Reading view

There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.

Millions will see rise in health insurance premiums if federal subsidies expire

Andrea Deutsch stands in her pet store in Narberth, Pa. Deutsch is one of the millions of people who receive federal aid to help them pay their health insurance premiums on an Affordable Care Act exchange. The extra help is set to expire at the end of 2025, and states say they don’t have the money to replace it. (Courtesy of Andrea Deutsch)

Andrea Deutsch, the mayor of Narberth, Pennsylvania, and the owner of a pet store in town, doesn’t get health care coverage through either of her jobs. Instead, she is enrolled in a plan she purchased on Pennie, Pennsylvania’s health insurance exchange.

Deutsch, who has been mayor since 2018, is paid $1 per year for the job. Her annual income, from Spot’s – The Place for Paws and her investments, is about $50,000. The 57-year-old, who is diabetic, pays $638.38 per month for health care coverage — about half of the $1,272.38 she’d owe without the enhanced federal subsidies Congress and the Biden administration put in place in 2021.

But that extra help is set to expire at the end of 2025. It would cost an estimated $335 billion over the next decade to extend it — a step the Republican-controlled Congress and the Trump administration are unlikely to take as they seek budget savings to offset potential tax cuts.

You try not to go bankrupt by the end of your life.

– Andrea Deutsch, mayor of Narberth, Pa.

States say they don’t have the money to replace the federal aid. In Pennsylvania, for example, doing so would take about $500 million per year, according to Devon Trolley, the executive director of the state’s exchange.

“That is a significant amount of money, an insurmountable amount of money,” Trolley said.

The disappearance of the federal help would make coverage unaffordable for millions of Americans, including Deutsch. She said it would be a struggle to pay double what she is paying now.

“You try not to go bankrupt by the end of your life,” Deutsch told Stateline. “You need assets to take care of yourself as you get older and to have a little bit of security.”

Enhanced subsidies

The 2010 Affordable Care Act included some subsidies to help people purchase health insurance on the exchanges created under that law. Under the enhanced subsidies that started in 2021, some people with lower incomes who qualified for the original subsidies have been getting bigger ones. And those with higher incomes, who wouldn’t have been eligible for any help under the original rules, are now receiving assistance.

Thanks to the enhanced subsidies, people making up to 150% of the federal poverty level, or $22,590 for an individual, are now getting free or nearly free coverage. And households earning more than four times the federal poverty level, who didn’t qualify for subsidies before, are getting some help.

The enhanced aid also has helped push ACA marketplace enrollment to record levels, reaching more than 21 million this year. Southern states that have not expanded Medicaid as allowed under the ACA have seen the most dramatic growth in marketplace enrollment since 2020, according to KFF, a health policy research organization. The top five states with the fastest growth are Texas (212%), Mississippi (190%), Georgia (181%), Tennessee (177%) and South Carolina (167%).

If the enhanced subsidies go away, premium payments will increase by an average of more than 75%, according to KFF. Some people, like Deutsch, would see their payments double.

Given those premium hikes, millions of Americans would no longer be able to afford the coverage they’re getting on the exchanges, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. CBO estimates that enrollment would drop from 22.8 million in 2025 to 18.9 million in 2026 to 15.4 million in 2030. Some of those people would find coverage elsewhere, but others would not.

Edmund Haislmaier, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said Republicans view the expiration of the enhanced subsidies as “an opportunity to rework and address some of the basic flaws in the ACA.”

Before the ACA, Haislmaier said, many self-employed people, such as small-business owners and freelancers, were able to find their own private insurance at competitive prices. But the health care law destroyed that market, he said, leaving such people with a selection of expensive and subpar plans.

Haislmaier said it would take time for the Trump administration to determine how it wants to change the ACA — which President-elect Donald Trump unsuccessfully tried to repeal during his first term — but that “you can do that in a way that preserves access and preserves subsidies for the lower-income people who were the primary focus of the ACA.”

States’ limitations

But Jared Ortaliza, a research associate at KFF, said letting the enhanced subsidies expire could result in higher premiums for everyone. That’s because higher prices likely would prompt many healthier people to forgo insurance, he said. Their departure would leave only chronically ill people on the exchanges, and the cost of their care is higher.

“If sicker enrollees need coverage because they need care, they’ll still choose to buy it, potentially. And if the market were sicker as a whole, that could drive premiums upward as well,” Ortaliza told Stateline.

Ortaliza said states might consider keeping premiums down through so-called reinsurance, or reimbursing insurers for their most expensive enrollees. Theoretically, they also could try to replace the expiring federal aid with their own money.

But few if any states have the financial flexibility to do that, said Hemi Tewarson, executive director of the nonpartisan National Academy for State Health Policy.

“There might be a couple states who don’t have current state subsidies that might add that, but that will be very nominal,” Tewarson told Stateline, adding that officials from different states have been discussing potential solutions. “They are all assuming that they would just have to absorb the loss of coverage across the population.”

Trolley, the head of the Pennsylvania exchange, said her state is working to provide its own subsidy to make the marketplace plans even more affordable. But even when fully implemented, it would spend only $50 million on that help, a tenth of what it would need to replace the federal aid.

Two-thirds of the 435,000 Pennsylvanians who purchase insurance on the marketplace joined after the enhanced federal subsidies were put in place in 2021. If they expire, Trolley said, she worries that 100,000 or more exchange participants will leave.

Jessica Altman, executive director of California’s exchange, said her state is in a similar situation. California currently receives $1.7 billion annually in enhanced subsidies from the federal government and spends an additional $165 million of its own money to keep costs down.

California estimates that if the subsidies expire, monthly premiums for the state’s enrollees would increase by an average of 63%. More than 150,000 people would no longer be eligible for federal help, and between 138,000 and 183,000 would disenroll, the state estimates.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

Want to design the car of the future? Here are 8,000 designs to get you started.

Car design is an iterative and proprietary process. Carmakers can spend several years on the design phase for a car, tweaking 3D forms in simulations before building out the most promising designs for physical testing. The details and specs of these tests, including the aerodynamics of a given car design, are typically not made public. Significant advances in performance, such as in fuel efficiency or electric vehicle range, can therefore be slow and siloed from company to company.

MIT engineers say that the search for better car designs can speed up exponentially with the use of generative artificial intelligence tools that can plow through huge amounts of data in seconds and find connections to generate a novel design. While such AI tools exist, the data they would need to learn from have not been available, at least in any sort of accessible, centralized form.

But now, the engineers have made just such a dataset available to the public for the first time. Dubbed DrivAerNet++, the dataset encompasses more than 8,000 car designs, which the engineers generated based on the most common types of cars in the world today. Each design is represented in 3D form and includes information on the car’s aerodynamics — the way air would flow around a given design, based on simulations of fluid dynamics that the group carried out for each design.

Side-by-side animation of rainbow-colored car and car with blue and green lines


Each of the dataset’s 8,000 designs is available in several representations, such as mesh, point cloud, or a simple list of the design’s parameters and dimensions. As such, the dataset can be used by different AI models that are tuned to process data in a particular modality.

DrivAerNet++ is the largest open-source dataset for car aerodynamics that has been developed to date. The engineers envision it being used as an extensive library of realistic car designs, with detailed aerodynamics data that can be used to quickly train any AI model. These models can then just as quickly generate novel designs that could potentially lead to more fuel-efficient cars and electric vehicles with longer range, in a fraction of the time that it takes the automotive industry today.

“This dataset lays the foundation for the next generation of AI applications in engineering, promoting efficient design processes, cutting R&D costs, and driving advancements toward a more sustainable automotive future,” says Mohamed Elrefaie, a mechanical engineering graduate student at MIT.

Elrefaie and his colleagues will present a paper detailing the new dataset, and AI methods that could be applied to it, at the NeurIPS conference in December. His co-authors are Faez Ahmed, assistant professor of mechanical engineering at MIT, along with Angela Dai, associate professor of computer science at the Technical University of Munich, and Florin Marar of BETA CAE Systems.

Filling the data gap

Ahmed leads the Design Computation and Digital Engineering Lab (DeCoDE) at MIT, where his group explores ways in which AI and machine-learning tools can be used to enhance the design of complex engineering systems and products, including car technology.

“Often when designing a car, the forward process is so expensive that manufacturers can only tweak a car a little bit from one version to the next,” Ahmed says. “But if you have larger datasets where you know the performance of each design, now you can train machine-learning models to iterate fast so you are more likely to get a better design.”

And speed, particularly for advancing car technology, is particularly pressing now.

“This is the best time for accelerating car innovations, as automobiles are one of the largest polluters in the world, and the faster we can shave off that contribution, the more we can help the climate,” Elrefaie says.

In looking at the process of new car design, the researchers found that, while there are AI models that could crank through many car designs to generate optimal designs, the car data that is actually available is limited. Some researchers had previously assembled small datasets of simulated car designs, while car manufacturers rarely release the specs of the actual designs they explore, test, and ultimately manufacture.

The team sought to fill the data gap, particularly with respect to a car’s aerodynamics, which plays a key role in setting the range of an electric vehicle, and the fuel efficiency of an internal combustion engine. The challenge, they realized, was in assembling a dataset of thousands of car designs, each of which is physically accurate in their function and form, without the benefit of physically testing and measuring their performance.

To build a dataset of car designs with physically accurate representations of their aerodynamics, the researchers started with several baseline 3D models that were provided by Audi and BMW in 2014. These models represent three major categories of passenger cars: fastback (sedans with a sloped back end), notchback (sedans or coupes with a slight dip in their rear profile) and estateback (such as station wagons with more blunt, flat backs). The baseline models are thought to bridge the gap between simple designs and more complicated proprietary designs, and have been used by other groups as a starting point for exploring new car designs.

Library of cars

In their new study, the team applied a morphing operation to each of the baseline car models. This operation systematically made a slight change to each of 26 parameters in a given car design, such as its length, underbody features, windshield slope, and wheel tread, which it then labeled as a distinct car design, which was then added to the growing dataset. Meanwhile, the team ran an optimization algorithm to ensure that each new design was indeed distinct, and not a copy of an already-generated design. They then translated each 3D design into different modalities, such that a given design can be represented as a mesh, a point cloud, or a list of dimensions and specs.

The researchers also ran complex, computational fluid dynamics simulations to calculate how air would flow around each generated car design. In the end, this effort produced more than 8,000 distinct, physically accurate 3D car forms, encompassing the most common types of passenger cars on the road today.

To produce this comprehensive dataset, the researchers spent over 3 million CPU hours using the MIT SuperCloud, and generated 39 terabytes of data. (For comparison, it’s estimated that the entire printed collection of the Library of Congress would amount to about 10 terabytes of data.)

The engineers say that researchers can now use the dataset to train a particular AI model. For instance, an AI model could be trained on a part of the dataset to learn car configurations that have certain desirable aerodynamics. Within seconds, the model could then generate a new car design with optimized aerodynamics, based on what it has learned from the dataset’s thousands of physically accurate designs.

The researchers say the dataset could also be used for the inverse goal. For instance, after training an AI model on the dataset, designers could feed the model a specific car design and have it quickly estimate the design’s aerodynamics, which can then be used to compute the car’s potential fuel efficiency or electric range — all without carrying out expensive building and testing of a physical car.

“What this dataset allows you to do is train generative AI models to do things in seconds rather than hours,” Ahmed says. “These models can help lower fuel consumption for internal combustion vehicles and increase the range of electric cars — ultimately paving the way for more sustainable, environmentally friendly vehicles.”

“The dataset is very comprehensive and consists of a diverse set of modalities that are valuable to understand both styling and performance,” says Yanxia Zhang, a senior machine learning research scientist at Toyota Research Institute, who was not involved in the study.

This work was supported, in part, by the German Academic Exchange Service and the Department of Mechanical Engineering at MIT.

© Credit: Courtesy of Mohamed Elrefaie

In a new dataset that includes more than 8,000 car designs, MIT engineers simulated the aerodynamics for a given car shape, which they represent in various modalities, including “surface fields.”

NIH targeting rare diseases, director tells U.S. House funding panel

Pediatric Oncology Branch researchers observe samples in a microscope in the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center. NIH Director Monica M. Bertagnolli testified at a U.S. House Appropriations hearing Tuesday. (Photo credit: NIH)

WASHINGTON — The director of the National Institutes of Health testified before Congress on Tuesday the agency is looking to rebuild trust following the COVID-19 pandemic by solving some of the biggest health challenges facing the country.

Monica M. Bertagnolli told the House panel in charge of the agency’s funding that one of those focus areas is rare diseases, since private, for-profit companies often won’t take on the financial risk of developing gene therapies. 

“What if you’re a parent of a child who has this rare disease?” Bertagnolli said. “We know if we work hard, our technology will be able to cure that child.”

Bertagnolli said during the two-hour hearing that NIH plans to soon begin “delivering more out of our pipeline for gene therapies for rare disease” and is collaborating with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to ensure a smooth process.

“We will manufacture and test them within the clinical center at NIH. And then when they are ready for marketing and production — at that point after everything is completely de-risked — we will hand them over to the for-profit sector with the absolute requirements that the people who need them are able to access them,” Bertagnolli said.

The NIH, she told lawmakers, is responsible for the health of all Americans and will partner with the private sector on projects, but “can’t abandon these patients and these families.”

Bertagnolli told the House Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Subcommittee that working to solve health challenges is one of several ways the NIH is working to rebuild trust with Americans following the global pandemic.

“We do not get people’s trust by putting out public service announcements. We do not gain people’s trust by saying ‘We’re smart, we know what to do, we’re the scientists,’” Bertagnolli testified. “We get people’s trust by solving the problems they need to have solved.”

Science, not politics

Bertagnolli also sought to reinforce basic scientific understanding about public health during the hearing, pressing back against political notions of researching infectious diseases.

“First and foremost, NIH concentrates on science, not on politics,” Bertagnolli said. “We actually have an integrity mandate against political interference in our work. That is the law for us and we abide by that completely.”

Bertagnolli noted that if NIH ceased research into diseases, death rates would rise.

“We are facing some serious threats. I mean, look in the news today, H5N1 is scary for us and we are all over risk assessment, mitigation, working with our other federal agencies to make sure that we can protect and mitigate anything that happens with that virus doing something evil,” Bertagnolli said. “We cannot afford to let down on that, people will die.”

H5N1, also known as highly pathogenic avian influenza, has caused significant disruptions to U.S. poultry farms for years, but showed up in dairy herds this March, raising alarm bells for public health experts.

Fifty-three people have been diagnosed with the virus so far, though the risk to the general public is low.

NIH duties

The NIH is made up of 27 different centers and institutes, including the National Cancer Institute, National Institute on Aging, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, and the NIH Clinical Center that’s also referred to as America’s research hospital.

Congress approved $48 billion in discretionary funding for NIH in March as part of a full-year spending package.

The NIH writes on its budget website that 84% of its funding goes to “extramural research, largely through almost 50,000 competitive grants to more than 300,000 researchers at more than 2,500 universities, medical schools, and other research institutions in every state.”

“In addition, approximately 11% of the NIH’s budget supports projects conducted by nearly 6,000 scientists in its own laboratories, most of which are on the NIH campus in Bethesda, Maryland,” it states. “The remaining 6% covers research support, administrative, and facility construction, maintenance, or operational costs.”

Bipartisan support for funding

The NIH has long had broad bipartisan support in Congress, especially from members of the Appropriations committees.

That continued Tuesday with the majority of Democratic and Republican lawmakers on the panel asking genuine questions about NIH research, funding and future plans.

Alabama Republican Rep. Robert Aderholt, chairman of the subcommittee, said there was “no doubt every life is touched by the discoveries made by the investments at NIH.”

Aderholt encouraged Bertagnolli to make it a top priority to rebuild “confidence in the NIH as a leader in unbiased, nonpartisan, objective, basic science.”

A Pew Research Center survey published earlier this month showed 76% of Americans held a fair amount or a great deal of “confidence in scientists to act in the public’s best interests.” That represents a slight rebound for public faith in scientists after a steady decline since the start of the pandemic, according to Pew surveys.

Eighty-nine percent of those surveyed said research scientists were intelligent, while 65% said they were focused on solving real problems.

Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro, ranking member on the panel, applauded Bertagnolli for “ensuring NIH’s life-saving research reaches more places and more patients, especially in rural communities.”

“And she understands that health policy must be first and foremost based on science and data,” DeLauro said.

NIH funding, she said, was going toward better understanding numerous diseases facing Americans, including ALS, Alzheimer’s, cancer, diabetes and mental illness.

The agency is also dedicating research dollars to address several health challenges facing women, including maternal mortality, as well as other areas that historically have been ignored or underfunded.

“NIH supported research has us on the cusp of curing endometriosis and they are ramping up investments for menopause, which will ultimately impact half of our country’s population,” DeLauro said. “But there is still a long way to go.”  

Health experts outline how Trump administration could affect abortion, contraception access

Packages of Mifepristone tablets are displayed at a family planning clinic on April 13, 2023 in Rockville, Maryland. (Photo illustration by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump has several choices to make in the coming months about whether his second administration will keep access to contraception and abortion as it is now or implement changes.

While Trump cannot on his own enact nationwide laws or abortion bans without Congress, he and the people he picks for key posts throughout the federal government will have significant influence on reproductive rights nationwide.

During Trump’s first term in office he barred health care organizations that perform or refer patients for abortions from receiving Title X family planning grants, even though there’s a moratorium on using federal funds for abortions unless it’s the result of rape or incest, or the life of the woman is at risk.

Alina Salganicoff, senior vice president and director for women’s health policy at the nonpartisan health research organization KFF, said on a call with reporters Friday that about a quarter of providers withdrew or were disqualified from receiving federal family planning grants as a result of that policy.

“The Title X program basically funds family planning services for low-income people,” Salganicoff explained. “It’s basically a small program, it’s around under $300 million — but it is a critical program to people who don’t otherwise have insurance.”

Abortions as stabilizing care

Trump will also have to decide whether to leave in place guidance from the Biden administration that says a federal law from the 1980s protects health care providers who perform abortions as stabilizing care during an emergency that would affect a woman’s health or life.

That law, known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, became one point of disagreement between the Biden administration and Republican states that implemented abortion bans or strict restrictions after the Supreme Court ended the nationwide right to an abortion.

U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra wrote in a letter released in July 2022 that under the federal “law, no matter where you live, women have the right to emergency care — including abortion care.”

EMTALA is at the center of an ongoing lawsuit between the Biden administration and Idaho over that state’s abortion law. Oral arguments in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals are set for early December.

Abortion pill

The future of medication abortion, a two-drug regimen approved for up to 10 weeks gestation that’s used in about 63% of abortions nationwide, will be another area the Trump administration could alter without congressional approval.

Salganicoff said there’s no way to know just yet if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will seek to change prescribing guidelines for medication abortion or revoke the 2000 approval of mifepristone altogether.

“We don’t know whether they’re going to actually review the approval, but I will tell you that it is likely that they will revisit the conditions in which medication abortions, which now account for nearly two-thirds of all abortions in this country, can be provided,” Salganicoff said.

The Trump administration, she said, is likely to focus on revisions made during the Biden administration that allow doctors or other qualified health care providers to prescribe the two-drug medication abortion regimen via telehealth and then have mifepristone and misoprostol mailed to the patient.

Salganicoff anticipates anti-abortion organizations will also encourage the Trump administration to address recent findings from the We Count Project, showing 1 in 10 abortions take place after medication abortion is mailed to people in states with bans or significant restrictions from states that have shield laws.

“This FDA protocol is legal to do that, but clearly this is going to be a target,” she said.

Mailing of abortion medication

The Comstock Act, an anti-obscenity law from the late 19th century that once banned the mailing of boxing photographs, pornography and contraception, will also be front and center after Trump takes the oath of office on Jan. 20.

The law, which is still on the books despite not being enforced in decades, could potentially allow the U.S. Postal Service to prevent the mailing of abortion medications or any other instrument or tool used in abortions.

“The Biden administration’s Department of Justice did a review and said that they are not going to enforce Comstock,” Salganicoff said. “Project 2025 sees it very differently, and even though President-elect Trump has said that he is not going to enforce Comstock, it’s not clear, and there will likely be a lot of pressure to do that.”

Project 2025 is a policy map for a Trump presidency published by the Heritage Foundation. Trump has disavowed any connection with it, although former members of his first administration helped develop it.

Salganicoff said enforcing the Comstock Act would affect access to medication abortion throughout the country, even in states that have reinforced reproductive rights during the last two years.

“Clearly that’s going to tee up a lot of litigation and challenges,” Salganicoff said.

Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, said during the call that the Trump administration’s possible elevation of people who spread misinformation or disinformation could lead to more confusion about research-based health care.

“I think one thing, particularly with the rise in prominence of RFK Jr., you know, is the potential for misinformation,” Levitt said, referring to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., a prominent vaccine opponent who endorsed Trump and campaigned extensively with him.

“We turn to the government for reliable data, public health information and scientific information,” Levitt said. “And there’s the potential now, for the government to be not only not an effective source for health information, but in fact, an accelerant for misinformation.” 

Tackling the energy revolution, one sector at a time

As a major contributor to global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, the transportation sector has immense potential to advance decarbonization. However, a zero-emissions global supply chain requires re-imagining reliance on a heavy-duty trucking industry that emits 810,000 tons of CO2, or 6 percent of the United States’ greenhouse gas emissions, and consumes 29 billion gallons of diesel annually in the U.S. alone.

A new study by MIT researchers, presented at the recent American Society of Mechanical Engineers 2024 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, quantifies the impact of a zero-emission truck’s design range on its energy storage requirements and operational revenue. The multivariable model outlined in the paper allows fleet owners and operators to better understand the design choices that impact the economic feasibility of battery-electric and hydrogen fuel cell heavy-duty trucks for commercial application, equipping stakeholders to make informed fleet transition decisions.

“The whole issue [of decarbonizing trucking] is like a very big, messy pie. One of the things we can do, from an academic standpoint, is quantify some of those pieces of pie with modeling, based on information and experience we’ve learned from industry stakeholders,” says ZhiYi Liang, PhD student on the renewable hydrogen team at the MIT K. Lisa Yang Global Engineering and Research Center (GEAR) and lead author of the study. Co-authored by Bryony DuPont, visiting scholar at GEAR, and Amos Winter, the Germeshausen Professor in the MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering, the paper elucidates operational and socioeconomic factors that need to be considered in efforts to decarbonize heavy-duty vehicles (HDVs).

Operational and infrastructure challenges

The team’s model shows that a technical challenge lies in the amount of energy that needs to be stored on the truck to meet the range and towing performance needs of commercial trucking applications. Due to the high energy density and low cost of diesel, existing diesel drivetrains remain more competitive than alternative lithium battery-electric vehicle (Li-BEV) and hydrogen fuel-cell-electric vehicle (H2 FCEV) drivetrains. Although Li-BEV drivetrains have the highest energy efficiency of all three, they are limited to short-to-medium range routes (under 500 miles) with low freight capacity, due to the weight and volume of the onboard energy storage needed. In addition, the authors note that existing electric grid infrastructure will need significant upgrades to support large-scale deployment of Li-BEV HDVs.

While the hydrogen-powered drivetrain has a significant weight advantage that enables higher cargo capacity and routes over 750 miles, the current state of hydrogen fuel networks limits economic viability, especially once operational cost and projected revenue are taken into account. Deployment will most likely require government intervention in the form of incentives and subsidies to reduce the price of hydrogen by more than half, as well as continued investment by corporations to ensure a stable supply. Also, as H2-FCEVs are still a relatively new technology, the ongoing design of conformal onboard hydrogen storage systems — one of which is the subject of Liang’s PhD — is crucial to successful adoption into the HDV market.

The current efficiency of diesel systems is a result of technological developments and manufacturing processes established over many decades, a precedent that suggests similar strides can be made with alternative drivetrains. However, interactions with fleet owners, automotive manufacturers, and refueling network providers reveal another major hurdle in the way that each “slice of the pie” is interrelated — issues must be addressed simultaneously because of how they affect each other, from renewable fuel infrastructure to technological readiness and capital cost of new fleets, among other considerations. And first steps into an uncertain future, where no one sector is fully in control of potential outcomes, is inherently risky. 

“Besides infrastructure limitations, we only have prototypes [of alternative HDVs] for fleet operator use, so the cost of procuring them is high, which means there isn’t demand for automakers to build manufacturing lines up to a scale that would make them economical to produce,” says Liang, describing just one step of a vicious cycle that is difficult to disrupt, especially for industry stakeholders trying to be competitive in a free market. 

Quantifying a path to feasibility

“Folks in the industry know that some kind of energy transition needs to happen, but they may not necessarily know for certain what the most viable path forward is,” says Liang. Although there is no singular avenue to zero emissions, the new model provides a way to further quantify and assess at least one slice of pie to aid decision-making.

Other MIT-led efforts aimed at helping industry stakeholders navigate decarbonization include an interactive mapping tool developed by Danika MacDonell, Impact Fellow at the MIT Climate and Sustainability Consortium (MCSC); alongside Florian Allroggen, executive director of MITs Zero Impact Aviation Alliance; and undergraduate researchers Micah Borrero, Helena De Figueiredo Valente, and Brooke Bao. The MCSC’s Geospatial Decision Support Tool supports strategic decision-making for fleet operators by allowing them to visualize regional freight flow densities, costs, emissions, planned and available infrastructure, and relevant regulations and incentives by region.

While current limitations reveal the need for joint problem-solving across sectors, the authors believe that stakeholders are motivated and ready to tackle climate problems together. Once-competing businesses already appear to be embracing a culture shift toward collaboration, with the recent agreement between General Motors and Hyundai to explore “future collaboration across key strategic areas,” including clean energy. 

Liang believes that transitioning the transportation sector to zero emissions is just one part of an “energy revolution” that will require all sectors to work together, because “everything is connected. In order for the whole thing to make sense, we need to consider ourselves part of that pie, and the entire system needs to change,” says Liang. “You can’t make a revolution succeed by yourself.” 

The authors acknowledge the MIT Climate and Sustainability Consortium for connecting them with industry members in the HDV ecosystem; and the MIT K. Lisa Yang Global Engineering and Research Center and MIT Morningside Academy for Design for financial support.

© Photo: Bob Adams/Flickr

A new study by MIT researchers quantifies the impact of a zero-emission truck’s design range on its energy storage requirements and operational revenue.

Rhetoric versus reality: Addressing common misconceptions about immigration

Morning commuter traffic waits to cross into the United States from Tijuana, Mexico, in March 2024. South of San Diego, the San Ysidro Port of Entry is the largest land crossing between the two countries and the most transited in the Western Hemisphere. Some 70,000 vehicles and 20,000 pedestrians pass through there daily. Border and immigration issues have become dominant themes in the 2024 presidential election. (John Moore | Getty Images)

MYTH: Immigrants increase crime rates 

Among the most persistent political talking points raised by opponents of immigration is that migrants bring crime with them into the U.S.

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” former President Donald Trump famously said on the campaign trail in 2016.

“Has anybody ever seen the movie ‘Gangs of New York’?” Republican vice presidential nominee J.D. Vance asked during a meeting with the Milwaukee Police Association in August. “We know that when you have these massive ethnic enclaves forming in our country, it can sometimes lead to higher crime rates.”

In reality, the opposite is true. Immigrants are far less likely than U.S.-born citizens to commit crimes, numerous studies show. One study of incarceration rates going back over 150 years — between 1870 and 2020 — found that U.S.-born citizens were consistently more likely to end up in prison than immigrants. And the gap between the two groups has only increased in recent years, with immigrants 60% less likely to be incarcerated than U.S.-born citizens today, according to the nonpartisan National Bureau of Economic Research.

Assertions that immigrants have caused spikes in crime in the areas where they settle have also been proven false. Overall, incidents of crime, including violent crime, have fallen in cities across the country since peaking during the pandemic, FBI data shows. And while politicians have claimed that border cities have been overwhelmed by lawlessness and chaos, the data shows that crime rates, including for homicide, are far lower than the national average.

The equation of immigrants with criminals is exhausting to hear for Irayda Flores, a businesswoman in Phoenix, Arizona. Flores moved to the Grand Canyon State from Sonora, Mexico, in 2004, hoping to make her entrepreneurial dreams a reality. Since then, her seafood wholesale business, El Mar de Cortez Corp, has thrived, serving restaurants across the city and employing more than a dozen people. But despite the example she and other immigrants provide, politicians continue to frame them as villains.

The rhetoric is the same every election year, she said, and it ignores the positive contributions of many of the immigrants who left their home countries to seek a better future.

“Politicians talk about the migrant community like they’re criminals, like they are really awful people,” Flores said. “But when migrants leave their country — their culture and the land that they were born and grew up in — they do it because they’re searching for opportunity. And searching for a new opportunity means they come here with the intention to work and get ahead.”

Dismissing all immigrants as criminals is harmful, she added, and unfair to the work many immigrants have put in to make a difference in their host communities.

“You can’t generalize or treat an entire immigrant group as criminals because there are people who’ve lived in the country for decades, and they bring benefits to the table,” Flores said. “They benefit the economy, they benefit their communities, and they deserve to be treated with respect.”

MYTH: There’s an invasion at the U.S.-Mexico border

While the campaign season has prompted politicians to stir up voters about an “invasion” at the country’s southern border, the situation is more complex. In late 2023, the number of migrant encounters at the U.S.-Mexico border hit record highs. In December 2023, more than 300,000 encounters between border officials and migrants occurred at the country’s southern border — an all-time high. Experts believe the surge was, in part, the result of a global spike in migration patterns caused by economic strains during the pandemic.

In January 2024 the record high set in December plummeted to about 176,000 encounters. The number eventually fell to a three-year low not seen since before the pandemic. In August, the month for which the most recent data is available, encounters increased slightly from to 107,503 from 104,101 in July.

MYTH: Fentanyl is smuggled into the country by migrants

The U.S.-Mexico border stretches across nearly 2,000 miles and includes 26 land ports of entry. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents monitor both ports and the spaces in between. The vast majority of fentanyl is smuggled into the U.S. via legal routes by citizens, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security reports. More than 90% of interdicted fentanyl is confiscated by border officials at land ports of entry, according to DHS, and cartels mainly seek to move the drug across the border with the help of U.S. citizens. In fiscal year 2023, the latest year for which there is data, 86.4% of fentanyl trafficking convictions were citizens.

MYTH: Immigrants take advantage of public benefits 

In most cases, immigrants who aren’t citizens of the United States are ineligible for public benefits. Federal programs like Section 8 housing aid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)  are all strictly reserved for U.S. citizens.

Immigrants who aren’t citizens also can’t receive subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, and they can’t apply for federal health insurance coverage through the marketplace.

People with legal permanent residency status, however, may be able to access some public benefits after reaching the five-year residency mark.

Some federal protections are in place to ensure that migrants have access to care if they are facing life-threatening circumstances. Emergency Medicaid helps migrants without legal status receive urgent medical treatment, and some benefits are available to migrant women under the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program.

Eligibility for state public benefit programs varies across the country and can range from access to driver’s licenses to in-state tuition rates and scholarships.

A hundred people are sworn in at a naturalization ceremony hosted by the Jimmy Carter National Historical Park in celebration of the former president’s 100th birthday on Tuesday, Oct. 1, in Plains, Georgia. Migrants endure a lengthy and complex process to receive citizenship status. (Megan Varner | Getty Images)

MYTH: It’s easy to gain U.S. citizenship 

Gaining citizenship is a costly, multistep and complicated process. And backlogged naturalization and asylum systems mean long wait times for hopeful migrants.

Those seeking to achieve legal status through marriage must pass a number of hurdles meant to verify that the marriage is genuine, including periodic interviews with immigration officials. Couples often spend hundreds or thousands of dollars and years in the application process.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals grants people without legal status who were brought to the country as minors protection from deportation and a temporary work permit, but recipients must meet strict criteria to qualify. That includes living in the U.S. since 2007, having arrived in the country before turning 16, no significant criminal convictions and either current enrollment in a high school, a diploma or a GED.

DACA recipients who were accepted into the program must reapply for a renewal every two years. And while recipients can apply for legal residency status if they are eligible through their family or via employment-based immigration, the DACA program is currently frozen. Though applications are still being accepted, they aren’t being processed while the program is under ongoing litigation that threatens to end it altogether.

Asylum seekers must undergo fear screenings with immigration officials to determine if their concerns about persecution or threats to their lives warrant being granted protection in the U.S. New guidance issued by the Biden administration barring the consideration of asylum claims when high numbers of migrant encounters occur has made it more difficult for people to request asylum.

Those hoping for a resolution in their asylum or refugee cases might wait years. In 2019, the immigration backlog ballooned to more than 1 million cases, a number that only doubled in the following years. As of September, the number of pending immigration cases exceeded 3 million. The average time it takes to close a case is four years, according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, an organization that compiles and analyzes federal immigration data.

MYTH: Immigrants don’t pay taxes

Roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants live in the United States, and all of them pay some form of taxes. An analysis of the 2022 American Community Survey, an annual demographics survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, estimated that immigrants contributed $383 billion in federal taxes, and $196 billion in state and local taxes. And while people without legal status can’t benefit from Social Security, the administration receives about $13 billion from the paychecks of workers without citizenship status every year.

Saúl Rascón (Courtesy photo)

Saúl Rascón moved to the U.S. with his family when he was 5-years-old. He became a DACA recipient in high school and has been employed ever since. Today, he works with Aliento Votes, a pro-immigrant voter outreach campaign. Accusations that immigrants don’t pay their taxes irritate Rascón, who views it as a way to diminish the demographic group’s contributions.

“It’s particularly frustrating when immigrants are pinned as this economic deficit and harm when it’s been proven time and time again that they’re not,” he said.

The problem, Rascón said, is that the claim is believable to the average voter who doesn’t do additional research. And that claim is dangerous for all immigrants, including himself, because it could engender hostility towards the community as a whole.

The spread of disinformation about immigrants is harmful, he added, not just because it fosters anti-immigrant sentiment, but also because it makes it more difficult to find common ground when it comes to changing the country’s immigration system. While Republican politicians have focused on riling up their base against immigrants, Democrats have shifted to the right on the issue, increasingly spotlighting enforcement policy to capture as many votes as possible.

“We’re no longer focusing our energy on our Dreamers and DACA, on undocumented people who’ve been here, and contributing taxes,” Rascón said. “We’ve seen a shift towards border security, which isn’t unproductive but it’s not the best use of our time and resources.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

The History of Seat Belt Development

This chronology of major events related to the development and use of occupant securement systems in motor vehicles, including school buses, may provide some perspective and details to anyone who is unfamiliar with this topic.

Information presented here is based on research by the National Transportation Safety Board, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the European Commission and other sources, as well as School Transportation News reporting. The following chronology has been pieced together from sources including the HAR NTSB/SS-86-03, NTSB Safety Study: “Performance of Lap Belts in 26 Frontal Crashes,” pp. 225-230. Dates and developments from 1967 onward pertinent to safety belt systems on school buses has been added by the editors of School Transportation News. Information about safety belt developments in Europe is drawn from the European Commission website. (School Transportation News is solely responsible for the contents of this history.)

2024

School bus manufacturer Blue Bird announced in June it was making lap/shoulder seatbelts standard equipment in all models at no additional cost, starting in the fall.

An Ohio School Bus Safety Working Group initiated by Gov. Mike DeWine following a school bus crash in 2023 that fatally ejected a student concluded that a state law requiring the restraint systems was not necessary. A resulting list of 17 recommendations issued on Jan. 31 included the recognition individual school districts should be able to invest in seatbelts, if they fit their unique needs.

2022

IMMI crash-tests two school buses at its Center for Advanced Product Evaluation (CAPE) for attendees of the STN EXPO East conference to highlight the differences between belted and unbelted passengers.

2019

IMMI conducted a crash test by launching a school bus off a ramp and onto its side at CAPE for STN EXPO East attendees to demonstrate what happens to both the school bus and the belted and unbelted occupants in the event of a rollover, when compartmentalization by federally regulated high-back, padded school bus seats is ineffective. IMMI said the event was the latest reminder that compartmentalization only works in frontal- and rear-impact crashes, and that students who don’t wear lap/shoulder belts in side impacts and rollovers are susceptible to serious injury or death.

2018

Montana PBS airs a 57-minute documentary in November that explores the question asking if school buses are “Safe Enough?” without lap-and-shoulder seatbelts. The report by Anna D. Rau looks back at a 2008 school bus crash that killed 7-year-old Sarah Fark and led several school districts, led by Helena Public Schools, to voluntarily add the seatbelts despite repeated, failed efforts to pass state legislation that would require them. The documentary discusses how compartmentalization is inadequate protection for students in side-impact and roll-over crashes and how lap-shoulder seatbelts improve student behavior on the school bus to limit driver distraction.

On Aug. 25, New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy signs A4110 into law, which updates existing law to require lap-shoulder seat belts in newly manufactured school buses, from the previous requirement for lap belts. Law goes into effect in January 2019.

The National Transportation Safety Board on May 22 recommends that all states enact laws requiring lap-shoulder seat belts in school buses.

2017

The Nevada Assembly passed AB485 on June 1 to require lap-shoulder seat belts on newly purchased school buses as of July 1, 2019. Gov. Brian Sandoval signed the bill into law on June 4.

In March, Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson signed into effect HB 1002 that states that if 10 percent of local voters to sign a petition seeking lap-shoulder belts on the school district’s school buses, then the school district must propose a levy on property taxes to raise funds for purchasing the occupant restraint systems and training students on their use.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbot signed into law a new school bus lap-shoulder seat belts requirement that removed a previous provision hat the legislature must appropriate funding for school district implementation. Instead, the SB693 requires school districts to install the occupant restraints in model-year 2018 and newer school buses, unless local school boards vote during a public meeting that they do not have the funds necessary. The law goes into effect on Sept. 1, 2017.

Metro Public School Board in Nashville, Tennessee, unanimously passed a one-sentence resolution to commission an impact study to determine whether seat belts on buses are in the best interest for the safety of students.

Due to the deadly school bus crash that recently occurred Chattanooga, the Metro Public School Board asked Director of School, Shawn Joseph to study the correlation between seat belts and safety, as there have been contradicting reports.

The report’s findings are expected by early February and will be discussed on the board floor in order to decide on which measure the board will enforce. However, the resolution does not state which restraint systems will be required depending on the findings.

A Kansas bill to equip seat belts on every school bus is being considered by Kansas Legislature. House Bill 2008 was pre-filled by State Rep. Susie Swanson in light of a deadly school bus crash that killed six elementary students in Chattanooga, Tenn. On Nov 21.

If passed, the bill would lead to higher costs for the purchase of school buses. It could add upwards of $10,000 to the cost of a new school bus. The bill would also require all buses purchased after Jan. 1, 2018 to have seat belts on all seats and does not require the retrofitting of buses already on the road.

2016

Washington State House of Representatives passed legislation to proceed with a study on the cost and feasibility of equipping school busses with seat belts and harnesses. The bill was passed early February with a vote of 87 to 9.

The bill would require the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction to analyze the costs and the benefits of requiring each new school bus purchased after December 2017 to be equipped with seat belts, safety harnesses or other approved restraint systems.

The study would include the different seat belt and safety harness options available, the potential pros and cons of each, as well as the approximate cost.

If the legislation passes through the state senate, OSPI will need to submit its study’s results to the legislature by Oct. 15, 2016.

In November Louisiana Legislators began examining a law requiring lap-belts on school buses that has been in existence for more than 12 years, but does not have funding to enforce it.

After the fatal Chattanooga, Tenn. school bus accident that claimed the lives of six elementary school children in late November, the restraint issue was re-visited.

Louisiana revised Statute 17:164.2 and was enacted in 1999 and required all school buses used in the state primarily for the transportation of students to be equipped with occupant restraint systems by no later than June 30, 2004, if the legislator appropriates the necessary funds.

State Sen. Troy Carter authored Louisiana State Resolution 122 that directs the Department of Education “to establish a task force to study and make recommendations regarding student transportation and school bus passenger safety.” The task force report is due no later than Jan 31, 2017.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) requested a public comment on a published proposal that focused on obtaining data collection regarding the application and cost of three-point seat belts on school buses.

NHTSA’s proposal identifies school districts that implemented the lap-shoulder systems on school buses, whether voluntarily or in response to a state or local law. It also seeks a stronger understanding of the decisions school districts make to install the occupant restraints and the funds necessary to pay for them.

The proposal also includes a web-based survey to gather additional information regarding bus driver distractions correlating to student behavior caused by using seatbelts. The findings will be used as a base model to develop a potential policy and guide to assist jurisdictions that will consider the use of seat belts on school buses

2015

Houston Independent School District announced November 17th that all new school buses the district purchases will be equipped with three-point seat belts. The decision was made due to the fatal accident that claimed the lives of two high school students last September.

The announcement comes a week after the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration updated its position to recommend occupant restraints on all school buses at the National Association for Pupil Transportation’s Annual Summit.

This makes HISD the first school district in Houston, and among the first in the state to implement such a measure, according to a district statement.

2014

State Rep. Robert L. Kosowski introduced two bills in March to the Michigan House. Both bills aimed at requiring all school buses to be equipped with seat belts. The first bill (HB 5436) would mandate that all new school buses provide a seat belt for every pupil, yet does not specify if it must be a lap or a lap/shoulder belt. The second bill (HB 5437) would allow districts with voter-approved sinking funds to use these monies to buy school buses equipped with restraint belts. However, the bills would present a funding dilemma for districts that contract with intermediate school districts for transportation, as intermediate districts cannot seek sinking funds under state law.

2013

IMMI, the manufacturer of the SafeGuard line of seat belts and child restraint systems for school buses and other vehicles, crashed a 1981 model-year Type C conventional school bus head-on into a concrete barrier at 25 mph. The crash was done to demonstrate the impact seat belts have on students.

The crash, Safety 101, was held on Aug. 8 at IMMI’s Center for Advances Product Evaluation (CAPE) at the company’s headquarters in Westfield, Ind. The live simulated crash used the largest barrier block in the world and used an 800-foot track before meeting the wall. On board the school bus were several dummies that doubled as young children and teens.

The crash concluded, thanks to video footage, that the unrestrained dummies were thrown from their bus seats, while those that were restrained using three-point, lap-shoulder belts struck the back of the cushioned seats in front of them, but otherwise remained within their compartmentalized area. During the Safety 101 crash the chassis separated from the bus body, with the chassis being moved backwards about 16 inches.

2012

An amendment to legislation in Missouri on allowing external advertisements on the sides of school buses includes a provision that advertising will only be allowed in newly purchased buses with model years of 2015 or newer that are equipped with safety restraint systems for students.

The National School Transportation Association publishes a paper in March that outlines the safety, cost and operational factors that state and local policymakers should consider when looking at developing a mandate for seat belts in school buses.

In February, Collins Bus Corporation announced its line of Type A Collins Bus, Mid Bus and Corbeil school buses will come standard with the SafeGuard XChange seat from IMMI that allows bus operators to convert a base bench seat to one with three-point, lap-shoulder belts.

2011

The industry awaited the Oct. 21 effective date of NHTSA’s upgrade to school bus passenger crash protection that was finalized in 2008. The new rule requires all Type A school buses under 10,000 pounds to roll off manufacturing lines with installed three-point, lap/shoulder restraints. The update also publishes performance standards for these lap/shoulder belts voluntarily installed on large Type C conventional or Type D transit-style school buses with a gross vehicle weight rating of more than 10,000 pounds. Seat backs mus also be raised to 610 mm (24 inches) from the previous standard of 508 mm (20 inches), and the seats must come equipped with a self-latching mechanism on seat bottom cushions that are designed to flip-up or be removable without tools.

In August, NHTSA denied a petition brought by the Center for Auto Safety and 21 other organizations or individuals that sought a federal requirement for lap/shoulder seat belts on large school buses. NHTSA said school buses are already one of the safest vehicles on the road, and a requirement for the three-point restraints could actually result in more student fatalities each year because of reduced ridership on buses. NHTSA estimates that the seat belts incur an incremental cost of $5,485 to $7,345 per bus.

IC Bus announced in July that it had partnered with IMMI to develop the BTI Seating System that makes it easier for school districts to upgrade to three-point seat belt systems. The entire seat back can be removed in a matter of minutes and replaced with a seat back equipped with the seat belts or integrated child safety restraints without the need to reconfigure the bus floor. The BTI Seating System was expected to be in production by October.

In May, IMMI announced that it was finalizing testing on a new seating line that would enable customers of Thomas Built Buses to more easily upgrade existing bench seats to three-point, lap/shoulder belts or integrated child safety seats. The XChange Seat allows school bus operators to swap out existing seat back modules and replace them in a matter of minutes with modules equipped with the restraint systems. IMMI said the new seat was expected to go into production in the fall.

2010

On Oct. 29, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published three proposed changes to the October 2008 final rule on seat belts in school buses centering on how the height of occupant torso belts are measured, integrated seat belts for wheelchairs and the self-latching requirement for seat cushions.

A University of Alabama study group formed in response to a fatal Huntsville school bus crash three years earlier published its final report to Gov. Bob Riley and the Alabama Department of Education that the funds required to equip school buses with seat belts is best spent mitigating student injuries and fatalities that occur during loading or unloading.

Passed in 2007, a Texas law requiring lap/shoulder seat belts on newly manufactured school buses went into effect on Sept. 1 only for those school districts seeking to receive reimbursement for the additional cost of these school buses from the state. This makes the state requirements for implementation of school bus seat belts voluntary, only holding school districts to the letter of the law if they received state funding. But absent was the $10 million in funds authorized by the state legislature to reimburse school districts. That pot of money shrunk to $3.6 million in January by the Texas Education Agency after Gov. Rick Perry ordered at least a 5 percent cut of programs statewide. The Legislative Budget Board signed off on the allocation of funds on Sept. 2. At this writing, TEA was working out details before issuing further guidance to school districts informing them of the procedures to follow when applying for the grant money. This was likely to occur in October 2010 with funds being disbursed by the end of the year, according to a TEA spokesperson. The Texas Transportation Institute completed a draft implementation plan in June and submitted it to the Legislative Budget Board, which released the plan publicly on Sept. 2. TEA issued guidance to school districts in October on how to go about applying for the voluntary funds.

In response to the Jan. 9 death of a 16-year-old boy during a crash involving a school bus and a car driven by another teen, the first school bus fatality in the state over the past four decades, a Quinnipiac University survey of nearly 1,600 voters in Connecticut found that three out of four respondents favored a new law requiring seat belts on school buses. Resulting legislation to require three-point belts statewide eventually reached the compromise of an optional program that provides a revenue stream to school districts and private school bus operators that choose to purchase new school buses equipped with the occupant restraint systems.

A Minnesota state legislator introduced a bill in January that would require 3-point lap/shoulder restraints on all large buses manufactured after Dec. 31, 2010. The bill would also protect school districts, school bus drivers, other school employees or volunteers from wrongful death lawsuits brought about by any student fatality the might occur onboard the school bus that was related to the use of seat belts or lack thereof. All students would be required to buckle up in school buses equipped with the passenger safety restraints unless the school received and filed a letter from a child’s parents or guardians that excused them from wearing their seat belt.

Meanwhile, for the second consecutive legislative session, Colorado lawmakers reject a bill that would have mandated three-point lap/shoulder restraints on school buses. They cited as reasons the added cost to vehicle purchases and the existing safety record of school buses. The state has not seen a fatality on board a school bus since 1989.

2009
NHTSA conducted a follow-up study that agreed with a 1986 study that concluded that school buses without seat belts have little if any carryover effects to school children and if they use a seat belt in a personal vehicle.

No new state legislation had yet passed to require seat belts in school buses, although Wyoming came close to seeing a law.

2008
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued on Oct. 15 a long-awaited final rule that updated FMVSS 207, 208, 210 and 222 by requiring all new Type A school buses that weigh 10,000 pounds or less and that are manufactured on or after Sept. 1, 2011 be equipped with three-point, lap/shoulder belt systems. NHTSA stopped short of requiring the seat belts on all school buses, instead opting for voluntary requirements for equipping large buses weighing more than 10,000 pounds with systems. NHTSA said the requirement will cost the industry about $100 million to implement and on average will save one life a year

The NPRM also called for seat back heights in all buses to be raised to 24 inches from the current requirement of 20 inches and for a self-latching mechanism on all seat bottom cushions.

Later in October at annual conference of the National Association for State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services. Dr. Roger Saul, director of NHTSA’s Vehicle Research and Testing Center, said further side-impact crash testing was not necessary to show whether lap/shoulder belts in large buses should be a requirement and that their installation should be a voluntary choice made by states or local school districts.

2007
U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters announces “first ever federal rules for three-point belts” the morning of Nov. 19 at Morrisville Elementary School in Raleigh, N.C. A Noticed of Proposed Rulemaking calls for three-point lap/shoulder belts on all Type A school buses (GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less) due to their higher rate of rollover in crashes than large Type C and Type D school buses (GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds). While calling lap/shoulder belt and school bus compartmentalization “optimum protection,” NHTSA only issues guidelines for voluntary use of the passenger safety systems in large school buses due to potential reduced passenger capacity, which could lead to more student deaths each year in other vehicles during the normal school commute. NHTSA also cites the increased costs of three-point belts. Instead, NHTSA calls for an increase in seat back heights to 24 inches from their current 20 inches, implementing test procedures for all three-point seat belts in buses to ensure strength of the anchorages and the compatibility of the seat with compartmentalization and requiring all school buses with seat bottom cushions designed to flip-up for easy maintenance to have a self-latching mechanism.

The NPRM was based on a NHTSA-sponsored school bus seat belt summit held in Washington, D.C., on July 11 to discuss the feasibility of three-point lap/shoulder belts on school buses.

A month earlier, on June 8, Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed House Bill 323, the nation’s second state law requiring three-point lap/shoulder belt systems on all new school buses. It goes one step further than a similar law in California by including charter and multi-function school activity buses purchased after Sept. 1, 2010. There was no funding immediately appropriated. An aide of Sen. Eddie Lucio, Jr., the bill’s primary sponsor, said the legislature will be tasked with appropriating the difference between the current cost of newly purchased school buses and that of new buses equipped with the new occupant securement systems.

2006
A Missouri legislator introduced on Feb. 6 House Bill 1673, which would have required all newly purchased school buses to be equipped with 3-point lap/shoulder belts as of Jan. 1, 2007. Click here to read the article. The bill failed but the legislator vowed to try again.

2005

On Dec. 14 several Michigan legislators introduced a curiously worded bill that would require safety belts on public and private school buses “owned, leased or operated” beginning Jan. 1, 2006. It was unknown if House Bill 5519 contained typos. Calls by School Transportation News to Rep. Lamar Lemmons III, the bill’s primary sponsor, for clarification was never returned.

After several past attempts by the Virginia General Assembly to introduce seat belts on school buses, Del. Robert G. Marshall offered a bill requiring either 2-point lap belts or 3-point lap/shoulder belts, with the variety of securements to be approved by the superintendent of state police, on school buses purchased on or after July 1, 2006. The motion was prefiled on Dec. 13, with the intent to formally offer it on the General Assembly floor on Jan. 11, 2006. HB 51 says “The Board of Education must adopt policies, guidelines, and regulations to ensure that all passengers, including the driver, wear these belts or harnesses or both, whenever the bus is in motion. However, a school bus driver may not be held personally liable for the failure of passengers to wear safety belts as required by the Board’s regulations.” Meanwhile, HB 84 prefiled by Del. Lionel Spruill on Dec. 16 uses similar language sans a provision reducing driver liability, with an effective date of Jan. 1, 2007. The bills died in a House committee but Spruill told the Associated Press he would try again.

Despite a letter from former NHTSA Administrator Jeffrey Runge to congressional committees in the fall detailing the administration’s intent to develop a tool to measure the economic impact of installing the safety belts on school buses, School Transportation Director reported Dec. 7 that NHTSA currently does not have funding in place to fund such an effort during the upcoming fiscal year. A NHTSA spokesman told School Transportation Director, a publication of the Federal News Service, that the administration’s School Bus Safety: Crashworthiness Report (see details below under 2002 events) was comprehensive and no new plans existed to study the requirement of lap-shoulder belts on school buses. Charlie Hott, NHTSA’s school bus administrator, meanwhile told members of the National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services and the National Association of Pupil Transportation that proposed rulemaking would most likely occur in late 2006 that would change the federal requirement for seat belts on Type A special needs buses to the 3-point lap-shoulder variety from the currently mandated 2-point lap belt systems. Also, NHTSA would look into proposed regulations for making the 3-point harnesses voluntary on large school buses.

Kansas became the latest state on Nov. 18 to introduce a proposed lap-shoulder belt law for school buses. The state legislature would require all school buses to be equipped with lap-shoulder belts for all seating positions, including a retrofit of the state’s fleet of approximately 5,600 existing buses. If passed, House Bill No. 2546 would require all bids for the purchase of any bus to include requirements for the 3-point harness systems. School districts and contractors would be held responsible. Usage of the lap-shoulder belts would be mandatory for all passengers; congruently, the law would neither hold liable the school district, school-bus company nor the driver in the event of passenger injury due to improperly adjusted or fastened seat belts. The Kansas State Department of Education would be responsible for developing and implementing a school bus safety program that covers behavior of students in the loading/unloading zone, including boarding and egress, and the proper use of the lap-shoulder belts.

On Nov. 6, Western Australia Premier Geoff Gallop announced that seat belts would be introduced throughout the state’s “orange” school bus fleet, with retrofits at a price of about $18 million for 800 buses, speculated one local media outlet. The government later said the seat belts would be of the 3-point lap/shoulder variety. Priority was set for those vehicles that operate on country roads. Non-governmental schools were expected to follow suit and Gallop added that he would push for legislation to ensure compliance. A total cost was said to be forthcoming by the end of the year. The decision was made following an Oct. 21 school bus crash in Baldivis, where emergency responders credited the occupant belt systems with minimizing injuries. Other states were urged to also implement school bus seat belts. The National Transport Council Planning accepted the proposal from Planning and Infrastructure Minister Alannah MacTiernan on Nov. 18. Reece Waldock, CEO of the Public Transport Authority Administration, told SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION NEWS the new 3-point lap/shoulder belt and seating configurations will be compliant with the National Australian Design Rule Standards set forth by the Department of Transport and Regional Services. They will also follow the guidelines of the “National Code of Practice – Retrofitting Passenger Restraints to Buses,” which is currently being developed by the National Transport Commission. Western Australia transports approximately 24,000 students to and from school.

Effective July 1, California required all new large school buses (Type I or Type C or D) purchased and/or leased by school districts to be equipped with three-point lap/shoulder belts, bringing in line all state school buses regardless of size (see the 2004 entry, below). The securements will be phased into fleets meaning it could be decades before all state school buses have the 3-point lap/shoulder belts.

Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt took a school bus task force recommendation one very large step further in August by calling for legislation requiring three-point lap/shoulder belts in all state school buses. The governor called to order the task force in the spring after a spate of highly publicized school bus accidents in the Kansas City area. By the end of the summer, and after taking testimony from a host of school industry experts, safety consultants and seat belt proponents – and taking into consideration the safety benefits of school bus compartmentalization and high seat backs and the recognition by NHTSA and NTSB of the school bus’ exemplary safety record, task force members concluded that school districts and school districts alone were in the best position to decide if three-point occupant protection systems on school buses would be both beneficial and financially affordable. Instead, Blunt opted for the legislative route to potentially force all school districts to add the occupant safety belts. He said he will work with legislature to come up with whatever funding is necessary to assist school districts with compliance.

Meanwhile, the Tennessee state legislature formed a committee to investigate the possibility of requiring three-point lap/shoulder seat belts on school buses and was planning the bill draft process. The committee was unanimously approved in both the House and Senate following a 2003 school bus crash left a 7-year-old girl with a serious brain injury. But a study was never performed. WTVF-TV in Nashville in November questioned House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh on why the committee never met. The media attention prompted him to name members and the committee first met on Dec. 1. If a seat belt mandate is passed, he told School Transportation News the state should provide the necessary funding instead of placing the burden on local government or school districts. An analysis prompted by a separate bill in April 2004 determined that it would cost $84 million to retrofit all school buses in Tennessee . A phase-in, as old school buses are retired, would cost less than $6 million a year. The Tennessee Association of Pupil Transportation also told STN that it was in the process of conducting its own cost study and survey to determine the level of support for seat belts on school buses from school transportation officials.

2004
Effective July 1, three-point lap/shoulder belts are required on all new small Type II (also known as Type A or A-1) school buses, carrying 16 or less passengers, in California. On Nov. 9, the state Department of Education issued regulations pertaining to the training of students on how to use the passenger restraint systems. Title 5, Section 14105 of the California Code of Regulations says that all students riding school buses, including the School Pupil Activity Bus (SPAB), “shall be instructed in an age-appropriate manner” on the proper fastening and release of seat belts. The new code, which does not apply to special needs students or in cases of emergency evacuation, describes the appropriate positioning of the lap-shoulder belt snug across the shoulder and chest, away from the neck, and low and tight across the pelvis area, not the stomach. When not in use, “passenger restraint systems shall be fully retracted into the retractors so that no loose webbing is visible, or stored in a safe manner per the school bus manufacturer’s instructions.”

2003
On 20 June 2003 the European Commission adopted a Directive making installation of safety belt systems in all types of vehicles placed on the market effective in July 2004. Whereas only private cars have had to be fitted with seat belts to date, this requirement will extend in future to all other categories, particularly minibuses, coaches, light commercial vehicles, lorries and the like. It will affect nearly two million commercial vehicles every year. Click here for further details.

Directive 2003/20/EC [PDF or HTML] of the European Council and the European Parliament, adopted on 8 April 2003, amended 1991 Council Directive 91/671/EEC, and will, when it comes into force in Member States, require the use of seat belts, where provided, in all vehicle categories (M1, N1, M2, N2, M3, N3). In addition, under this new directive, children must use appropriate child restrains in passenger cars and light vans (M1, N1).

The C.E.White Co. introduces the Student Safety Seat, an integrated 3-point lap/shoulder belt seats for use in school buses. The company begins working with school bus OEMs to gain final certification of the system.

IMMI of Indiana introduces the SafeGuard seating system. Safeguard offers a 3-point lap/shoulder belt system for application in school buses. Girardin Minibus is the first school bus manufacturer to offer final certification of the occupant restraint system.

IC Corp. offers an optional 3-point lap/shoulder belt system of its own design in the company’s new 2005 CE series of school buses.

2002
The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration publishes School Bus Safety: Crashworthiness Report, its study about the next generation of occupant protection in school buses that Congress ordered in 1998. [large PDF file]. This report is the first to suggest an active occupant restraint system for school buses; previously, compartmentalization offered only a passive occupant restraint system.

2001
The state of California extends implementation of AB 15 that requires lap/shoulder belts on all new school buses purchased after January 1, 2002. The new law, SB 568, requires lap/shoulder restraint systems in new Type 2 small school buses by July 1, 2004, and lap/shoulder restraint systems in new Type 1 large school buses by July 1, 2005. The measures only affect new school buses procured after those dates. Retrofitting would not be permitted.

The country of England requires compliance with an EU Directive that minibuses, coaches and buses (apart from those designed for urban use with standing passengers) first used on or after 1 October 2001 must have seat belts fitted by the manufacturer. The seat belts must be fitted in all forward and rearward facing seats. Moreover, children on organized trips in minibuses and coaches must be provided with forward facing seats with seat belts. In minibuses and coaches first used on or after 1 October 2001, which have seat belts and anchorages that meet the EU Directive requirements, children may also be provided with rearward facing seats with seat belts.

2000
Minnesota State Legislature enacts the Education Omnibus bill which includes language authorizing seat belts installed in new school buses. The bill mandates education of proper use, model training and addresses liability issues. See Minnesota Seat Belts in School Buses Bill H.F No. 935. No funds were appropriated to implement the law, and the appropriation expired June 30, 2001.

1999
Florida enacts law requiring that “each school bus that is purchased new after December 31, 2000, and used to transport students in grades pre-K through 12 must be equipped with safety belts or with any other restraint system approved by the Federal Government ….” The law does not require school buses purchased prior to December 31, 2000 to be equipped with safety belts. Legislation also required 28″ seat backs. See Title XXIII Motor Vehicles Chapter 316 Florida State Uniform Traffic Control 316.6145

California enacts law requiring improved occupant restraint systems on large school buses. California law specifically mentions “lap and shoulder restraints.” For new buses purchased after January 1, 2002.

Louisiana enacts law requiring school buses used to transport children be equipped with occupant restraint systems. The law to become effective June 30, 2004.

Officials in Louisiana, California and Florida announce they will wait for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to complete an occupant protection study before deciding the exact system to use.

1998
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration sends a report to Congress titled, “School Bus Safety: Safe Passage for America’s Children,” announcing a two-year research project to develop the next generation of occupant protection systems for school buses. The study is expected to be complete by the July 2000.

1996
Economic Commission of Europe approves amendments to three directives relating to: [1] seat belts, [2] seat belt anchorages, and [3] seat strength for Minibuses and Medium and Large Coaches. Requires 3-point seat belts in all seating positions of minibuses (vehicles of less than 3.5 tonnes) and at least 2-point belts.

1995
Great Britain requires seat belts on mini buses used in school transportation

1992
New Jersey becomes the second state in the nation to require seat belts on large school buses. Use is mandatory. Legislation also required 28″ seat backs.

1991
The European Union adopted Directive 91/671/EC on 16 December 1991 imposing the compulsory use of safety belts in all seats, where fitted, starting January 1993. The Directive applies to vehicles of the categories M1 (i.e. private cars) and N1 (light vans), and also the category M2 (minibuses, i.e. buses weighing less than 5 tons ). This included minibuses used in school transport. The directive also applies to vehicles weighing less than 3,5 tonnes or minibuses containing specially designated standing areas. This Directive does not cover buses and coaches carrying more than 9 persons, but there are requirements regarding the fitting or installation of seat belts for these vehicles.

1987
New York becomes the first state in the nation to require two-point seat belts on large school buses. Use of the lap belts is not made mandatory but is dependent on individual school districts adopting a policy requiring their use. Legislation also required 28″ seat backs.

1986
A NHTSA study conducted by Gardner, Plitt, and Goldhammer concludes that whether seat belts were installed on school buses had little effect on a student’s use of seat belts in personal vehicles. Students reported that parents and mandatory seat belt laws played a significant role on their seat belt use in personal vehicles.

1985
Nova Scotia makes belt use mandatory, front and rear

Norway makes rear seat belt use mandatory in vehicles registered after 1/84 (front seat use mandatory since 9/75)

New York makes belt use mandatory, front and rear (in rear for persons 10 years or older)

Mercedes-Benz introduces driver side air bag with knee bolster (in addition to pre-tensioned 3-point belts) in U.S. market

1984
Austria makes belt use mandatory in rear for cars with vehicle approval after 1/84 (front seat use mandatory since 7/76)

West Germany makes rear seat belt use mandatory in cars manufactured since 5/79 (mandatory use in front since 1/76)

Seven of Canada’s 10 provinces by this time require occupants of moving vehicles to use whatever set belt system is available to them

1983
New Brunswick and Ontario make belt use mandatory, front and rear (front seat use mandatory in Ontario since 1/76)

Saab introduces 3-point in rear in all models sold in U.S. (had provided “for years” in Scandinavia and Europe)

1981
NHTSA rescinds requirements for eventual installation of passive restraint systems

1980
Mercedes-Benz provides driver side airbag and knee bolster, and pre-tensioner an all 3-point belts

1979
France mandates seat belts in rear: either 3 lap belts or 3-points at outboard positions and lap belt at center (most manufacturers choose latter option)

New Zealand requires 3-point belts, front and rear outboard positions

1977
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 222 “School Bus Passenger Seating and Occupant Protection” promulgated through rulemaking by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The European Union adopted a directive about the fitting of occupant restraints.

1976
The first European Union Directive concerning seat belt anchorage was adopted in this year.

1975
Sweden requires 3-point, ELR belts in rear; mandates front use by persons 15 and older

1974
GM becomes the first automaker to develop and offer air bags in production vehicles. Offers dual air-bag-equipped Cadillacs, Oldsmobiles and Buicks, hoping to sell 100,000 a year. Drops effort three years later after selling only 10,000 ***

Mercedes-Benz provides ELR on 3-point belts in midsize (300 Series) cars

Sweden requires ELR on belts in front seats

NHTSA requires 3-point belts (i.e., nondetachable shoulder straps) in front outboard positions

U.S. cars provide “vehicle-sensitive” ELRs in front outboard shoulder belts (lap belt portion has ALR)

First production tension relief device on U.S. vehicle.

1973
Mercedes-Benz provides ELR on 3-point belts in large (“S” class) cars

General Motors manufactures 1,000 Chevrolets equipped with experimental air bags and provides them to fleet customers for testing

An Oldsmobile Toronado, first car with a passenger air bag intended for sale, rolls off assembly line

1972
NHTSA begins rulemaking leading to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 222: Occupant Seating Protection in School Buses

Volvo introduces adjustable B-post anchor point (not standard) to permit better fitting of shoulder portion of front lap/shoulder belts

Last Australian state law requiring belt use, front and rear, goes into effect 1/1

New Zealand requires belt use, front and rear

  1. Germany requires 3-point belts, front and rear

NHTSA requires anchorages for (detachable) shoulder straps for rear outboard (FMVSS 210)

VW displays 3-point belt system with webbing pre-tensioner (Transport 72, Washington, D.C.)

1971
Ford builds experimental air bag fleet

Volvo provides ELRs as standard in rear, all markets

NHTSA amends FMVSS 208 to require passive restraints in front, to be effective 1973

New South Wales requires use of seat belts

1970
Sweden requires belts in rear (diagonal and static allowed; lap-only not approved)

Victoria, Australia requires 3-point belts, front and rear and mandates use, front and rear

1969
Sweden requires 3-point belts of approved type in front

Volvo provides 3-point belt in rear as standard, all markets

Mercedes-Benz adds 3-point belt in rear outboard seats as standard, all markets

Japan requires seat belts, front and rear

Australia requires 3-point belts, front outboard seats, all cars registered since 1965

1968
Volvo provides emergency locking retractors (ELRs) as standard in front, in Sweden

Great Britain requires retrofit of 3-point belts in front in MY 65 and newer cars

Many U.S. cars this MY provide ALRs.

1967
Society of Automotive Engineers study at UCLA leads to calls for two-point seat belts, high back seats and other occupant protection strategies for school buses.

U.S. manufacturers provide lap belts at rear outboard positions (MY 1967)

NHSB issues initial Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 208, 209, setting standards for lap and shoulder belts in front outboard positions, lap belts in all other positions (to take effect 1/1/68 and 3/67, respectively)

Volvo introduces 3-point belt in rear as standard, certain markets

Great Britain requires 3-points in front outboard positions

Australian standard for belt anchorages issued

South Australia requires seat belts (lap belts OK) at front outboard positions

1966
Swedish regulations prohibit 2-point cross-chest diagonal belt at seats next to a door, and Y-type of 3-point belt altogether

U.S. Commerce Dept. issues revised seat belt standard (SAE j4c)

U.S. Congress passes P.L. 89-593, establishing National Highway Safety Bureau (now NHTSA)

Sports Car Club of America requires competing drivers to wear a shoulder harness as well as a lap belt (perhaps 1967, according to ref. 131)

1965
Rules for School Bus Passengers were published in the NSC Fleet Safety newsletter.
U.S. Commerce Dept. issues first seat belt standard (adopted SAE standard)

SAE issues revised standard (J4c)

All U.S. manufacturers providing lap belts in front outboard positions by this time

Some U.S. manufacturers provide automatic locking retractors (ALRs) in front seat belts

1964
About half the U.S. States require seat belt anchorages at front outboard

Most U.S. manufactures provide lap belts at front outboard seat positions

Victoria and South Australia require seat belt anchorages at front outboard positions in new cars (either 2- or 3-point permitted)

1963
Questions of whether to install seat belts in school buses were answered by the director of Florida’s State Department of Education at the National Safety Council’s Division Midyear Meeting.

Volvo introduces 3-point belt in front as standard, in USA

Some U.S. manufacturers provide lap belts in front outboard positions (23 States have laws to requires belts in front, most effective 1/64)

SAE issues revised standard (J4a)

U.S. Congress passes P.L. 88-201 to allow Commerce Department to issue mandatory standards for seat belts sold in interstate commerce

1962
Virginia Trailways reported to be the first U.S. bus company to install passenger safety belts.

Association for Aid to Crippled Children and Consumers Union sponsor landmark conference on “Passenger Car Design and Highway Safety” with occupant protection the sole theme

Six U.S. States require front outboard seat belt anchors

U.S. manufacturers provide seat belt anchors in front outboard as standard

1961
SAE issues standard for U.S. seat belts (J4)

New York requires seat belt anchors at front outboard seat positions (effective January 1, 1962)

Wisconsin requires seat belts in front outboard seat positions

Standards Association of Australia issues standard for “safety belts and harness assemblies”

1960
New York again considers and again rejects seat belt bill

1959
Volvo introduces 3-point belt in front as standard, in Sweden

New York considers and rejects bill to require seat belts in new cars sold in State

1958
Nils Bohlin, a design engineer with Volvo in Sweden, patents the “Basics of Proper Restraint Systems for Car Occupants,” better known as a three-point safety belt. The device comprises two straps, a lap strap and shoulder strap. **

Volvo provides anchors for 2-point diagonal belts in rear

1957
Volvo provides anchors for 2-point diagonal belts in front

Special Subcommittee on Traffic Safety, U.S. House of Representatives, opens hearings on effectiveness of seat belts in automobiles

1956
Volvo markets 2-point cross-chest diagonal belt as accessory

For and Chrysler offer lap belts in front as option on some models

Ford begins 2-year ad campaign based on safety, focusing heavily on belts

1955
California Vehicle Code is amended to require State approval of seat belts before their sale or use

National Safety Council, American College of Surgeons, International Association of Chiefs of Police vote to support installation of lap belts in all automobiles

Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) appoints Motor Vehicle Seat Belt Committee

1954
Sports Car Club of America requires competing drivers to wear lap belts

American Medical Association House of Delegates votes to support installation of lap belts in all automobiles

1953
Colorado State Medical Society publishes policy supporting installation of lap belts in all automobiles

1930s
Several U.S. physicians equip their own cars with lap belts and begin urging manufacturers to provide them in all new cars

Sources:

Dates and developments from 1977 to present pertinent to occupant protection in school buses, added by School Transportation News.

* HAR NTSB/SS-86-03, NTSB Safety Study: “Performance of Lap Belts in 26 Frontal Crashes,” pp. 225-230

** “TRAFFIC SAFETY,” National Safety Council, March/April 1998

motorvista: History of Airbags

*** GM Canada website

The post The History of Seat Belt Development appeared first on School Transportation News.

Pollsters are turning to AI this election season

voting sign/polling place/election

As response rates drop, pollsters are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence to determine what voters are thinking ahead of Election Day, not only asking the questions but sometimes to help answer them. (Stephen Maturen | Getty Images)

Days after President Joe Biden announced he would not be seeking re-election, and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, polling organization Siena College Research Institute sought to learn how “persuadable” voters were feeling about Harris.

In their survey, a 37-year-old Republican explained that they generally favored Trump for his ability to “get [things] done one way or another.”

“Who do you think cares about people like you? How do they compare in terms of caring about people like you?” the pollster asked.

“That’s where I think Harris wins, I lost a lot of faith in Trump when he didn’t even contact the family of the supporter who died at his rally,” the 37-year-old said.

Pollsters pressed this participant and others across the political spectrum to further explain their stances, and examine the nuance behind choosing a candidate. The researchers saw in real time how voters may sway depending on the issue, and asked follow-up questions about their belief systems.

But the “persuadable” voters weren’t talking to a human pollster. They were conversing with an AI chatbot called Engage.

The speed in which election cycles move, coupled with a steep drop of people participating in regular phone or door-to-door polls, have caused pollsters to turn to artificial intelligence for insights, both asking the questions and sometimes even answering them

Why do we poll? 

The history of polling voters in presidential races goes back 200 years, to the 1824 race which ultimately landed John Quincy Adams in the White House. White men began polling each other at events leading up to the election, and newspapers began reporting the results, though they didn’t frame the results as predictive of the outcome of the election.

In modern times, polling for public opinion has become a business. Research centers, academic institutions and news conglomerates themselves have been conducting polls during election season for decades. Though their accuracy has limitations, the practice is one of the only ways to gauge how Americans may be thinking before they vote.

Polling plays a different role for different groups, said Rachel Cobb, an assistant professor of political science and legal studies at Suffolk University. For campaign workers, polling groups of voters helps provide insight into the issues people care about the most right now, and informs how candidates talk about those issues. It’s why questions at a presidential debate usually aren’t a surprise to candidates — moderators tend to ask questions about the highest-polling topics that week.

For news outlets, polls help give context to current events and give anchors numbers to illustrate a story. Constant polling also helps keep a 24-hour news cycle going.

And for regular Americans, poll results help them gauge where the race is, and either activate or calm their nerves, depending on if their candidate is polling favorably.

But Cobb said she, like many of her political science colleagues, has observed a drop in responses to more traditional style of polling. It’s much harder and more expensive for pollsters to do their job, because people aren’t answering their phones or their front doors.

“The time invested in getting the appropriate kind of balance of people that you need in order to determine accuracy has gotten greater and so and they’ve had to come up with more creative ways to get them,” Cobb said. “At the same time, our technological capacity has increased.”

How AI is assisting in polling?

The speed of information has increased exponentially with social media and 24-hour news cycles, and polls have had to keep up, too. Though they bring value in showing insights for a certain group of people, their validity is fleeting because of that speed, Cobb said. Results are truly only representative of that moment in time, because one breaking news story could quickly change public opinion.

That means pollsters have to work quickly, or train artificial intelligence to keep up.

Leib Litman, co-CEO and chief research officer of CloudResearch, which created the chatbot tool Engage, said AI has allowed them to collect answers so much faster than before.

“We’re able to interview thousands of people within a matter of a couple hours, and then all of that data that we get, all those conversations, we’re also able to analyze it, and derive the insights very, very quickly,” he said.

Engage was developed about a year ago and can be used in any industry where you need to conduct market research via interviews. But it’s become especially useful in this election cycle as campaigns attempt to learn how Americans are feeling at any given moment. The goal isn’t to replace human responses with AI, rather to use AI to reach more people, Litman said.

But some polling companies are skipping interviewing and instead relying on something called “sentiment analysis AI” to analyze publically available data and opinions. Think tank Heartland Forward recently worked with AI-powered polling group Aaru to determine the public perception of artificial intelligence.

The prediction AI company uses geographical and demographic data of an area and scrapes publicly available information, like tweets or voting records, to simulate respondents of a poll. The algorithm uses all this information to make assertions about how a certain demographic group may vote or how they may answer questions about political issues.

This type of poll was a first for Heartland Forward, and its executive vice president Angie Cooper said they paired the AI-conducted poll with in-person gatherings where they conducted more traditional polls.

“When we commissioned the poll, we didn’t know what the results were going to yield,” she said. “What we heard in person closely mirrored the poll results.”

Sentiment Analysis

The Aaru poll is an example of sentiment analysis AI, which uses machine learning and large language models to analyze the meaning and tone behind text. It includes training an algorithm to not just understand literally what’s in a body of text, but also to seek out hidden messaging or context, like humans do in conversation.

The general public started interacting with this type of AI in about 2010, said Zohaib Ahmed, founder of Resemble AI, which specializes in voice generation AI. Sentiment analysis AI is the foundation behind search engines that can read a request and make recommendations, or to get your Alexa device to fulfill a command.

Between 2010 and 2020, though, the amount of information collected on the internet has increased exponentially. There’s so much more data for AI models to process and learn from, and technologists have taught it to process contextual, “between-the-lines” information.

The concept behind sentiment analysis is already well understood by pollsters, says Bruce Schneier, a security technologist and lecturer at Harvard University’s Kennedy School. In June, Schneier and other researchers published a look into how AI was playing a role in political polling. 

Most people think polling is just asking people questions and recording their answers, Schneier said, but there’s a lot of “math” between the questions people answer and the poll results.

“All of the work in polling is turning the answers that humans give into usable data,” Schneier said.

You have to account for a few things: people lie to pollsters, certain groups may have been left out of a poll, and response rates are overall low. You’re also applying polling statistics to the answers to come up with consumable data. All of this is work that humans have had to do themselves before technology and computing helped speed up the process.

In the Harvard research, Schneier and the other authors say they believe AI will get better at anticipating human responses, and knowing when it needs human intervention for more accurate context. Currently, they said, humans are our primary respondents to polls, and computers fill in the gaps. In the future, though, we’ll likely see AI filling out surveys and humans filling in the gaps.

“I think AI should be another tool in the pollsters mathematical toolbox, which has been getting more complex for the past several decades,” Schneier said.

Pros and cons of AI-assisted polling 

AI polling methods bring pollsters more access and opportunity to gauge public reaction. Those who have begun using it in their methodology said that they’ve struggled to get responses from humans organically, or they don’t have the time and resources to conduct in-person or telephone polling.

Being interviewed by an anonymous chatbot may also provide more transparent answers for controversial political topics. Litman said personal, private issues such as health care or abortion access are where their chatbot “really shines.” Women, in particular, have reported that they feel more comfortable sharing their true feelings about these topics when talking to a chatbot, he said.

But, like all methodology around polling, it’s possible to build flaws into AI-assisted polling.

The Harvard researchers ran their own experiment asking ChatGPT 3.5 questions about the political climate, and found shortcomings when it asked about U.S. intervention in the Ukraine war. Because the AI model only had access to data up through 2021, the answers missed all of the current context about Russia’s invasion beginning in 2022.

Sentiment analysis AI may also struggle with text that’s ambiguous, and it can’t be counted on for reviewing developing information, Ahmed said. For example, the X timeline following one of the two assassination attempts of Trump probably included favorable or supportive messages from politicians across the aisle. An AI algorithm might read the situation and conclude that all of those people are very pro-Trump.

“But it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re navigating towards Donald Trump,” Ahmed said. “It just means, you know, there’s sympathy towards an event that’s happened, right? But that event is completely missed by the AI. It has no context of that event occurring, per se.”

Just like phone-call polling, AI-assisted polling can also potentially leave whole groups of people out of surveys, Cobb said. Those who aren’t comfortable using a chatbot, or aren’t very active online will be excluded from public opinion polls if pollsters move most of their methods online.

“It’s very nuanced,” Ahmed said of AI polling. “I think it can give you a pretty decent, high-level look at what’s happening, and I guarantee that it’s being used by election teams to understand their position in the race, but we have to remember we exist in bubbles, and it can be misleading.”

Both the political and technology experts agreed that as with most other facets of our lives, AI has found its way into polling and we likely won’t look back. Technologists should aim to further train AI models to understand human sentiment, they say, and pollsters should continue to pair it with human responses for a fuller scope of public opinion.

“Science of polling is huge and complicated,” Schneier said. “And adding AI to the mix is another tiny step down a pathway we’ve been walking for a long time using, you know, fancy math combined with human data.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

A Strategic Roadmap for Decarbonizing the U.S. Ethanol Industry

Emergence of Ethanol as a Key Enabler of the Transition to Low-Carbon Fuels

The U.S. clean energy transition requires a transition to both carbon-free electricity and clean fuels. Ethanol has been the leader in the move to low-carbon fuels, as long-standing attempts to develop other advanced low-carbon liquid fuels (cellulosic biofuels, algae derived fuels, e-fuels, etc.) have not succeeded in achieving scalable production at an acceptable cost.

Since 2005, the overall carbon intensity (CI) a of ethanol has decreased by 23%. Ethanol’s CI today is 53.6 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule of ethanol produced (gCO2e/MJ), 42% lower than unblended gasoline. This has enabled blends of ethanol and gasoline to reduce on-road vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by over 544 million tons of CO2.

This reality leads the EFI Foundation (EFIF) to present in this report a strategic roadmap to further decarbonize the U.S. ethanol industry through a portfolio of actions that can help it reach a goal of net-zero carbon intensity by midcentury, and several additional options that can achieve net-negative carbon intensity. The strategic roadmap will enable ethanol to play a central role in decarbonizing the transportation sector, which accounted for 29% of total U.S. GHG emissions in 2021.

Continued decarbonization of ethanol, combined with higher blend levels, can complement the shift to electrification of light-duty vehicles—both battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs)—in achieving further reductions in 2030 and beyond. Conversion of ethanol into aviation fuel will allow blends of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) at a significant scale. Further decarbonization of the U.S. ethanol industry also will strengthen its contribution to the U.S. economy, particularly to the rural economy.

In 2023, the United States produced 15.6 billion gallons of ethanol, making it the world’s leading producer and exporter of ethanol, responsible for producing over half of the global supply. The ethanol industry accounted for 28% of farm GDP, contributing $57 billion to total U.S. GDP in 2022. The ethanol industry supports more than 420,000 jobs.

Corn production for ethanol is a high value-added proposition—ethanol producers use about 30% to 40% of the U.S. corn crop, spending $38 billion, but require only about 1.5% of total U.S. farmland (an estimated 13.9 million acres). Since 2001, the U.S. food crops industry overall has maintained relatively consistent land use for planting while yields have continued to increase, indicating that corn is not in direct competition for acreage with other food crops. This report does not assume any increase in corn planting for ethanol production.

The post A Strategic Roadmap for Decarbonizing the U.S. Ethanol Industry appeared first on Growth Energy.

Health and farmworker advocates urge ban of herbicide linked to Parkinson’s

Scott Faber of the Environmental Working Group speaks Tuesday, Sept. 17, at a Capitol Hill briefing urging the EPA to ban the use of the herbicide paraquat dichloride to protect farmworkers. (Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom.)

WASHINGTON — Public health advocates and farmworkers called for a federal ban on a toxic herbicide they say led to their Parkinson’s disease during a Tuesday briefing for congressional staffers.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will determine next year if the herbicide, paraquat dichloride, should have its license renewed for another 15 years. The herbicide is used for controlling weeds in agriculture settings. It’s currently banned in more than 70 countries and has several serious health conditions it’s linked to, such as cancer and increases the likelihood of developing Parkinson’s disease.

Nora Jackson, a former farmworker of Indiana, said that her cousin, whose job it was to spray paraquat on farms, developed Parkinson’s at 55 years old. Signs of Parkinson’s usually appear around 60 years old.

“Farmworkers often have to do extremely risky jobs … but it doesn’t have to be that way,” Jackson said. “It is possible to have an agriculture system that does not depend so heavily on paraquat and it does not have to be a pesticide that puts so many people’s lives at risk.”

The disease has drastically affected his life, Jackson added.

“He now relies heavily on medication and uses a walking stick to be able to walk every day,” she said.

The briefing on the health risks of paraquat was hosted by the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, Alianza Nacional de Campesinas, which is an alliance for farmworker women, and the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit that produces research and advocates for public health.

The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research was established by the actor who starred in blockbusters Back to the Future, Doc Hollywood and Teen Wolf. Fox was diagnosed with early onset Parkinson’s at the age of 29.

Ban necessary

The EPA has until Jan. 17 to make a decision on paraquat’s future availability.

Advocates at Tuesday’s event called for the agency to deny paraquat’s license renewal, saying other regulations to reduce exposure to the herbicide have come up short.

“Keep in mind that people have been using this chemical as directed, and are still developing Parkinson’s disease,” Scott Faber, Environmental Working Group’s senior vice president of government affairs, said. “So putting more restrictions on how it’s used, when it’s used, what equipment you use, and so on, is not the answer.”

Parkinson’s disease affects the nervous system and causes unintended shakiness, trouble with balance and stiffness. There is no cure.

The California Legislature is moving to ban the herbicide. 

David Jilbert, of Valley City, Ohio, a former farmworker with a background in engineering, was diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 2021.

“As a longtime environmental engineer, I understood the importance of personal protection equipment, and I particularly followed all safety protocols,” he said.

He sold his vineyard in 2019 because he wasn’t feeling well and his hands were beginning to move slowly.

“My diagnosis changed everything, affecting every aspect of my life, from physical capabilities to emotional wellbeing, financial stability,” he said. “There is no cure for Parkinson’s. It is degenerative and it will only get worse, not better.”

Charlene Tenbrink of Winters, California, was diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 2020. She worked on her family farm from 1993 to 2000 where she would mix, load and spray paraquat.

Tenbrink said she felt let down by the federal government because she was unaware of the health risks that paraquat could pose.

“We’ve been trying to change this for a long time,” she said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

Study: EV charging stations boost spending at nearby businesses

Charging stations for electric vehicles are essential for cleaning up the transportation sector. A new study by MIT researchers suggests they’re good for business, too.

The study found that, in California, opening a charging station boosted annual spending at each nearby business by an average of about $1,500 in 2019 and about $400 between January 2021 and June 2023. The spending bump amounts to thousands of extra dollars annually for nearby businesses, with the increase particularly pronounced for businesses in underresourced areas.

The study’s authors hope the research paints a more holistic picture of the benefits of EV charging stations, beyond environmental factors.

“These increases are equal to a significant chunk of the cost of installing an EV charger, and I hope this study sheds light on these economic benefits,” says lead author Yunhan Zheng MCP ’21, SM ’21, PhD ’24, a postdoc at the Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology (SMART). “The findings could also diversify the income stream for charger providers and site hosts, and lead to more informed business models for EV charging stations.”

Zheng’s co-authors on the paper, which was published today in Nature Communications, are David Keith, a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management; Jinhua Zhao, an MIT professor of cities and transportation; and alumni Shenhao Wang MCP ’17, SM ’17, PhD ’20 and Mi Diao MCP ’06, PhD ’10.

Understanding the EV effect

Increasing the number of electric vehicle charging stations is seen as a key prerequisite for the transition to a cleaner, electrified transportation sector. As such, the 2021 U.S. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act committed $7.5 billion to build a national network of public electric vehicle chargers across the U.S.

But a large amount of private investment will also be needed to make charging stations ubiquitous.

“The U.S. is investing a lot in EV chargers and really encouraging EV adoption, but many EV charging providers can’t make enough money at this stage, and getting to profitability is a major challenge,” Zheng says.

EV advocates have long argued that the presence of charging stations brings economic benefits to surrounding communities, but Zheng says previous studies on their impact relied on surveys or were small-scale. Her team of collaborators wanted to make advocates’ claims more empirical.

For their study, the researchers collected data from over 4,000 charging stations in California and 140,000 businesses, relying on anonymized credit and debit card transactions to measure changes in consumer spending. The researchers used data from 2019 through June of 2023, skipping the year 2020 to minimize the impact of the pandemic.

To judge whether charging stations caused customer spending increases, the researchers compared data from businesses within 500 meters of new charging stations before and after their installation. They also analyzed transactions from similar businesses in the same time frame that weren’t near charging stations.

Supercharging nearby businesses

The researchers found that installing a charging station boosted annual spending at nearby establishments by an average of 1.4 percent in 2019 and 0.8 percent from January 2021 to June 2023.

While that might sound like a small amount per business, it amounts to thousands of dollars in overall consumer spending increases. Specifically, those percentages translate to almost $23,000 in cumulative spending increases in 2019 and about $3,400 per year from 2021 through June 2023.

Zheng says the decline in spending increases over the two time periods might be due to a saturation of EV chargers, leading to lower utilization, as well as an overall decrease in spending per business after the Covid-19 pandemic and a reduced number of businesses served by each EV charging station in the second period. Despite this decline, the annual impact of a charging station on all its surrounding businesses would still cover approximately 11.2 percent of the average infrastructure and installation cost of a standard charging station.

Through both time frames, the spending increases were highest for businesses within about a football field’s distance from the new stations. They were also significant for businesses in disadvantaged and low-income areas, as designated by California and the Justice40 Initiative.

“The positive impacts of EV charging stations on businesses are not constrained solely to some high-income neighborhoods,” Wang says. “It highlights the importance for policymakers to develop EV charging stations in marginalized areas, because they not only foster a cleaner environment, but also serve as a catalyst for enhancing economic vitality.”

Zheng believes the findings hold a lesson for charging station developers seeking to improve the profitability of their projects.

“The joint gas station and convenience store business model could also be adopted to EV charging stations,” Zheng says. “Traditionally, many gas stations are affiliated with retail store chains, which enables owners to both sell fuel and attract customers to diversify their revenue stream. EV charging providers could consider a similar approach to internalize the positive impact of EV charging stations.”

Zheng also says the findings could support the creation of new funding models for charging stations, such as multiple businesses sharing the costs of construction so they can all benefit from the added spending.

Those changes could accelerate the creation of charging networks, but Zheng cautions that further research is needed to understand how much the study’s findings can be extrapolated to other areas. She encourages other researchers to study the economic effects of charging stations and hopes future research includes states beyond California and even other countries.

“A huge number of studies have focused on retail sales effects from traditional transportation infrastructure, such as rail and subway stations, bus stops, and street configurations,” Zhao says. “This research provides evidence for an important, emerging piece of transportation infrastructure and shows a consistently positive effect on local businesses, paving the way for future research in this area.”

The research was supported, in part, by the Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology (SMART) and the Singapore National Research Foundation. Diao was partially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China.

© Image: iStock

"The joint gas station and convenience store business model could also be adopted to EV charging stations," Yunhan Zheng says.

Upcoming Farm Labor Conference Tackles Critical Issues

Although critical to the nation’s food security, farm work is potentially hazardous, farmworkers receive lower wages when compared with nonsupervisory workers outside agriculture, and many hired farm workers lack legal work authorization and access to basic public services. For the United States to remain competitive as a producer of fruit, vegetables, and other labor-intensive commodities both private and government institutions will need to accelerate adaptation to a changing landscape of farm labor.

An upcoming conference on farm labor seeks to strengthen ongoing farm labor research by convening and developing a network of researchers and stakeholders. The Changing Landscape of Farm Labor Conditions in the United States: What the Future Holds and How to Prepare for It conference will take place September 17 to 19, 2024, in Santa Cruz, California.

The conference is presented by the USDA Economic Research Service and Farm Foundation. It will cover four key themes: trends in the farm labor force, including worker migration and the H-2A Temporary Agricultural Program; labor costs, farm worker conditions, and workforce development.

Visit https://farmfoundation.swoogo.com/farmlabor for more information and to register.

The post Upcoming Farm Labor Conference Tackles Critical Issues appeared first on Farm Foundation.

❌