Advocacy group ranks Mass. among worst states for roadway safety

A traffic safety advocacy group ranked Massachusetts as one of the worst states for highway and roadway safety, partially because of its resistance to heightened seatbelt enforcement and use of ignition locks for all impaired driving offenders.

Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety on Tuesday morning released its 2023 Roadmap to Safety, scoring all 50 states based on whether they have adopted the organization's "optimal laws" in six categories: occupant protection, child passenger safety, teen driving, impaired driving, distracted driving and automated enforcement to curb speeding.

Massachusetts was among nine states that had overall scores in the "danger" tier, "indicating these states fall dangerously behind in adoption of Advocates' recommended optimal laws."

The one category in which the Bay State scored "good" was distracted driving, getting credit for prohibitions on texting and hand-held phone use. The impaired driving category ranked Massachusetts in the middle "caution" zone, dinging the state slightly for not having ignition interlocks for all offenders. On the other four categories, Massachusetts fell into the "danger" category.

A spokesperson for the Mass. Department of Transportation said Tuesday that the department "has not studied this specific report however we welcome any opportunity to raise awareness about highway safety which continues to be a local and national problem."

Gov. Charlie Baker has repeatedly filed road safety legislation with only partial success. One of Baker's policy proposals that the Legislature has consistently ignored is the idea of moving the state from its current secondary enforcement system for seatbelt use, in which police can only cite motorists for driving unbuckled if they first observe another traffic violation, to primary enforcement, in which cops could pull someone over simply for not wearing their seatbelt.

Supporters of the change say it would help increase the Bay State's seatbelt use rate, but skeptics like House Speaker Ronald Mariano have "long been concerned about potential racial profiling with primary enforcement measures," the speaker said a year ago.

The Advocates' report also took issue with Massachusetts not having a law that "[m]andates the installation of ignition interlock devices (IIDs) on the vehicles of all convicted drunk driving offenders."

An alcohol ignition interlock device prevents a vehicle from starting until the driver provides a breath sample that registers below a pre-set low limit for blood alcohol content. Massachusetts has required the use of ignition interlock devices for all repeat impaired driving offenders since 2006. Mothers Against Drunk Driving said there were 5,907 interlocks installed in Massachusetts as of 2017, and that interlocks stopped 39,482 attempts to drive drunk between 2006 to 2018.

After more than a decade of failed attempts, an amendment requiring use of an ignition interlock device for certain first-time impaired driving offenders was included in the fiscal year 2021 budget.

Most recently, in September, Baker returned to the Legislature with amendment a bill intended to reduce traffic fatalities, citing differences over a proposed safe passing distance measure and lower speed limits.

The House in early November rejected Baker's amendment and adopted its own amendment offered by Transportation Committee Chairman William Straus. Rep. Paul Donato. The bill remains hung up in the Legislature.