Motorcycle Fatality Surge Renews Helmet Debate

April 4, 2007 — -- The feel of the wind whipping through your hair or the possibility of your brains splattered on the roadside.

The debate over whether the nation's nearly 6 million motorcycle riders should by law be required to wear helmets is nothing new.

In 1995, Congress repealed a policy that had withheld federal transportation money from states that did not have mandatory helmet laws. But following that action, a steady and significant increase in the number of annual motorcycle fatalities -- including in five states that since have repealed mandatory helmet laws -- has renewed interest into what for some is a civil liberties dispute.

"We have been successful in reducing the fatality rate for passenger vehicles, but that success has been negated by the increase in motorcycle fatalities," said Ray Tyson, a spokesman for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The number of motorcycle fatalities has more than doubled, from 2,227 in 1995 to 4,553 in 2005, according to the latest data available from the NHTSA. And while it's true there are more bikes on the road, the fatality rate has also increased by nearly 13 percent.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the majority of the deadly crashes involved riders who were not wearing helmets.

During the same period, the fatality rate among passenger cars has dipped more than 20 percent, while the percentage of deaths in light truck crashes is also down.

The problem, according to advocates of helmet laws, is that one-sided, well-organized lobbying at the state level -- where for now, this issue is primarily legislated -- have largely hampered the creation of new helmet laws or the strengthening of existing ones.

Of the 50 states, 20 maintain helmet laws for all riders, while 27 require helmets for select rider groups -- typically those under 18 years old. Colorado, Illinois and Iowa currently have no helmet laws.

"It's pretty much a single-issue lobby," said Barbara Harsha, executive director of the Governors Highway Safety Association. "They're very well-organized and they've become very adept at working state legislatures."

"It's no longer guys who show up with tattoos and leather," she said. "They show up in business suits."

Harsha laid out the practical arguments -- such as the taxpayer burden when an uninsured and helmetless rider's crash requires expensive surgery. She also described the emotional toll on families and friends who loved ones who could have been saved by helmets.

In many ways, the helmet debate has been taken off the table at the federal level, Harsha said, describing $25 million distributed by Congress to states in 2005 for motorcycle training and education that cannot be spent on promoting helmet use.

And to groups that advocate against mandatory helmet laws -- such as state chapters of the Alliance of Bikers Aimed Toward Education -- that's exactly the way it should be: The government should stay out of a motorcycle rider's personal decision-making.

The Motorcycle Safety Foundation, made up of 11 motorcycle manufacturers, focuses its efforts on rider education and training instead of specific mandates, such as helmet use.

"We're not about supporting helmet laws," said Robert Gladden, a project manager for MSF. "We're about supporting good decisions. It ultimately comes down to the rider's choice on the gear they're going to wear."

Gladden said his organization knows that helmets work, but he also sees a passionate group of motorcyclists who aren't going to back away from defending what they consider a civil liberty.

"The topic is not going to go away," Gladden said. "People who ride motorcycles are very passionate."