Obama Doesn't Get MADD, Even

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago
obama doesn t get madd even

There’s a clever headline in there somewhere. Meanwhile, Automotive News [sub] reports that the Obama administration has abandoned plans to nominate the CEO of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) to head the National Highway Safety Transportation Administration (NHTSA). Although neither the White House nor Charles Hurley’s MADD men (and women) are saying Jack about the decision, it appears Hurley ran afoul of . . . environmentalists. “His potential nomination had been criticized by environmentalists such as Dan Becker, director of the Safe Climate Campaign. Becker cited Hurley’s work at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in the 1990s, when he said Hurley backed car companies that were fighting attempts to reduce vehicle size to improve fuel economy.” I guess they forget that TTAC took Hurley to task for his support of reintroducing the double-nickel speed limit, his close ties to the red light camera industry and his insistence that piloting a vehicle with a .04 BAC constitutes drunk driving. Still, the end result is what counts. Oh, and I nominate Bill Broadhead for the job.

Join the conversation
4 of 11 comments
  • Johnthacker Johnthacker on May 13, 2009

    Ah, so the safety-above-all guy ran into trouble with the environment-above-all people. Well, take what you can get, I suppose. Both are sets of people that don't like to admit that life has tradeoffs.

  • Lutonmoore Lutonmoore on May 13, 2009

    Glad to hear it.

  • F_Porsche F_Porsche on May 14, 2009

    sweet bentley!

  • Mitchim Mitchim on May 18, 2009

    @chuckgoolsbee Wow! Someone who gets it. The Law even here in Canada has gone so far the otherway its sick. I am too young to remember when the cops would tell you to drive straight home if there was boozing going on. We gradually started saying that this was not OK. Fine. I can't beleave that it is so far gone that you are guilty untill proven innocent. But untill these new laws and tools cause a problem we will have to live with them. (automatic loss of license after 2 weeks, and impounding of auto on the spot). There has to be some great examples of how this new system is failing. Situation: For example said truck driver loses license for drinking and driving. The matter is settled in court 2 months later (which can be typical). The charged is found innocent. BIG PROBLEM! Who pays for the lost wages he would have made while driving? The cab costs ect... If we are to be held responsable for our driving behavour then the "system" should be held responsible for there errors. I say stop the MADDness but still deal with those found guilty in a REGULAR legal way. Those found guilty for drinking and driving AND making an error while doing so should be slammed hard. I'm not soft on those who error but the what if game is too sticky. rant over