This is a guest post by Randy Mullett, vice president of government relations and public affairs for freight transportation and logistics services company Con-way Inc.

Addressing driver distraction has been a major priority for the trucking industry, as we seek ways to improve safety on our nation’s highways. As Scott Belcher points out in his post, there are three basic types of distractions for drivers: visual, manual and cognitive, and texting is one technology that involves all three. Research from a study conducted by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI) shows that drivers take their eyes off the road for an average of 4.6 seconds out of every 6 seconds while texting. At 55 miles per hour, texting drivers will travel the length of a football field, including the end zones, without looking at the road!

The same study found that drivers who texted while driving were 23 times more likely to have a collision.

Even before data from the VTTI study was released just over a year ago, Con-way Freight recognized the danger of texting and instituted a texting ban for all of its 15,000 drivers. Texting is just one of many distractions that drivers face, however. Safety advocates agree that the solution for distracted driving must include upgraded technologies that help warn drivers of impending crashes.

That’s why Con-way Freight joined with the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) for a 10-month field test investigating driver distractions and recording driver behavior using an in-cab camera along with other data gathering tools.

Con-way Freight provided 10 Class-8 commercial freight tractors for the study. Over the course of the study, 18 Con-way Freight drivers operated the trucks out of the company’s Detroit service center as part of its normal business operations, logging 601,844 miles; 22,724 trips; and generating 13,678 hours of data. While the test vehicles were driven, data acquisition systems recorded driver actions and reactions as they went through the course of their trips. UMTRI researchers then analyzed the data to study the effect that the integrated warning system had on driver acceptance and changes in driver behavior.

Key findings from the study include:

· Seven drivers reported the integrated system prevented them from potentially having a crash

· Fifteen out of 18 drivers said they prefer a truck equipped with the integrated safety system and would recommend that their employers purchase such a system

· In terms of satisfaction, drivers rated warnings for lane departures the highest, and second highest in terms of perceived usefulness

· The integrated crash warning system had a statistically significant effect helping drivers maintain lane positions closer to the center

· Overall, drivers responded more quickly to potential rear-end crash scenarios with the system

The results of the study were so compelling that Con-way Freight chose to invest in new safety technologies for our fleet this year, ahead of any government mandate, equipping 1,300 new road tractors. The technologies included an adaptive cruise control system that automatically maintains a safe distance behind the vehicle ahead; a roll stability control system that can sense an impending rollover and warn the driver via an indicator lamp on the dash and even apply brakes if the driver does not act; and an accidental lane departure warning system that sounds an alarm to alert drivers if they are inadvertently driving out of their lane. For our drivers, it was a worthwhile investment to make them better and help improve their safety and those with whom we share the nation’s highways.

While we can never remove all driver distractions, we have the technology to alert drivers to impending crashes and improve safety records significantly. As motor carriers move quickly to implement these safety measures in advance of changing policies, the good news from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) is that trucking safety has improved dramatically since 2004. ATRI’s analysis of data from approximately 260 motor carriers representing 127,000 commercial drivers shows that the total collision rate dropped 11.7 percent from 2004 to 2009. Preventable collisions declined 30.6 percent.

As more and more of these high-tech measures are deployed nationally, we should continue to see a reduction in collisions involving motor carriers and an increase in driver safety. Investment in these technologies can provide real-world, lifesaving results and that’s an investment we are proud to make.

While we will never be able to completely eliminate all distractions from driving, there are things we can do to lower our risk from getting into a distraction-related crash. Similarly, there are policy decisions that can help combat the problem. We commend Secretary LaHood for his leadership in drawing public awareness to this critical safety issue and for advocating for policy solutions.

Drivers should focus on eliminating distractions that take their attention off the road. No one – old, young, or in-between – should be texting while driving. There is simply no way you can drive safely when you’re not looking at the road and don’t have your hands on the wheel. The same can be said for using a cell phone – if you’ve got to take your eyes off the road to find your phone or to dial it, your attention is diverted and your crash risk rises.

Some drivers use hands-free phone devices so that they can keep their hands on the wheel. Many, however, do not. Maintaining control of your vehicle with your hands – not your elbows or knees – is fundamental. We all know that we’ll never get to a point where drivers won’t fiddle with the radio station, or play “I Spy” with the kids on a family trip, but personal grooming or entering data into a navigation system while a car is in motion is dangerous for the driver and all those around her.

Keeping your mind on driving is also critically important. Even if you are using a hands-free phone or talking with a passenger, your attention can be momentarily distracted at the precise moment when it could help you avoid a crash.

Policymakers have options to eliminate the problems of distracted driving. One way to do that is ensure that when people learn to drive, they learn about the dangers of distracted driving. AARP’s Driver Safety Program helps drivers refresh their driving skills and update their knowledge of the rules of the road. The program, and others like it, contain information on distracted driving. Laws and regulations should be enacted to prohibit the most egregious forms of distracted driving. These should cover everyone – those of us who drive our own vehicles as well as commercial drivers who drive for a living, as demonstrated in federal government policies covering texting behind the wheel by both commercial drivers and federal government employees. Once adopted, enforcing distracted and reckless driving laws remains important. Drivers need to know that there will be consequences if they engage in dangerous driving behaviors.

Improving the way roads are designed can also help. Making signage and pavement markings more visible can make it easier for drivers to concentrate on the road. Research has identified design elements that make the roads safer for older drivers. These improvements would benefit everyone who drives, and AARP believes that Congress should include funding to implement these improvements in the next transportation authorization.

There is wide agreement that distracted driving is a serious danger on our roadways. AAA and other safety advocates agree that more needs to be done – more laws, more enforcement, more education, and more research. As increased public attention is placed on the consequences of distracted driving, it’s important that the discussion not be too narrow or be oversimplified. Driver distraction extends far beyond the cell phone and there is not a silver bullet that will ‘fix’ this problem.

AAA has long urged drivers to avoid all forms of distraction behind the wheel and we have engaged in a wide range of outreach activities during the year since the inaugural DOT summit. Legislation and law enforcement remain a key part of our response. Like other dangerous moving violations, distracted driving laws should be primary enforcement and accompanied by visible police enforcement. AAA supports laws to ban the use of all wireless devices by novice or teen drivers and supports the adoption of comprehensive distracted driving laws that create enhanced penalties for drivers who crash or commit traffic violations as a result of being distracted.

While many forms of distraction carry risk, texting while driving is beyond the pale of what should be allowable. That’s why AAA launched a national campaign last year calling on all states to ban text messaging while driving for all motorists. And the latest research tells us that it’s not enough simply to pass a law. We need laws that treat distracted driving like the dangerous moving violation that it is, with real penalties and significant, visible enforcement.

Just as distracted driving is actually myriad distracting activities, it will take a broad range of strategies to get motorists’ attention back on the road where it belongs.

Let me start by taking the unusual step of agreeing with Greg Cohen - don't worry, normal service will resume later. Reducing or eliminating distracted driving is indeed something we can all agree is critical to continue the decline in traffic fatalities recently reported for 2009. Regardless of what we drive and where we drive, distracted driving is a real threat. Reducing that threat is something that we all have a stake in; cyclists and pedestrians can stand beside truck drivers and soccer moms in minivans to address it together, and who knows where that might take us in the future as we actually get to know each other a little better. That started to happen at the "Towards Zero Deaths" meeting in Washington last month. At the state and local level, you will find cycling organizations to be great allies with an impassioned membership ready to work with you to pass tough distracted driving legislation and support the enforcement that must go with it. That started to happen in Florida, Michigan and many other states this year.

Where we part company with Greg is being willing to accept that some level of distracted driving is acceptable and inevitable - and that therefore we should focus on making vehicles and roadways that are OK to crash on. I'm not interested in trying to walk or ride along the street as part of some giant fairground bumper car game where drivers feel like they can crash with relative impunity. I want drivers (and cyclists) to pay attention, drive carefully, and NOT crash. The focus for me has to be on improving driver behavior, attention and responsibility.

We have come a long way in improving the safety of vehicle occupants. Indeed, you could be fogiven for wondering why we aren't doing dramatically better already after the introduction of seat belts, air bags, anti-lock brakes, crumple zones, roll-over protection and the like. After 50 years of highway design that has widened, and straightened roads; removed all manner of roadside obstacles (like killer trees); installed collapsible poles and safer guardrailing; limited access and crossings; rumbled, signed and marked roads with ever-increasing levels of visibility and reflectivity. After quite incredible improvements in medical treatment and EMS services in the event of crashes. Really, where have all the benefits to all these great developments disappeared? Why have we still been killing 40,000-plus people a year for decade after decade?

One possible answer could be that we are a nation of generally lousy, distracted, careless drivers who really don't take the responsibility of driving seriously and are not held to account for that behavior individually or collectively. That needs to change, and focusing on distracted driving is a welcome opportunity to do just that.

The best prevention strategy is to reduce vehicle miles traveled by giving people alternatives to driving.

Specifically, providing free wifi on all public transit would give us a wide range of benefits: -- Gives people undistracted access to the internet and yes -- annoyingly but not dangerously -- to the telephone. -- Provides an enduring and uncontestable advantage over driving yourself. -- Reduces congestion and emissions. -- Provides internet access to those who might not have access otherwise. -- Easier, faster, cheaper to implement than the alternatives. What's not to like?

Texting while driving has brought the issue of driver distraction into the limelight, particularly as the fastest adopters of texting, those under 20, are also the least experienced drivers. This is a deadly combination. But it is neither a new nor a simple problem, and it’s easy to blame the technology that enables texting (rather than driver behavior), when in fact technology is a key part of the solution to driver distraction.

We all agree that texting while driving (which has been described as the perfect storm of visual, manual and cognitive distraction) is extremely dangerous, and that an approach combining legislative action, public education and technology advancements will likely provide the best results.

However, texting is not the only driver distraction, and driver distraction is fundamentally a behavioral issue. Naturalistic driving studies have shown that other activities such as personal grooming, reaching for an object, attending to a child or pet, and reading/writing can all be just as distracting as texting.

And how about talking with a passenger or listening to the radio? Recent research by the UK’s Transportation Research Laboratory suggests that intently listening to a sports game on the radio can be a significant distraction (this should come as no surprise to anyone tuning into yesterday’s Redskins overtime debacle).

In addition to raising awareness about the risks of distracted driving (whatever the cause), we should be investing in the deployment of proven technologies – like those mentioned by Dave McCurdy and Greg Cohen – to reduce driver distraction and make our roads and vehicles safer.

Technologies are here today that can help alert drivers to impending collisions and other dangerous situations such as lane drifting, vehicles in your blind spot, and stopped traffic ahead. An estimated 31 percent of fatal traffic crashes could be prevented or have their severity reduced through the deployment of collision avoidance systems, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

These and other more active technologies, like pre-emptive braking systems and automatic crash notification, have all have been demonstrated to significantly reduce distraction-related crashes and improve response times when crashes do occur. While the cost of these systems was initially very high, the technology is now reaching mass scale maturity, allowing wider application to more affordable, mainstream vehicles.

In addition, the work on next-generation cooperative safety systems being pursued under the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT) IntelliDrive initiative shows great potential for improving roadway safety. U.S. DOT estimates that a comprehensive IntelliDrive vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications network has the potential to address 82 percent of vehicle crash scenarios involving unimpaired drivers.

The recently-released NHTSA 2009 Motor Vehicle Crash statistics show an encouraging trend, with traffic crash fatalities continuing to decline, but 33,808 deaths should still be an unacceptable number to all of us, particularly when compared to other developed countries around the world.

According to the World Health Organization, on a per-inhabitant basis Japan has less than 40 percent of the traffic fatalities of the United States in spite of their heavily congested road network, and many European countries have less than half.

It is no coincidence that Japan also leads the world in the deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) according to a recent report by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF). They invest more than six times as much as the United States, spending over $700 million per year in these technologies that save lives, time and money.

Central to this effort is Japan’s Smartway system, which combines knowledge of the vehicle’s location with tailored real-time traffic information to help drivers avoid crashes before they happen. At least 34 million vehicles in Japan have access to this real-time, in-vehicle traffic information.

We have the technology to make our transportation network smarter. While we are rightfully focused on improving public education and finding legislative solutions to combat distracted driving, we must also make an equal commitment to deploying the life saving technologies of today and tomorrow.

All of us need to begin every day with the intention to drive safely, remembering that autos give us great mobility, but along with that benefit comes great responsibility to be vigilant every second behind the wheel.

Automakers support responsible driving and we go much further -- the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers supports banning the use of a hand-held device to text or call while behind the wheel. We believe that those laws, combined with aggressive and highly-visible enforcement, as well as continued education are all needed to affectively address this issue.

Digital technology has created a connected culture in our country that has forever changed our society. Taking a ‘just say no’ approach to technology won’t turn back time. Managing technology is the solution, and that’s why automakers developed Driver Focus Design Guidelines to help drivers keep their eyes on the road.

We know that drivers are going to have conversations, listen to music and read maps while driving. Our mission as automakers is to help them do this more safely with integrated connectivity technologies. That is why years ago, automakers developed Driver Focus Design Guidelines to help drivers keep their eyes on the road. These science-based measures guide how in-vehicle technology is designed, where in the vehicle it’s placed, and how operators interact with it in a way that allows them to maintain focus on the road.

Perhaps it’s a visual display that automatically changes to night vision when the vehicle enters a tunnel, or maybe it’s extra-large buttons that a driver can glance at while still maintaining focus on the road. Many of these safeguards are ones you’d never find on “nomadic” devices that a consumer purchases in the store and then brings into a vehicle – those items were never designed to be used while driving.

Beyond what we’re doing today, we must also remember that wireless communications will also serve as the backbone of the next generation of safety enhancements.

Take Automatic Crash Notification (ACN), for example. ACN can contact emergency officials immediately after a crash, even when the driver can’t. That reduces the time it takes for first responders to become aware of a crash, which is critical to saving even more lives. One analysis of fatal accidents found that, on urban interstates, reducing incident notification times from 5.2 minutes to two minutes can further decrease road traffic fatalities by up to 15 percent. In the future, systems may allow drivers to add a personalized profile of their important health information into the vehicle, so vital facts like blood type, allergies and health information can automatically be sent to first responders when it matters most: as soon as a crash happens.

These are just some of the ways that technology, when properly managed, can further enhance road safety.

We can all agree on the need to combat distracted driving. Yet if we are honest, we should admit that we all get distracted sometimes. Hopefully an educated group of "transportation experts" on this blog has put down the cellphone and blackberry while driving. But the reality is that we will continue to make mistakes -- enforced legislation and education can only go so far to stop them. So we need to do more than try to stop all distractions -- we need to embrace the many engineering solutions that focus on preventing crashes, injurires, and fatalities caused by the distractions that, under any realistic scenario, will continue to occur. Two focus areas are: vehicles and roadways.

We need to embrace the safety advances coming from newer generations of in-vehicle technology that are much more focused on safety than in the past. Examples include enabling technology that uses a vehicle's computer to sense weather, light, and traffic safety emergencies and uses the information to automatically reduce in-vehicle distractions caused by phones, IPods or other electronic devices connected to the vehicle's speaker and driver information systems. Intellidrive technology also has the potential to prevent many types of crashes, such as rear-end crashes and lane departures.

The other engineering focus area is the safety features of the roadways and roadsides, which can certainly be designed to be more forgiving of driver error. Earlier this year, I met a girl who was seriously disfigured in a car crash in South Carolina. She is doing an incredible job of talking to teenagers around the state about what happened to her and the need to avoid distractions. The people in the car with her were distracted -- taking pictures of each other -- and it led to her tragedy and her best friend getting killed. I was there on behalf of our charitable organization -- the Roadway Safety Foundation -- to work with the media to urge public support for the state DOT's plan to put down rumble strips on its pavement edges, despite severe cuts in the statewide budget. Those rumble strips prevent up to 80% of run-off-the-road crashes -- commonly caused by distraction and drowsiness. These safety devices are just one of so MANY techniques to make our roads more forgiving for all kinds of highway users -- both distracted and attentive people. We need to seriously prioritize road safety -- the benefits are so great and the costs are so small.

Public policy solutions are at their best and most effective when they're based on good science. Distractions come in many forms, but research tells us that those associated with wireless communication represent the most urgent need for action. Policy makers at all levels of government have responded to that need, and we should all be grateful that they have. Regarding the question of whether there are promising prevention strategies that merit wider use, the answer is yes. In 2003, TTI started its Teens in the Driver Seat Program, the first peer-to-peer program in the nation focusing exclusively on the safety of young drivers and passengers. The TDS Program is designed to use the power of peer pressure to help young people change the way they think about driving. A growing collection of data suggests strongly that the program is working. Knowing we can fundamentally change the driving safety culture for the highest-risk drivers on the road should tell us something -- that there's a good chance we can change that culture for the rest of us, as well.

Texting and cell phone use by drivers are symptoms, not the disease itself. In urban settings especially, we have come to regard driving as an inconvenient part of a multitasking array that all can be accommodated in the interval between two physical locations.

A number of studies and a growing body of work show the myth of multitasking for what it is and demonstrate that in switching from one task to another the brain slows down and is more susceptible to mistakes. Distracted driving occurs when the operation of a vehicle becomes a secondary task, rather than a primary one demanding full focus on a constant stream of incoming data along with complex motor skills.

Habits involving multitasking have become so common that it is an open question as to whether most drivers would even recognize this behavior in themselves. And since drivers tend to rate their own driving abilities above average, most believe it is “the other guy” who has the problem. This is why messaging and reason alone have very little effect, nor will establishing new rules without ensuring driver compliance.

A root problem is that drivers, by-and-large, do not expect detection and enforcement of traffic violations. There is a good reason for this nonchalance: while the number of drivers, cars and VMT keeps increasing steadily, the number of police available to stop and cite lawbreakers has grown much less. Between 1987 and 2003, VMT increased 52%, while local sworn officers only increased 27%. Add to that the fact that law enforcement agencies have added many new responsibilities, from maintaining various offender lists to homeland security procedures, and drivers have good reason for reduced expectations of detection and punishment for traffic violations.

It would be great if we could simply depend on drivers to drive responsibly, obey traffic laws and “do the right thing,” including looking out for their own safety, but generations of automobile use have shown us how unreliable that kind of thinking is. The only thing that really works to get irresponsible drivers to behave and, indeed, bring all drivers into compliance with traffic laws is consistent and ubiquitous enforcement.

In a longitudinal study published in The Lancet in 2003, researchers quantified the safety benefits of stepped up enforcement through the issuance of tickets and concluded that there is a direct relationship between crash risk and issuing traffic citations to lawbreakers, lowering crash risk by 35%.

Funny thing, nothing seems to snap drivers’ attention back to the task of driving like a pinch in the wallet!

Which raises the question: While we focus on passing laws banning texting and writing PSAs about no-phone zones, would we actually get more drivers to put down the phones (and the drive-through burgers, etc) if we were to consistently enforce laws against tailgating, speeding, red light running, and other already illegal behaviors?

Focusing on "Distracted Driving" looks like another nibble at the highway safety problem that the current administration is exacerbating by forcing manufacturers to make cars lighter, to save fuel. ["Blood for oil"?]

Be that as it may, a more effective way to make roads safer would be to require insurers - rather than local governments - to test and license vehicles and drivers, as is widely done in shipping, where safety is taken very seriously.

To give an example: Maryland requires those convicted of drunk driving to drive vehicles equipped with devices that disable the vehicles when alcohol is detected in them. But Maryland was reported not to have been enforcing this law. Is it likely that insurers, with $millions at stake, would allow their staffs to neglect such regulations?

Competing insurance companies would also have incentives to develop programs to increase safety, e.g. the production of slower, safer, vehicles for the young and the elderly.

Why do governments show no interest in insurer testing and licensing?

Cross-posted to DOT's FastLane blog.

This week the Department of Transportation hosts our second national Distracted Driving Summit. This summit brings together transportation experts, safety advocates, law enforcement officials, industry representatives, academic researchers, and distracted driving victims.

It's almost as if National Journal's expert Transportation blog went live. And to share the wealth of information the summit promises, we're webcasting it at www.distraction.gov and blogging about the proceedings live at fastlane.dot.gov.

We're hosting this summit because there is important work to be done. In 2009, as indicated by data I shared with the Orlando Sentinel yesterday, distracted driving-related crashes caused at least 5,500 deaths in the U.S. and upward of 450,000 injuries.

And, because many police departments do not routinely document distraction factors in their crash reporting, I think it's safe to say these numbers are only the tip of the iceberg.

But once you've met the victims and the loved ones left behind by this dangerous behavior, it gets even worse. Because then you understand that we are not talking about numbers, but about lives being broken and people being killed in crashes that are 100% preventable.

At the summit, panelists will take stock of the progress we've made in our fight to end this deadly epidemic. And we will reassess the challenges and opportunities ahead.

The challenges? Those are probably familiar to most of us. Americans are hooked on multi-tasking. We are. We're hooked on our devices and we can't put them down, even when it means jeopardizing our own safety and the safety of others.

And we have young people texting habitually long before they learn to drive who then can't even imagine turning off their devices when they climb behind the wheel.

But the opportunities are promising. First, we have 30 states that have outlawed texting behind the wheel, and eight of those states have banned all handheld phone use while driving.

We also have seen a tremendous wave of grassroots. People like Kari Galassi and Jodi Brubaker, who began distributing yellow "Get off the phone!" car window signs in their Hinsdale, Illinois, community. Or the group of high school students from Sanford, Florida, who formed Reynolds' Right Hands to raise awareness about distracted driving after their teacher Christy Reynolds was killed last year. Across the nation, we've seen a groundswell of support and advocacy whether in communities and workplaces or on Facebook and Twitter.

In addition to these preventive developments, we can add some encouraging news from the enforcement side of the safety equation.

Our pilot programs with police departments in Syracuse and Hartford are reporting that high-visibility enforcement combined with stepped-up public service announcements has resulted in declines in driver cell phone use of 38% in Syracuse and 56% in Hartford. The data on texting in those cities is even more impressive with texting down 42% in Syracuse and a very promising 68% in Hartford.

I can't emphasize the importance of these results enough because many state legislators have opposed texting and cell phone bans for drivers on the grounds that they can't be enforced. Our ongoing pilot programs may be demonstrating otherwise.

These positive trends are grounds for hope, but they don't mean we can relent. Rather, they tell me that now is the time to leverage this momentum by redoubling our efforts to end this deadly practice and persuade people to take the personal responsibility for safety that comes with a driver's license.

This week, I'm hoping the panelists at our Distracted Driving Summit and the expert contributors to this National Journal blog will help point those efforts in a productive direction.