Why Washington State’s Plan To Put Speed Limiters In Speeders’ Vehicles Isn’t What You Think

There’s some big news out of Washington State that’s sure to be controversial: House Bill 1596 wants to put speed limit-linked governors in the vehicles of street racers and frequently convicted speeders. A state looking to install smart speed limiters into the cars of habitual traffic violation accumulators may sound like a reach, but if anything, it’s — in my opinion — pretty much the opposite of government overreach. Let me explain.

This bill advocating for speed limiters isn’t a remedial program to be completed after a license suspension is served, it’s a proposed replacement for license suspension. The bill aims for anyone facing license suspension due to repeated excessive speed or street racing to be eligible for a speed-limiter conditional license, and states, “By leveraging technology to enable individuals to continue driving and prevent speeding, the legislature intends to enhance road safety to promote safer driving habits and keep the public safe.”

As of now, the House bill doesn’t extensively detail the technology used in these speed limiters, only that it will be third-party and leased by the driver of the vehicle. While an OBDII-linked device makes sense for many applications, cars live a long time in Washington and it wouldn’t be surprising if some habitual speeders own vehicles made prior to the implementation of the standardized onboard diagnostics system port. In addition, whichever speed-limiting device gets approved for use needs to be better than OEM, because the speed limit warnings in new cars have some serious limitations.

[Ed Note: I suggest we use the old Swedish EPA-tractor strategy and lock the cars into gear, limit their speeds to 19mph. You do the crime, you do the time — lots and lots of time on the roads. -DT]

As part of my work, I spend a whole bunch of time in new cars equipped with speed limit alerts, and as anyone with prolonged experience with these systems knows, they aren’t always right. Sometimes they read high, failing to pick up new signs on camera or pull updated speed limits from GPS-linked data, and sometimes they read low, hanging onto ramp advisory speeds after merging. Assuming these alerts were hard limits, existing technology could contribute to a significant speed differential between habitual speeder-driven speed-limited vehicles and surrounding traffic, which is where the danger lies. Many roads are safest when all traffic is moving at about the same speed, so exchanging one form of risk for another form of potential risk doesn’t seem like the most desired outcome.

So, if we go back to the root of the problem, what tools are known to work here? Well, higher fines may be worth looking at. If we zoom in on studies around higher speeding fines, we can see mixed results. An Australian study found that when Britain increased its most serious speeding penalty costs by 50 percent back in 2017, there was no measurable reduction in fatal crashes. At the same time, a 2017 meta-analytic study found that increasing penalties by 50 to 100 percent may reduce offense rates. The effect of fines alone isn’t clear, but looking at where existing fines sit, they’re low enough that increasing them might be worth a shot.

According to the Tacoma News Tribune, the fine for speeding 21 to 25 mph over the limit in a speed limit zone under 40 mph is $268. That seems quite low considering the excess of speed relative to the limit, and it’s not the only area where Washington state could beef things up. See, the state doesn’t have a demerit point system, and license suspensions for milder road penalties like speeding require six infractions in 12 months, or seven infractions in 24 months. Compared to the demerit point systems used in other jurisdictions, it seems as if Washington is giving habitual speeders a comparatively long leash.

What’s more, this proposed intelligent speed assistance license requires a speed limiter on almost every vehicle the holder of the license drives, with the main exception being shared work vehicles. It’s well intended, but how do you be sure that applicants don’t just lie? Given that the briefing of the bill claims that “more than 70 percent of people with suspended licenses continue to drive during the suspension period,” enforcement seems like it could be tricky.

At the end of the day, this proposal to put intelligent speed limiters in habitual speeders’ cars doesn’t seem like government overreach to me, but rather the opposite. It’s a plan to let otherwise suspended motorists keep driving, and while it might temporarily reduce speeding in some instances, it’s hard to see how a speed limiter would impact other dangerous road behaviors, from red-light-running to cutting up through traffic. Before extending this leash, perhaps look at treating the causes first. A combination of increased enforcement visibility and greater consequences for repeated road violations could, in my view, be more effective at reducing dangerous driving than offering an alternative to license suspension.

Top graphic: Dani/stock.adobe.com; depositphotos.com

Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.

• California’s Proposed Speed Limit Warning System Law Has One Big Problem

• Why Europe’s Mandatory Speed Limiters Mean The End Of Driving As You Know It

• California Governor Vetoes Bill Requiring Speed Limit Warnings On New Cars, But The War’s Not Over

• Why Cars With Speed Limit Readers Can Be Annoying: COTD

Please send tips about cool car things to tips@theautopian.com. You could even win a prize!