Legislative Insight: Federal and State Gas Taxes

By Danny Restivo (posted 5/24/17)

Shortly after President Donald Trump entered the White House, he pledged a large investment in America’s infrastructure during a nationally televised address to Congress.

“To launch our national rebuilding, I will be asking the Congress to approve legislation that produces a $1 trillion investment in the infrastructure of the United States—financed through both public and private capital—creating millions of new jobs,” the President said during his February speech.

The American Society for Civil Engineers gave American infrastructure a D+ in its 2017 report card.Deteriorating infrastructure is impeding our ability to compete in the thriving global economy, and improvements are necessary to ensure our country is built for the future,” the report said. “While we have made some progress, reversing the trajectory after decades of underinvestment in our infrastructure requires transformative action from Congress, states, infrastructure owners, and the American people.”

The report also said current road conditions cost the country $160 billion in time and money every year, while a report from the Federal Highway Administration says the country’s transit system has a $90 billion backlog on repairs. Democratic lawmakers have long-supported federal dollars to help improve America’s roads, bridges, dams, airports and tunnels. Trump’s plan offers a rare opportunity for bi-partisan support in an increasingly fractured political environment.

While a final proposal has yet to be agreed upon, Trump has called for a public-private partnership, but that seems more viable in urban areas where companies can recoup money by levying tolls. In rural areas, where less people live, projects may not entice enough investment because of revenue concerns.

In early May, President Donald Trump signaled that he’s open to raising the federal gas tax to help subsidize infrastructure improvements.

“It’s something I would certainly consider,” the President said to Bloomberg News in an interview. His statement underscores an issue that’s plagued politicians for years. The last time Congress increased a nationwide gas tax was in 1993, when lawmakers approved a 19.3 cent per gallon tax on gasoline, and a 24.3 cent per gallon tax on diesel fuel. However, that tax has not adjusted for inflation, and the Highway Trust Fund has not kept pace. Since 2008, the federal government has injected $143 billion in the fund, while the tax has generated roughly $34 billion a year. However, the federal government usually spends $50 billion per year on transportation projects, leaving a $16 billion annual shortfall.

The Congressional Budget Office said the fund will become insolvent by 2021 without additional funding. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, increasing the federal tax to 35 cents per gallon will create an additional $473.6 billion over a period of 10 years.

The Chamber of Commerce, AAA auto club and the American Trucking Association support a new gasoline tax. After the 2014 mid-term elections, the group sent a joint letter to the 114th Congress that lends support for a bill that increases the gas tax. 

“While no one wants to pay more, we urge you to support an increase to the federal fuels user fee, provided the funds are used to ease congestion and improve safety, because it is the most cost efficient and straightforward way to provide a steady revenue stream to the Highway Trust Fund.”

However, critics believe a gas tax will hurt working families by leveling fees on middle class commuters, many of whom supported Trump. Low gas prices may provide cover for a tax increase, but a sharp spike in gas prices could change consumer sentiments. In an interview with CNBC, Chevron CEO John Watson, pushed back against a tax on gas.

“I think a good first step would be to evaluate where existing taxes are going,” he said. “In other words, we have road taxes today. How are they being used? Are they being put to good use in rebuilding our infrastructure?”

In light of the debate, several states have increased their respective gas tax to shore up roads, bridges, tunnels and other state-operated transportation systems.Since 2015, sixteen states and the District of Columbia have enacted legislation to increase taxes on gas that help support infrastructure programs. According to American Road and Transportation Builders Association, voters approved 269 of the 361 transportation funding measures that appeared on township, city, county or state ballots in 2016. Many of these initiatives were approved in Democratic and Republican-dominated regions of the country. Furthermore, Louisiana, Minnesota, Oklahoma and Oregon have transportation funding measures pending in their respective legislatures.

Gas Tax Map

States Enacting Gas Taxes in 2017

California

The State Senate approved a 10 cent per gallon tax hike in April as part transportation bill estimated to raise $5.2 billion a year to repair state roads and highways. The legislation, which was backed by Governor Jerry Brown, increases the per gallon tax rate from 18 cents to 30 cents. The law also mandates $100 annual fee for electric cars, as well as annual fees ranging from $25 for cars valued at or under $5,000, to $175 for a car worth $60,000 or more. About $34 billion of the first $52 billion would go to repairing roads, bridges, highways and culverts, with most of the money split 50-50 between state and local projects.

Michigan

Michigan drivers saw a 7 cent tax increase in fuel prices at the beginning of the year, increasing a 19 cent per gallon tax to 26.3 cents per gallon, while diesel fuel will increase 11.3 cents from 15 to 26.3 cents per gallon as well. Lawmakers also approved a 20 percent increase in vehicle registration fees, while gas-electric hybrid and electric vehicles will experience an added $47 and $135, respectively. The hike is the first gas tax increase in 20 years, and aims to fund crumbling bridges and roads with an additional $2.3 billion over the next four years. The plan allocates 61 percent of the funding to counties, cities and villages, while the rest goes to state projects.

 

 

Indiana

Governor Eric Holcomb signed a $1.2 billion highway improvement plan in April which increases the Hoosier gas tax from 18 cents to 28 cents per gallon in July. Furthermore, registration and licensing fees will increase by $15. There’s also a $50 fee on hybrids and a $150 fee on electric cars. In addition, Holcomb intends to draft a plan that adds tolls for certain interstate projects by the end of 2018.

Montana

The Montana house assembly approved a bill this year that will levy a 6 cent per gallon gas tax increase phased-in over 6 years. More than four percent will take effect on July 1, while the remainder is implemented in 0.5 cent increments between 2019 and 2022. The Montana tax is expected to generate $28 million in 2018, and more in future years to help repair state roads and bridges, as well as the construction of new ones.

South Carolina

On May 10 the South Carolina House and Senate overrode a veto from Governor Henry McMaster to approve an infrastructure bill that increases the state’s gas tax. The legislation will enact a 12 cent per gallon increase phased in over six years, with a two cent increase occurring in July. The tax will eventually reach 28.75 cents per gallon while generating $600 million for infrastructure projects throughout the state.

Tennessee

The House and Senate approved a bill sponsored by Governor Bill Haslam, which would generate $350 million for the state’s highway fund, and boost road revenues for cities and counties. The gas tax will rise by 6 cents per gallon and the diesel tax by 10 cents on July 1. The bill also has several fee increases, including a $5 car registration increase and a $100 fee on electric car users

States Enacting Gas Taxes in 2016

New Jersey

In October 2016, Governor Chris Christie signed a bill that increased the gasoline tax to 23 cents per gallon. The bill marked the first tax hike of Christie’s tenure, and the first tax increase on gas since 1988. The law takes the second lowest gas tax rate from 14.5 cents per gallon, to 37.5 cents, the seventh highest. The law levies diesel users with a 15.9 cent per gallon tax increase, totaling more than 27 cents per gallon.

The bill will generate $1.23 billion annually to help finance an eight year, $16 billion transportation program. The legislation comes after the state’s Transportation Trust Fund, which helps pay for Garden State roads, bridges and railways, had no money to pay for new projects over the summer.

After Christie signed the bill in October, voters approved a November referendum to amend the state’s constitution to allocate the tax revenue to transportation projects. The law prevents lawmakers from reallocating the money to different projects.

States Enacting Gas Taxes in 2015

Georgia

The Georgia Legislature enacted the Transportation Act of 2015, increasing the excise gas tax by 7.5 cents per gallon, along with a four percent state sales tax, to 26 cents per gallon. These rates will then adjust to Consumer Price Index Every year. The money accrued from the tax will allocate to future state transportation projects. Additionally, the state will also collect a $5 per night hotel fee, as well as fees for heavy trucks and a $200 registration fee for electric cars. The law also eliminates a $5,000 tax credit for anyone who purchases an electric car. House Bill 170 also allows counties and municipalities to levy a 1 percent use tax on all motor fuels. The bill aims to collect $900 million a year to help fund transportation projects throughout the Peach State.

Idaho

Idaho’s gas tax increased 7 cents after state lawmakers approved a funding bill in April 2015 to help raise money for road repairs. The house bill increased the gas tax from 25 to 32 cents, to help raise more than $95 million a year. The accrued revenue is then split between local governments and state highway departments (60/40). Idaho also stipulates a $145 registration fee for an electric car, and a $75 fee for hybrid vehicles. However, a house bill introduced in 2017 will eliminate those fees if approved by the Governor.

Iowa

Governor Terry Branstad signed a bill in February 2015, which increased Iowa’s gas tax from 20 cents to 30 cents per gallon. The bipartisan initiative provides $215 million in annual funds for city, county and state roads. The gas tax increase received support from the Iowa Farm Bureau, the Chamber of Commerce, the trucking Industry, the Iowa State Association of Counties and the Iowa County Engineers Association. The gas tax legislation was the first fuel tax increase since 1989.

Kentucky

Kentucky lawmakers approved legislation pegging the gas tax to the average wholesale price of gas over a three-month span. However, a $1.46 drop in gas prices in 2015 created a significant shortfall in the Commonwealth’s transportation budget. As a result, the lower gas taxes helped create a $125 million gap for transportation projects in local municipalities and townships, as well as state highways. To ensure a steady stream of revenue, lawmakers approved a 26-cent minimum for the gas tax rate.

 

 

Nebraska

State legislators overrode a veto from the Governor to increase the state’s gas tax by cents per gallon, creating roughly $75 million a year in additional funding for transportation projects. The law says the gas rate will increase 1.5 cents every year for the next four years, through 2019. The State’s Transportation Innovation Act is estimated to raise $400 million. Nebraska’s gas tax has three components. This legislation will impact the fixed tax, which is set by state law at 12.3 cents per gallon in 2017. Meanwhile, the wholesale tax is pegged at the wholesale price and the variable tax adjusts every six months to meet the funding demands of previously approved state roads projects. The gas tax currently sits at 27.3 cents per gallon.

North Carolina

Governor Pat McCrory signed a bill reducing the fuel tax from 37.5 cents per gallon to 34 cents per gallon by 2016. In January 2017, the gas tax began using a formula that accounts for population, energy prices and the consumer price index to help adjust the rate. The reformed gas tax formula takes population and energy prices into account when calculating future gas tax increases in the years ahead. The first of those increased the rate to 34.3 cents per gallon.

South Dakota

Governor Dennis Daugaard signed legislation that increased the gas tax from 22 cents per gallon to 28 cents. The legislation also increases the excise tax on vehicle registration from three to four percent and increases license plate fees for noncommercial vehicles by 20 percent. The fuel tax hike will generate an estimated $40.5 million annually, while the excise tax increase will produce an additional $27 million to $30 million. Most of the revenue generated is allocated to state roads and local bridges. The new bill allows municipalities to levy their own taxes to repair roads in their jurisdiction.

Utah

State lawmakers approved legislation to increase the state’s gas tax by 5 cents per gallon from 24.5 cents. The legislation levies a 12 percent wholesale tax on fuel and pegs future increases to a formula that considers fuel prices and inflation. In March 2017, the state house voted to pass fuel tax increases of .6 cents per gallon beginning in 2019 and 1.2 cents a gallon in 2020, essentially reworking the formula established two years prior.

Washington

The Governor signed a 16-year transportation revenue package in August 2015, which increases the state’s gas tax to 44.5 cents per gallon. The legislation is part of the state’s $16 billion transportation project aimed at improving highways and roads, as well as non-highway projects like walkways, bike paths and transit systems. The two-part tax hike increased rates by an additional 4.9 cents a gallon, putting the total tax at 49.4 cents.

Technology Briefing: Hacking Vehicles

By Danny Restivo (Posted 5/3/17)

A few months ago, we looked at the legislative developments surrounding driverless vehicles–something that nearly all 50 states are thinking about. As driverless vehicles become reality and states continue to grapple with regulatory challenges, more threats have emerged, including the ability for hackers to take control of someone’s car whether they’re driving it or the car drives itself.

Recent technological developments have allowed drivers greater accessibility and convenience than ever before. Whether it’s a WiFi hotspot, a mobile car starter application, a locator connected to your phone or a computer located under the hood that monitors maintenance, new technology has given consumers and technicians a level of sophistication that was once the work of science fiction.

Unfortunately, a greater degree of convenience means an increased level of vulnerability. In August 2015, two hackers compromised a tech reporters’ vehicle on the highway (The Wired reporter was working on a story about the dangers of car hacking and was aware of their attempts). From a remote location, the two hacked into the reporter’s 2014 Jeep Cherokee and controlled the vehicles steering and brakes from a computer more than 10 miles away. Ultimately, the reporter’s car ended up in a ditch (no one was injured). The story grabbed public attention and Fiat Chrysler recalled more than 1.4 million vehicles, including Ram, Dodge, Jeep and Chrysler vehicles. A similar organized hack occurred in June 2016 when a British security firm purchased a 2017 Mitsubishi Outlander and successfully disabled the vehicles alarm system. Nissan, Tesla and Chevy have all experienced similar breaches in their vehicles computer systems.

The hacks underscore a growing concern among regulators and legislators that automakers haven’t safely created communication systems. In light of these security vulnerabilities, the FBI, The Department of Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a public service announcement in March 2016.

“While not all hacking incidents may result in a risk to safety – such as an attacker taking control of a vehicle – it is important that consumers take appropriate steps to minimize risk,” the statement said. “Therefore, the FBI and NHTSA are warning the general public and manufacturers – of vehicles, vehicle components, and aftermarket devices – to maintain awareness of potential issues and cybersecurity threats related to connected vehicle technologies in modern vehicles.”

They added: “Vulnerabilities stemming from wireless communication, such as a cellular phone or tablet connected to the vehicle via USB, Bluetooth, or Wi-Fi, can put drivers at significant risk,” the statement also included several best practices for minimizing cybersecurity risks:

  • Ensure vehicle software is up to date
  • Be aware of making any modifications to vehicle software
  • Exercise discretion when connecting third party devices to a vehicle
  • Be aware of who has physical access to your vehicle

If you end up a victim of a car hack:

  • Check for outstanding vehicle recalls or vehicle software updates
  • Contact the manufacturer or authorized dealer
  • Contact the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration
  • Contact the FBI

The NHTSA and the FBI also suggested that automakers and auto companies should consider the full life cycle of their vehicles, while creating a rapid response and recovery system to help stem cybersecurity incidents. With the introduction of autonomous driving technology by companies like Tesla Motors, Uber, and others, yet another layer of vulnerability has complicated the issue. In September 2016, the NHTSA issued a framework for states to regulate self-driving cars, but critics fault it for its lack of focus on car hacking. A 2016 report from the Government Accountability Office, an independent watchdog organization, said the Department of Transportation had not taken enough steps to help prevent car hacking.

“Until [DOT] develops such a plan … the agency’s response efforts could be slowed as agency staff may not be able to quickly identify the appropriate actions to take,” the report stated.

Shortly after hackers showcased their ability on a 2014 Jeep Cherokee, Senators Ed Markey (D-Mass) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn) introduced the SPY Act of 2015 (Security and Privacy in Your Car).  The proposed legislation would have created a uniform regulatory standard for vehicle communication, while protecting a driver’s privacy data. The bill would also have created a “cyber dashboard” to inform the public of how well the vehicle protects drivers’ security and privacy.  While Markey and Blumenthal’s legislation did not make it out of committee during the 114th Congress, they recently reintroduced the SPY Act legislation in March as S. 680, along with a reintroduction of the Cybersecurity Standards for Aircraft to Improve Resilience (Cyber Air) Act (as S. 679 in the 115th Congress).

“This critical legislation will help protect the public against cybercriminals who exploit advances in technology like wireless-connected aircraft and self-driving cars,” said Blumenthal in a release following the reintroduction. “As technology rapidly advances, we must ensure that auto and airline industries protect their systems from cybersecurity attacks. Security and safety cannot be sacrificed as we achieve convenience and promise of wireless progress.”

Markey and Blumenthal cited a need to reintroduce the legislation because of an increased vulnerability in our transportation systems. After Uber unveiled plans to use driverless cars in Pittsburgh in September, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration unveiled a federal framework for the technology to prosper, giving states a significant degree of sovereignty. However, some believe the NHTSA’s mandate didn’t go far enough in solving technological vulnerabilities in vehicles. Conversely, tech researchers and developers fear any federal regulatory framework will not ensure safety because cyber technology often outpaces the law, making hacks more accessible.

In a bipartisan effort, the House introduced a new piece of legislation to help safeguard drivers. Representatives Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Joe Wilson (R-SC) have cosponsored the Security and Privacy in Your Car Study Act of 2017. Compared to the senate bill, the House bill would only perform a study of best practices.

While federal lawmakers debate the best path forward, some states have taken their own steps to improve cybersecurity in vehicles. In Michigan, home of the American auto industry, state lawmakers have decided to use deterrence as a weapon against car hacking. In August, the state senate unanimously passed a law that would increase the penalty to life in prison if the interference of a vehicle’s computer system resulted in death. According to state law, there’s a 10-year sentence and $50,000 fine for anyone who tampers with the computer system of a driverless vehicle that results in injury.

Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe announced a public-private commission in May 2015 to help protect state troopers against cyberattacks. Just prior to the announcement, The Old Dominion became the first state to create its own information and analysis sharing organization to help prevent against cyber-attacks. As part of its public safety initiative, researchers hacked into two Virginia State Trooper vehicles; a 2012 Chevrolet Impala and a 2013 Ford Taurus. Researchers from the University of Virginia and a few private tech companies, hacked into the vehicles control system before meddling with the gear shift, instrument panel, car locks, trunk and accessing the vehicles Bluetooth and key fob. While the organized hack was an attempt to raise awareness about the seriousness of car hacking, Governor McAuliffe continued a call for voluntary partnership between private and public entities in an effort to prevent car hacks.

While Michigan and Virginia pursue preventative action against car hacking, many state legislative bodies have tabled the issue. Every state has some sort of law on computer hacking, but none (besides Michigan) have laws that specifically deal with hacking vehicles. Meanwhile, New York University, University of Nevada, North Dakota State University, and others, have taken steps in research and development to create cybersecurity systems for self-driving cars. Furthermore, The Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee has begun experimenting with electronic control systems to help protect the federal government’s automotive fleet.

“Car hacking remains a significant issue for automakers and regulators, but it hasn’t spurned the federal government into action, just yet” says Brett Goldman, DMGS Manager of Special Projects. He adds that “it’s safe to say that at some point in the future, car hacking will receive greater public scrutiny, but whether that comes as an issue of legislative and regulatory foresight or as a reactionary measure to the unthinkable remains to be seen.”

 

Legislative Overview and Regulatory Matters of Driverless Vehicle Technology

By Danny Restivo, DMGS

Edited by Brett Goldman, DMGS Manager of Special Projects

The popular ride-sharing service Uber introduced a fleet of driverless vehicles to Pittsburgh in September 2016. Days after the launch, President Barack Obama wrote an op-ed in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and praised Uber for its innovation and effort to improve safety. “…Too many people die on our roads – 35,200 last year alone – with 94 percent of those the result of human error or choice. Automated vehicles have the potential to save tens of thousands of lives each year.”

Uber’s program comes eight months after the United States Department of Transportation announced a multi-billion dollar investment into the technology. In January 2016 Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx unveiled a $4 billion, 10-year plan to accelerate driverless technology. “We are on the cusp of a new era in automotive technology with enormous potential to save lives, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and transform mobility for the American people,” Foxx said in a statement announcing the plan.

In light of the federal government’s investment, Google, Ford, BMW, Tesla, Volvo and General Motors have all begun developing similar driverless programs. As the technology edges closer to highways, the federal government has paved the way for autonomous vehicles to hit the road. On September 20, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration released proposed guidelines and benchmarks for driverless vehicles. The announcement received applause from the Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets, which represents Ford, Uber, Lyft, Volvo and Google. The coalition’s leadership also acknowledged the need for other regulatory entities to follow their lead.

“State and local governments also have complementary responsibilities and should work with the federal government to achieve and maintain our status as world leaders in innovation,” David Strickland, coalition spokesperson and general counsel, said in a statement following the NHTSA’s announcement. “With the guidance now publicly available, we encourage state policymakers to engage with our coalition to develop the appropriate policy solutions, and we stand ready to provide support and expertise for both technological and policy questions.”

The Obama administration’s guidelines provide 15 benchmarks companies must meet before their driverless vehicles can hit the road. Those benchmarks include operational functions and safety procedures. However, the NHTSA has given automakers and tech companies flexibility to meet those benchmarks, as long as detailed explanations are given. While the federal government’s proposal provides a framework, several states have already approved or introduced laws regulating autonomous vehicles. Legislative bodies in Nevada, Michigan, Tennessee, California, Louisiana, North Dakota, Utah, Florida and Washington, D.C., have all approved laws related to driverless vehicles. Meanwhile, Arizona’s governor wrote an executive order in August 2015 that supported efforts to test driverless cars on public roads. In June of that year, Virginia’s governor announced a partnership among the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles, the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute to research and develop driverless technology.

Several other states have debated legislation, but their laws often conflict with the nature of driverless technology. For example, many states call for a licensed driver behind the wheel before a vehicle can operate. Moreover, laws related to seatbelts, unattended vehicles, hands on steering wheels and licensing requirements raise questions about legislating the technology. Whether state legislatures approve the federal government’s proposed guidelines remains to be seen.

Eric Martins, Managing Director of DMGS thinks that “if states do not adopt uniform legislation, a patchwork of laws could make autonomous driving through state lines a major challenge for driverless vehicles. This, of course, would be a terrible setback for both consumers, industry, and regulators. Crafting smart legislation and regulations will be key to making this technology thrive.”

Enacted Autonomous Vehicle Legislation

California (CA SB 1298)—Establishes safety and performance standards to be overseen by California Department of Motor Vehicles and the Highway Patrol. Also allows autonomous vehicles to be tested on public roads (2012).

Florida (HB 1207)—Defines autonomous drivers and driverless technology. Also allows a licensed driver to operate an autonomous vehicle with insurance (2012). HB 7027–Eliminates the requirement that a driver be present in the vehicle. Requires autonomous vehicles meet applicable federal safety standards and regulations (2016). HB 7061–Defines autonomous technology and driver-assistive truck platooning technology. Requires a study on the use and safe operation of driver-assistive truck platooning technology and allows for a pilot project upon conclusion of the study.

Louisiana (HB 1143)—Defines autonomous technology (2016)

Michigan (MI S 169 and 663)—Defines automated vehicle technology and modes, and limits the liability an automated driver manufacturer faces in a lawsuit (2013). (SB 995-998)–Allows people to purchase autonomous vehicles upon availability. It also permits autonomous cars without steering wheels and pedals, and it doesn’t require a human operator (2016).

Nevada (NV AB 511) Permits the operation of autonomous vehicles for licensed drivers, and directs the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to adopt rules for license endorsement and for operation, including insurance, safety standards and testing in relation to driverless vehicles (2011). (NV SB 140) Permits the use of wireless handheld devices in a legally operated driverless vehicle (2011). (NV SB 313) Requires an autonomous vehicle to have insurance (2013).

Nevada regulations currently require two people in a driverless car that is being tested, which can only occur in approved areas. However, regulators have begun revamping policy for autonomous vehicles in non-testing environments.

North Dakota (ND HB 1065) Commissioned a study to research the implications of autonomous driving in relation to reducing crashes, fatalities and traffic congestion (2015).

Tennessee (TN SB 598) Prohibits local governments from banning vehicles equipped with autonomous driving technology (2015). (TN SB 1561) Establishes a program through the Department of the Safety that would certify autonomous vehicle manufactures before, they could be tested, sold or operated in the State. It also creates a per mile tax structure for driverless vehicles (2016).

Utah (HB 280) Requires certain state agencies to study autonomous vehicle technologies and best practices and report the findings. It also permits agencies to partner with driverless companies and entities (2016).

Washington, D.C. (DC B 19-0931) Defines autonomous driving and requires a prepared human driver to take control of the vehicle in an emergency. It also addresses the liability of the original manufacturer of a converted vehicle (2013)

Introduced Autonomous Vehicle Legislation in 2016

Alabama (S 178) Requires testing of autonomous technology with approval by the Alabama State Law Enforcement Agency. Also requires each driverless vehicle to carry insurance and “authorizes the agency to create a driver’s license endorsement and require testing.” Status: Failed

California (A 1592) Authorizes the Contra Costa Transportation Authority to conduct a pilot project for to test autonomous vehicles that are not equipped with a steering wheel, a brake pedal, an accelerator, or an operator inside the vehicle Status: Sent to the Governor.  

Georgia (S 113) Classified autonomous vehicles and technology with specific provisions. Would allow the operation of autonomous vehicles for testing Status: Failed.

Hawaii (H 2687) Authorizes autonomous vehicles for research and testing purposes. Requires the Department of Transportation to establish an application process to report to the legislature annually. Status: Failed.

(S 630) Requires certain safety features and testing requirements for autonomous vehicles. Also requires an autonomous vehicle operator to hold a driver’s license. Status: Failed.

Illinois: (H 3136) Creates the Automated Motor Vehicle Study and Report Act to be done by the Secretary of State. The feasibility study will cover and record automated vehicle operations. Status: Passed House. In Senate. Placed on Calendar Order Third Reading. Pending Carryover.

Massachusetts (H 4321) Authorizes autonomous vehicles without human operators. Status: In House Committee on Ways and Means.

(S 1841) Defines autonomous vehicles and permits autonomous vehicles to operate on public roads if the vehicle manufacturer meets all safety standards. Status: Pending, Senate Study Order.

Maryland (H 8 & S 126) Establishes a task force that was used to research driverless vehicles and determine the best path for governing autonomous vehicles. Status: Failed.

Michigan (S 927 & S 928) Prohibits and provides penalties for accessing a computer system that operates a vehicle with intent of doing harm or damage. The proposed legislation also provides penalties for such action. Status: Pending in Senate Judiciary Committee.

(S 995 & S 996) Allows for driverless vehicles to operate without a person in the car. Status: Passed Senate. In House Committee on Communications and Technology.

(S 997 & 998) Defines automated driving and allows for the creation of mobility research centers where automated technology can be tested. Provides immunity for automated technology manufacturers when modifications are made without the manufacturer’s consent. Exempts mechanics and repair shops from liability on fixing automated vehicles. Status: Passed Senate. In House Committee on Communications and Technology.

Minnesota (H 3325 & S 2569) Establishes autonomous vehicles task force and demonstration project to serve mobility needs of people with disabilities; provides support for the task force; defines terms; appropriates money. Status: Failed

New Jersey (A 554) Requires self-driving vehicles to have ignition interlock device Status: In Assembly Committee on Law and Public Safety

(A 851 & S 343) Directs Motor Vehicle Commission to establish driver’s license endorsement for autonomous vehicles. Status: In Assembly Committee on Transportation and Independent Authorities/the Senate Committee on Transportation.

(A 3745) Permits testing and use of autonomous vehicles on state roadways under certain circumstances. Status: In Assembly Transportation and Independent Authorities Committee.

New York (A 31) Provides and regulates the operation and testing of vehicles with autonomous technology. Status: To Assembly Committee on Transportation.

(A 10586) Directs a study and report on autonomous vehicles on highways. Also directs the commissioner of the Department of Transportation to support such testing and operation. Status: In Assembly Committee on Transportation

(S 7879) Specifies the law requiring one hand on the steering wheel does not apply if autonomous technology is engaged to perform the steering function. Passed Senate. Pending in Assembly Committee on Transportation.

Pennsylvania (H 2203) Defines terms related to autonomous vehicles. Regulates the testing of autonomous vehicles. Allows the adoption of regulations dealing with autonomous vehicles. Status: In House Rules Committee.

(S 1268) Provides for autonomous and connected vehicles. Status: In Senate Transportation Committee.

Rhode Island (S 2514) Would permit the use of vehicles equipped with autonomous technology on Rhode Island roads. Status: In Senate Judiciary Committee

Endnotes

  1. Obama, Barack. “Barack Obama: Self-Driving, Yes, But Also Safe.” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. (Pittsburgh) September 19, 2016.  http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2016/09/19/Barack-Obama-Self-driving-yes-but-also-safe/stories/201609200027
  2. Secretary Foxx unveils President Obama’s FY17 budget proposal of nearly $4 billion for automated vehicles and announces DOT initiatives to accelerate vehicle safety innovations.” Nhtsa.gov. January 14. 2016.  http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/dot-initiatives-accelerating-vehicle-safety-innovations-01142016

  3. Kang, Cecilia. “Self-Driving Cars Gain Powerful Ally: The Government.” The New York Times. (New York) September 19, 2016.  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/20/technology/self-driving-cars-guidelines.html?_r=1

  4. Plungis, Jeff. “Self-Driving Cars Must Meet 15 Benchmarks in U.S. Guidance.” Bloomberg Government. September 20, 2016. https://www.bgov.com/core/news/#!/articles/ODT8KW6JIJVF?niReferrerLink=homepageFeed

  5. Self-Driving Coalition for Safer Streets. “Self-Driving Coalition Reacts to NHTSA Autonomous Vehicles Guidance.” September 19, 2016. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/self-driving-coalition-reacts-to-nhtsa-autonomous-vehicles-guidance-300330616.html

  6. Plungis

  7. National Conference of State Legislatures. “Autonomous Self-Driving Vehicles Legislation.”  September 13, 2016. http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonomous-vehicles-legislation.aspx

  8. National Conference of State Legislatures.

  9. Coy, Brian. “Governor McAuliffe Announces New Partnership to Make Virginia a Leader in Automated-Vehicle Industry.”  Office of the Governor. June 2, 2015. https://governor.virginia.gov/newsroom/newsarticle?articleId=8526

  10. LaFrance, Adrienne. “Anybody Can Test a Driverless Car in Pennsylvania.” The Atlantic. (Washington, D.C.) September 14, 2016. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/09/anybody-can-test-a-self-driving-car-in-pennsylvania/499667/

  11. National Conference of State Legislatures