auto safety industry leaders appeared on capitol hill to discuss the benefits of reauthorizing funding from the national highway traffic safety administration. the house energy and commerce subcommittee hearing is to hour and 20 minutes.

the subcommittee will come to order. chairman recognized himself for five minutes opening statement. good morning. and thank you to our witnesses for joining us today. today's educational hearing on the motor vehicle safety in the safe state of the automotive industry i look forward to a robust and informative discussion that will help congress uband specifically the subcommittee gain a clear understanding of motor vehicle safety issues and its regulator the national highway traffic safety administration. automobile safety has been a long-standing topic of the subcommittee will play a crucial role in ensuring vehicles and the roadways are safe for families workers of the traveling public. automobiles are deeply woven

into the fabric of the american life. automobiles about the cultural icon and a pillar of the american dream. that's why today's hearing marks the beginning of the bipartisan process to develop a motor vehicle safety title as part of the broader efforts to re-emphasize our surface transportation programs. the subcommittee is spearheading a bipartisan process to solicit stakeholder process. we will seek priorities from committee members to ensure the product reflects priorities of our diverse membership. our primary objective will be to find solutions to address the tragic reality that nearly 40,000 americans die annually from motor vehicle crashes. staggering and tragic statistic. these crashes also lead to hundreds of billions of economic losses and cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars. amidst the plans that plays a

central role in addressing the pressure issue through its education programs regulatory work and enforcement efforts. congress must ensure the agency is equipped and needed to fulfill its mission and save lives. we must continue to recognize the economic importance of the automotive sector congress must examine how her leg was actually can foster american leadership. this includes ways to modernize and streamline relations while maintaining our strong safety standards. we must embrace the future mobility the emergence of automated vehicle technology presenting generational opportunity to restore independence cto millions of elderly and disabled americans and bolster economic rowth.

the chairman recognizes ranking member caskey. i want to congratulate and thank kathy chase with advocates. and has longer neck than that. exhibits advocates. want to say that we were able to pass a number of pieces of

legislation meso we will talk about later. i do want to say that it is true that about 70,000 people have died on the highway and we have to do better than that. these numbers that are going up not down. rep to focus on the things that what is the things that will

thank you witnesses for being here today. recent transformative developments in vehicle have been exciting to see. they speak to the need for congressional action one topic at a hearing today will be autonomous vehicles. is someone who represents most of the san francisco peninsula, the epicenter of economists vehicle developing. is truly been remarkable to see and experience the technology firsthand. potential for transforming traffic safety and eventually leading to rectifying. i believe is a develop so we have a responsibility to make sure it's safe and not causing unintended consequences. this is when my colleagues and i have been asking to collect information about these figures. the agency is agdeclined to do

so. despite the fact that more and more atvs are driving on our roads. this is not a partisan issue. they could've done more in the previous administration another thing that my agency has looked not for you. when technology is the replacement additional tactile controls with dashboard touchscreens, among other development. flooring living technologies driving and i believe we should be back to my recently introduced driver technology and posting safety act including the use of

touchscreens driver attention and therefore pedestrian safety. >> the chairman recognizes the chairman of the full committee, mr. guthrie for five minutes of opening statement. want to say good morning and thank you to all of our witnesses were being here, we appreciate you being here. this hearing provides an opportunity an important opportunity for this committee to better understand the current state of the vehicle safety emerging trends and critical role of the national highway traffic safety administration. the committee on energy commerce has long played the role in safety at the core of

the work. as chairman noted, today's hearing the beginning of the thoughtful process bipartisan process to develop motor vehicle safety title as part of a broader surface transportation reauthorization efforts. understanding the important role the auto industry role my district is home to many automotive mocomponent parts manufacturers and creates thousands of jobs. is important to ensure motor vehicles and their components meet the highest safety standards to meet the public and millions of workers who build and maintain the vehicles on our roads together our committee will develop smart safety first policies that modernize regulations to meet the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century. this is also a moment to lead globally and emerging technologies particularly in artificial intelligence.

autonomous vehicles provide an important real-world application of ai technologies and demonstrate substantial benefits ai can provide to the public through significant academic and social advancement. whether through reduced traffic fatalities we need to support the mobility challenges. they can offer independence and millions of americans. our work on atvs demonstrate congress to existing regulatory frameworks to appropriately regulate sector specific ai. i will look forward to working with ranking member bloke and all of our colleagues on motor vehicle and safety issues in congress. i appreciate witnesses for being here i look forward to your s.testimony.

>> chairman recognizes the committee for opening statement. fatalities in the economic cost of the safety crisis is enormous almost $1 trillion a year medical bills emergency services plus productivity insurance clause workplace laws, legally and property damage. drug distracted and drowsy driving is speeding by relatively small number serial offenders are the leading cause of fatalities and injuries on the roads and right now there are proven solutions to the safety crisis but unfortunately they have not been widely adopted by automobile manufacturers pick up congress took action to address automobile safety issues in 2031 and directs the national highway traffic safety

administration to deter drunk driving and ever child deaths in hot cars and cars in their links. unfortunately many of these rulemaking's are not yet complete. the auto industry is looking to challenge one of the lifesaving rules they completed last year. rather than strengthening nhtsa the trump administration is undermining nhtsa's critical work to make our roads safer. the cuts at nhtsa have led to highly skilled to move forward with the lifesaving work nhtsa is hamstrung by the trumpet

administration executive orders requiring the appeal of the central auto safety rules before adopting the rules. instead of focusing on proven solutions to make cars sold safer the trumpet administration is bidding on the promise of vehicles. while driverless vehicles have shown potential, they are not by themselves a solution to dangerous driving and raise their own concerns. i would like to yield the last 2 and a half minutes of my time to represented single. many of you know i am a car girl, born and raised in michigan part of the american industry i work for the industry for more than 30 years. our auto industry need certainty.for too long it's been treated by like a political football cross between a ministrations with

rules and regulations constantly changing. that's not how we support long-term investment protect jobs and stay competitive in a global marketplace that's moving full speed toward electrification and advanced technologies. for decades congress has worked in a bipartisan way to strengthen auto safety. for us to do that, we need a fully functioning nhtsa too long since we've seen t.

we all drive the same roads and face the same threats we need to get as the ranking members that a number of rulemaking done and out to the committee ages ago.ty like child safety and guiding. i look forward to working together to support nhtsa advance vehicle safety and innovation protect consumers and keep the american auto industry globally competitive and number one in the world. kindly back. >> this concludes opening statements. all members opening statements will be made part of the record. we thank our witnesses for being here today and taking the time to testify before the subcommittee our witnesses today are mr. john mazzella, president ceo of alliance for automotive innovation.

mr. david harkey, president insurance institute for highway safety and highway data institute. the light on the timer in front of you will turn from green to yellow when you have one minute left. and mr. bizzell you are recognized for five minutes.

>> five percent of gdp, fa10 million american jobs public $1.2 trillion into the economy every year. but the industry is experiencing headwinds. this includes china where we are facing unfair competition from government-subsidized vehicles and technology. and it also includes tariffs. which are a significant near-term challenge. and of the president and his team are finalizing agreements with our automotive trading partners to deliver some clarity, that's positive. but i will say this, automakers are committed to building and investing in america. but auto making is a long leadtime high asset manufacturing business. in existing automotive facilities and global supply chains are massive and complex.

they can't be relocated or redirected overnight. it takes time. against the backdrop of geopolitical and trade uncertainty performing should be a top priority for congress. when nhtsa works it actually strengthens the industry's global competitiveness. can help speed the deployment of lifesaving automotive technologies, it can lead to innovation increase deportability and ensure the industry is competitive against china. the auto industry needs a functioning and effective safety regulator. we don't have that today. here's what i years. nhtsa has become less transparent and less collaborative. agency isn't nimble rulemaking is take too long if they come at all. rules accumulate even when

summer clearly obsolete. we well, there were nearly 40,000 deaths on our road last year it is i shocking and tragic number that is not acceptable to anyone and comes at a time when vehicles are safer and come equipped with more driver assistance technology and crash protection than at any time in history. so why is this? we are a safety partnership once existed automakers today are surprised by their actions. we shouldn't be surprising each other, instead we need a revitalized partnership, real dialogue and unaligned research agenda to achieve what i assure you is a shared mission. to help save lives and make our roads safer. i want to know we've had good important dialogue with secretary duffy i have seen some significant actions to advance safety and balance fuel economy revelations. we modernize and fix htsa?

nhtsa look at all federal motor vehicle safety standards and ask this question, are they reducing fatalities and increasing crash survivability or are they obsolete regulatory roadblocks that hurt innovation and delay deployment of lifesaving technologies or congress should establish a national autonomous vehicle framework. interviews represent the next

leak in personal mobility. provide transportation for people with disabilities and transform how we work d and liv. countries around the world are racing to dominate autonomy. america should be leading and operating under a set of national standards safer and immediate av deployment. we want a functioning and modern nhtsa. an agency properly stocked with enough resources to carry out its primary mission, vehicle safety.and a partner in american innovation and progress. thank you, i'm happy to take your questions. >> thank you for the opportunity to share the perspective of the insurance institute for highway safety. on the current state of road safety and the same at the role of nhtsa to address challenges the united states is in the

middle of the road safety emergency. crash deaths increase nearly 30% between 2014 and 2022 33,000 42,000 the spike is not a global trend. since creation in 1966 nhtsa has played a key role in moving forward through the issuance of safety standards for example the requirement that all vehicles be equipped with airbags to save at least 70,000 mice. beyond relation nhtsa's new car assessment nhprogram is an important source of information for consumers shopping for the safest vehicles.

the office of defect investigation is critical for providing consumers with defect notification working with the auto industry to make sure problems resolved quickly. more than a third of our fatalities on the roadways can be attributable to risky behaviors nhtsa behavioral research program has historically been the only large source of priming the country to help us understand these challenges and develop implement and evaluate interventions through demonstration projects. one of the most influential demonstrations that the engaged in click it or ticket. a high visibility seat belt enforcement program that began as a public-private partnership

funds allow for nationwide expansion of the program by 2003 and this campaign was a key component of a remarkable cultural shift. increasing front seat belt is from 67 to 84 percent having robust safety data is critical to understand what is and is not working and where to invest limited nhtsa data collection enables much of the research that ihs and other organizations conduct. we have repeatedly called on this for antilock braking

systems. in the meantime, more than 30 countries of all mandated the lifesaving technologies. , 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law nhtsa is instructed to issue a rule the deadline of 2024 for final roles of past and only issued advance notice of proposed rulemaking. mandate would likely provide just push it needs to potentially saving nearly 11,000 lives each ear.

we recently launched an we are going 30 by 30. the goal of produce u.s. fatalities 30% by 2030. we hope all stakeholders around the room this implied specific actions to contribute to the effort. for our partner to focus on this commercial vehicle safety inside and outside the vehicles. tsl role to play but doing so requires strong leadership, sense of urgency and greater willingness to act. thank you for your time and interest this morning. >> good morning.

i'm kathy chase president of advocates for highway and auto safety. abacus is a national lives will be property-casualty insurance agents and health consumer law enforcement to grips. working to go to prevent crashes, save lives, reduce injuries and curb economic costs.thank you for holding this hearing at a time when motor vehicle crash fatalities are at a historic high. america's roads we all rely on some form of motor vehicle for commutes and carpools for e-commerce packages to be delivered and first summer family vacations. unfortunately, we also experience tremendous tragedies are roadways. more than 40,000 people were killed and two point formally people were injured and crashes in 2023. more than 7000 workers austrians, over 6000 were motorcyclists, and more than 1000 rebecca soloists. for r all of these groups experienced significant increases over the last decade.

the leading computing factors are impaired driving speeding, unrestrained vehicle occupants and distracted driving. while this is the tragic news is that prison solutions are available and actionable. sent its inception in 1989 we worked with the holistic approach focusing on safe vehicles and safe roadway

environment. this comes with his eventual price tag is the constant pressure is approximately $40 billion. this means every person living with u.s. essentially crash taxable $1000. from 1968 through 2019 safety standards have prevented more than 800,000 deaths 49 million nonfatal injuries and damage to 69 million vehicles. there's no safety standards for the newer safety technologies. additionally the technologies are building blocks for av.

and av to detect and respond to vehicles and infrastructure in all conditions. this is why ranking member should cost the leadership of the 21st-century smartcards act congresswoman dylan's ng leadershipon drunk driving with the halls act and other issues must be brought bover t finish line by the u.s. department of transportation for advance in the next transportation reauthorization bill. in that vein, auto manufacturers and components claim that av's are safer because they don't drive drunk

distracted or tired. nobody is disputing that. but they may also cause crashes that sober alert and engaged drivers would routinely avoid. especially with all this technology to be the watchdog and top on the beat to keep everybody in the roadway say. the agency conducts important research imperative crash data and issues minimum safety standards. its ability to effectively protect the public necessitates sufficient funding and resources. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. name is jeff barrett, the ceo of the autonomous vehicle

industry association which represents the leading av companies that's committed to american leadership autonomous technology o today policymakers are faced with the choice. we can continue to lead avoid the federal level which helps

china's ambitions to dominate the global market and put u.s. states at the forefront of policymaking desperately in the direction committee sscould leading the way on federal framework for av's across all vehicle classes regardless of vehicle weight or size. data shared in my written testimony demonstrates what we've long known to be true. those who are passengers and autonomous vehicles quickly become comfortable with the technology and want to experience it again and gain.

we are optimistic with confirmed administrators at nhtsa and csa that were as yet to come. department of transportation action must be paired with activity from congress. want to highlight a few critical policy items needed and federal av legislation or from us doj. we believe the public trust in navies is essential to the and the industry must earn and maintain the trust everything okay. for an engagement first and

work closely lowith local first responders and law enforcement. last year we released via trust initiatives. to build and sustain public trust in v. to address requirements of the manually operated driver

controls. autonomous vehicles are an opportunity to reimagine what motor vehicles look like and how they are designed paving the way for greater accessibility safety and social utility. thank you for your attention, i look forward to any questions. >> thank you for your testimony. i will begin questioning and recognize myself for five minutes. this question is for you but i also want to go to mr. bizzell of her comments. as autonomous vehicles continue to advance much of the testing and deployment occurs in dense urban regions. however, there's a lot of rural

and remote areas including my state of idaho. most of geography would be considered rural or remote. that presents unique challenges with connectivity, tracking capacity, and so on. also with road markings, which could be obscure or nonexistent in some cases. can you comment how the industry is working to address some of those challenges in the av industry? >> the first thing to note is that when we talk about autonomous vehicles we are talking about autonomous driving systems. it's confined to operational design domain. a set of safety limiting

factors when the industry is looking to go into a new geographical area, the first thing they do is very expensive testing and mapping to understand many of the unique characteristics of where it is they can operate. this is why you see a very deliberate and study deployment going on highway by highway were not in a hurry to ultimately deploy the vehicles we will make sure safety is at the forefront. as we look to expand the footprint of autonomous vehicles into more geography across the country we need to make sure we take into account the special circumstances that you know. we been successful across many motives transportation. >> thank you. >> thank you mr. chairman. to build on what mr. farrell just talked about i think it's

important to recognize when we talk about highly automated vehicles we are also talking in addition to level iv vehicles, level iii this case we think there's a few cases that will support drivers and passengers who take long distances and benefit from eyes off safe av vehicle, and the personally on context. what this comes down to is that we need a national framework to make sure we are building use cases that support all consumers. >> the vast majority of americans are avid users of cell phones. can you share comments on the research you might have access to.

will. >> we know the distracted driving is a growing problem. it's one that the official numbers from the national highway traffic safety administration, and the 3000 or 4000 range in terms of fatalities that have been assigned as a result of distracted driving are researched and others have shown the number may be as high as 10,000. we know this is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. noel dell mobile phone device in our hands is a big part of that. has to be e addressed in a coup ways. we can do as much as we can with awareness and education of the general public. that works to some extent. at one of the things we've seen in our research is there are some policy changes that can be implemented. changing those laws from a hold and use to simply hold.

i think there's something that's really important moving forward it's gonna be a combination of what can we do from an awareness fstandpoint and from an enforcement standpoint, and more importantly as we think of the future, what can we do from a technology standpoint in the vehicle itself.nk there are ways we can limit the use and i think it's gonna be really good. >> i don't have time for another question that i want to give you i'm good and send a written question having to do with opportunities for elderly and disabled. with that i yielded to the ranking member for five minutes. >> i would like to ask a few questions of you. there are plenty more things we could do to make auto safety,

want to talk about some. we passed kids in hot cars, we passed that. i thought we were to be able to save the children. what can we do about that? also drunk driving. and all that's really hard but we still haven't succeeded. >> thank you for your leadership on asthe issues of h cars. is just devastating that we are still losing children either forgot in the backseat maybe they fell asleep.

surely we can get the detection system to vehicles so the children don't suffer both fatalities and injuries. as you mentioned, the bipartisan infrastructure watch directed the u.s. department of transportation issue final rule to have equipment and vehicles that would alert people if a child is left in the car. we have not seen action on it and we implored this committee and congress to continue oversight efforts that that rule can be brought over the finish line. our organization is held numerous demonstrations of which you been a part of over the years. showing the technology exists and works. this is not something a new technology has to be invented for. there and we need to get into cars. >> we really do need to work on this. >> absolutely.you brought up impaired driving that's another

issue where approximately 10,000 people are being killed every year on our roadways. there is technology. i personally have been in cars that had some of the impaired driving technology systems that mr. bizzell's organization held a demonstration about a year ago. where they show the passive systems can detect and prevent people from getting behind the wheel. that's really what we need. until the technology is required as required in the bipartisan structure law the steps can be taken there's a bipartisan and dwi act that should be enacted. people have been who had the in their car admitted stop them from driving while impaired and change their driving behaviors.

in terms of getting impaired drivers of the roadways. >> do we need to talk to the drivers the manufacturers to get busy on these. >> there is no soreason to wait for the centmac department of transportation to require the systems and cars although we do support minimum performance standards because we don't want a situation where subsystems are underperforming when a consumer is expecting them to act a certain way but right now there are automatic emergency braking systems. cars have the ability to be to continue their work to get the systems in the cars. >> we can definitely do better. >> and your back.

thank you to the ranking member. mr. guthrie. >> thank you very much. one of the things we had in the committee has been american global leadership in ai are values and china's values. talk about how continue to advance can help american global leadership in ai. >> thank you very much for the question and thank you for all your leadership on autonomous vehicles. will start by saying i think autonomous vehicles are really useful example of what we can do with artificial

intelligence. people can be passengers they see that their goods are being selectively delivered and see we can make huge strides on roadway safety and accessibility. these are all really wonderful things that i think babies can ultimately do but i'm very concerned that we have not had a federal policy framework in place that's allowing the united states to globally leave because we do know that many of our strategic competitors including china are very serious about dominating globally when it comes to ai and on a visa. right now are fighting with one hand tied behind our back. we give federal policy framework that allows for private sector investment by the k private sector innovation of the space we are very eager to work with you and members of the committee to pass av legislation ntand work with the department of tatransportation. >>. >> packets to another thing we been dealing with in the commerce committee we are the

protectors of the commerce clause of the constitution but also the 10th amendment of the constitution. sometimes you have to determine where it goes. we are also laboratory of democracy with the 50 states. and sometimes when we leave a vacuum the states try to fill it in this obviously needs to have a national standard. so the lack of that puts the pressure on us and states put pressure on us by doing it themselves because if you're not can do it we are. that's all we have to be mindful of but can you outline the major trends you've seen at the state level av g legislatio and explain how inconsistent state laws or patchwork of state laws inconsistent with each other thank you very much

for the question. we just heard an important dialogue between the link dominic ranking nkmember czajkowski and miss chase about the importance of federal motor vehicle standards on vehicle coming. that's precisely the challenge in the av space we are facing today. a customer in an atv should be able to understand that that vehicle they purchase or lease or an is the same vehicle going from state to state and works the same way. what we are seeing and states is, as you said, the states are actually considering and putting in place equipment requirements for av. this is clearly the purview of the federal government the federal motor vehicle safety standards exist the students would be clearly preempted from

doing so. i think the most important thing this committee needs to consider as it works on this legislation is, the preemptive importance of having a robust av policy at the federal level that is focused on safety. in california right now for different equipment standards are tbeing considered by the department of motor vehicles in california to be imposed on vehicles. this is a vacuum that has to be filled by the federal government. >> thank you. >> it's important to emphasize that there is a very strong role and autonomous vehicle regulations. what's most important is that you have 26 t.states that past autonomous vehicle deployment statutes accounting for more than 57 percent of the population is a welcome trend we work diligently in the course of 10 or so here's the proof is in place.

their speaking narrowly to state issues authorizing level for level dlxxxs on the roads and speaking to insurance minimum requirements and law enforcement first responder engagement with the federal government needs to be the one speaking to vehicle design construction and performance. we are seeing states creek then especially vehicle design issues that's not appropriate that's why we need the federal government to step in that's why we need congress passed a federal av statute. >>. >> protecting the american consumers by ensuring the safety of the products they buy the website they visit in the car they drive is a an essential responsibility of the subcommittee. is a key part of the subcommittee's work. there been reports as much as 35% of the expert staff of been laid off or otherwise left the agency this year. i'm concerned that the loss of

expertise along with the trump administration's proposed reallocation of resources will make it impossible to look at the safety rules that congress has mandated and do other work crucial to fulfill its mission to ensure the safety of americans on the roads today. you share my concerns, feel free to elaborate. but i do have a second question. >> thank you for the question. as a fellow new jersey and i appreciate talking with you today. it's very interesting that one commonality of all the panelists testimony is not we have all called upon nhtsa to do more llwork. yet as you rightly point out has been a significant reduction in the workforce in some very important talent has been lost. very concerned that this is not only a short-term certain long-lasting msramifications in terms of attracting talent at a time when cars are getting more

complex. need to have the expertise at the agency which is charged so importantly with protecting all road users i absolutely share your concerns. >> i appreciate that. over the years we deal with the healthcare system and i remember for the first maybe 20 years i was here i hear from everybody, not just republican democrat thing. nursing homes would come in doctors would come in and they say we could do more with the healthcare system and help more people and provide more services with less money. i would say okay, but at some point that's not to be true anymore. i think we've reached that point. generally speaking, you can't give an agency more work or provider more patience or

provide more services and then give them less money just doesn't work. let me get to my next question. nhtsa's five-star safety rating system also known as new car assessment program is intended to help consumers compare the safety of vehicles when they shop.while the rating system has been updated in recent years there is general agreement the ratings have become woefully outdated and we've fallen behind as a country. is the current five-star rating safety rating system working for consumers and what should nhtsa do to make sure the five-star safety rating program system is helpful to consumers who want to understand and compare the safety features to different cars. ... the united states started this program and in fact one of my board members, jones brook,

when she was at the head he started the program but now it has desolved over the years. we have come fallen subject to star-flation it is like oprah, you get five stars as iou mentioned earlier extend one of the biggest part of the family budget and they know that 5dg stars means something in the absence ofsa mcap stepping off,i have to say insurance for highway safety has done exceptional job in terms of reading and consumers can be informed but this should be the role of our government and of the agency. >> i appreciate that. you know, i think that more than any other area that i can think of, you know, right to know and

their ability to shop and make decisions if you provide them with information, you know, shopping for a car, i think, this is all very important so that's why i appreciate what you said. >> thank you to the ranking member. chair recognizes representative for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to the witnesses here today. i am going to start with you, in the past decade or so new vehicles have been equipped with advanced drivers and existing technology, prevently deadly crashes but while it can improve vehicle safety it's important that the safety features work not only when the vehicle comes off the assembly line but for the life of the vehicle. so do drivers know if the system in the vehicle is fully functional and properly calibrated? >> yes, thank you. this is a very important

question about -- about advanced safety systems like adash. i want to make a very important point. adash systems are not autonomous driving systems. the driver must be fully atenanttive and fully in control. point number two, we work on these systems, the durability of these systems and the effect of these systems like any other part of the car and it's really important that they work and all of the time. adaptive cruise control and lane centeringro and lane safekeeping it's important that we m

the driver and the universal way for vehicles should maybe -- so owners will know that your system is functioning properly. >> i would love to learn more about your concern, the vehicles that i'm familiar with make the customer aware of when the system is working and when it's not, when it's on and when it's off. do i think it's important that we educate customers about how the systems work and what their limitations, do i think education is abimportant part of this. >> the automakers providing automotive businesses information on how to maintain that a dust functionality? >> yes, this is critically important. the manufacturers provide all of the data necessary to diagnosis

and repair vehicles to everyone both dealers as well as independent repair shops. >> okay, that was my next question. >> sorry. >> you answered it. you saved me 3 seconds. [laughter] >> of -- you mentioned vehicle manufacturers need to jump 2, 3, 4 hoops when it comes to complying with the mission requirements, so explain just very briefly how cafe standards which benefits smaller cars how they can actually hinder safety standards. >> the challenge with regulations is we have four differents agencies and differt rules r regulating one vehicle d there's enormous amount of confusion and waste in the systemen that doesn't produce emissions benefit, and so that's really the biggest challenge for the most part manufacturers can

achieve both more safety and more fuel efficiency at the same time. the key is aligning all of the agencies on one national program. >> i know what you're talking about when it comes to agencies. i've got about a minute left. i keep reading reports with ev's for safety benefit that is you mentioned how some of the safety requirements to be modified or removed. so can you briefly clarify in more detail which safety requirements need to be changed for ev's and how would not not jeopardize patient -- passenger or patient safety? >> thank you very much for the question. i will say a coup of pieces, when we all get in our cars and leaving at the end of the day, you look around and see things put around you, they are put today because a a human has been driving the vehicle. our vehicles are always very human centric and why we have steering wheel and rear-view

mirror. it's there to help you the safely operate the vehicle. you step back and think, okay, what happens in a s world where autonomous car can do the driving. we need to make sure we are modernizing the rule to account for that situation where we aree going to have, we can speak to that. >> that's good. >> thank you, representative. you mr. chairman, for calling this hearing and thank you to the witnesses. automobile safety touches everyone.th unfortunately i represent a community where it's actually one of the most deadly places in the country, on average at least

one person for walking and one person biking are involved in the crash every day with many resulting in serious injury or death. tragic problem. area has been one of the most dangerous places to walk in the united states. pedestrians d are unlikely to de in tampa bay much busier, three times likely the big apple, throe times in a typical year drivers hit more than 1,000 pedestrian fors, about 100 of them die. >> thank you for recognizing that these are all individuals and not just specifics, a stark

reminder they stand little chance. t we try to do some things in the bipartisan law, we sent large grants back home to address the backlog of safety for, under the biden administration for safety rule-making, finalize several rules that will save lives but i share the concern that ranking member raised that you confirmed that these arbitrary cuts and taking the cops off the beat, firing experts, delaying rule-makings is is not going to do anything to save lives, ultimately. we benefit back home from the expertise, center for urban transportation research.

they've been -- they do a lot on safety practices and they highlight today me the most important things we can do are technologicalan and behavioral changes i think distracted driving right now is such a problem, everywhere you go -- you look at -- i count cards of people on their phones while they drive. where are we with this, ms. chase? where are they? >> thank you for your question and i want to commend you for bringing up pedestrian safety, going for a walk should not mean a death sentence and that's what's happening in sidewalks and roadways right now and doesn't happen to be. technology availableth automatic and prevents people from getting killed. additionally cars can be designed so that they're more forgiven if they're inat a crash with the pedestrian so the

vehicle endured the energy than the person that's more vulnerable. in terms of the question where are we, more resources to bring needed rule makings over the finish line in a number of areas and i'd like to focus specifically on advanced drivers. these are systems can reduce crashes and they can reduce crashes whether someone is distracted, r impaired, drowsy d all of these things arean happening behind the wheel. so if a driver, you know, falls prey to one of the characteristics the vehicle can take over, it can brake, it can center a lane, it can capture a blind spot and take action so that bicyclist or pedestrian isn't get. we need to get going on the rule makings -- >> finalize the rule in 2024 requiring automatic energy

braking on a new cars sold after september 2029? i know that it's being challenged in the courts by the alicense for automotive innovation. is the institute involved in that litigation? >> no. we are not directly involved in that litigation. our rule in aed testing, performing at a level that will prevent the kind of harm both vehicle to vehicle incidents as well as vehicle to pedestrians. >> did that show you that would save lives, that rule on braking, being integrated into a vehicle? >> what our data shows is that the systems that have been built are resulting in a 50% reduction vehicle to vehicle strikes and 27% reduction, vehicle to pedestrian strikes currently and

those are for lower speeds. our most recent testing we have now increased those speeds increased the number of targets that they mustards and so -- we are seeing better performance from the automakers. auto industry is working hard to continue to improve performance with respect to those systems and we are going to see them get better and better over time. >> thank you, i yield. >> thank you to representative castor. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i was interested in your discussion with chairman guthrie about the fact that 26 different states have already created regulation of autonomous vehicles and youed stated that it's important that regulation of av's be federal regulation and state regulation and each entity needs to stay in each lane and i was struck by the fact that we have a very similar situation that's developed with respect to artificial

intelligence in general. this balance off regulation is o important, so i wanted to ask specifically about something that we are considering right now in congress which is a temporary moratorium on state regulation we think that is neceo avoid 50 different state regulators going in 50 different directions on something that is clearly interstate commerce. we think ultimately regulation of ai will require a partnership between federal and state regulation. in your opinion, that moratorium is specifically for ai so general-purpose regulation of av's should be exempted. do you see the moratorium as a positive or negative to the develop and and adoption of av's? mr. farrah: we have been close

observers of that discussion on the moratorium. there is a discussion in the senate as we speak. what i can say is our read of the rule of construction related to that moratorium would preserve the state av deployment statutes that would advance the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on our roads. our organization has worked diligently for a decade to pass the 26 av employment stats and we want to make sure they remain in place. there is an excellent opportunity for partnership for federalism to exist where states are having a lot of jurisdiction around authorizing vehicles on the roads regulating things within their purview. the federal government has not caught up. they are not doing what is needed around vehicle design and performance. that is what we are looking for. rep. obernolte: i would say a

similar situation looks with respect to ai in general and will try to fix both of those things. i was very interested when you talked about the fact the public trust will be essential for the success of av and all of the benefits that technology can bring to our society, particularly with respect to lowering accident rates. you talked about things like the creation of safety data repositories and behavioral tests that can enhance public trust. i'm wondering if the problem is not just midge bigger than that? the reason i say that is when there is a bad vehicle accident locally you might see something about it in the local news. when there is one accident and a tesla on autopilot in florida we hear about it in california. the public has adopted this risk model with av's that is very dissimilar to the risk model they except when they drive their own vehicle on a highway. it would seem to me as a society from a logical standpoint as soon the safety level of av's exceeds the safety level

generally of human piloted vehicles we ought to celebrate that as a success. instead the attitude that one accident is too many and somebody must be at fault and it must be fixed. how we reconcile those different risk models because it seems like that is a lot more critical than the other things you mentioned. mr. farrah: your very eyes wide open about the reality that this is a new technology and something most americans have not had the opportunity to experience. this is something that is very new and fresh to a lot of people. they have a lot of questions. is why i said we are an engagement first industry. we want to talk to first responders and mayors and local committee members and citizen groups and explain who we are and what the technology can do, what the safety benefits are the accessibility benefits. we need to lead on the public education piece. that is the reality of what is going to be the case.

it is clear we need to do more to explain this but i also think congress can be a partner to all of us trying to pursue more public trust. rep. obernolte: i just have a few seconds. we will have a problem parceling liability for accidents when autonomous vehicles are involved. what is the current thinking on how we do that because it is a very complex topic. dr. harkey: it is a complex topic and i'm not sure we have the answers. i will not know until we get cases in the courts in see the litigation to understand how that will be arst and where this will fall in terms of the vehicle manufacturer, the insurer that is responsible, or the particular driver that owns the vehicle. all are going to be part of the lawsuits so we just don't know the answer as to how that litigation will play out. rep. obernolte: i wonder if congress could be part of that solution rather than leaving it to rooms full of lawyers. thank you for your testimony. >> thank you.

the chair recognizes representative soto for five minutes. >> talking about florida and lawyers, that is a double threat. i ought to get our chair down here to talk about florida pride. the other two floridians on the committee would be coming to my aid. we know a thomas vehicles, crash avoidance systems continue to evolve across america. safety, mobility, young people, seniors, folks with disabilities. central florida has been a big part of this. we helped develop one of the redundancy systems for a thomas vehicles. we have the longest-running autonomous public transit. way back in 2019. it shows you how new this technology is in our district.

and son tracks, a partnership -- and sun tracks, a partnership with the florida department of transportation. we will look at fast-growing central florida we see the turnpike, bright line, expansions to help with commuter rail and high-speed rail. electric links buses. when you see these of thomas vehicles, the last few miles can play a critical role in getting folks really need to go. i know having worked on their first nhtsa waiver and now their second we are in a waiver system , which is kind of great. it does not -- which is kind of gray. it does not help when we are trying to do up thomas vehicles that there is a lack of rules and inaction by congress. i am hoping this committee will move on this. contrast that to faa rules on flying cars. we are doing a vertical flying

car area for orlando international airport because that rulemaking came out. as far as i can see, and nhtsa rolled out their first national framework in december 20 under the biden administration that had a proposed voluntary review and reporting. five months later the trump administration came out with the second framework that incorporated the safety aspects and added innovation and commercial deployment. still a little light. not particularly substantive. we have not seen a lot of movement on rulemaking and you add in 50% of autonomous vehicle department being asked under -- being axed under doge. how is nhtsa doing on rulemaking? mr. farrah: i want to make a

point of commenting on something you talked about, which is the opportunity around shared mobility for the elderly and people with disabilities and that is an opportunity for all of us. florida has been a national leader when it comes to regulation for a long time. rep. soto: how is nhtsa doing? are they slow? mr. farrah: early days we have seen encouraging signs. we have seen secretary duffy talk about his federal framework and the need to take action. we hope with a confirmed nhtsa administrator we will see additional activity. it underscores the need for this committee to be acting on federal av regulation to give nudges to the department of transportation. rep. soto: they have authority? mr. farrah: nhtsa as incredible latitude to initiate new rulemaking. rep. soto: so they could.

tariffs. we saw 10% across-the-board. 50% on steel and aluminum. we know it is raising the prices of vehicles. it is also affecting innovation in areas like a thomas vehicles? mr. bozzella: it could and it depends on how long this environment lasts and how expansive it is. certainly with regard to not only tariffs, import tariffs but also export controls, those types of policies could affect the pace of innovation. rep. soto: we saw usmca, we had established a framework and even lifted the percentage that needs to be built in the united states free to be an american car. -- for it to be an american car. how are automakers feeling and the certainty of their business? mr. bozzella: congresswoman dig

no -- congresswoman dingell touched on this in her opening remarks. the industry runs best when we have clear rules and we know it they are and we adjust to manage them. we are hopeful these rules be clarified, negotiations will be completed ae e rus are. we make the adjustments necessary and move forward. we need the clarity to make the adjustments. rep. soto: i wanted to submit the special equipment market association letter in support of what we are doing today. >> repeat that. rep. soto: the special equipment market association. it is a courtesy to ms. harshbarger. >> without objection. rep. soto: i yield back. >> representative fry? rep. fry: dr. harkey, your testimony you reference

international trends. in terms of crash prevention and vehicle safety, what countries have good models we should look at when it comes to that? dr. harkey: it is a great question. you're trying to parse out what makes other countries better than ask and it is sometimes a challenge. there are themes that are there. the first is a systemic approach to safety. it has been integrated into all elements of government in a number of countries. whether it is sweden, the netherlands, a number of countries where they have done this and they have done it well. we adopted a safe system approach as part of the national roadway safety strategy in 2022. we have failed to implement it in this country. it is one example of something

that happens in other countries that we are not doing here. i do think congress can help encourage the u.s. dot to do that and provide more support for them to be able to do that at the state level or at the local level. culture is also a big thing. you do not see impaired driving problems in other countries the way we have those here. this is where technology and vehicles like passing alcohol detection can fix those problems. we need to be thinking about how technology can help. the other thing i would say is action in these countries to do things like safety cameras is very aggressive. speed is a huge problem. it is more than a quarter of the fatalities in these country. that is another area you see that. the final area in these other countries is policy. they have the ability because

they are much smaller than we are, they have the ability to federalize and put policies in place that go across the entire country and it is easy for them to do that. we still have states putting policies in. we can encourage things of the federal level for states to do and incentivize things that the federal level for states to do to address the risky behaviors we see on a roadway. rep. fry: in your written testimony you talked about overreliance on automation systems becoming a problem. what is your data show about how consumers interpret features like lane keeping or adaptive cruise control? dr. harkey: our work on those systems has generally been on the performance side in terms of how well those systems work with respect to keeping the driver in their lanes or adjusting the throttle and breaking to keep them out of crashes. what we are seeing in terms of our research is we survey

drivers on the use of these systems and their understanding of what the systems can do. the thing that is the most frightening about the partial automation systems is the lack of understanding. these systems are not self-driving. the drivers are interpreting these to be self-driving systems and that is where you get into the overreliance problem. we need to do a better job -- nhtsa needs to do a better job of helping get drivers to understand what these systems are and what they are not. rep. fry: what their limitations are, that is important. mr. farrah, what is the most realistic timeline for level four autonomous vehicles to be deployed in urban develop in's and what factors increase or decrease that timeline? mr. farrah: level four a thomas vehicles are here.

our members have driven more than -- driven ever-increasing autonomous miles on public roads. autonomous vehicles are being deployed in different fashions. robotaxis are being deployed in various u.s. cities and that will increase over the course of the next several years. i anticipate that as you see more cities having a thomas vehicles deployed you will see the footprint of those vehicles expanding out into more suburban areas and rural areas and then you see autonomous trucking which is a huge aspect of the a thomas industry which is moving cargo -- of the up thomas industry -- rep. fry: the chairman was going to go on this before he ran out of time. regarding elderly people and people with disabilities can you give concrete examples of way or av has close that gap or shown the most promise? mr. farrah: my grandmother will

turn 95 on saturday. rep. fry: you better be there for the birthday. mr. farrah: as she has gotten older i've seen her independence wayne. -- her independence wane. not every american has that. we do have people get to jobs more easily, get to social settings more easily. we've seen the negative effects of that. upon a missed vehicles can -- autonomous vehicles can drive down the cost. the elderly in the united states are going to be one of the main beneficiaries of this technology. >> representative trey hannon's rep read -- is recognized for five minutes. rep. trahan: hand it is no secret modern cars have become computers on wheels.

cars are smart but they carry tremendous privacy and security risk. on a single ride to the grocery store the average car might collect data on a drivers location, detailed information on their driving habits, even physical information like the drivers height and weight. it is clear from that the data can help make our roads safer but without guard rails the data can be transferred to third parties for purposes inconsistent with the drivers understanding our expectations. like most americans highfill strongly about the need to control my data. the suspect in the recent shooting gets of minnesota state rep. melissa hortman and her husband had in his possession a list of people search websites. reports suggest he may have used these sites to determine his victims home addresses. the herring ordeal has renewed calls for privacy protection, especially the right to be

deleted, an idea i have champion in legislation like the delete act. mr. bozzella, more and more car companies are collecting sensitive data, tracking visits to psychologists, places of worship, and even revealing when americans cross state lines to seek abortion care. an investigation by senator wyden found several car companies do not require a warrant before they turn over location data law enforcement and he found several car companies sold dated a data brokers, some for pennies on the dollar. what responsibilities do you believe car companies have to protect the privacy of vehicle owners, including handling requests from law enforcement and the sale of consumer data. mr. bozzella: this is a very important issues for the reasons you mentioned. they are computers on wheels. they collect the data for critical reasons. much of the data is used to

manage the safety systems of the vehicle. the biometric data, my weight, it indicates the power of the airbag. telematics data allows first responders to know where my car is even if i cannot respond to a phone call. these are important things. manufacturers are responsible. we have since 2014 had privacy principles, voluntary privacy principles which were groundbreaking at the time where companies committed to protect the data of their customers, especially this sensitive data. context is important. transparency is important. consent is important. those principles are enforceable by the federal trade commission. we expect our members will follow them and their consequences when they do not. we need a federal privacy law. rep. trahan: i cannot agree with you more.

i am happy the principles include data minimization, transparency, and choice. while today's computers -- while today's cars are moving computers i think it is fair to call autonomous moving supercomputers. av's rely on external sensors to operate safely and expensively -- and inexpensively. these sensors introduce novel privacy concerns. the risk to individuals present in today's car. the continuous video feeds could in theory be fed into a larger centralized network alongside other data sources. i am concerned we could create a mobile surveillance state if we are not careful. mr. farrah, in your testimony you state congress should include language "requiring av manufacturers to develop cybersecurity and privacy plans

for their technologies." do you believe a robust av privacy plan must include data minimization and consumer control? mr. farrah: thank you for the question and i share a lot of the feedback you received from mr. bozzella. we very much want to be part of a federal data privacy dialogue that will go on. we need to make sure we are not singling out autonomous vehicles. there are many concerns in terms of data and the use of sensors on vehicles. we want to be part of that conversation. rep. trahan: it is clear this committee should be working in a bipartisan fashion on comprehensive privacy regulation that covers every sector including av's i look forward to working with my colleagues on that. >> thank you. represent of mullen is recognized for 5 -- representative mullen is recognized for five minutes. >> i truly believe advanced

driver assistance systems and autonomous vehicles will one day reduce traffic deaths and i agree we need to move quickly to realize those benefits. isaiah have discussed we must ensure emerging vehicle technologies are delivering on their promise to reduce crashes and save lives. right now we are flying blind. as nhtsa has explained we are not able to evaluate the relative safety performance of a v's because we do not have the data. as ms. chase mentioned there been numerous incidents allowed my districts where aps entered construction zones, sped through crosswalks, block traffic and transit lanes come in interfered with first responders including the path of fire trucks. we do not know the extent of the problems. i understand this technology is in its early stages and will keep getting better over time.

how will we know when it is better? these are the kinds of situations that make the case for stronger oversight and standardized reporting. i've been encouraged by recent conversations with industry leaders including many supported today. there is a growing agreement that more transparency around this technology is necessary and responsible. i know human drivers can be erratic. let's make sure we have the data so we can be assured av's warming safely -- are performing more safely than humans. you mentioned av's have driven 145 million miles in the u.s.. for comparison californians alone drove 340 billion miles every year. we need to collect much more data to draw any conclusions. can you tell me who is collecting and validating av driving data right now? mr. farrah: i now the autonomous

vehicle industry is doing data reporting under the general order that nhtsa is collecting information so we are providing information about av incidents to nhtsa at the federal level. that information is shared at the website. sometimes it gets misunderstood. what we have said as an industry is let's step back from the standing general order, let's put in statute a national av safety data repository that will capture the data and improve it and let's make state regulators part of the process. in our travels to state capitals , many departments want to be part of the equation. they want more information from the federal level. what we have said is let's share that information to this natural -- this national safety data depository. that is something we will be very eager to work with you in your office on.

rep. mullin: encouraged to hear about this progress. i understand nhtsa collects data about collisions. beyond that is there any requirement to report vehicles traveled or how av's performing in complex environments like near schools and work zones or around first responders? mr. farrah: the incident data that is shared via the standing general order right now does talk about incidents that are occurring. in terms of vehicle miles traveled that is something we would support. i think that is a relevant point. we as an industry have taken that on in terms of producing the data point you mentioned around 145 million miles. we would very much like to do that in partnership with our regulator. ms. chase: i have -- rep. mullin: i have been heartened by the discussions i've had with industry leaders. you agree there is a need for more transparency in this arena?

mr. farrah: right now there is more data known about a thomasville vehicle than any other type of vehicle on our roads. if you combine the federal level with your home state of california, the department of motor vehicles is a very robust regulator. the cpuc is a robust regulator. there is a terminus meant of data available and it is requiring a lot of great insights about the safety record of autonomous vehicles which is extraordinary. we need to find a way to make sure that is more easily consumable, avoid the duplication, make sure we are putting this in a spot where people can understand it. we want public trust in a thomasville vehicle. we know that -- in autonomous vehicles. >> thank you. representative angelle, he recognized -- representative dingell, you are recognized for five minutes. rep. dingell: i am glad all of

my colleagues are focused on autonomous vehicles. i hope everybody understands china is collecting data right now and using it against us and someday we have to do something about it. i want to start by touching on consumer safety, specifically on how crash test standards are failing women. we know today's crash test dummies do not face the real world risk women face in car crashes. crash test dummies used in u.s. safety tests are still largely model after the average male from the 1970's. i don't even look like my colleague mullen today. even though women are 70 percent more likely to be injured in frontal crashes. this does not seem to be a technology problem. advanced female crash test tommy -- crash test dummies exist and are being used in other countries. it looks like it may be or a regulatory problem.

while legislation has been introduced to require nhtsa to a doubt the modern test dummy -- given that nhtsa has not incorporated a modern female dummy into its testing, can you explore what the auto industry is doing to close that gap and ensure vehicles are safe for all drivers? mr. bozzella: every driver, every passenger is entitled to the same safety. every human. we have to have a regulatory system and a product developer and system in a research develop and respects that. what we are doing is we continue to advance crashworthiness and we advance airbag technologies and seatbelt and restrict technologies. that is going well. here is a place -- there is work being done on advanced dummies

as you recognize. today nhtsa does not test its current female dummies in every driver position it tests male dummies. why is that? we wrote a letter this week to the national highway traffic safety administration asking that question. it is very important that in their testing they do so. rep. dingell: i will send you more questions on that so we get you on the record but i also want to talk about cafe standards because nobody else has. today's vehicles are much cleaner and more efficient than those of yesterday and that is not by accident. that is because of decades of innovation and smart regulation. there is more work to do for a series about reducing emissions and protecting public health and our auto industry globally competitive. what the auto industry needs is certainty. certainty is how it can support long-term investment, protect jobs come and stay competitive.

to do that we need to bring all of the stakeholders to the table , said fuel economy standards that are forward-looking but also practical and achievable. any future standards much push innovation, protect workers come and give manufacturers the predictability they need to plan for the future. as we sit here today the department of transportation is planning to reset these cafe standards, potentially taking us backwards while also redirecting resources away from the fuel economy will making. at the same time my republican colleagues are trying to eliminate penalties for failing to comply with these standards and removing any real enforcement mechanism from the equation. how do we expect u.s. automakers to lead in a competitive global market if we keep changing the rules? what does this uncertainty due to the long-term planning and investment needed to stay ahead? mr. bozzella: it is very

important we have one set of aligned standards for vehicle emissions and fuel economy going forward. i said earlier we have four different agencies, three of the federal level and one of the state level with seven different regulations regulating one tailpipe. this is very challenging and it produces no benefit. the first thing i have to do is get alignment. i agree with your comment that we have to have balanced, achievable standards that reflect market conditions and keep us moving forward. that is the place we need to be and that is the auto industry's ambition. we are heartened by the initial dialogue we have had with the department of transportation in recent weeks because we think there is a recognition we have to have a balance there. the market for electric vehicles is not what we thought it was going to be a few years ago when

very aggressive standards were set. adjustments need to be made but they should be balanced and they should continue progress to reduce emissions and improve fuel economy. rep. dingell: i have to yield back but i want to make the point there is a demand for some electric vehicles. mr. bozzella: i agree 100% without. there is and there is progress that is clearly part of a competitive automotive industry and our future. >> asserted schreier is recognized for five minutes. rep. schrier: despite significant safety improvements and innovations in technology to improve vehicle safety you have all call attention to the fact that driving remains dangerous in the united states and rates of roadway fatalities have increased in the last decade. one thing i do not think any of you have touched on is

pedestrians, cyclists, and scooter safety injury and death. perhaps if you could incorporate that into your next answer i would be grateful. some increasingly automated and eponymous system called this great promise for making our roads much safer, hopefully for everybody and debts. -- and deaths. mr. harkey, you mentioned we are seeing crashes happen when drivers are over reliant on partial automation. i can see something on the screen and i still look over my shoulder. i've not gone to the trust place yet. i do not think people truly understand the limits of what their vehicles can and cannot do on their own. we already talked about better communications. if you could add specifics to that. not just in terms of sensing cars but sensing pedestrians,

cyclists, and scooters and how that factors in? dr. harkey: thank you for that question. let me start with some stats that back up your point. pedestrians, by six -- bicyclists, motorcyclists, those rates of fatalities has risen much more than others in vehicles in the fatality picture . pedestrian fatalities are up more than 80% since they hit a low point. it is a serious problem. it is a reason we are focused on safety, not only inside the vehicle, but we are very much focused on how we protect the most vulnerable outside the vehicle. in our testing and evaluation program and in our research programs. two points.

we are seeing technologies like automatic emergency braking systems for pedestrians working. we have seen a 27% decrease in those crashes, vehicle striking pedestrians of that is encouraging. we will see that move forward and we will see that get better as we move to higher standards. rep. schrier: i want to take some of that blame off the cars. humans carry a lot of that responsibility when people are stepping into streets, looking at their phones and not listening for oncoming traffic. i want to be clear. you do not have all of the responsibility. it is just that did the driver will not get injured -- it is just that the driver will not get injured. we talked about cell phones. if you could talk about the safety of touchscreens. i have found and this is not my primary car, but the ones i've

used require me to take my eyes off the road for too long and i am comfortable for. i cannot even turn on the radio until i met a stoplight. i was sorting if you could talk about what you have found about the safety of the touchscreen to the right of the driver. dr. harkey: we have not done direct research on that but i will give you opinions from my team who worked with others. it is a huge human factors issue and design issue in vehicles. we are very much concerned about anything that takes her eyes off roadway for an extended time. the most problematic screens we have seen are the ones where you drill through menus to be able to get to the right function to turn something on or off or adjust. the longer your eyes are off the road right the more risky the situation, the more danger you are putting yourself in and your fellow road users in. rep. schrier: that sounds like

dumb engineering to meet, may be engineering by non-drivers. expanding on what my colleague talked about with privacy issues. there was a story may be a year ago that a bunch of people's our insurance rates went up because per insurance companies were sharing data about their driving with the insurance companies without the drivers being at all aware of this. you can say this would make things safer. although if you're not telling the driver they are being monitored that does not help their safety, it just makes them angry when they get their bill. you talked about voluntary privacy commitments. which car companies decided to reveal this information about their drivers without telling them? dr. harkey: every card company has agreed with these principles and they are enforceable at the federal trade commission. they are not voluntary, they are

enforceable. i 100% agree with you need a federal privacy framework, a federal privacy law to clarify all of this. context is important and most important is consent. consumers should get consent. rep. schrier: can you name the companies so the people watching are aware? mr. bozzella: of the companies, there was one company that you're referring to, general motors, there was subject to that news article. >> the gentlelady's time has expired. represent of clark is recognized for five minutes. rep. clark: good morning for about 10 more minutes. thank you to the chairman and the ranking member for holding this hearing today. i want to thank our witnesses for testifying and sharing your expertise with us. i want to talk about the intersection between the irresponsible 10 year moratorium on state and local laws regulating artificial intelligence that my republican

colleagues supported in the reconciliation bill they all voted for in state and local regulation of eponymous vehicles. av's are a promising technology that can potentially be very useful in curbing roadways fatalities and offering more transportation options to persons with disabilities and to all of us. autonomous vehicles use artificial intelligence to operate and make decisions about how to navigate our roadways. it is no secret there is no federal framework regulating av's nor is there a broad federal law regulating ai. states and local governments have stepped up to protect the public and oversee babies on our public roads. in new york city and state we have laws regulating that specifically allow the safe testing of atomics vehicles.

these are not general-purpose laws. they do not apply equally to a visa and cars driven by -- to av's and cars driven by people. republican version of the bill would prohibit new york state from adopting and enforcing laws governing av's, tripping the city in the state of their oversight on av deployment, making deployment that much less safe. the version in the current draft of the senate reconciliation bill would prohibit new york from enforcing av and other ai laws if it accepts funding to build at high speed internet. either way, new yorkers lose. are there additional examples of safety enhancing state-level regulations that would be unenforceable if a broad ai moratorium would be adopted? ms. chase: thank you for the question. we have significant concerns.

i am not an expert you but you point out that av's use a eyes. if there is a moratorium that prevents certain regulations -- certain areas called an operational design domain, under certain times or under certain weather conditions, we have concerns those will be disallowed under this ban. it is still being worked out or debated in congress so we do not know the final language, but we have very significant concerns that absent any federal regulations that states should be allowed, they must be allowed to protect their citizens. rep. schrier: very well -- rep. clarke: very well. some witnesses have discussed the growing av industry. how would an ai moratorium that ends state programs to test and provide guardrails with av deployment impact industry growth and adoption?

ms. chase: i am not an expert. what i would like to say is public opinion polls we've commissioned show the american public is very concerned and wary about getting into autonomous we have goals. -- about getting into autonomous vehicles. if they learned there are no federal regulations or state regulations to protect them getting into a vehicle, that shaky acceptance of autonomous vehicles could be threatened. our organization is not for or against autonomous vehicles. if they can be achieved safely and reduce crashes on our roadways, fantastic. what we have been observing. there been comments made about how many miles autonomous vehicles to the moon and back. av's have only driven .004% of what human drivers drive every

year. it is not an apples to apples comparison. we have significant concerns that absent regulation that these of tana must -- that these autonomous vehicles will be put on the roadways and they can already be put on the vehicles to test and not comply with any federal regulation now. rep. clarke: mr. farrah, would you want to add your perspective? mr. farrah: this is an obvious point but nhtsa regulates all vehicles operating on public roles -- on public roads. our vehicles are regulated by nhtsa and those applied to all vehicles. we are talking about a federal policy framework that gets at av specific items. >> the gentlelady's time has expired. rep. clarke: i yield back. to be continued. >> the is recognized for five minutes.

>> is no secret america stands to benefit from developing and deployment of ai systems including in the automotive industry. at the same time we have had experts raised concerns about the risks ai poses. i know a faulty language model may be annoying but faulty ai in a car can kill or injure the stakes are very high. this week texas passed a new autonomous vehicle law requiring authorization from the state's department of motor vehicles for cars on public streets without human interaction. meanwhile house republicans have supported and passed a 10 year freeze on state regulations concerning artificial intelligence. if this freezes passed by the senate and signed into law it would prevent state such as texas from implementing their own safety and regulatory oversight of av's. i want to ask mr. chase what impact with the states pursuing

a cautious approach and some of these restrictions i just talked about on states have when it comes to effective integration of av's nationwide? ms. chase: states should have the traditional authority to protect their citizens. that is what the federalism concept is about. when there are no standards for the advanced technologies -- true av's have to comply with the traditional, but there are no regulations on the new technologies. just to counter the last point. to your point. it is essential states and localities being protect their citizens and absent any -- should that authority be taken away that is threatened. rep. veasey: this is back to you, ms. chase. how could this regulatory tension influence united states position in the global rates for leadership in ai against our

competitors in china? ms. chase: if citizens do not feel safe they will not get into cars. the billions of dollars that have been invested in order for av's to achieve could be threatened. it is essential there be federal regulations and not just federal framework, but federal regulations that nixon these vehicles perform as needed and as expected -- that makes sure these vehicles perform as needed and as expected. rep. veasey: it was concerning the just before elon musk departed the administration doge slashed the number of employees working on vehicle automation safety at the national highway traffic and safety administration and these cuts to critical av research came over months before tesla launched its first-ever robotaxi service in austin. i wanted to ask mr. farrah,

given these layouts and potential funding cuts across the national highway traffic and safety administration ordered by doge and trump, how can this agency fulfill its responsibility to regulate the agency and collect data needed when its hands are tied behind its back? mr. farrah: you noted the new texas state law that is in place. our organization worked very closely with that and texas has been a tremendous leader nationally in a tana miss vehicles. -- in autonomous vehicles. we do recommend adequate funding for safety regulators. we want to make sure nhtsa has adequate resources. we are asking for them to set new regulations as it relates to autonomous vehicles. we want to make sure there are people in the seats to do that. rep. veasey: i know is the

industry continues to advance and it is amazing to go to austin and see the cars everywhere. as the industry continues to rapidly advance and deploy av's in our communities what can congress do to ensure av's are equipped with features like spot detection and automatic emergency braking and rear cross trafficking alert? ms. chase: we strongly encourage congress in the next reauthorization bill fireman's for the u.s. department of transportation to discuss rulemakings that issue rules to discuss at eight certain for these technologies with the institute of highway safety has demonstrated to reduce crashes such as the ones you mentioned. rep. veasey: i yield back. >> the chair recognizes representative kelly for five minutes. rep. kelly: thank you and thank

you to the witnesses. over the past decade roadway fatalities and injuries have increased substantially. congress has passed bipartisan roz -- bipartisan laws directing nhtsa to implement these trends. these technologies would have the potential to save lives. speaking as one of the leading factors in many motor vehicle crashes. what actions can congress take to promote to promote technologies that would reduce instances of speeding? >> thank you. a tremendous problem in our roadways. the old adage remains true. those required the vehicle to -- comply with speed limits. we know that lake speed -- exceed speed limits. what i assay does is make sure, first it can alert and let them

know if they are exceeding a speed limit. also, the next step would be to slow the vehicle down. strong bipartisan support. the first law in the country was enacted this year in virginia that requires i is a for offenders known as super speeders. people who race on the highways and have been convicted of doing so, to reduce their speed limits. we strongly support that and also support federal action to incentivize states to continue this. right now, only virginia, washington state, and the district of columbia have these laws. we want to see them around the country. i sa is a proven technology to combat speeding. >> thank you. regarding my previous question, my district is urban, suburban, and rural.

started in chicago, and i have 405,000 in my district. does the research show distinguished factors contributing to crashes due to excessive speeding between urban and suburban and rural areas? >> speeding is a problem everywhere. it is a factor in rural in urban areas. when you start talking about urban areas where speed really impacts, it is on the pedestrian safety issue. we talk about the bicyclists. one thing we have to really pay attention to is how we are addressing speed in those areas. that is where vehicle technology such as idsa can play a role. anything we talk about with technology in vehicles is the long game. it takes a long time. we have to continue to look at it.

safety cameras are critical. we see a rise in being allowed in states in works zones and school zones to protect the most vulnerable. anything we can do as a system to slow down vehicles and get drivers to understand the risk they are taking is an important step. >> right now as he rightly pointed out, federal funds can be used in works zones but not outside of them. it would be a tremendous step for congress to allow funds to use safety speed cameras. >> thank you. becoming more and more prevalent . these can reduce crashes and save lives. more advanced driver systems, how do we make sure low income and middle class americans can

buy cars, which are so expensive, they can have access to these advanced safety speed -- safety features found in more expensive vehicles? >> this is important. safety needs to be available for every consumer in every vehicle. what we are seeing with advanced driver systems is they are increasingly available at every price point in virtually every sized vehicle. that is encouraging. i think you will see more of that as the technology develops and as manufacturers provide these vehicles and customers get comfortable with them. i am encouraged by what we see in the marketplace today and i think it will continue. >> thank you. we talk about speed. is it generational or across-the-board? what about age wise?

>> it is across-the-board. there are issues with demographics and speeding. you do have younger people, younger males, who are often involved in speed related fatalities so you see some differences but speeding in general is something we have to address if we are going to get a control on fatality numbers. >> thank you so much. i yelled back. >> the chair recognizes for five minutes. >> thank you to our witnesses for being here today. it is hard to believe i am working on autonomous vehicles for over 10 years. we had that piece of legislation that passed unanimously. it passed the floor. i think what is important is we look back at the number of highway deaths that we see out

there. about 94% of the accidents being caused out there are because of driver error. the troopers are out on the road and you can point out quickly, people not paying attention. we want to make sure we get this legislation passed. we will be reintroducing legislation because we have got to get it done. one thing i have said, it is so important we look at this because it is safety first, safety last, safety always. as we look forward going with safe or safe there than any vehicle on the road today, it is notable that it is never tired or distracted or impaired, but how else can we ensure that when av is on the road, it means that threshold and can detect and

respond? >> congressman, i want to first start by thanking you for all your efforts over a long time and acknowledge all of the efforts you put into this issue. i do not think anyone in congress has thought more deeply about this or more committed about this. you worked closely with the congressman who has stepped out. i want to acknowledge her work as well. very pleased to work with you again to advance this legislation. you really articulated why this is so important from a safety and economic perspective and a strategic competitive perspective. a couple things we need to do here. to make sure we are advancing public trust. one thing is to make sure the federal government is able to speak to issues that only it can speak to. that will be married with a lot of great efforts that can happen in a lot of u.s. states, including your state of ohio. we would like to see, first and

foremost, to try to get rulemaking off the ground at the department of transportation and work to build public trust, requiring a driving and behavioral competency test, and this repository i talked about with the representative. in addition, a lot of issues with design that we would like to see congress speak to, specifically trying to make sure that we clarify that manual controls meant for human drivers are not applicable to level four or level five autonomous driving systems. that is the way to modernize the cb standard, lead to more accessible vehicles for americans. >> thank you. you mentioned the importance of modifying the provision. can you share why this is so essential? >> yes, and it builds on those comments. federal motor vehicle safety standards are built around hands

and feet and heads and eyes. we also have vehicles that have steering wheels and petals and the like. in an atv context, especially in a level 3 av context where the vehicle is both able to be operated autonomously in a highway setting or a traffic jam setting, those manual controls do not go away, but they need to be made inoperative while the automated driving system is in control. federal regulation is unclear about what to do about that, so it is important that the law clarify that a manufacturer can do that. all the testing has been done, all the certifications have been done, safety has been insured. when this system is engaged and it is driving, those controls

should be disengaged. current federal regulation does not allow a manufacturer to disengage systems required by federal law or federal standards right now. >> thank you. i only have about 17 seconds left. what happens if we don't act? what happens? especially looking forward to the competition where we might be coming from and we only have seven seconds. >> i will say briefly that while the united states invented autonomous vehicles, we are currently the leader but far from the only country that wants to be the global leader. the communist party in china is very debit -- dedicated, meaning -- leaving a federal policy in place to help move faster and ultimately globally. >> thank you. i yelled back. >> don is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. i am grateful for joining today.

a critical choice in automotive safety that hits close to home for almost every american. if you own a truck, car, or motorcycle, this matters to you. i am talking about the repair bill. i applaud the colleagues for the right to repair. it is 60 bipartisan cosponsors. last congress, we already have 30. and a bipartisan senate bill for the first time. i want to thank my colleagues on this subcommittee. i to thank you for already cosponsoring the opportunity for everybody. for most, car ownership is essential. it is facing some significant marketplace and regulatory changes. as cars become more complex, they turn into computers on wheels, which is great for innovation, but it is imperative

to protect consumer choice about how and where we get our cars repaired or we repair them ourselves. i am from that generation. we did a lot of that. my bill is motivated by a preservation of consumer choice as well as fair and open marketplace in the automotive repair industries. repair technicians traditionally could plug into the port, analyze critical repair maintenance data. the phaseout of these tools and newer vehicles is incredibly problematic. that is just among other tech -- as well. if you own your own car, you should own the data generated by your car. specifically critical repair maintenance, wear and tear calibration, and recalibration of parts. this is just a basic concept of ownership. you own it, it is yours. over the past three years, i deliberate we worked with many

stakeholders, including the auto manufacturers after parts industry, to ensure there is a robust representation of all of these parties in the bill. i think that is why there are new provisions codifying protections for intellectual property trade secrets, cybersecurity, parity and costs and even protections around autonomous vehicles. days ago, the wall street journal published the article that high cost ended america's affair -- it was a riveting read. they showed the average cost of owning a motor vehicle is almost $12,300 a year. that is just owning it. a 30% rise in the last few years. cost issues coupled with mounting complexity of new

technology, i think that confirms that the act is needed to update to level the playing field. mr. chairman, i have a level of support and 20 organizations supporting this bill that i submit for the record. >> without objection. >> thank you. i want to thank the automotive vehicles association for working to negotiate the av protections together with your team and the chairman's team. we included repair protections around the highest levels of four and five. this will ensure that the highly computerized systems should not be unintentionally -- to share any computerized data that would affect the intellectual property of the autonomous vehicle company really into the computerized system unrelated to repairs. i want to quickly mention how helpful tesla has been working

with our bill. even though their cars are -- are advancing, many americans cannot take their tesla's to an independent repair shop to get things fixed. how important is it for the av industry to ensure americans still have the option to fix their vehicles without restricting access to clinical repair data? >> thank you very much for the comments. i want to acknowledge the great efforts you took continuing in this congress and working on the specific provisions you referenced around autonomous vehicles and levels four and five. it is important to acknowledge the way in which our industries are evolving are a fleet managed mode -- model where they are owned and maintained by the manufacturer, by the autonomous vehicle developer that is there, something that will probably continue to evolve in the future. we need to make sure for a safety perspective that we

maintain the vehicles for the highest possible care because they are elaborate and complicated. it is paramount to everything we do. >> i am sure we will do that. time flies mr. chairman. i will yield back but i will submit questions for the panel. with that, i yelled back. thank you. >> thank you. for a brief closing statement, the ranking member is recognized. >> thank mr. chairman. congratulations on the way you handled this committee. i hope you will share this information with gusto when he comes back, that every single member on the democratic side came and asked for questions -- asked questions and participated. it is not all the time that that

happens. many of the republicans as well. there is clearly a lot of interest in this issue and i am so happy about that because we have a lot of work still to do about autonomous vehicles, about safety, and i look forward to moving forward. i want to say, he is at his son's wedding and so we want to wish him well. so thank you very much for your leadership today. >> thank you, ranking member. the chair and i represent -- recognizes the representative for five minutes. >> thank thank you to our distinguished witnesses being here today. as congress works to ensure roadways are safe, i am grateful for the opportunity to hear from

experts, the automobile industry, innovation and the impacts we are having on safety, new jersey's roads, and across the united states. the central aspect of the motor vehicle safety act is it promulgates the federal motor safety standards and motor vehicle manufacturers certified compliance with all standards. you discuss the importance of maintaining the self certification regulatory framework and how this supports motor vehicle safety and innovation. >> yes, thank you. this is an essential structure that supports innovation and safety at the same time. what is key to this is making sure they continue to maintain and update federal motor vehicle safety standards. what we have seen is motor vehicle safety standards that

are no longer relevant, necessary, or producing safety are often still on the books and they slow innovation down. we have an antiquated bumper standard that makes it difficult for manufacturers to put in the sensors required for automatic emergency braking, for example. federal safety standards are critical. self assessments and certification are critical because they move these technologies into the marketplace quickly. but the key to this is there needs to be alignment and fast movement to modernize these. >> thank you. can you point to any research that supports the safety promise of autonomous vehicles? >> thank you. i would be happy to. i will start by saying that right now, the autonomous vehicle industry is reporting

data under the standing general order so we want to see this process involved and -- evolved and improved so that americans can better understand the safety of these vehicles because we know that public trust goes hand-in-hand with the deployment of these vehicles. that is something our industry has embraced and we want to work on a bipartisan basis with members of this committee. there has been a tremendous amount of data produced by the manufacturers themselves and the industry writ large. we have been collecting the total amount of autonomous miles driven by our members over the course of a number of years. we published last month that our members have driven 145 million autonomous miles just on our roads, not simulation or close tracks. what is interesting is that figure has more than doubled just last year. it really speaks to the inflection point we are at right now with regard to commercial --

commercialization. i will go back to what i said before, which is that many factors have been releasing data . one study that is very compelling is there was an evaluation of limo and 3.8 million miles that the way mode driver drove -- waymo driver drove. if you think about, it is 3.8 billion miles. what if we could do that at scale in the united states and have that amount of reduction of bodily injury claims, it speaks to the technology. >> can you discuss the latest research on seatbelt use and solutions to promote seatbelt use? >> thank 2 -- for the question. the seatbelt is the most important safety feature in a vehicle today. we stressed that in every communication.

one thing that is a real challenge is getting people to understand that they need to wear that seatbelt in the front seat or back seat, no matter where you are sitting in the vehicle, at all times in all scenarios. this is something we continue to work on. there is a real disconnect. we see seatbelt usage for this country, 90% right now in the front. in the back, 75%. that sounds good and encouraging, yet the number of fatalities we see in our country, almost half of those in the front seat of passenger cars are un-belted. we have got to do a lot of work to get people to buckle up, specifically those who are high risk in vehicles. a lot more work needs to be done and i encourage this committee to think about what they can do to help with those who are not will -- not wearing their seatbelt. >> thank you.

>> thank you, representative. panel, thank you for your participation today. there is a lot of interest in this. anytime there is a new technology, that adoption implementation will be a key thing in the interest that you represent will play a key role in that. i will point out to you specifically that when it comes to data, they will read too much to that especially adopting something new. i ask unanimous consent, the documents on the staff, the list be without objection so ordered. again, thank you to our witnesses for being here today. members have additional written questions for you all where they will be submitted to you. they have ten business days to submit records for the record and i ask witnesses to respond to questions promptly. july 11th, with that, the subcommittee is adjourned.

[inaudible conversations] >> one october morning in 2018 journalists william says he was returning some books to his local virginia beach library when he noticed the historical state marker planted on the ground near the front entrance and said it was built world war ii prisoner war camp and author's note in latest book called the 15 he writes, quote, i was surprised and a little embarrassed unquote, not to neglect that the u.s. had pow camps spread throughout the united states in 46 different states, housing 371,683 german soldiers and 49,784 italians, that's during world war ii. the book subtitle murder, retribution and forgotten story

of nazi pow's in america. >> host brian lamh. >> c-span's washington journal live forum involving you to discuss latest issues in government, public policy from washington, d.c. and across the country and coming up friday morning, texas republican congressman keith, member of the freedom caucus and foreign affair committee discusses u.s. military against iran and vote soon on the president's big beautiful bill. jill, member of the armed services committee and the progressive caucus will also talk about u.s. military action against iran and her opposition to the president's tax and spending legislation. c-span's washington journal, join the conversation live at 7:00 eastern friday morning on

c-span, c-span now, our free mobile app or online at c-span.org. >> democracy, always unfinished creation. >> democracy is worth dying for. >> democracy belongs to us all. >> we are here in the sanctuary of democracy. >> great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies. >> american democracies is bigger than any one person. >> freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected. >> we are still at our core a democracy. >> this is also a massive victory for democracy and for freedom. >> and now to the u.s. capitol where house speaker mike johnson honored u.s. army ranger veteran of world war