Slow Approval of Self-Driving Cars Could Cost Lives

SACRAMENTO – A recent event in West Hollywood provided some amusing chatter for those skeptical about self-driving cars, but it also highlights a more serious issue. Last month, a sidewalk delivery robot and a robotaxi collided at a slow speed of four miles per hour. Thankfully, no injuries occurred, and neither vehicle was damaged. However, this incident was covered extensively, with some writers jokingly suggesting it heralded an impending battle between robots on our streets.

While critics of autonomous vehicles (AVs) can choose to focus on trivial matters, their concerns often lead to legislative actions that can be dangerous. In fact, robots are statistically better drivers compared to humans. They do not get distracted by cellphones, are not preoccupied with the radio, and are certainly not distracted by crying children. Autonomous vehicles are designed to be more aware of their surroundings and can anticipate traffic conditions farther ahead than average human drivers. Yet, fear of the unknown tends to influence policy decisions.

There was a time when I also shared the hesitation to ride in a self-driving car. Watching the smooth operation of Waymo's robotaxis in San Francisco was fascinating but nerve-wracking. However, after experiencing a ride in Phoenix, I discovered it was much like a typical taxi ride, only better. The robotaxi I rode in was a comfortable Jaguar, and I had the freedom to listen to my own music without the usual chatter from a human driver.

In contrast, my human-driven taxi ride to visit Waymo’s operations took an unexpected turn when the driver got lost, making my trip unnecessarily longer. Meanwhile, the robotaxi navigated smoothly. While accidents can happen with any vehicle, traditional taxis and human-driven cars commonly face accidents as well.

Moreover, discussion around a minor robotaxi accident in San Francisco overshadowed numerous accidents involving human drivers occurring simultaneously. According to peer-reviewed research by Swiss Reinsurance Co., robotaxis significantly outperformed human drivers, with property-damage claims dropping by 88 percent and bodily-injury claims decreasing by 92 percent. This data is crucial as insurance companies base their rates on reliable risk assessments.

Despite the evidence supporting the safety of AVs, lawmakers and regulators often impose barriers to their development. For example, unions may resist the technology due to fears of job losses in industries such as trucking, taxis, and public transportation. Though these concerns stem from a degree of protectionism, their safety claims are undermined by the data showing AVs could save lives.

Some states have enacted “driver in” laws that require a human driver to be present, which essentially negates the technology's purpose. This is reminiscent of early 20^th-century regulations that insisted on horses being attached to cars for safety. Other jurisdictions have enforced bans on AVs for interstate commerce, hindering industry growth and compelling companies to invest time in lobbying instead of innovation.

In California’s new legislative session, lawmakers are likely to reconsider Senate Bill 915, which would grant larger municipalities the authority to impose restrictions on AVs, including permit requirements, vehicle caps, and inspections. The already existent regulations by the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles and the California Public Utilities Commission highlight that AVs are not entirely unregulated. The proposed changes could lead to a confusing mishmash of laws as vehicles cross city lines.

This regulatory environment can resemble debates surrounding the federal Food and Drug Administration, which regulates the approval of drugs and medical devices. While some regulation is necessary for public safety, the FDA's notoriously slow approval process can delay access to life-saving treatments. In the same way, delays in approving self-driving cars may contribute to unnecessary deaths on our roads.

In the United States, over 42,000 fatalities occur annually in vehicle collisions. Given the evidence showing AVs have significantly lower rates of bodily injuries, the slowdown of their approval could ultimately result in more traffic deaths that could have been prevented. Unfortunately, the reasons behind these preventable tragedies often go unseen.

While it might be amusing to picture robots battling it out on Los Angeles streets, it is essential to keep the focus on the bigger picture and recognize the potential lives at stake.

selfdriving, safety, legislation