Federal highway safety grants go unclaimed

Regulators and advocacy groups have attached so many strings to highway safety incentive grants that few states have qualified for millions in federal dollars.

As a result, the money intended to help save lives through graduated licensing, ignition interlocks and distracted driving prevention has been diverted to other transportation programs since the grants became available in 2012.

Jonathan Adkins, executive director of the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), says the incentive grants were well-intentioned, but aren't helping change laws.

"Incentives should encourage states to reach for the next level in improving their highway safety laws, not be so unreasonable that qualification is impossible," Adkins says. "As written now, the incentives have had little to no impact at improving highway safety."

Many states have laws in place to promote highway safety, but they fail to qualify because their laws don't meet the grant requirements. Erik Strickland, government relations manager for the GHSA, says that given the requirements and the two-year time frame of the grants, it was unreasonable to assume states could change laws in time to qualify. And he says the requirements are so prescriptive that many states were unwilling to drastically change laws that work well for them.

As the law that created the grants is considered for reauthorization, transportation officials are taking a look at ways to restructure the incentive grants.

Graduated drivers license (GDL). Every state has a multi-step GDL program, but only one state (New Jersey) has passed a law saying teens can't get their unrestricted licenses until they are 18, as the grant requires. Even so, New Jersey did not qualify for the grant based on other stipulations, so no state has qualified for any of the $13.6 million in GDL grant money.

GDL programs are usually administered in three stages that result in an unrestricted license obtained by age 16 in most states. The grant requires a minimum six-month learner's permit stage that prohibits cellphone use; it remains in effect until age 16. A six-month intermediate stage that restricts night driving and the number of passengers under 21 is required to remain in effect until drivers reach 18.

According to Anne McCartt, senior vice president for research at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, the longer states prevent teens from obtaining unrestricted driver's licenses, the better chance they have at reducing highway crash rates.

"It's a combination of exposure, maturity and experience," McCartt says.

Ignition interlock. Only four states qualified for the ignition interlock grant, which requires a state law to mandate ignition interlock systems for all first-time impaired driving offenders.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving worked with Congress to develop the ignition interlock grant. Though many states have laws in place requiring ignition interlock devices for second- and third-time DUI (driving under the influence) offenders, only four states have qualified because the grant requires the law to apply to all first-time offenders and to say they may drive only vehicles with alcohol ignition interlocks for no less than 30 days.

"It's much more effective in reducing DUI recidivism and in turn reducing DUI deaths and injuries if the law is in place for first-time offenders," says J.T. Griffin, MADD senior vice president of public policy.

Distracted driving. Only Connecticut has passed a law that complies with the distracted driving grant qualifications, earning the state more than $2.3 million.

To qualify for distracted driving incentive grants, state laws must include minimum fines that escalate for subsequent offenses and require distracted driving issues in driver's license exams.

Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety helped Congress determine regulations for the distracted driving grants, but Cathy Chase, senior director of governmental affairs for the group, says the provisions ended up being too strict, and she hopes Congress will make changes to help states qualify.

"(The grants) were a good idea that went wrong," Adkins says. "They are so complicated and convoluted that in most cases it is extremely difficult to understand what a state needs to do to qualify."

Contributing: Jayne O'Donnell