Is it a Convenience Bill or a Danger to Public Safety?
The motor vehicles in New Hampshire could see a dramatic shift as the state House of Representatives just voted to remove the state’s requirement for annual car safety inspections. The move is being greeted by supporters as a good thing from the current economic drought we are in, but others are raising a red flag over a threat to road safety and overall environmental health. The bill now will go to the state Senate. With the fall of periodic inspections comes many advantages.
- Economic relief for car owners
New Hampshire drivers already pay a $40 a year charge for required inspections. Supporters of the bill say those charges, along with the cost of required repairs, are a big economic expense on taxpayers and poor families whose older cars constantly break down over small things. If the state would simply eliminate inspections, they think it would be removing an out of proportion cost from poor families.
- Preventing unnecessary repairs
Most drivers say mechanics use the inspection process as a way to ask for unnecessary repairs on the spot. Some drivers report cars failing for small things like rust spots or other subjective issues and owners pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to get into compliance. People who want the current system removed think that car owners should have more say regarding when they would like to have their car fixed.
- Following other states’ lead
New Hampshire is among 12 states with annual car inspections. Supporters of the bill say that most of the states do not have an annual inspection and have seen no visible increase in car accidents from mechanical failure.
While there are many great arguments as to why getting rid of inspection is a good change, others argue the opposite.
- Increased safety risks
Bill opponents feel that yearly checks are necessary to ensure that every car on the roads is safe by checking for minimum safety standards. They seek the most basic problems such as faulty brake pads, worn tires, damaged headlamps, and rusted bodies or frames, problems that would result in fatal crashes if undetected. Police officers and road workers are worried that elimination of the checks will put more dangerous vehicles on New Hampshire roads.
- Environmental issues
New Hampshire’s existing programs already have emission testing, so the environment is less flooded with chemicals and harmful gasses. Critics argue that if not checked, most vehicles would over-pollute the environment.
- Possible federal action
Some lawmakers have worried that overturning state inspections would allow federal coercion. If a state lacked the standards of the federal environmental and safety law, the state might be coerced by the likes of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration or the Environmental Protection Agency into enacting other safety controls like random vehicle inspections on the side of the road. Others worry that this will mean greater regulatory expense or even fines.
What’s next:
The bill is now heading to the New Hampshire Senate, where it will vote on whether or not it becomes law. If it does, New Hampshire would be part of a small group of Northeastern states with no required car safety inspections. While all the law is being decided, the public remains divided, half applauding the decision as a good thing, half worried about the risks of not having safety inspections.
