Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
This bill directs the Secretary of Transportation to contract with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to study how driver-controlled technology — especially touch screen-based systems — affects severe traffic injuries and fatalities, including those involving pedestrians and bicyclists. The Secretary will set a study period (beginning no earlier than ten years before the agreement), require a report within 24 months of the agreement, and then submit recommendations and suggested data-collection changes to federal crash and usage surveys.
Whether study should prompt immediate regulatory action or remain advisory
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-framed study/reporting measure that clearly defines the subject matter, identifies responsible entities, lists specific topics to be addressed, and prescribes deliverables with deadlines.
This bill directs the Secretary of Transportation to contract with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to study how driver-controlled technology — especially touch screen-based systems — affects severe traffic injuries and fatalities, including those involving pedestrians and bicyclists.
The Secretary will set a study period (beginning no earlier than ten years before the agreement), require a report within 24 months of the agreement, and then submit recommendations and suggested data-collection changes to federal crash and usage surveys.
Recommendations must be categorized by whether existing agencies can implement them or whether new legislation would be required.
Narrow, technical, low-cost study bill historically fares well; passage depends mainly on appropriations and floor scheduling.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-framed study/reporting measure that clearly defines the subject matter, identifies responsible entities, lists specific topics to be addressed, and prescribes deliverables with deadlines. It integrates with existing statutory definitions and federal data systems and requires categorized recommendations for agency action or legislative change.
Whether study should prompt immediate regulatory action or remain advisory
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Whether study should prompt immediate regulatory action or remain advisory
Generally supportive; views evidence-gathering on roadway safety as a necessary step to reduce injuries and deaths.
Wants the study to lead to concrete regulatory or legislative reforms protecting pedestrians and other vulnerable road users.
Will watch for industry influence, funding adequacy, and strong data-collection recommendations.
Cautiously favorable: values evidence-based policymaking and sees this as a reasonable, nonregulatory first step.
Wants clear methodology, cost controls, and timely reporting so results inform policy without unnecessary delay.
Will balance safety benefits with fiscal and administrative practicality.
Mixed to somewhat skeptical: accepts study value but worries it could be a pretext for expanded federal regulation and burdens on manufacturers.
Prefers limited scope, protection for innovation, and that Congress retain control over new regulatory mandates.
May support the bill if funding is modest and study stays nonbinding.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, technical, low-cost study bill historically fares well; passage depends mainly on appropriations and floor scheduling.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Whether study should prompt immediate regulatory action or remain advisory
Narrow, technical, low-cost study bill historically fares well; passage depends mainly on appropriations and floor scheduling.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-framed study/reporting measure that clearly defines the subject matter, identifies responsible entities, lists specific topics to be addressed, and prescrib…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.