Highly autonomous vehicles (HAVs, or self-driving cars) represent a breakthrough technology being pursued by the major car manufacturers and many would-be car manufacturers.
The promise of HAVs is significant in terms of improved safety (94% of traffic fatalities are due to human error), mobility (those unable to drive no longer need to find a chauffeur), fuel savings (driving routes and traffic flow will be optimized), and savings in personal time (no need to focus on driving). However, there are also significant drawbacks from such breakthrough technology: higher prices for consumers, an increase in some types of accidents uniquely associated with nascent technology (until the bugs get worked out), legal uncertainty (who is to blame when two self-driving cars collide?), employment issues (what will all the Uber drivers do?), and ethical issues (how should a car be programmed to react when an accident is inevitable?), etc.
At the local, state, and national levels, policy makers are engaged on these issues. For example, the US Congress has considered legislation (H.R.3388) to promote the deployment of HAVs. In the last Congress, the House of Representatives passed this legislation, but the bill stalled in the Senate.
Here is H.R.3388 from the last Congress: BILLS-115hr3388rfs.pdfPreview the document
https://thehill.com/policy/transportation/455554-congress-looks-to-rev-up-discussion-around-self-driving-car-legislation
Here is a link to a congressional hearing where various interest groups provided testimony (look for the witness statements) about what the legislation should do: https://energycommerce.house.gov/hearings/self-driving-vehicle-legislation/ (Links to an external site.)
Here is the most recent NHTSA report on FMVSS and HAVs: preparing-future-transportation-automated-vehicle-30.pdfPreview the document
Q1: What are the problems that the legislation is intended to address?
Q2: What is the strongest rationale (e.g., externality, public good, inefficient or ineffective law or governmental process) or rationales for the government to get involved to solve the specific problems you identified?
Q3: Why is the federal government getting involved in this issue? Why can’t the federal government leave these issues to the states?
Q4: In your own words, what would the legislation do to promote autonomous vehicles? Please identify the policy alternatives that are being pursued under the legislation.
Q5: Is Congress, with this legislation, requiring that autonomous vehicles be less safe than, as safe as, or more safe than regular automobiles? Please explain/justify your answer.
Q6: In your opinion, what is the strongest argument against the legislation as it is currently written? Can the legislation be altered to address this concern? How so? Will such a change lower the benefits to society from autonomous vehicles? If so, please describe briefly.