Fatal crash numbers remain high; advocates say "safety cameras" could help

Bridge Michigan reported this week that fatal crash numbers remain high in post-pandemic Michigan, with safety advocates again citing risky driving behavior as the reason.

On this week’s Talking Michigan Transportation podcast, Bridge Michigan reporter Mike Wilkinson talks about his analysis of the data and what he found. In a second segment, Pamela Shadel Fischer, senior director of external engagement at the Washington, D.C.-based Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), offers her organization’s perspective on the problem and how automated traffic enforcement could stem the tide.

Wilkinson collected data that supports these troubling findings. He discovered that despite a decrease in overall driving during the pandemic, fatal crash rates have increased by 30 percent over that time frame, particularly in the northern half of Michigan's Lower Peninsula.

The discussion begins with an exploration of worrying trends: an alarming rise in reckless driving and crashes, particularly in rural areas. This is due to several factors, including higher speeds, more risky behavior on the roads, and a concerning disparity in seatbelt usage between rural and urban areas.

Shadel Fischer is among advocates who say policy makers should promote measures that take advantage of automated technology to detect speeding. She also cites provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to allow for the use of the technology, what she terms "safety cameras."

Transcript

Jeff Cranson: 0:00

Hi welcome to the Talking Michigan Transportation podcast.

Jeff Cranson: 0:10

I'm Jeff Cranston.

Jeff Cranson: 0:16

Today I'm going to be revisiting a topic that we've talked about frequently on the podcast and unfortunately the situation doesn't seem to be improving and that has to do with an increase in speeds and other risky behavior on the roads, which is continuing to show more crashes and especially more fatal crashes, and it's keenly become a problem in rural areas, as illustrated in a well reported story by Bridge Michigan this week.

Jeff Cranson: 0:44

First I'll be talking with Mike Wilkinson, who is the reporter that wrote that story and crunched a lot of numbers and came up with a lot of data to support the troubling conclusions. Then later I'll speak with Pamela Shadel Fisher, who is the senior director of external engagement at the Washington DC based Governor's Highway Safety Association, and she'll offer her perspective on the problem and how automated enforcement and other things could try to make a difference. As promised, I'm with Mike Wilkinson, who is a reporter for Bridge Michigan and did some very good number crunching and thorough reporting on the latest crash statistics. Numbers are still going in the wrong direction, as we all know, but I think what I found most interesting and I guess I want to know from you, mike, if anything surprised you in terms of what you found about the rural areas.

Mike Wilkinson: 1:40

Well, I did not know until I did the reporting on it that those areas typically have had a higher accident rates. But what really did surprise me is the underlying reasons and I think you might talk to another expert later about that. But within Michigan, you see, some of the rural areas, particularly the northern half of the lower peninsula, still has higher fatal crash rates than they had in 2019 before the pandemic. It's up 30% over that time frame, as it has happened across most of the state. It rose in 2020 against all expectations because the driving went down so much, but it remained up in 21 and 22. So you see a 30% increase in fatal crashes in the upper half of the lower peninsula. But you also see a pretty big increase 25% increase in Metro Detroit 2022 over 2019.

Mike Wilkinson: 2:38

You see the Bay region which is up 21%, which includes a bunch of the thumb and some places that wrap around there, like here on. But surprisingly as well, one of the most rural parts of the state, the upper peninsula, saw an 8% decline compared to 2019. So it wasn't uniform that all the rural places were up and they weren't all up as much, but they did see some pretty substantial increases and even within some of those areas you see, places like here on to Skola counties jump pretty quite a bit A lot of times. With those there's less population and the numbers to start with are smaller. If there's just a few crashes the percentage number can go up fast. It's hard to move the number in Metro Detroit, so that's why it's kind of significant that it still was a 25% increase. It has 40% of the state's population.

Jeff Cranson: 3:34

It is puzzling about the upper peninsula, given that you don't get much more rural than that.

Mike Wilkinson: 3:40

You see five counties had an increase and then a couple counties were just kind of flat and then the rest were down. So that's positive for those areas but the rest of the state. We have a map on our website, bridgemicom, where it goes along with the story that you can kind of see the distribution of where the increases and the decreases are. And it is not uniform but some places do jump out. I was surprised that it was in rural areas. But one of the things that just surprised me is some of those behaviors that leads to some of those poorer outcomes. When you do have a crash you have lower seatbelt usage in the rural parts versus the urban parts. I was unaware of that before I did the story.

Jeff Cranson: 4:26

Yeah, I've talked to a lot of experts about this and one of the most puzzling things is that trend toward lack of seatbelt compliance that really took off with the pandemic. My personal theory on it was that it was the same mindset that led to other behavior. People that didn't like mask mandates and other mandates just decided you know what? I'm just not going to. I'm tired of the government telling me what to do, so I'm not wearing my seatbelt either, but I don't even know how you do that.

Mike Wilkinson: 4:58

I do think that disparity did exist beforehand. I might have been amplified by those concerns. My family is from rural Indiana and I just talked to my sister about it. I remember some of the crazy things my cousins would tell me to do, like blowing stop signs back in the 80s. I'm like well, what are you talking about? They say well, there's probably not any cars coming. It was just a different attitude. I think I was 15 and had my learners permit and I'm going 55 miles an hour through a stop sign in Indiana thinking this is insanity. But they live a different life. There aren't that many cars. If the corn is not high, you can see everywhere. So, I think some of that doesn't happen if you're driving through Warren or Rockford or wherever.

Mike Wilkinson: 5:49

I think that there's just so much more going on around you that I think you have to be vigilant.

Jeff Cranson: 5:55

It's interesting what you observe. You know you make that point about other rural areas, and it's a really good point about when the corn's high, because that really is a safety concern on its own when you're on those, those country roads. What do you think, though, anecdotally, what does what your reporting show track with what you saw driving, I guess, mostly in southeast Michigan the past few years?

Mike Wilkinson: 6:21

Well, I mean there has been a lot of riskier driving, more speeding, more people I mean they say there's more people are getting pulled over for distracted driving and for alcohol and drug use. So there's these behaviors that did jump, which makes complete sense if you're gonna have an increase in fatal crashes. At the same time, you had the miles ribbon go down as much as they did. Something had to happen. So you mean you do see the these behaviors that took place in the metro areas. You know when I was, where I live, which actually just a little south of the Michigan border, three and a half mile south in the northern Ohio, I was driving through an intersection with five lanes in each direction, broad daylight, coming to Spundown. That's right in the middle, the intersection. And you know I went around three times and I just I couldn't believe it. I've seen the all-terrain vehicles blowstop signs in Central City where I live. Just crazy stuff that I don't think I had seen before, or maybe I wasn't aware of it before. So I think a lot of people took advantage of the fact that a lot of departments were not out for whatever reason. There were times when the Detroit police were down hundreds of officers because of COVID and so they weren't obviously out there. And you know, Michigan State Police said we're gonna limit some of our contact.

Mike Wilkinson: 7:43

I think people might have gotten used to that that they were gonna pick up and take the drive a little faster.

Mike Wilkinson: 7:48

As you know, Michigan State police men mentions in my story he looked at the national trends and if you look at him you know I don't know if he's theory holds up, but it does track that Just people drive like idiots when there's times of distress in the country, and COVID being one. But if you look back, you know during the wars there have b een that during the oppressed of the 60s, there've been you know this uptick at times we look at it, I mean the traffic fatality rate because cars have gotten safer, infinitely safer. You know, campaigns like those against drunk driving, the number has gone down and the rate has gone down for the most part for a long time. But there would still be these increases and you notice that it was seem to always be timed with a moment of national distress. So maybe that you know COVID did the same thing, right, people just kind of got a little unmoored from the safety concerns.

Jeff Cranson: 8:43

Yeah, I think that's right and I think that it's now lost on you. I'm sure that when you talk about cars getting safer and all the technology we've created to make vehicles safer, that we also keep creating more technologies to distract us.

Mike Wilkinson: 8:56

Yeah, I wait, and then I think states like where I live in Ohio and then Michigan, have adopted, you know, distracted driving. You know we let's go hands-on. We have the tools and we don't have the phone in our hands. So I think those are good things. But you know the lighter cars that you have the devices in your car that keep you safe there is a crash, with all the wraparound airbags and then keep you in the right lane, they will stop you if you're getting too close.

Mike Wilkinson: 9:25

I think a lot people have just forgotten this. How many things have happened to cars that have just really dropped the fatal, the accident rate? And the fatal accident rate? I mean I think my story. I point out that I mean there was 54,000 traffic deaths in 1972, and it fell to 3,200 in 2014. I mean you just don't see those kind of drops in statistics too often. And, yeah, there's a lot more people in the country, a lot more motors in the country over that timeframe. So things have been done to keep us safer, but we do control a lot of that with our own behavior and it seems in the last couple of years we've been fighting the technology that is trying to keep us safe.

Jeff Cranson: 10:05

Yeah, well, it was good reporting and I'm really glad you put a spotlight on it. And again, I'm gonna talk to Pam Shadel Fisher later from the Governor's Highway Safety Association and she was assourcing your story and she had some good analysis and some good things to offer. Is there anything else that you wanna say about what you found in reporting your story?

Mike Wilkinson: 10:25

No, but I just think that we need to keep watching this, because the decline had been so profound for so long and we have had a slight increase, not just in the last three years, but it's slowly gone up for the last seven. At the same time, we've had these other benefits of technology. These things, I think, do need to be addressed. Does it mean, like the legislature just approved, being able to use automated cameras to catch speeders and traffic zones? Not completely approved yet, it's got a couple more hurdles, but a lot of people don't like that right. They don't want big brother looking over their shoulder and give them a ticket. But why is it illegal to speed? Why is it illegal to blow a stop sign? We're trying to keep people safe and maybe some are advocating like, I think, your next guest that we have to take advantage of technology on that end as well, not just in the car, but perhaps externally, to help law enforcement keep us safe.

Jeff Cranson: 11:24

I think that's right and I think that we have to really put the emphasis on deterrence, that and I know that everybody talks about transparency and making sure that people understand that this isn't about generating revenue for the state or any given municipality that really, in the ideal world, the police would say look, if the threat of a camera gets everybody to slow down and stop at red lights, then we've done our jobs. It's not about giving out tickets.

Mike Wilkinson: 11:53

I mean, I know I live in Toledo, Ohio and we have those, or we have had those. Everyone knows where they are and you don't blow the stop sign because you'll see someone blow. You'll see the little flash go off and go. Oh, they got another one. So someone loses some money. But I think the rest of us keeps us a little safer.

Jeff Cranson: 12:11

Yeah, I think that's right. Well said well thanks again, Mike, for taking time to talk about this and again for putting a spotlight on this. No problem, appreciate you reaching out and including me, and I'll be back in a minute with Pam Shadel Fisher, again from the Governor's Highway Safety Association. Stay with us. We'll have more on the other side of this important message.

MDOT Message: 12:37

The Michigan Department of Transportation reminds you that when a vehicle collides with another vehicle, person or other object, it is a crash, not an accident. By reducing human error, we can prevent crashes and rebuild Michigan roads safely.

Jeff Cranson: 12:55

Again, as mentioned, I'm with Pamela Shadel Fisher, who is the Senior Director of External Engagement at the Washington DC-based Governors Highway Safety Association. She's a repeat visitor to the podcast and has offered her organization's perspective on this problem in the past. And I really want to delve into automated enforcement as one of the solutions, because in that Bridge Magazine story Bridge Michigan Magazine story you talked about that specifically, Pam, thanks for being here again, Appreciate it.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 13:26

Yeah, just probably wish you could talk about something else for a change right.

Jeff Cranson: 13:29

I would like to have happy news.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 13:31

I think this is the key for all of us in working in this arena. But we're also, we have to realize that we are in a different situation than we expected to be, and it's time for us to, you know, kind of really buckle down and make some change here and get the numbers going back in the right direction.

Jeff Cranson: 13:52

Emphasis on the word buckle. Yes, so Mike's reporting really several findings. But all across Michigan, at least the lower peninsula of Michigan, crashes are especially in rural areas. Does that track with the rest of the country the rural crash numbers?

Pam Shadel Fisher: 14:11

Yeah, it does, and that's often surprising to people because most folks think that, you know, crashes happen in suburban and more urban areas where there's a lot more congestion.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 14:21

But we know that the number of people who are injured and killed in crashes in rural areas is significant higher than what is actually the population.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 14:30

So people have to understand there's danger on those roadways and oftentimes when we think about rural areas we think about narrower lanes, less safety protection for, you know, the drivers, people in the vehicles and their passengers, often more fixed objects that they can run into, like trees and poles and things like that, and also distance to emergency care in the event they're involved in a crash. Right, we know there are areas where literally it's, you know, hundreds of miles to the nearest trauma center hospital, even if it's a small hospital, and also getting first responders out to these folks. You know these are often volunteers, they're small departments, they have limited resources. So if you are involved in a crash in a rural area, your survival rates are going to be significantly less because of that time factor. You know we all heard about the golden hour, right, that first hour you're involved in a crash, getting that care to you within that first hour makes all the difference in terms of survival rate. So that's a big issue in rural areas for sure.

Jeff Cranson: 15:33

Yeah, several years ago journalism colleague of mine did some reporting based on some urban planning. You know data and you know, basically with the conclusion, that sprawl is dangerous for that reason, that kids in high school and urban areas were much less likely to be involved in a car crash than their counterparts out in the suburban and rural areas. And it's all the reasons that you're talking about.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 16:00

It's really true. You know it's funny, you know not to digress, but I live in an area in northern New Jersey. New Jersey is a very congested state, it's considered an urban state, but I live in a more rural county. People say you live all the way out there. I live, you know, kind of towards the Pennsylvania Delaware River the water gap is what we call it and I, you know, I have a son who's in his late 20s now, but when he was in high school and he went to high school and a school that was in a more of a rural area and I didn't let him drive to school much. But a lot of parents would say I only let my kids drive on the local roads, I don't trust them on the interstates and I've said I'm going to tell you something I said.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 16:41

it's much more dangerous on these local roads than it is on the interstates. You know, it really is inexperienced drivers in particular. They're often going too fast for these roadways. They, you know, they don't recognize the geometry of the road, they're not anticipating those curves and they're going too fast and they often lose control. And it's a real problem. And I had a lot of parents kind of go, what do you mean? What do you mean? You know, and I really have it.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 17:06

It is. It is totally counterintuitive. So you know, a lot of parents kind of was a wake up call for them and hopefully we get that message out to lots of folks in more rural areas in your state. You know, think about that. You know you really need to recognize that those roads can be particularly dangerous for inexperienced drivers.

Jeff Cranson: 17:26

I think the reason it's counterintuitive is because, just like you know, we make the comparison to plane crashes and what a big story it is If a plane goes down, which very rarely happens anymore because of technology and all we've done to make planes safer but when there's a crash on the freeway it's probably going to be worse. There aren't as many but they are worse and they create more media. So it creates this mindset that the freeways are more dangerous than the local roads, and it's just not true, absolutely.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 17:53

Absolutely.

Jeff Cranson: 17:55

So talk a little bit. We talked about this before. Do you see and things aren't really moving necessarily in Michigan, but in other states are you seeing any progress on automated enforcement or people coming around and starting to realize that you know, I get big brother and I understand all these things, but we're talking about saving lives here.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 18:15

Yeah, we are starting to see a shift in mindset, and I really think, you know, one of the upsides if there really is an upside to the pandemic was an understanding of the speed, the speeds that people are traveling on our roads, and particularly for the media and elected officials, they were kind of like whoa, you know what is going on out there. We had sounded the alarm early on because of conversations we had with our state highway safety offices, but we really started getting folks to understand that speed is a real problem on our roads and it is deadly. And so with that has come the understanding of what can we do about this? We cannot put a police officer on every road, on every corner, every intersection, if you will, so we need to look at things that can supplement that, and that's where automated enforcement I would like to refer to it as safety cameras, because that's really what their role is to improve safety, and I wish we you know people would start using that nomenclature. At least I'm trying to do that.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 19:16

Safety cameras can make a big difference. There's tons of research, tons of research, and I point most particularly to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Lots of research they've done on automated enforcement and its effectiveness in getting people to comply with the law. Stopping at red lights, slowing down and so forth. So you know, we always point to that research and I think that there is a greater understanding.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 19:42

The good news is in the in the recently passed it's been over a year now the new transportation funding bill, the Infrastructure Improvement and Jobs Act, IIJA, there is now a provision that state highway safety offices, that's, the members of the Governor's Highway Safety Association, these are the behavioral safety folks can use some of their federal grant funding for automated enforcement, for safety cameras in school zones and work zones. And that has kind of given the lack of a better way to put it a sense of legitimacy that we haven't had before to this technology. Again, the research shows it works. But there's always been this you know, pushback on, oh, you know, automated enforcement is nothing more than a money grab, you know, and it is big brother and so forth. But it really does point to the need to start using this technology in a way that can prevent crashes, can get people to slow down, can save lives. And when you think about school zones, how do you argue with wanting to protect children, right, and work zones right.

Jeff Cranson: 20:50

You make a really good point in that. The work zone language, specifically the bills addressing that in Michigan, I think, have a better chance of going somewhere. But I really like the term safety camera a lot. What is the language in the IIJA say? How does it talk about the technology?

Pam Shadel Fisher: 21:09

It talks about it as automated enforcement. It does talk about it that way. I mean, that's the standard nomenclature. But I think we're trying to create that understanding that this is a safety program. It is not about revenue generation. It should never be about revenue generation and it should be focused on. It should be a program that you bring in to a particular roadway on a roadway system where you've tried other things and people just are not doing what we need them to do to protect all other road users.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 21:46

So when you think about if you want folks to slow down in school zones, what is the speed limit, have we done that? What have we done infrastructure-wise to slow vehicles down? We talk about self-enforcing roads, right when we narrow the lanes or we put greater curb extensions out there, we have high visibility crosswalks and things like that. So if we can get drivers slowed down, we try all these things and if that still doesn't give us what we need, then we have this technology Because, again, as I said, we can't put a police officer on every roadway in every corner. So I think it's really important. But the other thing that's important about this we have this legitimacy now with IJA and how we're using this technology. But I also think it's really important that this has to be done in a fully transparent way and the public has to be brought in at the beginning.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 22:41

Before you ever put up cameras, put up signs, to understand what the system is, how it works, how these images are reviewed, who's reviewing them? It is reviewed by law enforcement, and that not every person that goes through, whether it's a school zone or maybe it's an intersection, if it's a red light camera or it's a work zone, it's going to get a ticket. They may not, because they may not have done something that is in line with what is required in order to be cited for this. So there's a review process. You can do that, but at the same time, I want people to understand that this technology is in real time. It is seeing what people are doing out there. So I always say if you don't want to be cited, get a red light camera or a speed camera citation, obey the law.

Jeff Cranson: 23:36

I mean, it's as simple as that, well your point about deterrence is a good one, and speaking of things that are counterintuitive, I used to think when a police agency would tell people ahead of time, on this weekend we're going to have a DUI checkpoint, and I think, well, why would you do that? Well, because they didn't want to bust people, they just wanted to deter the behavior, and it works?

Pam Shadel Fisher: 24:02

Yeah absolutely, it is. And so, to go back to that transparency piece, I think that's important is that, before you bring the technology in, it's really important that the community is part of this conversation and they understand why the decision has been made to use it and that it is all about the safety aspect They've tried potentially other things and also understanding exactly how it works. And then where will the money go? I think that's the other important piece of this. I firmly believe this and I've done a lot of work in this area. I did a report years ago on a pilot program in New Jersey and I was a consultant at the time.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 24:40

I believe the money should go back into safety improvements, plain and simple. Put it back into safety improvements. It should not be about doling it out to this person, this organism, whatever. Give it back to put it back into the system to make additional improvements. That's critical, and the most successful programs are those that do that. I mean, I think that's important.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 25:02

You should also be reporting on what's happening out there. So you're going to see, you're going to have a period where no tickets are written, there's warnings, and then you're going to start to turn these things on and you're going to start to issue citations, but over time you should see those numbers start to go down right. I mean, the goal of the work we do is to put ourselves out of business quite essentially, and I mean that's the concept. If you get these safety cameras working the way you want them to, people know they're there, they will comply and you'll see the numbers go down significantly. So we have to be really careful when we say you know we need these cameras to pay for themselves.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 25:42

Well, okay, but over time they're probably not going to. But if they're getting deterrence, if they're getting people to do what they're supposed to do, it is a solid investment. It is a return on investment because you're not having to respond to crashes which we all pay for from a societal standpoint. You know you don't need the responders to go out there. It's not going to impact a lot of different things. So you're getting a positive return on investment, even if you're spending money to pay for this system right.

Jeff Cranson: 26:11

There's multiple layers of ways that crashes and fatalities cost us all money. Right.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 26:18

Absolutely. Absolutely. So you know when I hear people argue oh, the cameras have to pay for themselves. Well, they may, in the beginning, very possibly, if you have some of that money, go back into the system, but over time they're not going to. If they work the way they're supposed to.

Jeff Cranson: 26:33

I think that's what makes your job so challenging. Is that you could say, over a given amount of time we employed new technology, new enforcement, new techniques and whatever reason deaths went down, but there's no way to prove it was because of that right. You can never prove how many lives you saved or why.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 26:52

No, it is difficult but you can. I'm going to use the state of Pennsylvania as a good example. They have had a five-year pilot program for speed cameras in work zones. They started this five years ago and they were able to really track the data, saying you know what was happening in our work zones with crashes before we started the technology, then we have it and so forth, and they've continued to monitor this very closely and they have seen crashes go down in those areas where they have this technology. No doubt about it, it has made a significant difference. How many more crashes have they prevented? Hard to say, right, we do know that they saw reduction in crashes, which is a very positive return.

Jeff Cranson: 27:37

That's good enough. Yeah, yeah, I think so.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 27:40

I mean, it's important. Here's the other thing that I'm gonna say this, it's my pet peeve, it drives me crazy. You know, when people say, oh, I don't like this technology, it is a money grab, it's unfair, it's just, and I said, but take a step back for a second. You know, we have a challenge here where we have a speeding problem in this country and we can't get people to understand how dangerous it is. Speed kills, no doubt about it's a factor in just about every crash, and speed doesn't just kill people in the vehicles, it kills people outside the vehicles. So we need to get people to understand. So we need to harness this technology and use it in a positive and equitable way. But there's this mindset of it's unfair. I don't like it. But we want technology in everything else we do right? We want it to bank, we want it to shop, we want it to do everything. You know I mean I don't remember the last time I set foot in the bank. You know I do everything online. I use technology.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 28:35

Same here. You know I take advantage of the prime day the other day and I spent some money and shopped online. You know we do this.

Jeff Cranson: 28:46

I get annoyed if I can't use Apple Pay now.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 28:48

Right exactly exactly so. We want technology, but you know, in this case we're saying but not when it comes to traffic safety, not when it comes to really traffic enforcement. No, that's not fair. And I say, you know, hey, we all have control over this. It really starts with us obey the law, slow down, do what you're supposed to do, and the technology is there and you're just another car passing through.

Jeff Cranson: 29:17

Well, the equity argument is important too, and that's why I think transparency really matters here, like you said. So, going back to provisions in the bill, what are you hearing about? What do you think about the provisions that would have automakers include technology to, you know, prevent drunk driving?

Pam Shadel Fisher: 29:37

I think it's fantastic, it's incredibly exciting and it's something that you know could really finally get us where we need to go. You know, you think about the strides we've made in changing the culture around drunk driving right, and we've got to really tip our hats to mad and the mad advocacy group for all the work they did to really make it socially unacceptable. And we saw numbers come down and we saw a lot of changes in legislation and we saw, you know, the requirement that you know states have a point, oh, eight blood alcohol content level and they tied it to federal funding. All those things together have made a big difference and we've gotten the numbers down, but we're sitting at the same place. We've been now for years. You know about, you know about a third of fatalities on our roadways have an alcohol component and impaired driving component and we're just stuck there. And what is it going to take for us to get those numbers to truly drop? And I truly believe this technology is a big part of the answer. I really, truly believe that.

Jeff Cranson: 30:39

How do you expect that fight to play out from a you know, from a legal standpoint?

Pam Shadel Fisher: 30:44

Well, I mean, they're doing a ton of testing. You know, I don't know how many folks who you know, who listened to this, are familiar with something called DADS. It's a technology that has been tested and is being tested to basically be able to determine if a person gets behind the wheel and they have a certain you know their breath that they can figure out that they you know the vehicle shouldn't start because they are impaired. So, you know, DADS is this wonderful technology that's being tested in several states, have had fleets you know, operating in this, and so there's there is data showing that it works and it makes a big difference. And there's this, you know the push is on to get a requirement that you know vehicle manufacturers get this technology into vehicles as soon as possible. And I think you know that this technology is going to continue to evolve.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 31:37

But I mean, if I were a parent that had a new driver my driver isn't so new anymore and that kind of indoctrinated him with you don't drink and drive. But if I were the parent of a new driver, I'd wanna have this technology in my vehicle for sure. I just think it makes sense and for my own peace of mind and safety, for myself. I go out that night and maybe I have an adult beverage and stuff and if I don't handle, I don't drink a lot, so it doesn't take much for me to to have my blood alcohol level be higher than, say, other folks. So I'd wanna know if it's saying to me you know you really shouldn't drive, you know? I want that reminder and I think there's more people that do want it than don't. I really truly believe that. And I think the other thing that's important is that we have absolutely seen safety as a selling point in vehicles. We have seen this people want safety in their vehicles.

Jeff Cranson: 32:36

Oh my gosh, they wouldn't. Yeah, I mean the automakers, it seems like certain ones especially. I mean you've seen Volkswagen, what they do with auto braking. They show the dad dropping off his daughter at school and then somebody stops in front of them that he wouldn't have seen otherwise. I mean they wouldn't be advertising those things if they didn't think it was important to the consumer.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 32:56

No, they sell. Safety sells and it's really important, and so this is another tool that we can. You know that automakers have you know for vehicle sales. I truly believe that I don't see people saying you know. No, I see people saying you know, give me more technology that's gonna improve my safety and keep me safe out there on the road. Not just you know how I'm operating the vehicle, thinking about everybody. You're sharing the road with right. You may not be a person who consumes alcohol and gets behind the wheel, but there are other people out there that do it. So if this technology can better protect me, I'm all for it, and most people want this kind of technology. So I think it's exciting and I do think that technology is gonna continue to drive so much of the changes that can really bring the numbers down in terms of crashes and injuries and fatalities. I do believe that.

Jeff Cranson: 33:48

Yeah, very, very well said. Is there anything else you wanna touch on that the organization is doing or focusing on right now that we haven't covered?

Pam Shadel Fisher: 33:57

Yeah, I think you know we've been really sounding the alarm for, you know, the last couple of years in particular about pedestrian safety, and I take this I connect this back to all of us who drive. I live in an area where I have to drive to get where I wanna go. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of services real close by. However, I would walk everywhere if I had the time, to be quite honest with you. But you know, as drivers, really there's a huge onus on us to think about how we're operating our vehicles, because the decisions we make, the things we do behind the wheel, impact everybody else out there on the road, and right now in our country, we are killing 20 pedestrians a day in this country 20 pedestrians a day. And you know, while many pedestrian fatalities happen in urban areas, they also happen on suburban and rural roads too. So we have to think about what we're doing out there, and I'm gonna bring this back to speed. Speed is the number one factor when you think about behavioral issues that impact people on foot. The slower we're going if there is a collision, the less likely that person will be seriously injured and killed. So we can get those speeds down. That's important. So I want us to think about this from a responsibility aspect, and I know I'm asking a lot of some people, but the onus is on us as car drivers. We're operating a machinery that has the potential to do some significant damage to others. There's not, you know, there aren't airbags on the front of the car for the pedestrian or the bicyclist. So we've got to think about what we're doing out there.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 35:26

And so, you know, I kind of I'm urging people, I'm kind of pleading with people to please, when you get behind the wheel, do kind of a reality check. You know, do I have a tendency to have a lead foot? You know, am I kind of I hear my phone boop or bing or ping or whatever it does, and I have this. I got a look. You know, I'm afraid I'm gonna miss something.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 35:47

You know, are we overly aggressive? You know, what are we doing out there that really is not good for us, our passengers, but also for everybody else that's out there on the road with us. And we've got to think about this because we can build and improve roadways and try to make them as safe as possible, we can educate like crazy, we can enforce using technology and traditional methods and we can have the best EMS systems in the world, but all this starts with the user right, so we need the public to join us in this effort. We cannot do this alone and, knowing what's happened over the past few years because of the pandemic, a lot of unsafe, reckless behavior out there on the road that's putting people at risk and the numbers are there to prove it.

Jeff Cranson: 36:32

So Including wrong way crashes, which is a scary phenomenon, but you said it well, I think we can't human-proof the system right, so no, I mean we can. The humans have to do the right thing.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 36:44

Yeah, we can try to make it, as you know, as helpful as possible to the drivers. People make mistakes, we get that, but we also have to think about what we're doing and we have to be as drivers, as roadway users, part of the solution.

Jeff Cranson: 36:59

And you, just you have to think about it every time you get in the vehicle. I'm always amazed on weekends when I see people driving aggressively and you know, because they're going up North or whatever and I just think, okay, I get it. Maybe Monday through Friday for most people. You know you were in the rat race and you were hustling to get to work, but why, on the weekend, are you still in such a hurry? Why are you driving so aggressively?

Pam Shadel Fisher: 37:23

Yeah, I mean, hey, it's the weekend. Let me bring it down a notch right.

Jeff Cranson: 37:27

Yeah, yeah, but it's a habit, right that we bring it.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 37:31

We are a hassled and hurried lot out there hustling to get from one place to another and in that hustle to get there we often, you know, don't think about safety, and that should be priority number one.

Jeff Cranson: 37:44

Yeah, well, thanks, Pam. As always, I really appreciate it.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 37:48

I know we'll continue this conversation because it's not going to get fixed tomorrow, so no, we will keep at it and hopefully we can see the numbers start going in the right direction.

Jeff Cranson: 38:00

Yeah, I greatly appreciate your advocacy.

Pam Shadel Fisher: 38:03

Thank you so much and thank you for what you do as well.

Jeff Cranson: 38:06

I'd like to thank you once more for tuning in to Talking Michigan Transportation. You can find show notes and more on Apple Podcasts or Buzzsprout. I also want to acknowledge the talented people who help make this a reality each week, starting with Randy Debbler, who skillfully edits the audio, Jesse Ball, who proofs the content, Courtney Bates, who posts the podcast of various platforms, and Jacke Salinas, who transcribes the audio to make it accessible to all.