House Energy & Commerce Subcommittee Receives Testimony from Consumer Reports
"Good morning, Chairman Burgess, Ranking Member Schakowsky, and members of the Subcommittee. My name is
"I want to start today by honoring the life and legacy of
"Clarence's dogged persistence was legendary, and his accomplishments spanned decades. He will be sorely missed by the advocate community and consumers nationwide, whose cars are safer because of his work. At Consumer Reports, we consider it a responsibility and a privilege to carry forward our shared dedication to safer cars and accountability for corporate malfeasance.
"We will keep pushing for ever safer cars and help consumers make informed choices that assist them in staying safe on the road, through evaluations at our Auto Test Center, journalism, policy work, and consumer mobilization.
"As you know, traffic deaths on
"It is critical to note at the outset, however, that improvements to crashworthiness, while less trendy than the debate over automated vehicles, also remain far from exhausted. For example, although the Research Safety Vehicle designed by NHTSA in the late '70s was crash-safe at 50 miles per hour,2 today the minimum safety standard for frontal impact is set at 30 miles per hour, with a 35-mile-per-hour test for the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP). This is not just limited to frontal impact, though; many of NHTSA's performance standards are badly dated, and should be changed to better protect the public than they do today. In the meantime, we strongly support NCAP and the tests done by the
"As consumers will be far more likely to entrust their lives to crash-safe vehicles, these improvements should be viewed as a necessary corollary to automated crash avoidance systems. Moreover, putting consumers' lives into the hands of software updates requires agile and timely agency oversight and a far more aggressive, updated and responsive approach to defect investigation than we have seen at any time in past or recent history.
"To reduce traffic deaths, automated driving systems--intended to yield fully and partially self-driving cars--are advancing rapidly, and may be part of the solution. Our auto testing team has driven thousands of miles in cars that can steer within a lane and adjust speed automatically, using increasingly prevalent technologies like automatic emergency braking and lane-keeping assist. As these features continue to lay the groundwork for automated driving, significant investments should be made in research and testing, including at the
"There is much additional work that needs to be done as these technologies develop. Self-driving vehicles would represent the single biggest change in the relationship between cars and their passengers since the invention of the motor vehicle itself, and they warrant diligent oversight at every step of their development to ensure that they are safe. This is particularly true regarding cars with semi-autonomous features, as these vehicles may be marketed in a manner to make it seem to consumers that the car can drive itself. This technology--and the ability to take human drivers out of the equation--cannot and should not be oversold, as in reality consumers need to be prepared to take over the controls at a moment's notice. Failing to appropriately communicate the limitations or design systems with appropriate checks on foreseeable use and misuse of the system can cost lives and give consumers a false sense of security in an automated car's capabilities.
"Some companies appear to be struggling with the responsible deployment of new technologies. For example, Tesla's decision to market its system as "Autopilot," and its initial choice to fail to ensure that drivers keep their hands on the wheel, was troubling to us. Tesla has taken steps to improve Autopilot, but it has thus far failed to fully address these concerns. Of course, it is not just Tesla that offers self-driving features. The
"As the industry's regulator, NHTSA can ensure that companies put consumers first by collecting and publishing data on the systems, and when it has collected appropriate evidence, by setting robust safety standards. NHTSA has said that the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy guidance is an initial regulatory framework, designed to set voluntary best practices while the agency continues to research vehicle automation. The Policy rightly covers a wide range of subjects that companies should consider, but it is light on specific choices that companies must make to assure safety.
"Members of
"Second, members should recognize the fundamental steps--beyond the Federal Automated Vehicles Policy--that should be taken to ensure effective oversight of automated driving technologies. We have made a number of recommendations in oral comments to NHTSA, addressing various issues ranging from manufacturers being clear with consumers about the limitations of automated features, to the role of the states, to how the agency should approach ethical considerations.6
"But I want to highlight two recommendations in particular:
"First, we call on companies to give their safety data to NHTSA and the public. Right now, the safety benefits of autonomous driving are entirely speculative and based on data held internally. Regulators and consumers deserve to know the basis that companies use to determine that an automated technology is safe. This kind of disclosure would only help companies build trust in their products, which right now is lacking, according to recent research.
"Second, NHTSA's enforcement capabilities should be strengthened. NHTSA makes clear in a recent Enforcement Bulletin that it has the authority to deem reasonably foreseeable automated system risks to be safety-related defects. But NHTSA's practical ability to get unsafe cars off the road quickly has long been limited. For the agency to be the kind of tough watchdog consumers deserve,
"In conclusion, automotive innovation is essential and has brought about features with major benefits to consumer safety, such as automatic emergency braking. But our ambitions must be balanced with accountability. When emerging technologies bring with them new risks, it must be the company, and not the consumer, that shoulders them. This is particularly needed because consumers will be asked to trust and accept these new technologies. Public data, vigorous agency oversight, and attention to a total-vehicle and consumer-first approach, will be needed to ensure that safety keeps up with the speed of technological change.
"Thank you."
* * *
Footnotes:
1
2
3
4 See, e.g.,
5 Consumer Reports, "
6
7 See, e.g.,
MSTRUCK-5699834 MSTRUCK
CMS Modifies Permanent P-Code Allowing Outpatient Hospital Billing of the Verax PGD® Test
Disaster Assistance Tops $53 Million for Hurricane Survivors in South Carolina
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News