It’s rare that a new technology threatens to fundamentally change an entire facet of American life, but we may be on the verge of just such a revolution. Make that two revolutions, actually: the world’s tech companies are in the process of pioneering wearable technology, and all the while Google has been toiling away on their driverless cars, which may even change American life as we know it.
Both of these technologies are case studies in how technology can influence politics and policy. We saw it before when smartphones found their way into our pockets, our cars, and our lives. We’re now beginning to see it with the consumer-level drone industry – buy them while you can! – and we’re going to see it with wearables such as Google Glass (already banned in movie theaters) and the forthcoming Apple Watch.
Given all the uncertainty, let’s narrow down the conversation a little bit and focus only on distracted driving and its implications. Until the autonomous car revolution truly arrives, we’re going to have a lot of unanswered questions about how distracting technologies are going to fit into our daily lives.
But before we can get a sense of where we might be going, we must first see where we’ve been. Here’s what distracted driving looks like right now.
Statistics Reveal Opportunities
Distracted driving is a problem that transcends socioeconomic barriers, age groups, and any other demographic classification you can think of. According to Distraction.gov – the official US government website for distracted driving awareness – 3,328 people died in 2012 as a result of distracted driving. Little surprise, given that at any given moment, about 660,000 US drivers are interacting with electronic devices behind the wheel. If this proves anything, it’s how wide – and widening – the rift really is between technological progress and the policy that governs it.
Will the government need to keep an up-to-the-minute list of products that are illegal to use while driving? Will the law allow us to check the time on our smartwatches but not our text notifications? At what point will we be able to trust that a given technology is “safe enough” not to pose a danger to drivers – if ever? And will driverless cars render this all moot?
When Are States’ Rights Not Right?
So, on to the big question: How long will it take until we get some kind of comprehensive legislation governing our use of technology while we drive?
Those who live in fear of governmental overreach likely hope it never happens, and for them there’s good news: our 50 states still have not reached a consensus on what constitutes distracted driving, nor on the appropriate punishments for those who have been found to be in violation.
While we seem to have a more-or-less accurate picture of how many people die each year due to distracted driving (in 2010, this number was just over 3,000 deaths), individual states are still stuck in legislative limbo. In Pennsylvania, for example, text messaging is banned under state law, while general cell phone usage is not. The state of Colorado is equally complicated: despite being home to 472 traffic deaths in 2012, they have banned cell phone usage only for drivers under the age of 18.
Does that sound unnecessarily convoluted to anyone else? These laws represent a fractured front in the battle against preventable driving deaths, making it all the more confusing why so many of us still champion the sacred cow of states’ rights. Should we not recognize that distracted driving is a highly preventable cause of death that calls for a unified approach?
States’ rights do, however, give states the opportunity to lead by example or ask important questions, as when Massachusetts filed a suit challenging the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, or when New York instituted a statewide ban on fracking late last year. It also opens up contentious legislation to productive debate, as when Virginia challenged the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Sebelius in 2010.
Moving at the Speed of Legislation
In a perfect world, the federal government wouldn’t have to promote safety by way of legislation and regulation. We could, for example, count on energy companies to seek profits using non-destructive technologies like solar or nuclear. And, yes, we could also count on our fellow motorists to leave their phones where they belong until they get where they’re going.
I chose consumer electronics to frame this discussion because it’s one of the fastest-moving industries in the world, and one that poses a unique problem for lawmakers. New technologies may represent our best and brightest hope for escaping our own worst instincts (again, the wait for the Google Car is beginning to feel interminable), but the political process seems to frequently be a day late and a dollar short to deal with these developments. We have yet to see how the government will deal with the impending rollout of autonomous cars. Their potential to make us safer and more productive is almost too great to fathom right now – the only question is whether we’ll be ready to greet them with a logical, nationwide policy or whether they’ll be mired in red tape for ages. For now, they remain legal for road use in just four states, while individual counties are now beginning to issue their own laws on the subject, further complicating the issue.
In short, it’s become clearer than ever that our political process has grown much too bloated and cumbersome to effectively and appropriately respond to significant shakeups as they happen. Then again, the glacial speed of American legislation might be an advantage, given the importance we rightfully place on scientific due process and productive discourse. Maybe we’ve simply approached the moment where our grasp of technology is finally outpacing our skill at effectively governing ourselves; perhaps in time we’ll even see sweeping changes in the way technology policy is written in this country.
Until then, we’ll keep living in the gray area between progress and policy.
–
Image Credit: Flickr (via Creative Commons)
Dan Wilhelm is a columnist for The Moderate Voice and Political People. Join him for discussions about progressive music and politics at New Music Friday, Utopian Daydreams, and on Medium.