CASE STUDY QESTION

To fulfill the mandate of the Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Safety Act of 2007, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), as of May 1, 2018, requires the installation of rear-view video systems in all passenger cars, trucks, multipurpose passenger vehicles, buses, and low-speed vehicles with a gross vehicle weight of less than 10,000 pounds.

The purpose of the regulation is to reduce the risk of "back-over" crashes involving vulnerable populations (young children, the elderly, people with limited mobility).

The benefits of the regulation are estimated to be between $344-396 million (save 13-15 lives/year; prevent 1,125-1,332 injuries/year; and prevent $10-13/vehicle in damage).

The costs of installing the cameras are estimated to be between $546-620 million.

1. What is cost-benefit analysis?
2. What reasons might government agencies have to use this decision procedure to evaluate policies/regulations?
3. If the NHTSA relied solely on cost-benefit analysis to decide whether to implement the regulation in question, what would it have done?
4. Should federal agencies such as the NHTSA decide cases like this one solely on the basis of CBA? Why or why not?
5. If not, what other factors should federal agencies consider?
6. Overall, was the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration morally justified in passing the rear-view video system regulation? Why or why not?