California Gov. Gavin Newsom Vetoes Car Speed Alarm Bill
He returned S.B. 961 to the California Senate for all the wrong reasons.

In a rare victory for liberty in California, Gov. Gavin Newsom refused to sign into law Senate Bill (S.B.) 961, which would have required every passenger vehicle after the 2030 model year to beep each time its driver goes more than 10 miles per hour above the speed limit. Unfortunately, Newsom did not cite regulatory overreach but interference with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) as his reason for passing on the bill.
In a Saturday press release, Newsom expressed concern that California-specific vehicle rules "would create a patchwork of regulations that undermines [NHTSA's] longstanding federal framework." Appealing to federal rulemaking is an odd tack for Newsom to take considering the governor touted California's "17 bills covering the deployment and regulation of GenAI technology" yesterday.
Sen. Scott Wiener (D–San Francisco), the author of S.B. 961, was none too pleased by Newsom's refusal. In his own Saturday press release, Wiener described Newsom's veto as "a setback for street safety at a time Californians are feeling extremely unsafe." While Californians may feel unsafe, their sentiments are unsupported by the data on traffic deaths.
There is no crisis of pedestrian vehicle deaths, despite the NHTSA's claim to the contrary. The agency's proposed rule aims to establish new "performance requirements to minimize the risk of head injury" in head-to-hood collisions, set to take effect two years after the final rule's publication in the Federal Register. Yet per-capita pedestrian deaths have steadily decreased from 35 per million in 1975 to 23 per million in 2022.
The trend for all motor vehicle crash deaths reflects the trend in pedestrian deaths, as Insurance Institute for Highway Safety data show. In 1975, there were 20.6 deaths per 100,000 people; in 2022, the most recent year for which there are data, there were only 12.8 per 100,000.
Wiener described Newsom's rejection of the bill as resigning Californians to "a completely unnecessary risk of fatality." It's worth noting that this risk is lower than the one posed by falls, which claimed 46,653 American lives in 2022. There were 42,514 motor vehicle crash deaths in 2022.
Wiener appeals to similar requirements imposed by the European Union to justify his proposed regulation, but he shouldn't. The E.U.'s nanny state is not worth emulating. But not all of Wiener's arguments are so bad: He hails Wisconsin "passing the first seatbelt mandate in 1961" as an instance of a state taking the legislative lead to address an issue of public concern—i.e., federalism.
Newsom and Wiener are fun house mirror reflections of one another: Newsom was right to veto the helicopter-parent bill, but wrong to resist the federalism he embraces in other instances. Wiener was wrong to support the bill's passage, but right to embrace a state-based regulatory framework.
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
Newsom got the upper hand on Wiener.
He’s just playing with him.
At least this time, Newsom was able to handle Wiener possibly due to Gavin having more stroke.
Who’s the head of this operation?
Don't know, but we've only seen the tip of these responses.
More of these in the same vein? Regardless, motorists wanting safer travel got the shaft.
You never fail to rise to the occasion. That’s why I keep coming here.
My pen is mightier than the sword.
It's time someone circumscribed the debate.
Which member will you be pulling for to do this?
Ahhhh … that’s the ballsy answer I was looking for!
Perhaps Newsom thought the projected lives saved was a phallusy.
He gave him The Stranger.
Reading between the lines, is the NHTSA looking to require pedestrians to wear helmets?
And is it just me, or does everything stupid have 'TSA' somewhere in the acronym?
Its use sometimes fits like a glove.
Your helmet protects my car hood, my helmet protects your car hood!
#InThisTogether
TSA;
Too
Stupid
for Arbys
"It's worth noting that this risk is lower than the one posed by falls, which claimed 46,653 American lives in 2022."
Up next: "Sen. Scott Wiener (D–San Francisco) proposes to repeal the law of gravity.".
Gravity is racist or some shit. Trust the science.
Why don’t they just outlaw dying?
Because not everyone deserves to live.
Dang death from falls almost caught up to gun deaths and if you remove suicides fall far exceed gun deaths
In 2021, the most recent year for which complete data is available, 48,830 people died from gun-related injuries in the U.S
I want fall controll
Common Sense shower daisy mandates are definitely in order...
"a setback for street safety at a time Californians are feeling extremely unsafe...
...about leaving goods in their cars"
You just gave them an idea for a new law to abolish locks on car doors.
For older vehicles, Safelite repair Safelite replace.
Just ask Adam Schiff.........
ZOMG! A Reason article not only mentions liberty, but begins with that mention!
Kamala's the candidate for all the right reasons.
All those other morons in California are to blame for the State's troubles, even if only for the wrong reasons.
There is a thing called Libertarian Marxism, FYI. They talk about liberty and "liberation" a lot.
Either the cloak is slipping, or it's changing. Either way is a surprise.
In libertarian marxism, instead of a dictatorship of the proletariat, we get a dictatorship of the prostitariat.
Ironically Democrats think they're the Individual Liberty party instead of the Nanny-State. A consequence of their elitist-supremacy self-projection.
Bow-down and worship your CA government; only CA Gods packing Guns will save you from yourselves. Never-mind that other ironic situation where a Gun in your face is suppose to save you.
That's because so many Dems believe that "freedom" is a concept which applied only to the uterus and those capable of becoming a "birthing person".
I know way too many people who claim to be all about "bodily autonomy", and also support bans on vaping (as a delivery system for nicotine, but not THC), trans-fats, use of salt and butter in restaurants and soft drink portions larger than 16 oz. Not to mention having been strongly in favor of mask mandates, even after every legitimately scientific study performed anywhere in the world showed a negligible effect on viral propagation, and on Vaccine mandates (but only for Covid shots which were on "emergency approval", opting out of MMR and other standard childhood shots was still a "personal choice" for parents to make). They also typically back at least labeling laws for GMO food products, but were eagerly awaiting permission from the FDA to take every questionable new formulation of an injection that would literally modify the biochemical operation of cells within their own bodies, and weren't slowed by approval statement such as "we don't know that it's safe, and think it might possibly have some positive effect" as sufficient evidence that the regulators who are tasked with ensuring that all approved medications are "safe and effective" had adequately done their job.
They really should be hit with some kind of "truth in advertising" lawsuit and forced to change their slogan to "uterine autonomy"
It's a great day for liberty when, despite a few scant aberrations, my car won't go "beep" when I do 70 in a 60.
The libertarian moment!
Eat the bugs.
Sleep in pods.
Own nothing.
Obey the beeps.
Be happy.
Come on, we all know it's not about the alarm. It's about the infrastructure and technical requirements necessary to implement that alarm. Which would require tracking you constantly to determine what road you were on.
Now, Google already does this in their Waze app. However, this would mandate it at all times. Mandate reporting at all times. It's a full surveillance state for all transportation.
Next up in California laws, a car that reports to the police computer every time you speed, so they can just take the money out of your bank account.
Iirc, that was in the movie The Fifth Element.
Multipass.
Just consider how much data is being collected on how you drive your SUV.....speeding? Drifting through a stop? Going too fast for conditions? Distracted? Dunk, high or stoned?
More than you know about.
You're skipping ahead to step 3 in the "underpants gnome" plan that Weiner is operating by.
step 1, introduce the trojan horse legislation in the name of "safety"
step 2 ???
Step 3, generate revenue for a state which has created an environment from which taxpayers are fleeing so fast that they're leaving the State $billions short on annual revenues going forward.
"Wiener described Newsom's rejection of the bill as resigning Californians to "a completely unnecessary risk of fatality.""
People will die! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXWhbUUE4ko
With the 2 most recent vetos - It's almost like he is reading the Reason comments.
He is thinking 2028.
Next up: Gruesome Newsom vetoes legislation allowing Californians the right to exhale without permission.
There should be more effort in preventing vehicle thefts. Out of control in L.A. and no doubt Oakland.
Loud Labs news has covered some really gruesome deaths as a result of stolen vehicles from motor cycles to Lamborghinis.
In one instance a Lambo was stolen and clocked at more than 115MPH down the street when it struck a parked vehicle. When the cops arrived, the driver was not at the scene of the accident. After a brief search they found the driver approximately 200 feet away. The portion of the video was scrambled in order to hide the somewhat crumpled body. The Lambo was a 'T" top style and as usual the car thief never belted in.
So guess how he ended up 200 hundred feet from the scene.
Wiener described Newsom's veto as "a setback for street safety at a time Californians are feeling extremely unsafe."
...and who's fault is that?
Haitians.
So mandating seat belts is a *good* thing? Remember the story about the frog who wasn't at all concerned about being immersed in lukewarm water?
This is not to say seat belts aren't a good idea. I installed after-market seat belts in the first car I ever owned.
Hearing a beep when you drive 5MPH over the speed limit will be the least of your concerns.
Those in power plan to implement a tattle tale system in all vehicles that provides all the data to your insurance company, the police and anyone else who wants it.
Just think of the convenience: when you break the speed limit, your vehicle will notify the cops who will then charge your CBDC debit account automatically. Your insurance policy will either be cancelled or fees doubled. After too many violations, your vehicle will be "turned off" that is, it will no longer function after the command has been given to its onboard computer. Your CBDC account may also be shut down for a bit , just to teach you a lesson.
If Newsom is so concerned about CA regulations playing havoc with Federal rules, maybe he can also disband CARB? They've been embarrassing the EPA for decades with nonsense regulations and banning aftermarket components which significantly improve engine performance in terms of both power output and fuel economy (thereby preventing the reduction of fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions directly)