Reconsidering Right on Red: The Debate Intensifies Amid Pedestrian Casualties

7

While en route to a cycling safety event in the Lakeview district of Chicago this past June, Sophee Langerman suffered a collision with an automobile executing a right turn at a red signal. Although Langerman, who was ushering her bicycle through the crosswalk at the time, was fortunate to evade grave injuries, her bicycle was not as lucky, requiring significant repairs. This incident further solidifies her stance against a widely accepted traffic rule permitting drivers to make a right turn at red lights after halting—a rule prevalent across US cities for many years.

The alarming uptick in pedestrian and cyclist casualties has sparked various policy revisions and infrastructural developments. However, the proposition to revoke the right-on-red privilege has sparked considerable debate. Some urban centers in the United States are already acting on the matter, with Washington, D.C.’s City Council endorsing a prohibition on the practice, set to commence in 2025. Chicago’s newly elected Mayor, Brandon Johnson, hinted at limitations on these turns in his preliminary plan, though further details are pending. Ann Arbor, a university city in Michigan, has imposed a prohibition on right turns at red lights within its central region.

Cities like San Francisco have actively taken steps toward outlawing the maneuver throughout the municipality, and others, including Los Angeles, Seattle, and Denver, are considering similar bans.

Langerman, 26, holds a firm belief that drivers should not be left to their discretion in deciding when it’s safe to turn on red, emphasizing the distractions and hurriedness that often impair judgment.

Conversely, Jay Beeber, an executive at the National Motorists Association, which champions drivers’ rights, denounces the outright ban as a misguided solution, unlikely to enhance street safety. He references forthcoming research from the association, which, upon reviewing California’s accident data from 2011 to 2019, discovered an exceedingly low incidence of pedestrian and cyclist fatalities due to right turns on red.

Beeber perceives the burgeoning movement as an initiative to aggravate driving conditions to dissuade people from using cars. Safety proponents, however, argue that official crash data may not fully capture the risk, suggesting an underreporting of such incidents.

The United States, distinct from many other nations, typically permits right turns during a red light. This policy emerged during the 1970s’ energy crisis, with the government cautioning states of potential federal funding repercussions if they forbade right on red, barring exceptional clearly marked situations. Despite the abandonment of other energy-saving measures like the 55 mph speed limit cap, the right-on-red rule has persisted.

Bill Schultheiss, an engineering director at the Toole Design Group, criticizes the policy as poorly conceived. According to him, while the policy might have been justified during the fuel crisis, it was excessively lauded for its potential benefits without sufficient regard for the resulting dangers.

In contrast to most of the nation, New York City has largely refrained from allowing right on red, particularly in congested areas like Manhattan, well-noted by conspicuous signage. However, this was a departure from the norm until Washington, D.C., opted for change.

Advocates for safety, who supported Washington’s policy shift, are gearing up for pushback, especially if cyclists are permitted to perform the ‘Idaho Stop’, allowing them to proceed at red lights post-stop once safety is confirmed.

Jonathan Kincade from the Washington Area Bicyclists Association argues that public opinion may need to be sacrificed for pedestrian safety, underlining the distinct nature of cars and bikes and their disparate consequences in traffic.

Opponents to the ban suggest it will not only inconvenience drivers but could also hinder the efficiency of public transit and freight services. The United Parcel Service, while not formally choosing a side, instructs drivers to minimize left turns, deemed inefficient.

Priya Sarathy Jones of the Fines and Fees Justice Center expresses concern that sanctions from the bans might disproportionately affect drivers of lower income, who are dependent on vehicular commute due to unaffordable proximate housing. She fears increased red-light enforcement might lead to more surveillance cameras, a sensitive subject in the Chicago area, where the red-light camera program has faced severe criticism and legal challenges.

Jones advocates for road infrastructure enhancement as a more effective measure for reducing accidents, rather than punitive policies.

Despite the absence of recent comprehensive studies on casualties caused by right-turning drivers, a report by the Governors Highway Safety Association indicated an unprecedented number of pedestrian fatalities in 2022, with 7,500 reported deaths, the most since 1981. This surge, encompassing all accidents—not solely those from right on red—has been partially ascribed to the prevalence of larger vehicles.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety determined that pedestrians are significantly more at risk of fatal injuries when hit by a right-turning vehicle, especially if it is a pickup truck or SUV, due to larger blind spots and the force of impact from heavier models.

Mike McGinn, the executive director of America Walks and former Seattle mayor, points to the design of these larger vehicles, which instead of causing pedestrians to roll onto the hood, often knock them down and run over them.

While research directly examining the effects of right-on-red policies may be dated, the findings remain a point of contention for both proponents and adversaries of the ban.

A 1994 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report, incorporating crash data from various states, identified hundreds of injuries and a handful of fatalities resulting from right turns at red. Advocates for the ban note that this analysis predates the increase in larger, more hazardous vehicles on the roads.

Nonetheless, Beeber highlights the California study’s findings, asserting that injuries from such accidents are predominantly minor.

Washington state Senator John Lovick, advocating for a more conservative approach, emphasizes the significance of every life and injury. Despite his proposed bill, aimed at forbidding right on red in proximity to schools and parks, failing to advance, Seattle has adopted a policy to limit right on red with the installation of new traffic signals.

Seattle resident Melinda Kasraie recounts the repercussions of a collision with a right-turning car at a red light, which resulted in her requiring knee replacement surgery and leaving her long-term job. The incident has altered her lifestyle and instilled in her a fear of crossing streets. Her experience underlines the profound impact of a momentary delay for drivers, which can cause life-changing injuries for pedestrians.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Right on Red Policy

More about Right on Red Policy

• Pedestrian Safety and Right Turn Policies
• Cities Reconsidering Right on Red
• Right on Red: Urban Policy Debate
• Traffic Regulations and Public Safety
• Advocacy Groups and Traffic Laws
• Historical Context of Traffic Rules
• Economic Impact of Traffic Regulations