Advertisement

Bureaucracy Stifles Innovation, Even as Driverless Cars Get a Pass

Photo credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images - Car and Driver
Photo credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images - Car and Driver

From Car and Driver

Laser and adaptive-beam headlights that precisely brighten areas in the driver’s view are rolling out on luxury vehicles across Europe, but they’re illegal or dimmed down in the U.S. due to government regulations crafted in the sealed-beam, Scotch-at-the-office era. Some of those rules are in desperate need of revision for 21st century realities, such as the one that requires 2.5-mph bumpers on the Bugatti Chiron.

But federal lawmakers and regulators aren’t stuck in a complete time warp. In a rare syzygy of government, automakers, and tech startups, the latest safety innovations-automated vehicles and semiautomated driver-assist features-aren’t blocked at all. Instead, the government is allowing companies to flood our cars with unchecked software without a national standard or much, if any, oversight.

ADVERTISEMENT

In 2017, lawmakers in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate introduced legislation that would allow each automaker to exempt tens of thousands of Level 3, 4, and 5 automated vehicles from Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards that have been in place since 1966. These are the same regulations that stymie innovation in such seemingly mundane features as headlights.

While some states require manufacturers to obtain permits to test driverless vehicles on public roads, others forgo even those restrictions. Thirty-six states and the District of Columbia have enacted legislation or issued executive orders to either permit automated cars on the road or lay the groundwork for future public tests. Even automakers that may benefit, including Toyota, admit there’s been “some irrational exuberance” toward the capability of current automation systems.

Deregulation may be a boon for some sectors of the U.S. economy, but the auto industry’s attitude toward safety has historically prioritized cost savings over people (see Ford’s infamous Pinto memo suggesting that settling with the victims of fiery collisions would be cheaper than fixing the affected cars). In the case of driverless cars, a little more plodding from our bureaucrats might be a good thing.

('You Might Also Like',)