Bill Overview
Title: To prohibit the Secretary of Transportation from issuing any rule, regulation, or guidance that promotes the use of speed safety cameras, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill prohibits the Department of Transportation from promoting the use of speed safety cameras in any rule, regulation, or guidance.
Sponsors: Rep. Perry, Scott [R-PA-10]
Target Audience
Population: People who travel on roads globally
Estimated Size: 330000000
- Speeding is a global issue contributing to a significant number of traffic accidents every year.
- Speed safety cameras are used in various countries to deter speeding and improve road safety.
- The removal of promotion for speed safety cameras might affect how frequently they are implemented globally.
- Countries or regions that follow U.S. transportation guidance may reconsider or reduce the implementation of speed safety cameras.
Reasoning
- The population affected by changes in speed safety camera policy could include a wide range of road users, including urban and rural drivers, commuters, and professional drivers.
- The budget constraint implies that the policy is significant but not absolute for small communities or non-major highways.
- Policy impacts might be non-uniform across the U.S. due to varied driving conditions and cultural acceptance of speed cameras.
- The wellbeing impact could derive from perceived road safety, reduced or increased traffic incidence, and the sheer psychological effect of monitoring.
Simulated Interviews
logistics manager (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've always been wary of speed cameras, but I know they keep me in check.
- Without them, I might not stick to speed limits as strictly, especially if I'm late.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
software developer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel safer as a pedestrian and a cyclist when cameras are around.
- There's an inherent risk in lowering road safety standards.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
retired (Rural Arkansas)
Age: 62 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I heard about these cameras on TV but don't see them much here.
- Doesn't affect me since I rarely drive far.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
student (Miami, FL)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think speed cameras keep aggressive drivers in check.
- Without them, I worry there might be more accidents.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
taxi driver (New York, NY)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Speed cameras are important in controlling traffic but also a burden of fines.
- Less enforcement might mean more dangerous driving situations I'm stuck with.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 5 |
truck driver (Houston, TX)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Without cameras, I fear speeding might increase, making it more dangerous.
- It's enough stress managing heavy coastal traffic when others speed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 6 |
graphic designer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support speed cameras as they often deter reckless driving, which is a concern on scenic routes.
- Reduction in safety measures would alter my road trip considerations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 9 |
retired teacher (Seattle, WA)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I welcome more cameras for safety.
- Removing said deterrents might embolden risky driving around pedestrians.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
real estate agent (Denver, CO)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't mind cameras, as they act as speed deterrents.
- Policy changes won't stop irresponsible drivers, that's concerning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 6 |
freelance writer (Portland, OR)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having speed cameras around increases my confidence as a cyclist.
- Their removal sets back road safety efforts I'd advocate for.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 2: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 3: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 5: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 10: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $700000000)
Key Considerations
- The impact on road safety is substantial, as speed cameras are statistically proven to reduce speeding and related accidents.
- Local jurisdictions might still choose to implement speed cameras independently of federal guidance, affecting local trends.
- Public perception of surveillance and privacy regarding speed cameras may influence political decisions and policy responses to this bill.