Written by: Stephen Rogers | April 5, 2024

The rise of autonomous vehicles (AVs) promises to revolutionize transportation in the United States, offering potential benefits such as increased safety, improved traffic management, and greater accessibility. However, this burgeoning technology also poses unique challenges, which need careful legislative oversight to balance innovation with public safety and privacy concerns.

Let's take a look at the current landscape of legislation regarding autonomous vehicles, assessing its potential benefits and harms, and considering the road ahead.

Current State of Legislation

The legislative approach to autonomous vehicles (AVs) has been a patchwork of federal and state regulations. At the federal level, the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have issued guidelines for the development and testing of AVs, focusing on safety, cybersecurity, and privacy. These guidelines are voluntary, leaving room for industry innovation while also encouraging states to develop their own regulations.

State laws vary widely, with some states like California, Arizona, and Florida leading in AV testing and deployment through supportive legislative frameworks. These states have enacted laws that allow for extensive testing of autonomous vehicles on public roads, with certain requirements around reporting, safety drivers, and insurance.

This stakeholder page lists some of the key bits of legislation since 2022 that have been enacted or vetoed. Several bills are very forward looking, seeking to pave the way for wider adoption of self driving vehicles. Florida's H425 mandates the Florida Department of Transportation to work with various partners to develop standards for grading roads based on their compatibility with autonomous vehicles, considering safety and structural adequacy. California's SB500 prohibits the operation of autonomous vehicles that are not zero emission, from 2030. Arizona's SB1333 revises existing statutes to clarify liabilities and procedures if autonomous vehicles are involved in accidents.

A Mixed Blessing?

The Arizona bill touches on a key area of concern. One of the most touted benefits of autonomous vehicles is the potential to drastically reduce accidents caused by human error. With sensors and algorithms that can detect and respond to traffic conditions more quickly than a human driver, AVs could significantly decrease the number of traffic fatalities. But they raise complex ethical questions, such as decision-making in unavoidable accident scenarios. Additionally, determining liability in the event of an accident involving an AV is complicated.

AVs can communicate with each other and with traffic management systems to optimize traffic flow, reducing congestion and emissions. This connectivity can lead to more efficient use of roadways and potentially reduce the need for costly infrastructure expansions. But with the increase in connectivity, autonomous vehicles are susceptible to hacking and cyberattacks, which could compromise passenger safety and privacy. Ensuring the security of these vehicles is paramount, necessitating rigorous standards and continuous monitoring. There is also widespread concern about the safety of such vehicles - statistics about their reliability don't hold much sway against a visceral anxiety caused by seeing a car driving itself. Science fiction has taught us, in such scenarios they will end up running amok.

Autonomous vehicles could also provide mobility solutions for those who are currently unable to drive due to age, disability, or other factors, offering newfound independence and access to essential services.

Perhaps the issue causing most concern at the moment is the risk that the rise of AVs could disrupt employment for millions of Americans who rely on driving jobs, such as truck drivers, taxi drivers, and delivery workers. While new jobs will undoubtedly be created in the tech sector, there is a concern over the transition period and the potential for significant job displacement.

In response to safety and jobs concerns, California passed AB316 last year with near unanimous support from lawmakers. The bill sought to require all AVs over 10,000 pounds (which includes commercial trucks) to have a human 'safety operator'. The bill was backed by labor unions led by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which fear job losses when the technology is introduced. Opponents of the bill claimed it would hamper chances of achieving autonomous hauling of goods, for example, from seaports in Southern California to locations across the state, and cause future investments in autonomous infrastructure to flow to other states.

Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill, but said that any regulations framed by the department of motor vehicles would be transparent, with inputs from stakeholders and experts to ensure safety. Lawmakers promptly reintroduced the legislation as AB2286, spurred on by accidents involving Waymo robotaxis which led to a taxi being torched in San Francisco.

Current Legislation

Bills making their way through legislatures across the country in the current sessions tackle the issues in a number of ways. This stakeholder page lists almost 50 bills introduced. Florida attempted to introduce a bill similar to California's AB316, only to have it die in committee. DC District Council has passed a law enforcing stricter regulations on autonomous vehicle testing in the District. A bill that has been enacted in South Dakota established a new framework for operating AVs in the state, setting out legal liability, financial responsibility, accident protocols and so on.

The Road Ahead

As the United States navigates the transition to autonomous vehicles, it is clear that a balanced legislative approach is essential. This should include:

• Developing comprehensive federal standards to ensure safety and interoperability, while allowing states the flexibility to innovate.

• Investing in cybersecurity infrastructure to protect against threats.

• Creating transition programs for workers affected by the shift to autonomous vehicles, including retraining and education initiatives.

• Addressing ethical and liability concerns through inclusive dialogue with stakeholders and developing clear guidelines.

The momentum towards removing human drivers from vehicles is building, but deep unease remains among those who fear for their jobs or their safety. It may well turn out to be a generational shift. Just as people in the 1930s, as commercial air passenger transport began to take off, were slow to trust the apparently insane idea that huge metal tubes could safely fly like birds, the current generation of drivers who are used to being in control may not want to trust self driving systems. But future generations, growing up with the technology, won't give it a second thought, just as the majority of people today treat air travel as safe and routine.

It was a long journey to make air travel the safest form of transport, involving unprecedented international cooperation over safety regulations and procedures. Time will tell if people can be convinced that driverless cars are the safest means of transport on the roads, regardless of what the statistics say.

About BillTrack50 – BillTrack50 offers free tools for citizens to easily research legislators and bills across all 50 states and Congress. BillTrack50 also offers professional tools to help organizations with ongoing legislative and regulatory tracking, as well as easy ways to share information both internally and with the public.