The Traffic Death 'Crisis' Isn't What Bureaucrats Claim
Politicians overstate the situation, and to the extent there is a problem, it’s their doing.

To the limited extent that there was an upside during the early days of the pandemic, empty roads and reduced enforcement of petty traffic laws made what driving was still to be done relatively stress-free. But now that life has returned to something closer to what passes for normal these days, cars are back on the roads and traffic fatalities are rising. That has the usual suspects screaming that we're in a "crisis" that necessitates government action. But they overstate the case and, if there is a problem, it was caused by the politicians and bureaucrats who present themselves as our saviors.
"The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration…projects that an estimated 42,915 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes last year, a 10.5% increase from the 38,824 fatalities in 2020," the federal agency announced this week. "The projection is the highest number of fatalities since 2005 and the largest annual percentage increase in the Fatality Analysis Reporting System's history."
"We face a crisis on America's roadways that we must address together," commented U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. "With our National Roadway Safety Strategy and the President's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we are taking critical steps to help reverse this devastating trend and save lives on our roadways."
Really? Last year's infrastructure law was an expensive boondoggle, and the flood of money it served up might help make the roads a tad safer only as higher inflation renders fuel for vehicles less affordable (though that may not be what Buttigieg has in mind). For its part, the Transportation Department's National Roadway Safety Strategy is a marvel of control-freakery that emphasizes speed limits, technology mandates, and rule enforcement.
Among those in agreement is Urban Institute transportation expert Yonah Freemark. He favors "immediate interventions" including tighter speed limits and discouraging the sale of SUVs and pickup trucks that may be more lethal in accidents. All this to reverse that "devastating trend" of rising traffic deaths.
That increase in traffic deaths interrupts a decades-long decline in fatalities from 56,278 in 1972 to a low of 35,332 in 2010. That's remarkable when you consider that the U.S. population went from roughly 210 million to over 300 million during those years. If you measure traffic fatalities in an apples-to-apples way, the decline is even more astonishing.
"The population motor-vehicle death rate reached its peak in 1937 with 30.8 deaths per 100,000 population," the National Safety Council (NSC) notes of data through 2020. "The current rate is 12.9 per 100,000, representing a 58% improvement.…Since 1923, the mileage death rate has decreased 92% and now stands at 1.46 deaths per 100 million miles driven."
Federal highway bureaucrats invoke constant measures only after that breathless language about "the largest annual percentage increase" in traffic fatalities (their figures slightly differ from those of the NSC). As it turns out, "the fatality rate for 2021 was 1.33 fatalities per 100 million VMT [vehicle miles traveled], marginally down from 1.34 fatalities in 2020. While the fatality rate continued to rise in the first quarter, it declined in the other three quarters of 2021, compared to 2020."
So, it turns out that there was a big jump in the raw number of fatalities as people returned to the road after pandemic-related interruptions, but this jump represented a slight decline in the rate of traffic fatalities once you consider the number of miles driven. That's not what we were sold in the opening paragraphs of the press release, but it's not entirely good news since the rate was already elevated.
"The preliminary estimated rate of death on the roads [in 2020] spiked 24% over the previous 12-month period, despite miles driven dropping 13%," the National Safety Council, which also favors tighter driving restrictions, cautioned in March 2021. "The increase in the rate of death is the highest estimated year-over-year jump that NSC has calculated since 1924 – 96 years."
That's a surge in deaths by a constant measure, and it's weird. Why, after decades of improving highway safety did the rate of traffic fatalities jump up on relatively empty roads? But 2020 wasn't exactly an uneventful year. Could that surge have something to do with the pandemic, social distancing, and lockdowns that emptied those roads and disturbed our society in so many other ways?
"Evidence shows what service providers long suspected," the Justice Department conceded last October. "The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the domestic violence crisis by further isolating many people from family, friends, and support systems; and created even deeper economic and emotional hardship."
"In order to curb the spread of SARS-CoV-2 quarantines, social isolation, travel restrictions and stay-at-home orders have been adopted," a December 2020 article in the American Journal of Emergency Medicine pointed out. "Quarantine conditions are associated with alcohol abuse, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms. Stay-at-home orders may cause a catastrophic milieu for individuals whose lives are plagued by domestic violence."
"Some short-term impacts, such as isolation during lockdowns, led to longer-term problems, such as increases in crime and substance abuse," social analysts from Maryville University point out. "The National Center for Health Statistics, for example, indicates that drug overdose deaths increased by 27% between April 2020 and April 2021, likely due to the stress and uncertainty of COVID-19….While property crime and drug offense rates fell between 2019 and 2020, according to the Council on Criminal Justice, homicide rates increased by 42% between June and August of 2020 — a spike that may be due to increased stress and a change in routines."
You can add the social dysfunction of your choice here. There's ample evidence that the stresses of recent years made people a little nuts and worsened conflict and destructive behavior in shops, the streets, and the skies. While pandemic restrictions did little to slow a virus that we're learning to live with, they were very effective at shattering the economy, severing bonds, and turning people against one another. It would be surprising if that didn't also show up on the nation's highways as people acting out everywhere else got behind the wheels of their cars.
And, just as government officials want more laws and increased enforcement to deal with the other problems they caused, so Buttigieg and his fellow travelers call for a heavier hand when it comes to roads and automobiles. But that's what got us here to begin with in the form of lockdowns and other interventions. Control freaks broke the world by restricting normal life and now they claim the unpleasant consequences of their policies as an excuse to further tighten the screws.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
How else are bureaucrats supposed to get people to stop caring about gas prices?
Democrats in office is the only crisis this country faces.
The proof is that the answer to every crisis is in some way eliminate personal freedom.
And, of course, to throw more taxpayer money at it. Take "baby formula" crisis: Give the FDA $28 million more to hire inspectors, etc. who, by the time they are hired and trained, will have nothing to do because the crisis will be long over.
The day there are no more crises will be the day there is no more government
According to NHTSA, the cause of traffic deaths is always underregulation. Assume their press releases about traffic safety are lies. Some raw statistics are meaningful, like the total number of deaths. Others are cooked up before being entered into the system, like "speeding" which states are pressured to code as a cause far more often than they would if they were being honest.
Cars kill over three times as many people as firearms, and traffic deaths are almost always accidents.
Time for common-sense car control?
Those pesky assault SUV’s are the worst.
SUVs are often blamed for the rise in pedestrian deaths.
SUVs ain’t going away. The dems don’t want to lose the wine sipping soccer mom vote.
Worse. The mark of power in DC is the black Suburban/Tahoe/Escalade. Best if in a convoy, and also uparmoring is good. Are the top Biden bureaucrats going to give up theirs, in solidarity with us giving up ours?
We are currently debating where we want our Tahoe to end up. Currently, it is in PHX with us, but we are heading up to MT for the next half year, where it makes more sense. That is their natural element. You fill them up when you go to the city to shop, and they are safer when colliding with pretty much anything. Full sized SUVs, like full sized pickups, are ubiquitous in rural America. And that is probably part of why the left wants to ban them.
Yeah, who needs an SUB or even a car at all when you have public transit and bike shares. This seems to be how progs think-that the rest of America is like Manhattan or SF. Then act shocked when they lose elections.
How about free SUVs for all? In an accident, you are safer in a bigger, heavier car. Everyone deserves safe, comfortable transportation. And when the Fed causes the next housing crash, your SUV doubles as temporary housing.
You say that as if control-freak leftists don't want it.
Three-day cooling-off period before taking possession of a car. Red-flag laws so unbalanced people can't buy cars. And definitely get those assault vehicles off the road. No one needs a car with more horsepower than a Trabant.
And you know what else kills lots more people than firearms? Alcohol and drugs. Maybe we should try banning those things. After all, if it saves just one life. . .
The only defensible anti-second amendment argument is “have you seen how people drive?”
There's ample evidence that the stresses of recent years made people a little nuts and worsened conflict and destructive behavior
Obviously the solution is requiring a "breathalyzer"-type EEG test before the driver is able to start xir vehicle.
You forgot to mention that traffic fatalities dis-proportionally impact people of color, gender non-conforming persons, and children most.
Liberal urban planners are convinced that more traffic regulation will benefit marginalized non-motorized groups. In reality expect more tickets for driving while black.
So your big argument is "yeah it rose but overall it's not as bad as it could be"?
This is the type of hard hitting journalism I come to expect from reason. I mean, let's just ignore all these deaths because it's inconvenient. I want to get to work in my huge pickup as quick as possible, pedestrians and other drivers be damned.
If America at all gave a damn about its citizens it would start reconfiguring infrastructure to suit people, not cars. But hell, we brush off mass shootings, people needlessly dying from easily treated conditions due to lack of universal healthcare, deaths from road "accidents", etc. so who really gives a shit huh?
Crying will surely help.
Part of the problem with cops not enforcing traffic laws might have something to do with them not wanting to be accused of racism. Around where I live anyway, there is drag racing late into the night on public roads and most of the racers happen to not be of European descent. Then when a bad crash inevitably happens, the mentality seems to be “let’s reduce speed limits and make roads narrower” rather than enforcing existing laws.
Let's face it; traffic enforcement has got to be crappy duty. And speeding is not the only factor. But the cops will always be outnumbered by the felony speeders. They're just everywhere. It's sorta sad that photo radar is one of those "third rail" ideas here in the States. They deployed it in France many years ago and the highway fatality rate did drop. There, every photo radar "speed trap" has a big warning sign just ahead of it. If you're going 15 over, you can probably get down to 9 over in time to avoid a ticket. If you're going 30 over, not so much. And it's hard to accuse photo radar of racism.
Doesn't the article say that deaths per 100 million miles driven actually went down slightly from 2020 to 2021? Given that the government has no exact idea of how many miles are driven, one could reasonably conclude that traffic fatalities are stable and not rising to "crisis" proportions.
No, the big argument is "it didn't really rise at all" when measured sanely.
what else doesn’t rise at all when measured sanely?
Sort of like how the media and the government ignore the lockdown-caused deaths and only count the projected lives saved by the lockdowns.
The constant whining of you leftists about everything is just hitting peak levels of banal at this point.
What motivates you to be so godawful about everything?
I remember when leftists used to be fun. Now, all you are is righteous, angry, hyper-critical and judgmental, hysteric, and hyperbolic messes of humans.
If we really cared about people, we'd ban cars altogether.
I mean, if it saves even one life, we have to do it right?
We should also ban the internet. If it saves even one life.
We should just lock everyone into small, padded cages so they can't hurt themselves, with an AI in charge of delivering food. If it saves even one life.
In the 80's I was in the Navy. I made a couple of long deployments (three to eight months). When I got back after a deployment I noticed that my driving skills had eroded enough that I had to concentrate more on driving. This went away after a month or so and I was back to normal. We just had severe restriction in travel lasting over a year. How many people's skills have eroded in that time. This week is my first time being in the office for the full week in over eighteen months. Of course there's the old "never let a "crisis" go to waste" mentality of the Democrats. The NHTSA always wants more regulations, that's the purpose for it's existence.
Even the people who kept driving during the lockdown got used to less traffic. I see a lot more people acting surprised that there are cars in the other lanes now.
What a crappy assessment of the data. If you don't have a clue whether the fatalities (or injuries since those matter too) are occuring on highways, among peds/bikes, at intersections, with alcohol involved, etc; then you can't possibly know what's happening.
pandemic driving in Dallas was spectacular. also I like how the Prius beat the pickup in the above pic
""The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration…projects that an estimated 42,915 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes last year, a 10.5% increase from the 38,824 fatalities in 2020,""
This is not unlike the administration's claims that they have lowered deficit spending . . . when compared to the batshit-insane levels during covid 'pandemic relief' year(s).
So...a 10% increase with twice as many drivers on the road.
If they can't call it a crisis how else can they get MORE?
"How do we distract voters from the Afghanistan debacle, the covid crisis, the inflation crisis, Putin's price hike, and the baby formula crisis?"
"I've got a great idea - we'll create an entirely new crisis to distract them!"
Use pandemic logic and drop the speed limit to 30 mph. Most fatal crashes occur at 45 mph or higher.
Use pandemic logic and drop the speed limit to 30 mph
Lol
Lower speed limits to 30... What a card! Check out Mario Andretti over here. 30 miles per hour. Where's the fire?
You live in a city full of stupid people. Why?
25 mph everywhere, coming to a town near you.
Depends what is being hit.
At 16 mph, the chance of a ped fatality or serious injury is 10%
At 23 mph, the chance is 25%
At 31 mph, 50%
At 39 mph, 75%
At 46 mph, 90%
Peds are rational and understand this. They don't respond to the data by taking their chances and driving up fatalities. They respond by getting intimidated off the road. The faster the road speed, the fewer peds. So you can't actually look at resulting fatalities without that context for any road where peds (or bikes - but that gets a bit more complicated with body armor) are a transport option.
In Seattle, there's a unique relationship between a new class of pedestrian and road traffic that seems to be the most likely to be hit.
I don't know what the solution is.
What are the chances of dying when hit at 0mph?
Does the pic in that link look like the 65% of Seattle that is zoned for single family residential or other minimum lot size zone? Or anything residential-for-others? Those are where traffic density and speed are also lowest. Cause if the homeless can only pitch their tents near highways or other faster moving traffic, then ped fatalities are an obvious outcome.
Seattle is one of the most highly regulated housing markets - and it ain't driven by the homeless. It is driven by single family homeowners and (probably) land speculators.
I'm stunned that "Vision Zero" wasn't even mentioned in this article.
Excellent vintage Tucille! The part about risk per miles driven is apropos. Airlines know that passenger-miles look safer than passenger-hours stuck inside a plane and hoping to get somewhere other than a cemetery. People used to have passenger vessels before the 1920 Wesley Jones law sacrificing coastwise shipping to the requirements of the National Prohibition Law that same Senator increased into a chain-cang felony in 1929.
I live in Australia which has about one tenth the population of the US and about one fortieth the annual number of road deaths. Our cities are as congested as the US and our open road distances are as great or greater than the US. Our urban speed limits are generally 60 Km/h and 50 Km/h (about 37 and 30 miles per hour). Open road limits are generally 100 and 110 (about 62 and 70).
Why do you accept your huge road toll?
(I'm currently paying a bit under $2 Aus a litre for diesel (a bit less than $5.50 US gallon) which is almost double what it was two years ago.
"Why do you accept your huge road toll?"
Death toll? That's a good question.
We call it the road toll here, because once, not so long ago, the only place you had to pay to use a road was 5 cents to cross the Sydney Harbour Bridge. (And that was called the Harbour Bridge toll.)
The U.S. has the highest road death rates (and injuries) of all developed (OECD) countries. This on every measure - per km & per capita. Someone in a car in the U.S. is 3.2x as likely to be killed as someone in any of the top 10 countries. Vs the top 5 countries; someone bicycling in the U.S. is 11x as likely to be killed and someone walking an estimated 17x as likely to be killed.
Other countries are also lowering their rates faster than we are - we're falling further behind every year.
Yes, we do have a problem.
The problem is not one of a need for more regulation, but a need for different road designs.
From: https://streets.mn/2019/07/08/designing-a-road-different-cultural-perspectives/
U.S. Engineers: Drivers can and should drive perfectly, paying full attention at all times and perfectly obeying all rules. Our roads are designed with this expectation.
EU Engineers: Drivers are imperfect and will make mistakes. Roads must be designed to encourage drivers to pay attention, enforce obedience where possible and mitigate harm as much as possible when mistakes are made. At the core of Dutch design and increasingly elsewhere is sustainable safety.
But there's a deeper issue than just road design. At an early age we begin teaching our children that laws are not necessarily to be obeyed: https://streets.mn/2013/09/10/a-wink-and-a-nod-teaching-our-kids-to-be-criminals-part-i/
U.S. over regulation is like putting new wine in old wineskins ...and then wondering what happened.
Well anyone who's driven on and interstate in the last decade knows it's gotten bat s**t crazy and absolutely terrifying.
The main issue is what traffic lawsbeing enforced, why they're being enforced and the severity of the transgressions and how that equates to specific legal ramifications.
The truth is most traffic law enforcment is geared toward revenue generation and not public safety. What is the exact opposite of that.
A person aggressively tailgating at a 65 or 70 mph speed limit is commiting the act of menacing with a deadly weapon but we don't acknowledge that as equivocal or enforce that law aggressively.
Instead we have police sitting on their ass pulling over soccer moms for speeding one after the other while aggressive drivers terrorize everyone around them with zero accountability or repurcussions.
We need to charge aggressive driving as the serious crime it is -- a felony -- quit wasting time on bullshit speed and traffic compliance enforcement and prioritize stopping the most dangerous behaviors that right now go unpunished.
The issue on U.S. motorways is no lane discipline. People toodle in the left passing lanes blocking others (and causing irritation, frustration and anger) instead of keeping right except to pass.
Possibly congress should step forward and pass a law that all statistics be based on deaths per XXXX miles in each category. This would end the ability of a bureau to attempt to make political gain by statistical method.
As I've always liked to say to the assault weapon handwringers, you'll save far more lives banning cars than guns, but for whatever reason no one cares about that. Speed limit cars to 25 mph and the world will go on mostly as as normal with tens of thousands of lives saved every year, but oh, somehow that's unreasonable.
Article is rife with correlation = causation fallacy.
Domestic problems caused by blah blah, traffic deaths caused by blah blah etc were all already on the rise. Besides that, the traffic statistics are clearly meant to be used for a bankrupt anti-legal-pot catholic-mafia-smuggler-agenda. No mention of that in op though...
The expansion of the intellectually lazy equality between the sexes based on a fallacious interpretation of "mankind"..... is whats causing the rise in domestic violence cases. Not only because it causes more domestic violence but also because it enables abuses of the abuse reporting system. Covid restrictions could not be honestly cited as a cause as much as a medium that exaserbated a pre-existing condition.
Too often we seek to compartmentalize in such a way as to ignore the whole story. As proof, i myself did not even finish this article to see if it turned around at any point.