[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 153 (Thursday, September 28, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1871-E1872]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM DESIGNATION ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                         HON. JAMES L. OBERSTAR

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 20, 1995

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2274) to 
     amend title 23, United States Code, to designate the National 
     Highway System, and for other purposes:

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, the bill before us makes grave changes in 
the Nation's highway safety law, repealing national speed limits and 
mandatory helmet laws. The result will be a new, enormous unfunded 
mandate: Costs to the States as well as to the Federal Government and 
the general public of emergency, rehabilitative and long-term health 
care for those injured because these protections are gone; costs to 
employers of lost workdays; and costs to insurance companies, paid for 
by everyone who purchases insurance. An incalculable costs to family 
and friends, and to the victims themselves, who might have avoided 
injury or death if speed limits and helmet laws had remained in place.
  The amendment I intended to offer would have required States, prior 
to raising their speed limits, to take a snapshot of the current costs 
of motor vehicle crashes, and another snapshot 1 year later, after 
changes had gone into effect. If we are going to permit repeal of 
safety laws, we should at least know the consequences of these actions.
  The amendment agreed to with my good colleagues, which I offer now, 
is more modest. It requires the Secretary of the Department of 
Transportation, in cooperation with any State that raises its speed 
limit, to prepare a study of the costs to the State of deaths and 
injuries resulting from motor vehicle crashes, and the benefits 
associated with the repeal of the national maximum speed limit.
  To provide meaningful, useful information, the report should include 
information on the costs before the State changes its safety laws, and 
after. It would thus be my intent that the Secretary's report, due 
September 30, 1997, include information on the costs of motor vehicle 
crashes in the year before changes go into effect; and again a year 
later.
  That report should include, at a minimum, the costs of acute, 
rehabilitative and long-term medical care, sources of reimbursements 
and the extent to which these sources cover actual costs; and the costs 
to all levels of government, to employers, and others.
  All States are not alike. Each State will want to know its own data, 
so that it can determine whether its problems are coming from alcohol-
related or speed-related causes, from not wearing seatbelts or helmets, 
or other causes, and perhaps adjust its laws accordingly.
  The report should therefore also include additional factors such as 
whether excess speed or alcohol were involved in the accident, whether 
seat belts and motorcycle helmets were used by those involved in the 
crash, and any other factors the Secretary may wish to add, or State to 
know.
  We do know that the costs of motor vehicle crashes are substantial, 
even with the current laws in effect. NHTSA's data indicate that the 
lifetime economic costs of motor vehicle injuries, fatalities and 
property damage that occurred in 1990 will be $137.5 billion. American 
taxpayers will pay $11.4 billion of that total to cover publicly funded 
health care ($3.7 billion), reduced income tax revenue ($6.1 billion) 
and increased public assistance expenses ($1.6 billion).

  The lifetime economic costs of alcohol-related motor vehicle 
injuries, fatalities and property damage that occurred in 1990 was 
$46.1 billion. Of this, the American taxpayer will pay $1.4 billion to 
cover publicly funded health care and $3.8 billion to cover reduced 
income tax revenue and increased public assistance.
  States and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [NHTSA] 
have good data now on which to base the first report. NHTSA has been 
working with the States to develop such databases.
  States want and need these data. The National Association of 
Governors' Highway Safety Representatives wrote on behalf of my 
original amendment:

       NAGHSR believes that such a requirement is both reasonable 
     and necessary. It would allow every state to establish a 
     baseline of data with which to determine the costs of motor 
     vehicle crashes prior to the repeal of the mandatory federal 
     safety requirements. It would also allow a state to determine 
     the changes in these costs over time. States would be able to 
     use the information to evaluate the effectiveness of their 
     highway safety programs and Safety Management Systems. * * * 
     The requirement will not be onerous to the States since crash 
     cost information is already available through NHTSA.


[[Page E 1872]]

  The Federal Government--and Congress--have a legitimate interest in 
knowing what is happening on a Federal transportation system. We are 
not preventing States from doing what they want, but we and the States 
have a responsibility to know and squarely face the consequences of our 
actions.
  We and the States need the facts. This report will provide the data 
and help guide future decisions. I urge my colleagues to support the 
amendment.

                          ____________________