OPINION:
Drivers across the country are paying the price for neglected roads that contribute to deadly and preventable accidents. There’s an $800 billion backlog of road and bridge repair and maintenance needs, leading some politicians and pundits to perpetually call for tax increases to fix these roads.
The truth is that no amount of taxpayer funding is going to solve this problem if states and localities fail to fine-tune the rules of the road to prevent accidents and reduce wear and tear. Goaded by reckless federal proposals, some states and localities are ditching sensible length and weight limits on trucks in a misguided push to shore up the supply chain.
As the Taxpayers Protection Alliance’s recent report on the issue points out, relaxing roadworthiness standards is a recipe for disaster. Policymakers must avoid policy potholes by embracing sensible rules of the road.
Roadworthiness rules are set by the 50 states with 50 different sets of rules. While these laws vary according to a host of factors, one common criterion is vehicle size.
For example, policymakers in the U.S. have regularly debated whether to allow utility terrain vehicles on the road. The vehicles, known as UTVs, are typically smaller than ordinary cars and more like them than all-terrain vehicles, for which they are often mistaken.
Like ordinary automobiles, UTVs make use of steering wheels and pedals and can seat multiple passengers. But even a four-seat UTV usually will not exceed 160 inches in length and 65 inches in width. Because UTVs are relatively small, policymakers are reluctant to have them share the road with larger vehicles because of the risks and costs associated with crashes.
A report by World Population Review states: “Arizona requires that UTVs operated on public roads have a rearview mirror and a horn that can be heard at least 250 feet away. Tennessee requires that UTVs have a red triangle sign (like that used on tractors) and tires approved by the Department of Transportation. Texas, Wyoming, and Utah require that UTVs have a plate with a lit license plate bracket.”
These restrictions are understandable, given the relatively high cost borne by taxpayers for emergency services.
States have similarly good reason to restrict large trucks on the road. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety: “Multiple-trailer trucks have more handling problems than single-trailer trucks. In general, the additional connection points contribute to greater instability, which can lead to jackknifing, overturning, and lane encroachments.”
There is also a significant link between large trucks and road damage. A 9-ton rig does roughly 40 times as much damage as a Hummer H2. According to a 2023 analysis produced by county commissioners and engineers in Alabama, Illinois, Iowa and Texas, more than 70,000 local bridges nationwide “do not have sufficient weight ratings to safely accommodate 91,000-pound trucks.”
Current federal rules give states and localities plenty of leeway to weigh risks and incorporate their own limits, although federal maximum weights are in place. While the current rules for semitrucks stipulate a maximum weight of 80,000 pounds, recent proposals in Congress would raise the limit to 91,000 pounds.
For example, H.R. 3372 (“to establish a safety data collection program for certain six-axle vehicles, and for other purposes”) would enact a state opt-in pilot program raising gross vehicle weight limits to 91,000 pounds (on six axles) across the Interstate Highway System. In addition, the Carrying Automobiles Responsibly and Safely Act would increase the allowable weight on stinger-steered car haulers from 80,000 pounds to 88,000 pounds.
These proposals enable reckless roadworthiness proposals across the country, jeopardizing the balance between safety, efficiency, and cost control.
Lawmakers should reject these bills and encourage states and localities to set their own roadworthiness rules against the backdrop of a reasonable federal maximum level. Now is no time to steer America’s infrastructure system into a ditch.
• David Williams is president of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.