WASHINGTON — After privacy concerns arose, three Republican senators, including Texan John Cornyn, introduced legislation to repeal a provision that would mandate the development of advanced drunken driving prevention technology and require their use in all new passenger cars.
The drunken driving tech provision had been celebrated last fall by advocacy organizations like Mothers Against Drunk Driving and Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety when President Joe Biden signed it into law as part of the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
But it became a point of contention for some Republicans worried about potential intrusions on privacy from new technology — in cars, appliances or otherwise — used in millions of American households.
The provision in the infrastructure bill gives federal regulators at minimum three years to determine what kind of technology should be required as part of the new vehicle standard, and automakers would then have two more years to actually implement that standard in their vehicles.
Natalie Yezbick, Cornyn’s press secretary, said that the senior Texas senator is supportive of the many measures that already exist to prevent drunken driving, like the placement of steering wheel breathalyzers and ignition locks in the vehicles of convicted offenders.
However, “the Senator is concerned with the federal government having broad, unchecked authority to place passive technology in vehicles that could easily violate privacy rights of law-abiding citizens,” Yezbick said in a statement to The Dallas Morning News.
Cornyn, a co-sponsor of the Republican-led legislation intended to repeal the provision, titled the Safeguarding Privacy in Your Car Act of 2022 and introduced by Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., is not alone in his preemptive concern.
After it passed in November, a senior policy analyst at the American Civil Liberties Union said the provision gives the Department of Transportation so much latitude in developing and implementing the technology that we could end up with a “privacy disaster.”
Albert Fox Cahn, founder and executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project watchdog group, and Nina Loshkajian, one of the group’s law fellows, wrote in an op-ed for The Hill that “not only is this sort of surveillance mandate invasive, biased and ultimately unconstitutional; it won’t work.”
But for people like Fairview resident Steve Mason, who’s volunteered with MADD since his son, Chris, died in a drunken driving accident in 2005, privacy concerns are just an obstacle that can and should be overcome to get the prevention tech into cars.
Mason said when he first saw that Rounds, Cornyn and Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., had introduced legislation to repeal the provision, it “made [his] blood boil.”
Every time he reads about a drunken driving accident, Mason said, he thinks about the families.
“You just cannot fathom the impact that it has had on our family and all the other families,” he said.
In 2021, 1,100 people were killed and 2,560 were seriously injured in drunken driving accidents on Texas roads, according to the Texas Department of Transportation. On average, one person dies every 7 hours and 57 minutes in Texas because of a DUI-alcohol-related traffic crash.
On the flip side, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, an independent nonprofit organization, estimated that systems in cars that restrict the driver’s blood alcohol concentration to less than the legal limit could prevent more than 9,000 deaths a year.
Car manufacturers are exploring a few different types of technology that could detect and prevent drunken driving, and Hyundai has said it’s made headway on a smart cabin controller that can monitor the occupant for signs of drowsy driving.
Congress didn’t specify what kind of technology cars should include, just that it has to be able to accurately detect drunken driving, and that it has to be “passive.”
MADD believes the provision in the infrastructure bill has the potential to ultimately eliminate drunken driving.
“It’s a complicated rule, but it’s going to be, we believe, the most significant safety rulemaking that ever comes out of the U.S. Department of Transportation in terms of potential life saved,” said Stephanie Manning, MADD’s chief government affairs officer.
Manning said MADD has met with Cornyn’s staff to address his concerns and find ways to work through them.
“Let’s figure out a way to address these concerns. We don’t want to compromise anybody’s privacy, we don’t want data being used in a way that puts anyone at risk,” Manning said. “We just want to stop crashes from happening.”
____
