• Pam K Posted: 3/10/2011 7:07am PST

    I believe the stat for cost of crashes of over $30 billion, not $30 million. Can you confirm?

  • RWDriver Posted: 3/10/2011 9:15am PST

    Teach teens how to make smart choices and you wont need this bill...

  • fb_1364603709 avatar Rick Posted: 3/10/2011 9:25am PST

    Another reason to get this administration out. They have no Constitutional power to do this whatsoever. Powers not DELEGATED to the Federal government are reserved to the People and the States. Roads and what drives upon them are the property and responsibilities of the respective states. The nanny government is again attempting to blackmail states with withheld funds.

  • Saabaru5 Posted: 3/10/2011 9:35am PST

    I have been talking about this for years, I think this is a great idea. It's scary and irresponsible to let these inexperienced drivers loose onto public roads without restrictions.
    Just as when I was a teenager getting my license and still in high school, these young people have far too many distractions, e.g., friends, phones, ipods, mixed and confused emotions, uncertainty, etc, to be safe and responsible drivers without some experience under their belt.
    I always said that a person should have to be 18 years old to get a drivers license, but I think this is a better solution to have them start getting practice with restrictions prior to getting a full, unrestricted license.
    This could create many better drivers, but I wonder how they would handle someone over the age of 18 that has never had a license before? Would they be held to the same standards and restrictions to gain the same type of experience prior to being allowed to jump behind the wheel?
    Now if only we could arrange refresher courses for the exsisting 75%+ of the drivers out there who apparently, desparately need it.

  • Jenny Posted: 3/10/2011 9:53am PST

    That figure should be $34 BILLION, not million. That number comes from a 2008 study done by AAA, using 2006 data.

  • Richard Prokopchuk2 Posted: 3/10/2011 10:03am PST

    What administration are you talking about? This bill was sponsored by Congressional members, not the White House. This is not a mandate as described by the editor of this page (which conceivably violates CarConnection's Editorial policy on honest, unbiased reviews. Withholding federal funding to states who do not comply is not a mandate since the State still gets to decide what it wants to do. This bill will certainly be an incentive for parents and their wallets to teach their children how to make smart choices. Fewer crashes equals safer highways and an economical return on investment. Win-win.

  • jchb Posted: 3/10/2011 10:24am PST

    Another overreach proposed by the nanny state Federal government. This is clearly a matter for the States.

  • bengt avatar Bengt Posted: 3/10/2011 10:44am PST

    @Jenny, -- Thanks, though these issues were corrected very early on and I'd recommend reloading, as I suspect you're seeing a cached copy.

  • bengt avatar Bengt Posted: 3/10/2011 11:02am PST

    @Richard, We're reporting on a bill introduced to Congress. The word 'mandates' doesn't necessarily refer to an order issued by the executive branch -- "to make mandatory, as by law, decree." The law would require compliance; states that didn't comply would be penalized. That sounds like a mandate to me.

  • use2play Posted: 3/13/2011 9:22pm PDT

    Too many accidents in Florida parking lots from Senior citizens - FORCE everyone to get new drivers test every 5 years or else get off the roads