Houston Coalition Against Red Light Cameras
USAA Action
As can be seen on our CORREPONDENCES page we have been informed that the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) is uninterested in ending its bias in favor of red light cameras. The United Services Automobile Association (USAA) supports IIHS. This page focuses on our efforts to persuade USAA to end its uncritical endorsement of IIHS’s stand on red light cameras.
LATEST UPDATE 4/29/10
As expected, General Moellering did not reply to my letter of 12/6/09 (mentioned below). I subsequently wrote similar letters to each of the other 15 members of the Board of Directors and received only two acknowledgements that my letter was received. USAA continues to reject my complaint about its support for red light camera enforcement and makes no effort to determine if a majority of its Subscribing Members agree with me on this issue. I have filed a complaint with the Texas Department of Insurance about USAA’s lack of concern about the opinions of its Subscribing Members. TDI has a copy of the following letter.
In a letter received yesterday council for the USAA Attorney In Fact (AIF) asserts that my insistence that the AIF take up my issue is misplaced. He is confident that the Texas Department of Insurance will find no problem with the way USAA deals with complaints such as mine.
The United Services Automobile Association (USAA) is a gigantic member-owned insurance and financial services provider which serves the U.S. Military and their families. USAA Subscribing Membership is restricted to United Services Automobile Association policy holders who are regular or reserve members of all branches of the U.S. Military including the U.S. Coast Guard. Subscribing Membership is retained by all such policy holders even after discharge from service. Spouses of Subscribing Members become Subscribing Members in their own right upon the death of the Subscribing Member. Military family members are not Subscribing Members nor are veterans who join USAA after being discharged. Only Subscribing Members hold a USAA Subscriber’s Savings Account and have voting rights in the Association.
H. F. Van Der Grinten
HCARCL Founder
USAA Subscribing Member
PREVIOUS POSTINGS
USAA, as do many other auto insurance companies, supports the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). IIHS endorses the present methods of using cameras to enforce traffic lights. They falsely claim that red light cameras reduce accidents and save lives. The following exchange of letters resulted in our creation of an online petition to end USAA support for red light cameras.
http://www.petitiononline.com/1109USAA/petition.html
At the USAA annual meeting held in San Antonio on November 21, 2009, the following exchange took place between me and Lt. General John H. Moellering, USA (Ret.), chairman of the USAA board of directors and meeting moderator.
Q. “The USAA supported Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s research on the photo enforcement of traffic lights is clearly flawed. IIHS’s staunch endorsement has unfortunately been very influential in promoting this method of enforcement throughout the country. While these cameras are being used as a source of a lot of revenue they are not increasing safety. They are in fact increasing crashes at traffic lights. What measures are being taken by USA to correct this problem?”
A. “Let me start by saying that about six years ago when I lived in Annapolis, Maryland, I was nailed by one of these red light – one of these traffic cameras at a red light. And my first reaction to it was the same as yours is, I am sure, I was really furious. But then I noticed that I was very careful around red lights from then on. And have been very, very careful and much more careful around red lights since that happened to me. And I think that most people exactly the same thing. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety is an organization that USAA and many other insurance companies support because of the incredibly good research that they do on all kinds of insurance related issues. They have saved countless numbers of lives and they’ve also saved millions and millions of dollars for the membership of this organization because the good work that they have done. Their research has shown conclusively the traffic accidents – red light running – as a result of red light running has been reduced by about 40% wherever those cameras have been installed. And that the – the injuries resulting from those accidents have been reduced as well by about 29%. So we think that the evidence is conclusive that they are a good thing, even though we do not like them, that they are good for us and they’re good for the Association, and so we will continue to support those.”
The good general was slightly in error in assuming that I am motivated by my anger in getting an RLC ticket. Not having ever received one, my anger stems from the knowledge that it is inevitable I will eventually get one given the crap shoot dilemma every driver faces when a green traffic light turns yellow. The numbers sighted by Gen. Moellering apparently come from the discredited so called “Oxnard Study of 2002”. The actual figures from that study claim a violation reduction (not an accident reduction as he stated) of 40%, an overall crash reduction of only 7% and an injury accident reduction of 29%. These numbers were never purported to apply to every location where red light cameras were installed. That study only states, “Because red light cameras can be a permanent component of the transportation infrastructure crash reductions attributed to camera enforcement should be sustainable.” Many subsequent studies have proven that prediction to be false.
In a letter to Gen. Moellering dated 12/6/2009 I provided him with list of 14 references opposed to RLCs which was gleaned from the NMA website (http://www.motorists.org/photoenforce/home/studies/). I hope he reconsiders his position in light of these studies, but I’m not optimistic.
Fourteen Anti-RLC References and Rebuttals
Los Angeles Red Light Cameras Lead To Increased Accidents
Virginia Accidents Increased After Ticket Camera Installation
A Long Term Study of Red-Light Cameras and Accidents
AAA Michigan Study Shows Cameras Aren't Needed
Red-Light-Running Behaviour at Red-Light Camera and Control Intersections
A Response to Unfounded Criticisms of Burkey and Obeng (2004) Made by the IIHS on page 6 of its January 2005
Status Report
http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4001.pdf
http://www.ncat.edu/~burkeym/DOCS/IIHS-Burkey-Response.pdf
University of South Florida Criticism of Oxnard Study
http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/armey/01oxnard.pdf
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/25/2593.asp
Impact of Red-Light Camera Enforcement on Crash Experience - A Synthesis of Highway Practice
Evaluation of the Red-Light-Camera-Enforecement Pilot Project
Development of Guidelines for Identifying and Treating Locations with a Red-Light-Running Problem
Effect of Yellow-Interval Timing on Red-Light-Violation Frequency at Urban Intersections
Virginia DOT Study on Red-Light Cameras – This study shows a definite increase in rear-end crashes and only a possible decrease in angle crashes. It also shows an increase in total injury crashes.
The Red-Light-Running Crisis: Is It Intentional?
Driver Behavior Characteristics at Urban Signalized Intersections
Yellow Light Duration Impact On Driver Response
