Testimony of Barry M. Sweedler
Director, Office of Safety Recommendations
Before the Committee on Transportation
Ohio House of Representatives
Columbus, Ohio, June 17, 1997

On H.B. 449 -- STANDARD SAFETY BELT ENFORCEMENT

Good morning Vice Chairman Carey and committee members. It is a pleasure to be in Columbus today. I want to talk with you about the tragedy that occurs on our nation’s highways every day, and about some of our most important recommendations for reducing deaths and injuries caused by these crashes.

The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency that investigates transportation accidents and makes recommendations to prevent their recurrence. The recommendations that arise from our investigations and safety studies are our most important product. In our 30-year history, more than 80 percent of our recommendations have been adopted by the organizations and government bodies in a position to effect improvements in transportation safety.

The Safety Board has recognized for many years that traffic crashes are one of this nation's most serious transportation safety problems. More than 90 percent of all transportation related deaths each year result from highway crashes. The Safety Board has made many recommendations to Ohio and the other states regarding a variety of important highway safety concerns.

The Safety Board recommended in June 1995 that Ohio and the other states enact legislation that provides for standard enforcement of mandatory safety belt use laws. This follows our 1991 recommendation that the 12 states without mandatory use laws enact legislation that would require occupants of all passenger autos, vans, and light trucks to use lap/shoulder belts. Because of its importance, this recommendation was added to our "Most Wanted" list of recommendations in April 1996.

Just last week, the Safety Board again called for the States to enact standard enforcement and to provide the political will that will enable law enforcement agencies to vigorously enforce this important lifesaving law. As Chairman Jim Hall said during that meeting, "The controversy over air bags would not exist today if 20 years ago our political leaders had the guts to require people to buckle up."

Standard enforcement means that law enforcement officers may issue a citation any time they observe an unbelted driver or passenger. The current secondary enforcement law allows an officer to issue a citation only if the officer has stopped the vehicle for some other reason. Although every State except New Hampshire has a mandatory use law, only 13 states have standard enforcement. This year, Maryland and Oklahoma have changed from secondary to standard enforcement, bringing to 13 the number of states with this lifesaving legislation, and legislation has been introduced in many more states.

Increasing the safety belt use rate is the most effective way of cutting the highway death toll. There is no debate that properly worn safety belts do prevent injuries. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has estimated that more than 14,000 lives could be saved nationwide if all front seat occupants used safety belts. Some 4,200 lives could be saved merely by hitting the national target of an 85 percent use rate by 2000.

Recent revelations of the dangers of automobile airbags to infants and small children have further increased the urgency for raising the safety belt use rate. This important safety issue was brought to the forefront in 1994, shortly after the Board initiated a safety study to evaluate the performance of occupant restraint systems for children under the age of 11. The Safety Board believes that air bags are a proven safety device for most properly restrained adults in severe frontal crashes. The vast majority of people are not at significant risk from air bags. They are at risk, however, if they do not wear seatbelts or wear them improperly. Children can be at risk even if restrained, and should always be restrained in a back seat. It should always be remembered that an air bag is a supplemental restraint system and that the seatbelt is the primary means of protection.

States with standard enforcement have lower fatality rates. For example, during the first full year after enforcement of belt laws, fatality rates dropped 21 percent in five standard law states, compared to only 7 percent in 11 secondary law states. There was a 24 percent reduction in fatality rates for persons under age 21 in the standard law states compared to a 3 percent reduction for that age group in secondary law states.

Ohio's December 1996 belt usage rate was 62 percent, which was below the nationwide rate of 68 percent. In 1995, every State with standard enforcement except one had a belt use rate higher than 70 percent, and five were at 80 percent or higher. Only 5 of 38 States with secondary laws had belt use rates higher than 70 percent, and only one was above 80 percent.

The experience of other States and other countries shows that standard enforcement increases the numbers of people who use their belts. States with standard enforcement average about 13 percent higher use rates than secondary law states. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has estimated that a 15 percent increase in belt use in Ohio would prevent 114 fatalities and more than 4800 injuries per year.

California was the first state to change from secondary to standard enforcement, and its experience illustrates the impact such a change can have. Just after implementation of the change in 1993, belt use rates in a six-city survey were 76 percent, compared with 58 percent six months previously. A statewide combined city and highway survey by California Office of Traffic Safety in the fall of 1993 found a use rate of 83 percent, compared with 70 percent prior to the law's change. Its use rate has continued to increase, reaching 87 percent in 1996.

Standard enforcement laws also can save dollars. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that an increase to 85 percent nationwide would save more than $6.7 billion annually, including $684 million in health care costs and $328 million in taxes and public assistance. Belted crash victims average 60 to 80 percent lower hospital costs than unbelted victims. A 15 percent increase in the use rate in Ohio is estimated to have an economic savings of almost $500 million per year. Why should Ohio taxpayers continue to pay for those who refuse to obey the law?

There also is public support for these laws. A 1991 nationwide phone survey found that 73 percent of the population would support standard enforcement legislation if they knew that it would result in more belt use and lives being saved. Surveys show that law enforcement officers consistently prefer standard laws. Further, a secondary enforcement law is a major deterrent to issuing citations.

The experience in North Carolina offers a model that you may wish to consider. In a co-operative effort led by Governor Jim Hunt, and involving State and Federal government, the insurance industry, and law enforcement, North Carolina has increased its safety belt use and reduced fatalities, injuries and economic costs from highway crashes. The foundation of North Carolina's "Click It or Ticket" program is thousands of safety belt checkpoints that have been conducted in every county in the State. Before "Click It or Ticket" began, 65 percent of North Carolinians buckled up. Because of the program, the rate has jumped to 81 percent, one of the highest rates in the nation. The results have been impressive. Since "Click It or Ticket" began in 1993, North Carolina has seen a 12 percent decline in fatalities and serious injuries, and a savings of $164 million in health care costs. Further, the insurance industry, in rate filings the last two years, acknowledged a $14 million savings in 1994 and a $19 million savings in 1995 because of the initiative. That is a total of $33 million in auto insurance premium savings that have been passed along to policyholders since the program began.

Finally, let me offer a comment about the fines associated with safety belt use law violations here and in many other states. The current penalty for not wearing a safety belt in Ohio is $25. In many places, parking tickets are more expensive. A North Carolina survey of "hard core" non-users found that the current low fines in most states are not an effective deterrent. A far more effective deterrent would be assessment of points against the driver's license, and a fine of $50 or more.

Seatbelts are an important part of the safety equipment that is in every vehicle on our nation’s roads. We would not consider driving without using other devices, such as the headlights at night. Just as it is illegal to drive without headlights during darkness, so also should we enforce the requirement that seatbelts be used by all occupants of all motor vehicles.

By passing a standard enforcement seat belt law, you can save the lives of more Ohioans than anything else you could do. And, it doesn't even cost anything -- its FREE! Not only will you save lives, but you will save hundreds of millions of dollars and help control auto insurance costs for your citizens. We urge you to take this important step.

Ohio is one of the nation's leaders in reducing drinking and driving on your roads. There is no reason why you can't also be a leader in saving lives by increasing seat belt use.

Thank you again for inviting the Safety Board to testify about this important problem. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.