Interpretation ID: aiam4400
P.O. Box 475
Howard
KS 67349;
Dear Mr. George: Secretary Dole has asked me to respond to your letter to her, in whic you asked why we believe it is necessary to have laws mandating the use of safety belts. You stated that you believe a public education campaign about safety belt use would have been sufficient. I am pleased to have this opportunity to explain our position to you.; During the past decade, 470,000 persons have died on American highways Each year, an estimated 300,000 are injured seriously enough to require hospital treatment. These traffic deaths and injuries have resulted in an annual cost to society of approximately 57 billion dollars resulting from such costs as emergency medical services, long-term medical care and rehabilitation, worker's compensation, welfare payments, and lost tax revenue.; Numerous analyses have shown that safety belts reduce fatalities b 40-50 percent and reduce serious injuries by 45-55 percent. I have enclosed copies of a safety belt fact sheet and several pamphlets we have published explaining how and why safety belts are so effective. Because of the extensive body of evidence about the effectiveness of safety belts, the United States Supreme Court has said, 'We start with the accepted ground that, if used, seatbelts unquestionably would save many thousands of lives and would prevent tens of thousands of crippling injuries.'; This Department and other groups tried many public education efforts t make these facts known to the public, with the anticipation that more people would use safety belts when they knew the facts. Despite these efforts, the rate of usage for safety belts did not change substantially from what it had been in 1967. As recently as 1983, the overall safety belt usage rate for front seat occupants was only slightly above 12 percent.; This trend suggested that public education campaigns *alone* would no substantially reduce unnecessary deaths and injuries on our highways. In an effort to protect their citizens by substantially reducing vehicle-related deaths and injuries, and to reduce the financial burden on their taxpayers, 29 States and the District of Columbia have enacted safety belt use laws. I want to emphasize that each of these State legislatures made their own decisions with respect to safety belt use laws. This Department neither has nor seeks any authority to withhold Federal funds if States do not adopt or repeal safety belt use laws. We do, however, believe that safety belt use laws are more than justified by the possibility of achieving substantial reductions in vehicle-related deaths and injuries, and reducing the financial burden on the taxpayers. The available data show that among front seat occupants, safety belts saved about 2,200 lives in 1986, and 1,750 of those lives were saved in States that have safety belt use laws.; We agree with you, however, that safety belt use laws *alone* may no ensure long-term increased usage of safety belts. Simply requiring persons to wear their safety belts does not get to the heart of the problem of non- usage: lack of knowledge and negative attitudes regarding occupant restraints. Experience has shown that a combination of usage requirements *and* information and education campaigns are the most effective way to get more people to wear their safety belts. Therefore, we have continued our public information and education campaigns about safety belts, as has the State of Kansas. As a result of these combined efforts, our most recent data show that the overall safety belt usage rate for front seat occupants is now slightly above 40 percent.; We in the Department of Transportation are committed to reducing a much as possible the deaths and injuries on our nation's roads. This mission can only succeed with the cooperation and input of concerned citizens like yourself. Thank you for taking the time to express your concerns, and please let us know if you have any further questions or concerns about our programs.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel