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License S = Secondary Enforcement January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 43 INDIANA 2015 Fatalities: 821 10-Year Fatality Total: 8,876 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $6.375 Billion IOWA 2015 Fatalities: 320 10-Year Fatality Total: 4,191 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $2.188 Billion KANSAS 2015 Fatalities: 355 10-Year Fatality Total: 4,395 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $2.445 Billion KENTUCKY 2015 Fatalities: 761 10-Year Fatality Total: 8,676 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.363 Billion LOUISIANA 2015 Fatalities: 726 10-Year Fatality Total: 8,933 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $5.691 Billion Highway Safety Laws Needed in Indiana: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Iowa: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction (Without S) Highway Safety Laws Needed in Kansas: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in Kentucky: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Louisiana: Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Open Container Law S = Secondary Enforcement January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 44 MAINE 2015 Fatalities: 156 10-Year Fatality Total: 1,747 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $1.303 Billion MARYLAND 2015 Fatalities: 513 10-Year Fatality Total: 5,920 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.476 Billion MASSACHUSETTS 2015 Fatalities: 306 10-Year Fatality Total: 3,983 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $5.835 Billion MICHIGAN 2015 Fatalities: 963 10-Year Fatality Total: 10,733 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $9.599 Billion MINNESOTA 2015 Fatalities: 411 10-Year Fatality Total: 4,767 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $3.057 Billion January 2017 Highway Safety Laws Needed in Maine: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in Maryland: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in Massachusetts: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Michigan: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Minnesota: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 45 MISSISSIPPI 2015 Fatalities: 677 10-Year Fatality Total: 7,959 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $2.718 Billion MISSOURI 2015 Fatalities: 869 10-Year Fatality Total: 10,006 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $5.560 Billion MONTANA 2015 Fatalities: 224 10-Year Fatality Total: 2,489 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $898 Million NEBRASKA 2015 Fatalities: 246 10-Year Fatality Total: 2,497 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $1.295 Billion S = Secondary Enforcement January 2017 Highway Safety Laws Needed in Mississippi: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Open Container Law Highway Safety Laws Needed in Missouri: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Stronger Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Open Container Law All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction Highway Safety Laws Needed in Montana: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction Highway Safety Laws Needed in Nebraska: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Supervised Driving Requirement (Without DE Exemption) GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction (Without S) GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction (Without S) DE = Driver Education Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 46 NEVADA 2015 Fatalities: 325 10-Year Fatality Total: 3,437 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $1.978 Billion NEW HAMPSHIRE 2015 Fatalities: 114 10-Year Fatality Total: 1,341 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $1.374 Billion NEW JERSEY 2015 Fatalities: 562 10-Year Fatality Total: 6,849 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $12.813 Billion NEW MEXICO 2015 Fatalities: 298 10-Year Fatality Total: 4,164 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $1.769 Billion NEW YORK 2015 Fatalities: 1,121 10-Year Fatality Total: 13,503 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $15.246 Billion S = Secondary Enforcement January 2017 Highway Safety Laws Needed in Nevada: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Nighttime Restriction (Without S) GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in New Hampshire: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - 6-Month Holding Period GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in New Jersey: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) GDL - Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in New Mexico: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Child Endangerment Law Highway Safety Laws Needed in New York: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Stronger Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License (Without DE Exemption) DE = Driver Education Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 47 NORTH CAROLINA 2015 Fatalities: 1,379 10-Year Fatality Total: 15,308 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $7.909 Billion NORTH DAKOTA 2015 Fatalities: 131 10-Year Fatality Total: 1,426 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $706 Million OHIO 2015 Fatalities: 1,110 10-Year Fatality Total: 12,354 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $10.125 Billion OKLAHOMA 2015 Fatalities: 643 10-Year Fatality Total: 7,870 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $2.910 Billion OREGON 2015 Fatalities: 447 10-Year Fatality Total: 4,314 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $1.768 Billion Highway Safety Laws Needed in North Carolina: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in North Dakota: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Ohio: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction (Without S) Highway Safety Laws Needed in Oklahoma: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt (Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Oregon: Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License S = Secondary Enforcement January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 48 PENNSYLVANIA 2015 Fatalities: 1,200 10-Year Fatality Total: 14,879 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $5.851 Billion Highway Safety Laws Needed in Rhode Island: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License RHODE ISLAND 2015 Fatalities: 45 10-Year Fatality Total: 743 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $1.599 Billion SOUTH CAROLINA 2015 Fatalities: 977 10-Year Fatality Total: 10,079 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.045 Billion SOUTH DAKOTA 2015 Fatalities: 133 10-Year Fatality Total: 1,561 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $720 Million S = Secondary Enforcement January 2017 Highway Safety Laws Needed in Pennsylvania: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in South Carolina: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in South Dakota: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - 6-Month Holding Period (Without DE Exemption) GDL - Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction (Without S) GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Child Endangerment Law All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction (Without S) DE = Driver Education Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 49 TENNESSEE 2015 Fatalities: 958 10-Year Fatality Total: 11,688 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $5.667 Billion TEXAS 2015 Fatalities: 3,516 10-Year Fatality Total: 36,681 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $17.044 Billion UTAH 2015 Fatalities: 276 10-Year Fatality Total: 2,835 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $1.725 Billion VERMONT 2015 Fatalities: 57 10-Year Fatality Total: 746 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $538 Million VIRGINIA 2015 Fatalities: 753 10-Year Fatality Total: 8,995 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.998 Billion Highway Safety Laws Needed in Tennessee: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Open Container Law Highway Safety Laws Needed in Texas: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Passenger Restriction (Without S) GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License All-Driver Text Messaging Restriction Highway Safety Laws Needed in Utah: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Passenger Restriction (Without S) GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in Vermont: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Child Endangerment Law Highway Safety Laws Needed in Virginia: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Stronger Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction (Without S) GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Open Container Law S = Secondary Enforcement January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 50 WASHINGTON 2015 Fatalities: 568 10-Year Fatality Total: 5,680 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.469 Billion WEST VIRGINIA 2015 Fatalities: 268 10-Year Fatality Total: 3,815 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $1.482 Billion WISCONSIN 2015 Fatalities: 566 10-Year Fatality Total: 6,846 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $4.546 Billion WYOMING 2015 Fatalities: 145 10-Year Fatality Total: 1,603 Annual Economic Cost Due to Motor Vehicle Crashes: $788 Million Highway Safety Laws Needed in Washington: GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Nighttime Restriction GDL - Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in West Virginia: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Rear) GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Supervised Driving Requirement (Without DE Exemption) GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Highway Safety Laws Needed in Wisconsin: All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - Supervised Driving Requirement GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Highway Safety Laws Needed in Wyoming: Primary Enforcement Seat Belt Law (Front & Rear) All-Rider Motorcycle Helmet Law Booster Seat Law Up to Age 8 and 57 Inches GDL - Minimum Age 16 for Learner’s Permit GDL - 6-Month Holding Period GDL - Stronger Nighttime Restriction GDL - Stronger Passenger Restriction GDL - Cell Phone Restriction GDL - Age 18 for Unrestricted License Ignition Interlock Law for All Offenders Open Container Law DE = Driver Education January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 51 SOURCE INFORMATION In developing this report, Advocates relied upon numerous research studies, statistical analyses, fact sheets and other public data. Additional information is available upon request. American Automobile Association Foundation for Traffic Safety, “Timing of Driver’s License Acquisition and Reasons for Delay among Young People in the United States, 2012” July 2013. American Automobile Association, “Crashes vs. Congestion- What's the Cost to Society?,” November 2011. American Automobile Association, “Caution Ahead: New Year’s Ranks as Deadliest Day on US Roads,” December 2012. Allstate Foundation Teen Licensing Survey, “Unlikely Allies in Fight for Stronger Teen Driving Laws: Teens Themselves,” 2010. American Journal of Surgery, Repeal of the Michigan helmet law: the evolving clinical impact, 2015 Arbogast, Kristy B., Jermakian, Jessica S., Kallan, Michael J., & Durbin, Dennis R., “Effectiveness of Belt Positioning Booster Seats: An Updated Assessment,” Pediatrics, October 2009. Ascone, Debra, Lindsey, Tonja, & Varghese, Cherian, “An Examination of Driver Distraction in NHTSA Databases,” Data Reporting and Information Division, National Center for Statistics and Analysis, NHTSA, September 2009. Chen, Baker, Li, “Graduated Driver Licensing Programs and Fatal Crashes of 16-Year-Old Drivers: A National Evaluation,” Pediatrics, July 2006. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “10 Leading Causes of Injury Deaths by Age Group Highlighting Unintentional Injury Deaths, United States,” 2014. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Helmet use among motorcyclists who died in crashes and economic cost savings associated with state motorcycle helmet laws,” 2012. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Injury Prevention and Control: Motor Vehicle Safety, Get the Facts.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Teen Driver: Fact Sheet,” 2012. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Vital Signs, Drinking and Driving, a Threat to Everyone,” October 2011. Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia - Partners for Child Passenger Safety: Fact and Trend Report, September 2008. Coronado, VG, Xu, L, Basavaraju, SV, McGuire, LC, Wald, MM, Faul, MD, Guzman, BR, Hemphill, JD, “Surveillance for Traumatic Brain Injury—Related Deaths—United States, 1997-2007,” 2011. Durbin, D.R., Chen, I. Smith, R. Elliot, M.R., and Winston, F.K., “Effects of seating position and appropriate restraint use on the risk of injury to children in motor vehicle crashes,” Pediatrics 115:e305, 2005. Durbin, D.R., Elliot, M.R., and Winston, F.K., “Belt-positioning booster seats and reduction in risk of injury among children in vehicle crashes,” Journal of the American Medical Association 289:2835-40, 2003. Elvik, R. (2009), “The Power Model of the Relationship Between Speed and Road Safety: Update and New Analyses,” Report No. 1034/2009. Oslo, Norway: Institute of Transport Economics. Ferguson et al., “Progress in Teenage Crash Risk During the Last Decade,” Journal of Safety Research, 2007. Flannagan, CA, “Analysis of Motorcycle Crashes: Comparison of 2012 to Previous Years,” 18th Michigan Safety Summit, 2013. Government Accountability Office, “Motorcycle Safety: Increasing Federal Flexibility and Identifying Research Priorities Would Help Support States’ Safety Efforts,” Report 13-42, 2012. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 52 SOURCE INFORMATION, CONT. Governors Highway Safety Association, “Mission Not Accomplished: Teen Safe Driving the Next Chapter,” Oct. 2016 Harris, Lou and Peter Harris Research Group, “Survey of the Attitudes of the American People of Highway and Auto Safety,” June 2004. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Status Report “Kids in Crashes Far Better If States Have Tough Restraint Laws,” 2011. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Status Report “Kids in Crashes Far Better If States Have Tough Restraint Laws,” 2011. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, “Fatality Facts 2015,” Teenagers Website Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, “Graduated Licensing Laws and Fatal Crashes of Teenage Drivers, A National Study,” June 2010. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, “Watch Your Head: Michigan’s Weakened Helmet Use Law Leads to Costlier Injury Claims,” 2013. Intoxalock Legacy Ignition Interlock Device Website. Kaufman, Elinore J., MD, Wiebe, Douglas J., PhD, Impact of State Ignition Interlock Laws on Alcohol-Involved Crash Deaths in the United States. Available at http://bit.ly/1RrkuZQ Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, “Liberty Mutual and SADD Study Finds Texting While Driving by Teens Not Affected by Their Awareness of the Dangers, Text Conversations with Mom and Dad on the Rise,” October 2011. Lui, BC, Ivers, R., Norton, R., Boufous, S., Blows, S, Lo, SK, “Helmets for Preventing Injury in Motorcycle Riders (Review),” The Cochrane Library, 2009. Mayhew, D., “Reducing the Crash Risk for Young Drivers,” June 2006. McCartt AT, Hellinga LA, Braitman KA, “Cell Phones and Driving: Review of Research,” Traffic Injury Prevention, 7:89-106 (2006). McCartt AT, Mayhew DR, Braitman KA, Ferguson SA, Simpson HM. “Effects of Age and Experience on Young Driver Crashes: Review of Recent Literature,” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Arlington, VA (2008). McCartt, Anne T., Teoh, Eric R., Fields, Michelle, Braitman, Keli A. and Hellinga, Laurie A, “Graduated Licensing Laws and Fatal Crashes of Teenage Drivers: A National Study,” Traffic Injury Prevention, 11:240-248 (2010). McEvoy SP, et al, “Role of Mobile Phones in Motor Vehicle Crashes Resulting in Hospital Attendance: A Case-Crossover Study,” British Medical Journal; July 2005:428-432. Miller, Ted R. & Zaloshnja, Eduard, “On a Crash Course: The Dangers and Health Costs of Deficient Roadways,” Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, commissioned by Transportation Construction Coalition, May 2009. Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Minnesota Motor Vehicle Crash Facts 2008 and 2011. Morgan, C., “Effectiveness of lap/shoulder belts in the back outboard seating positions,” NHTSA, DOT HS 808 945, 1999. Morse, B.J., Elliot, D.S., “Hamilton County Drinking and Driving Study, 30 Month Report,” 1990. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, 2016 Campaign to Eliminate Drunk Driving Report, February 2016. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, “Fifth Anniversary Report to the Nation.” November 2011. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Statistics, accessed at www.madd.org/drunk-driving/about/drunk-driving-statistics.html. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 53 SOURCE INFORMATION, CONT. National Governors Association and National Association of State Budget Officers. The Fiscal Survey of the States: An Update of State Fiscal Conditions, Fall 2010. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, “Driving While Distracted Research Results,” July 2010. Naumann, Rebecca B., Dellinger, Ann M., Zaloshnja, Eduard, Lawrence, Bruce A. and Miller, Ted R.(2010), “Incidence and Total Lifetime Costs of Motor Vehicle-Related Fatal and Nonfatal Injury by Road User Type, United States, 2005,” Traffic Injury Prevention 11:4, 353-360. New York Times. (2009) Technology Series: “Driven to Distraction.” Entire series can be found on this website: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/technology/series/driven_to_distraction/index.html. NHTSA, “Drinking and Driving Tips, Stops by the Police, and Arrests: Analyses of the 1995 Survey of Drinking and Driving Attitudes and Behavior,” DOT HS 809 184, 2000. NHTSA, “Ignition Interlocks—What You Need to Know: A Toolkit for Policymakers, Highway Safety Professionals, and Advocates,” DOT HS 811 246, November 2009. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts: Traffic Tech—Technology Transfer Series, Number 406. Determining the Relationship of Primary Seat Belt Laws to Minority Ticketing. September 2011. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts: Young Drivers, DOT HS 812 278, May 2016. NHTSA, National Evaluation of Graduated Driver Licensing Programs, DOT HS 810 614, 2006, NHTSA, Seat Belt Use in 2016 - Overall Results, DOT HS 812 351, November 2016. NHTSA, The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2010 (Revised), DOT HS 812 013, May 2015. NHTSA, The Nation’s Top Strategies to Stop Impaired Driving: Primary Seat Belt Laws, 2007. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Alcohol Impaired Driving, DOT HS 812 350, December 2016. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Children, DOT HS 812 271, May 2016. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Lives Saved in 2015 by Restraint Use and Minimum Drinking Age Laws,” DOT HS 812 319, August 2016. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Motorcycles, DOT HS 812 353, December 2016. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Occupant Protection, DOT HS 812 262, April 2016. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts Research Note, “2015 Motor Vehicle Crashes—Overview,” DOT HS 812 318, August 2016. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Research Note, “Calculating Lives Saved by Motorcycle Helmets,” DOT HS 809 861 2005. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Research Note, “Crash Outcome Data Evaluation System Project Seat Belt and Helmet Analysis,” 1996. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts Research Note, “National Child Restraint Use Special Study”, DOT HS 811 679, 2012. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Research Note, “Child Restraint Use in 2008—Overall Results,” DOT HS 811 135, 2009. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Research Note, “Distracted Driving 2014,” DOT HS 812 260, April 2016. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts, Research Note, “Driver Electronic Device Use in 2015,” DOT HS 812 326, Sept. 2016. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts: Traffic Tech—Technology Transfer Series, Number 323. Estimated Minimum Savings to a State’s Medicaid Budget by Implementing A Primary Seat Belt Law: Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, and Missouri. March 2007. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 54 SOURCE INFORMATION, CONT. Orsay, E.M.; Muelleman, R.L.; Peterson, T.D.; Jurisic, D.H.; Kosasih, J.B.; and Levy, P. (1994), “Motorcycle Helmets and Spinal Injuries: Dispelling the Myth,” Annals of Emergency Medicine 23:802-06. Preusser, D.F & Tison, J. (2007), “GDL Then and Now,” Journal of Safety Research, 38(2), 159-163. Redelmeier DA, Tibshirani RJ. “Association between Cellular-Telephone Calls and Motor Vehicle Collisions,” The New England Journal of Medicine 1997; 336(7):453-58. Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. State Transportation Statistics, 2009. Shults et al., 2015; The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia CHOP, 2015 Simon v. Sargent, D.C.Mass.1972, 346 F.Supp. 277, affirmed 39 S.Ct. 463, 409 U.S. 1020, 34 L.Ed.2d 312. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, “Teens, Smartphones and Distracted Driving” July 2016. Strayer DL, Drews FA, Crouch DJ, “A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk Driver,” Human Factors 2006; 48:381-391. Sun, K., Bauer, M.J., Hardman, S., “Effects of Upgraded Child Restraint Law Designed to Increase Booster Seat Use in New York,” Pediatrics, 2010. Vogel, Steve, “Teen Driver Menace: Text Messaging- Studies Show Texting While Driving Is Epidemic,” Parenting Teens, October 22, 2007. Weiss, Harold, Ph.D., MPH, MS, Agimi, Yl, MPH, and Steiner, Claudia, MD, MPH, “Youth Motorcycle-Related Brain Injury by State Helmet Law Type: United States 2005 2007,” Pediatrics, November 2010. Williams, A.F. (2007), “Contribution of the Components of Graduated Licensing to Crash Reductions,” Journal of Safety Research, 38(2), 177-184. Williams, A.F., Braitman, K.A., and McCartt, A.T., “Views of Parents of Teenagers about Licensing Policies: a National Survey,” 2010. The Wireless Association, “Wireless Quick Facts, Year End Figures,” CTIA. Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Mobility Accountability Preservation Safety Service Performance Improvement Report, 2013. January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 55 SOURCE INFORMATION, CONT. Organizations: Thanks to the many individuals and organizations whose websites and staff provided background and state law information for the 2017 Roadmap of State Highway Safety Laws. American Automobile Association (AAA) Foundation for Traffic Safety www.aaafoundation.org American Public Health Association (APHA) www.apha.org Brain Injury Association of America (BIA) www.biausa.org Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) www.fhwa.dot.gov Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) www.fmcsa.dot.gov Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) www.ghsa.org Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) www.iihs.org Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) www.madd.org National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) www.ncsl.org National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the National Center for Statistics and Analysis www.nhtsa.dot.gov National Safety Council (NSC) www.nsc.org National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) www.ntsb.gov Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD) www.sadd.org Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF) www.trafficinjuryresearch.com U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) www.cdc.gov Virginia Tech Transportation Institute www.vtti.vt.edu West Virginia University Injury Control Research Center www.hsc.wvu.edu/icrc January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 56 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Advocates would like to recognize the dedication and commitment of our Board of Directors. Their support and safety leadership have resulted in adoption of laws, regulations and programs that are saving lives, preventing injuries and containing costs resulting from motor vehicle crashes. Advocates would like to thank Cathy Barzey, Cathy Chase, Lisa Drew, Tara Gill, Henry Jasny, Allison Kennedy, Shaun Kildare and Peter Kurdock for their contributions to the 2017 Roadmap of State Highway Safety Laws. Also, special thanks to Jamie Douglas of DAYLIGHT for the cover design. Advocates would like to acknowledge the numerous contributions of Lou Harris, who passed away on December 17, 2016. Lou’s ability to tap into the pulse of the American public through his polling was invaluable to the content of Advocates’ Roadmap Reports. His keen insights, tireless efforts and standard of excellence were a catalyst for action resulting in safer cars, safer drivers and safer roads. ABOUT ADVOCATES Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety is an alliance of consumer, health and safety groups and insurance companies and agents working together to make America's roads safer. Advocates encourages the adoption of federal and state laws, policies and programs that save lives and reduce injuries. By joining its resources with others, Advocates helps build coalitions to increase participation of a wide array of groups in public policy initiatives which advance highway and auto safety.. For more information, please visit www.saferoads.org. Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 750 First Street, NE, Suite 1130 Washington, D.C. 20002 202-408-1711 Follow us on Twitter: @SafeRoadsNow January 2017 Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety 57