Change Is Hard

…but change is certain.


14 Comments

Crash dummy survives!

Crash dummies waiting to go to work.

Crash dummies waiting to go to work.


I’d never been a witness to a test crash before. I suppose not many people have. It’s kind of a surreal experience, especially for a person that’s had a loved one die in a violent crash.

My husband and I, along with several other of our truck safety volunteers attended an all day conference at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in Charlottesville Virginia on Thursday.

And it wasn’t just us in attendance.

In an unprecedented move truck companies, trailer manufacturers, safety advocates, bicycle and pedestrian representatives, policy makers, and researchers were all together in one room to talk about the problem of truck underride.

Most of you don’t know what truck underride is, and I wish I didn’t have to explain it to you. But because our country is a generation behind Europe you probably haven’t seen a truck sporting a side guard to keep a car from traveling under the trailer in a crash.

Perhaps, if you’ve been in New York City or Boston recently, you’ve seen city trucks with side guards; those two cities have now mandated this safety precaution after several bicyclists and pedestrians were killed by falling beneath the trailers and being crushed by the wheels.

Side and rear underride is a huge problem outside cities too. As you pass a semi out on the freeway, and if it’s safe, glance over and see where the underside of that trailer would hit you if you slid under. Just about the height of your head. And if you slide under your airbags won’t deploy as there would be no impact of the engine and front of your car. The first impact would be the windshield, and that won’t save you.

And don’t think you’re safe if you hit a semi from behind. Many of the rear guards were built to 1953 standards and will collapse if you hit them with any speed. Once again, the only thing between your head and the back of that trailer will be the windshield.

In the lobby of IIHS.  No airbags in the old days.

In the lobby of IIHS. No airbags in the old days.

So for years safety advocates, including the Truck Safety Coalition, have been asking the Department of Transportation to require better rear guards, and to start the process to mandate side guards. It’s another one of those no-brainer things that we just can’t seem to get done through normal channels.

Thursday’s conference wasn’t a normal channel. Never before has the industry met with the safety people to discuss making changes that would move ahead of any regulations that might some day come out of the D.O.T. Never before has such candid conversations been held, without animosity, without rancor, with only safety in mind.

It was amazing.

At noon we went into the lab and watched a test crash of a Malibu slamming at 35 mpr into the back of a semi trailer that had been equipped with a new, stronger rear guard. Some of us weren’t sure we wanted to witness such a thing, but we’re all glad we did.

The dummy survived this crash because the rear guard was strong.

The dummy survived this crash because the rear guard was strong.

Because in this case the new rear guard held up and the passenger compartment, crash dummy inside, was not penetrated. (You can watch the crash test here.) Everyone inside this particular car would have survived. For many people the test crash was the highlight of the day. But I thought the highlight was later in the program.

During the day we had speakers from New York City and Boston tell us about the processes they went through requiring side guards on trucks within their city limits. We had speakers from government talking about where in the regulatory process we are, speakers from trailer manufacturers talking about stronger rear guards that are ready for market now, from a truck company that has ordered 4,000 of the new, safer rear guards, and from Virginia Tech students who showed us their own new design for a stronger, safer rear guard.

Explaining one of their designs they didn't end up choosing to build.

Explaining one of their designs they didn’t end up choosing to build.

Those students almost made me cry. They were undergraduates, the project assigned to them was to build a better rear guard for a semi truck. They, like most people, had never heard of underride crashes before. They learned about the problem, dreamed up a number of potential solutions, weeded their options down to four, and then figured out which one was the most plausible, most acceptable to both the trucking industry and safety advocates.

And then they built a it.

Virginia Tech student and a Truck Safety Volunteer who has been fighting for side guards since her dad was killed 33 years ago.

Virginia Tech student and a Truck Safety Volunteer who has been fighting for side guards since her dad was killed 33 years ago.

Incredibly 18 and 19 year old young people spent a year on this project, realized the importance of their work, and were brave enough to come and speak about it to a group of adults working in the industry. They were excited about their design and proud to show it off. And a room full of jaded adults sat respectfully listening, leaning forward, following along, congratulation the students at the end for a good design, inviting them to join the industry after they graduate. To think that this whole room of people, including the kids, was there to make the roads safer for everyone. Well. That just about made me tear up.

It should make you tear up too.

Because change is happening. It’s happening because we’ve moved past regulations and asked the industry to listen and to do what’s right. And they are responding. Not everyone. And not every request. But some. And some change will lead to more change. And every step we make toward safety saves another life.

Change is hard. But it’s not impossible.

Retired test cars.

Retired test cars.


5 Comments

Two more dead

Wednesday near Charlotte NC a Swift semi ran off the road and hit a bridge. Watch this two minute news video that cites statistics about Swift, a large national carrier. These two deaths are numbers 56 and 57 for the truck company in the past two years. Other articles I’ve found say that Swift has been cited over 4000 times during the past two years for driving violations.

I don’t know how much more has to happen before the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) stops rating them as acceptable.

As many of you know I work with the Truck Safety Coalition, and we’ve been fighting to lower the maximum number of hours a driver can drive before having to take an extended rest break. It’s an uphill battle, with small victories later repealed by legislation backed by the deep pockets of the American Trucking Association which is out to maximize truck company profits. A news report yesterday said fatigue of the driver was a likely cause of this particular crash. He fell asleep behind the wheel at 4:30 in the morning.

So. Two more people are dead. This time they weren’t in a passenger car, they were in the cab of the truck that crashed.

In stories like this the news focuses on the traffic delays or the cost of repairing the infrastructure. I can tell you from personal experience the families of the two deceased don’t care about traffic delays or bridge repair today. As they move forward and figure out what caused their loss they’ll learn what so many other families have learned. That driving up to 11 hours a day is unsafe. That it doesn’t make any sense. That people die because they are pushed to work longer hours than in any other industry. It’s a complicated issue.

Five hundred truck drivers die in crashes each year. Yesterday two gave their lives just trying to make a living.

Sometimes I think that fighting the ATA on hours of service rules is useless. That we’re just playing defense, sticking our fingers in an deteriorating dike. That our time is better spent on issues we have a chance of winning. And then two more people die and I realize we have to keep fighting on all the issues.

Even hours of service.


7 Comments

Why listen to the other side?

Trucks and guns. Both are supported by huge organizations with deep pockets, organizations that donate heavily to congressional campaigns. Organizations that expect their contributions to protect their interests.

I’ve been fighting the uphill battle of anti-truck safety issues for a very long time. And as I watch the unfolding events after this latest mass shooting I am reminded once again that those fighting for gun law reform are climbing a similar mountain. A friend re-posted an article about the progress gun law reformers have made joining forces and gaining support. It sounds familiar, though with the media coverage mass shootings get it looks like their cause is getting more celebrity support and funding than our mission has to date. Still, even with funding, fighting the NRA, just like fighting the ATA, will always be a David and Goliath battle.

I’ve been thinking about these battles, ours against big trucking pushing anti-safety agendas, theirs against fervent gun owners pushing gun rights at all costs. If I’ve learned anything in my fight it’s that there is not always clear and obvious right and wrong. Sometimes, but not always. And I’ve learned that time spent listening to the other side without letting trigger words wash over my mind and emotions is worth the effort.

But both sides need to listen without talking over the top of each other.

What I’m seeing on television, as usual, is that no one is listening to anyone else. Everyone is talking loudly about their point of view. Maybe that’s good television, but it’s not going to resolve anything. We have learned that on some issues we need to work with truck companies, and I think there are going to be issues in the gun control fight where both sides have to compromise for the good of everyone.

But no one will be able to figure out where compromise is possible as long as both sides are busy building walls and flinging grenades of accusations, some true, some not, over those walls. In order to make progress and make the world a little safer everyone needs to look for ways to work together. These are complicated issues, with heavily entrenched views.

Nothing is easy when big industries and lots of money is at stake. But there’s always more than one route to problem resolution. We need to work together to find those options. We can’t continue on the way we are, arguing loudly, resolving nothing, the chasm between sides growing wider and deeper. We need to listen to each other, recognize the kernels of compromise hidden in the rhetoric and begin the difficult work.

Change is hard.


10 Comments

Thank you

The road is long and hazy.

The road is long and hazy.

The Senate and House versions of the transportation bills are going to a conference committee soon to hammer out their differences. Once that is done the final bill will be sent to the President. The Senate version has the 33 foot double trailers in it. The House transportation bill does not. Earlier in the year we came within 1 vote of getting the 33s out of the Senate version; so close, but still a loss.

Now the Wicker motion, which asks the Conference Committee to mandate a safety study on the double 33 foot trailers prior to making them legal across the country, was our last chance of even stalling the implementation of the longer trucks on our roads.

The good news is that we won!

The Senate voted 56 to 31 to approve the Wicker motion. This sends a strong message that the Senate is not happy with allowing 33 foot doubles drive across the country. There are 39 states that don’t allow double trailers longer than 28 feet. The transportation bill, if approved as it is currently written, would override all those states laws and allow 33 foot doubles in all states.

Thank you to everyone out there that contacted their Senators yesterday in an effort to push safety ahead of profits. The opposition argues that 33 foot trailers are safe, and that they will only run on interstate highways. I don’t know how they know the trailers are safe, as there haven’t been any safety studies. And last time I checked we all drive on interstates, so that argument is useless.

So we won this one. But the battle is not over. The bills are still going to Conference, and there’s no guarantee that the safety study will be mandated. Senator Boxer said she would carry the Senate message to conference. We hope she keeps that promise. On the Conference committee are many Senators that voted No to the Wicker motion. And there are many Senators that voted Yes. It’s pretty evenly split, almost down party lines.

I hope that the Senators spend the time needed to really think about the safety of the American public. Safety is not partisan. I can’t stress that enough. Safety has to trump profits.

I might need you to contact your Senators again. Meanwhile, below is a list of the Senators and how they voted on the Wicker motion. Remember a YES vote means they want the Conference Committee to mandate a safety study of 33 foot double trailers. A NO vote means they do not want a study, and instead want the 33 foot double trailers to remain in the bill.

If your Senator voted YES please take the time to go to their webpage and send them a thank you email. If they voted NO, consider sending them a polite email expressing your disappoint in their decision.

And THANK YOU for reading to the end of this, and for caring about safety, and for always supporting me and my safety family of victims and survivors.

We know we do not stand alone.

Results – Vote on Wicker motion:

Y 56
N 31
NV 13

Alexander N
Ayotte N
Baldwin Y
Barrasso N
Bennet Y
Blumenthal Y
Blunt N
Booker Y
Boozman N
Boxer NV
Brown Y
Burr Y
Cantwell Y
Capito N
Cardin Y
Carper Y
Casey Y
Cassidy N
Coats Y
Cochran Y
Collins N
Coons Y
Corker N
Cornyn N
Cotton N
Crapo NV
Cruz NV
Daines N
Donnelly Y
Durbin Y
Enzi N
Ernst Y
Feinstein Y
Fischer Y
Flake Y
Franken Y
Gardner NV
Gillibrand Y
Graham NV
Grassley Y
Hatch N
Heinrich Y
Heitkamp N
Heller NV
Hirono Y
Hoeven N
Inhofe NV
Isakson Y
Johnson NV
Kaine Y
King Y
Kirk N
Klobuchar Y
Lankford N
Leahy NV
Lee N
Manchin Y
Markey Y
McCain Y
McCaskill Y
McConnell N
Menendez Y
Merkley Y
Mikulski Y
Moran N
Murkowski N
Murphy Y
Murray Y
Nelson Y
Paul NV
Perdue Y
Peters Y
Portman Y
Reed Y
Reid Y
Risch N
Roberts N
Rounds N
Rubio NV
Sanders Y
Sasse Y
Schatz Y
Schumer Y
Scott N
Sessions N
Shaheen Y
Shelby N
Stabenow Y
Sullivan N
Tester N
Thune N
Tillis Y
Toomey Y
Udall Y
Vitter NV
Warner NV
Warren Y
Whitehouse Y
Wicker Y
Wyden Y


5 Comments

Emergency – Truck Safety, we need your help right now!

The Senate and the House versions of the Transportation Bill will be going to conference, probably this week. The Senate version allows for 33 foot double trailers to drive across the country. This policy change didn’t come from any safety studies, didn’t have any hearings, and isn’t even anything that most truck companies are requesting. It’s something that a few companies, notably FedEx and UPS, have managed to get attached to an important bill.

The Teamsters representing many drivers, law enforcement, safety advocates, environmental groups, biking organizations and pedestrian groups oppose longer double trailers. Thirty-three foot double trailers will require 22 feet longer to stop, and will require a 6 foot wider radius to make it around a corner. The back trailer won’t track the same as the front trailer when turning.

Here’s part of the email I got tonight from The Truck Safety Coalition:

URGE SENATORS TO VOTE YES ON WICKER MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES TO REQUIRE SAFETY STUDY OF DOUBLE 33s IN TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION BILL

November 9, 2015

The House and Senate multi-year transportation reauthorization bills contain several provisions that deteriorate truck safety and many missed chances to improve safety. The process of reconciling these two bills falls to the appointees on the Conference Committee who will be meeting soon.

Prior to Conference, Senators and Representatives may offer instructions to conferees, which must be approved by a majority of the respective chamber. Senator Wicker will be offering a Motion to Instruct [Senate] Conferees to include language that would require the Department of Transportation to study the safety impacts of Double 33s before requiring most states to allow these longer trucks on their roads. It is critical that this vote passes.”

SO…Senator Wicker is going to offer a motion that the DOT study the safety of double 33 foot trailers. It has to be voted on by the Senate. Below is a list of Senators that need to be contacted and asked to vote YES on the Wicker Motion on the multi-year transportation reauthorization bill. If you see one or both of YOUR senators, could you please call them or email them tomorrow (Tuesday) and ask them to vote YES on the Wicker motion?

I’d appreciate it very much.

Here’s more of the email:

“Please take the time to call and email Senators’ offices below, and urge them to vote YES on Senator Wicker’s Motion to Instruct Senate Conferees, which would require the Department of Transportation to study the safety impacts of Double 33s before federally mandating these longer, more dangerous trucks.

*PLEASE DO NOT FORWARD OR COPY & PASTE THE CONTENTS OF THIS EMAIL, please use your own words to make the points.

TALKING POINTS:

· DOT recommended no change to truck size and weight due to insufficient data.

· Double 33s will be 10 feet longer than double 28s; they will be 91 feet in length.

· Longer trucks make merging and passing more difficult.

· Double 33s have:

o A six foot wider turning radius

o 33% increase in low-speed off-tracking

o A 22 foot longer stopping distance (nearly the length of two cars).”

Here’s the list of Senators that need to be contacted:

Remember: Urge Senators to Vote YES on Wicker Motion to Instruct Senate Conferees to Require Safety Study of Double 33s in Multi-Year Highway Bill THIS IS THE LAST CHANCE TO DEFEAT DOUBLE 33s!

CONTACT FOR SENATE OFFICES:

Mark Kirk (IL)

· 202-224-2854

· Jeannette_Windon@Kirk.Senate.gov

Ron Johnson (WI)

· 202-224-5323

· Lydia_Westlake@ronjohnson.senate.gov

Pat Toomey (PA)

· 202-224-4254

· Daniel_Brandt@toomey.senate.gov

Kelly Ayotte (NH)

· 202-224-3324

· Adam_Hechavarria@ayotte.senate.gov

Lisa Murkowski (AK)

· 202-224-6665

· Kate_Williams@murkowski.senate.gov

Rob Portman (OH)

· 202-224-3353

· Pam_Thiessen@portman.senate.gov

Thad Cochran (MS)

· 202-224-5054

· Adam_Telle@cochran.senate.gov

Richard Burr (NC)

· 202-224-3154

· Natasha_Hickman@burr.senate.gov

David Perdue (GA)

· 202-224-3521

· Pj_Waldrop@perdue.senate.gov

Bill Cassidy (LA)

· 202-224-5824

· Chris_Gillott@cassidy.senate.gov

Dan Coats (IN)

· 202-224-5623

· Viraj_Mirani@coats.senate.gov

Joni Ernst (IA)

· 202-224-3254

· Ryan_Berger@ernst.senate.gov

Deb Fischer (NE)

· 202-224-6551

· Stephen_Higgins@fischer.senate.gov

Jeff Flake (AZ)

· 202-224-4521

· Chandler_Morse@flake.senate.gov

Johnny Isakson (GA)

· 202-224-3643

· Jay_Sulzmann@isakson.senate.gov

John McCain (AZ)

· 202-224-2235

· Joe_Donoghue@mccain.senate.gov

Tom Tillis (NC)

· 202-224-6342

· Ray_Starling@tillis.senate.gov

Michael Bennet (CO)

· 202-224-5852

· Riki_Parikh@bennet.senate.gov

Maria Cantwell (WA)

· 202-224-3441

· Pete_Modaff@cantwell.senate.gov

Amy Klobuchar (MN)

· 202-224-3244

· Travis_Talvitie@klobuchar.senate.gov

Gary Peters (MI)

· 202-224-6221

· David_Weinberg@peters.senate.gov

Bernie Sanders (VT)

· 202-224-5141

· Michaeleen_Crowell@sanders.senate.gov

Debbie Stabenow (MI)

· 202-224-4822

· Matt_Vankuiken@stabenow.senate.gov

Martin Heinrich (NM)

· 202-224-5521

· Jude_Mccartin@heinrich.senate.gov

Angus King (ME)

· 202-224-5344

· Chad_Metzler@king.senate.gov

Joe Donnelly (IN)

· 202-224-4814

· Andrew_Lattanner@donnelly.senate.gov

Heidi Heitkamp (ND)

· 202-224-2043

· Tracee_Sutton@heitkamp.senate.gov

Tim Kaine (VA)

· 202-224-4024

· Mary_Naylor@kaine.senate.gov

Mark Warner (VA)

· 202-224-2023

· David_Hallock@warner.senate.gov

This is what a double 33 looks like.

A double 33 parked in DC.

A double 33 parked in DC.

Think about it on the road with your family. Then call you Senator. If your Senator is NOT on the above list, it’s OK for you to call them anyway. They need to know this is important, and that the majority of the American public doesn’t want longer, heavier trucks on our roads.

Help me keep these trailers off our roads.

I appreciate all your efforts. I can’t begin to tell you how much.


3 Comments

WordPress Photo Challenge: Careful

Sticking with a trend here, when I saw this week’s photo challenge I knew what I had to show you.

Be careful.

Be careful.

In the eleven years that I’ve worked with the Truck Safety Coalition I’ve learned a lot about big trucks. But perhaps the most important thing I’ve learned is that as a driver in a passenger car we all need to stay vigilant. Put your phones away. Stay focused.

Don’t do stupid things like cut in front of trucks, pass on the right side of trucks, or take very long to pass them on the left. Don’t tailgate them, they can’t see you back there, and you can’t see ahead. Stay as far away from big trucks as you can. And try not to be the last car in a line of cars stopped in traffic.

My message this week is the same as it is every single day.

Be careful around big trucks.

Dangerous things.

Dangerous things.


14 Comments

Sorrow to Strength update

Imported Photos 00074
We’re home again, after spending several days in Washington DC. We spent the time with other families that have suffered loss and injury in crashes with big trucks. The conference we attended is called Sorrow to Strength because, though many of us come to the weekend drowning in sorrow, we almost always leave feeling stronger, energized, even hopeful.

This year the issues were many; longer trucks, heavier trucks, teenage drivers, the minimum insurance that truck companies must carry, the fact that they want to hide crash data from the public, the rollback of mandated sleep breaks for drivers. Each of these issues is complicated; it’s a fine line to balance the safety of all of us with the need for commerce in this country.

Most of these issues are part of both the House and the Senate Transportation Bills. The Senate bill has already passed and contains many anti-truck safety provisions. The House bill was in committee this week and will be on the floor the House for a general vote very soon. We were successful in getting some anti-truck safety amendments removed from the bill, but we expect they will be introduced on the House floor during debate.

FedEx, UPS and a few other truck companies are fighting to put double 33 foot trailers on our roads in all states. Currently 39 states limit double trailers to 28 feet. In the bill being voted on are amendments that would make it federal law to allow double 33s across the country regardless of state law. Double 33 foot trailers are harder to drive, the back trailer doesn’t track around corners, meaning it will ride up over curbs if the driver isn’t careful, and take longer to stop. Drivers don’t want to drive them. Many large truck companies don’t want to have to purchase new trailers. The 33 foot trailers don’t fit on current container ships or railway cars. They will cause more damage to our roads and bridges. It seems that a few companies with a lot of money want these trailers, and expect the rest of us to just let it happen.

Welcoming everyone to the conference.

Welcoming everyone to the conference.

There was a press conference on Wednesday with a double 33 foot trailer, I put the photo of it in my header above. Think about it…would you want to pass this truck on a dark highway in your home state? Would you want it coming up behind you? No Senator or Representative we visited thought these were a good idea, yet there it is in the bill.

Every truck company has to have liability insurance. The minimum level of $750,000 was set in 1980 and it has never been increased. Most companies carry at least $1M, but in a crash where there are injuries even $1 million won’t be enough to cover hospital expenses. The liability insurance is paid out per incident. So if there is more than one person injured or killed, the insurance has to be split up among the victims. Think about that. Suppose two or three or more families have been injured or killed. The company writes a check, it gets split up by a judge, and the company walks away. Sure you can sue them in civil court, but small truck companies don’t have much in the way of assets, they file bankruptcy and open up the next day under another name. The families are left to pay the bills on their own. They often have to file bankruptcy too, and eventually tax payers pick up the tab in the form of disability and other kids of state or federal aid.

In the Transportation Bill are more hurdles for the DOT (Department of Transportation) to even study the need for an increase in mandatory liability insurance. They say they need to do a cost/benefit study on this issue; they want to study how much would it costs to mandate more insurance coverage v.s. what the benefit would be. Really. Even if the limit was increased to the cover the cost of living minimum insurance requirements would be over $2M. And that still wouldn’t cover the medical costs of someone injured by a big truck.

Senator Feinstein says NO to double 33 foot trailers.

Senator Feinstein says NO to double 33 foot trailers.

And let’s talk about teenage drivers. I know this is very controversial. Some states allow people 18-21 to drive an 18 wheeler within their state lines. The House and Senate bills have different versions of this issue, but in effect they’d like to do a pilot study to allow teenage drivers to cross state lines. At first this sounds innocent enough, if a teenage driver can drive anywhere in his/her own state, what’s 100 miles across state lines? But we know that pilot studies never stop and they never go away, they just expand. And what was once 100 miles across a few state lines will shortly become permission to drive across the country at the wheel of a truck weighing at least 80,000 pounds.

Teen drivers are less likely to stand up to truck owners demanding that they drive more hours than are safe, that they bend rules, that they drive trucks in poor repair. Many large truck companies say they won’t hire teenagers to drive, they understand that teen drivers have a higher crash rate than the general population. Rental car companies often won’t rent to a driver under the age of 25 because of the liability. Why would we want teenagers driving big trucks? It’s a deadly combination and something we’d like to stop now. I understand young people needing to make a living. But they don’t have enough driving experience to handle an emergency effectively. And an emergency in a big rig is a big emergency, one that can kill drivers as well as other people sharing the road.

There are several other issues that we talked about in meetings with the DOT and other regulators, as well as Senate and House members and their staff. Telling our stories, asking for safety to be made a priority made us all feel stronger. Every family at the conference wanted to make a difference. They didn’t want another family to go through the heartache that they’ve been through. And after spending three days on the Hill we feel like our voices were heard.

Safety can not be partisan. It just can’t. Trucks kill nearly 4000 people every year. They injure another 100,000 annually. They irreparably damage Democrat and Republican families, people of every religion, every nationality. This is one issue that should be first on the minds of everyone regardless of beliefs.

I’ll keep you updated as the bills move through Congress. We are at the edge of a very large cliff, and some truck companies seem willing to nudge us over that edge. You can help by calling your House of Representative member (they will be voting soon!) and telling their office that you do not want the Reauthoriation Bill to contain any anti-safety truck provisions.

Meanwhile, stay vigilant when you’re driving. And stay as far away from big trucks as you can. Your life may depend on it.
20151020_115218


4 Comments

Tales of the subway

Metro

Metro


My husband and I went to a lot of meetings today, talked to lots of people, even met a Senator when we gave him an award. And I’ll tell you about all that soon. But for now let me tell you about a few conversations we had today on the metro, DC’s subway system.

First, let me say I love the metro. Living in Michigan we don’t have anything like it. So for us it’s a treat to ride mass transit, figure out the map, people watch, even get lost and laugh about it. We feel so urban chic…like we’re city people, like we belong in the hustle that is DC. Though I think the natives can tell we don’t.

This morning the four of us, husband and me, my sister Beth and my brother Paul, were heading up to Capitol Hill for meetings with legislators. My sister was leaving town after her 11:00 meeting, and she was going to have to get back from the Hill, stop at the hotel to pick up her luggage, and then navigate the metro back out to the airport, all on her own. So as we’re heading down the long long escalator to the Roslyn metro platform all three of us are trying to explain to her which subway line she needs to take from the Hill back to the hotel and from the hotel out to the airport. She is getting confused and frustrated and ticked off.

We get on the train heading to our meetings and we’re still intensely discussing it. A woman sits quietly behind us reading something on her phone. We are arguing loudly now about which way she is supposed to go to get to the airport. The train stops and lets people off, people get on, and the train moves again. My brother notes that the station we are now leaving is the same station we’d go to if we were going to the Truck Safety Coalition office.

Which is in the opposite direction from Capitol Hill.

We are heading away from our meetings! The three of us, who have been confidently telling her to follow our directions, start laughing hysterically. Beth is even more confused. Then she starts laughing too, and the lady sitting quietly, not looking at us, begins to smile. By the time we get off at the next stop, the lady is grinning. We cross over the bridge above the tracks to the other side and head back to town. I’m pretty sure we made that lady’s day.

We told Beth to take a cab to the airport.

Once we were headed back in the right direction we boarded a crowded train, and stood for a stop or two. A very nice older gentleman offered my sister his seat, and she declined. He noticed that she was wearing a button with a picture of my dad on it and the man asked if dad was running for office. Beth said no, that he had died in a truck crash, and she was in DC to work on making trucks safer. The man got very sad and said he was sorry. He asked more questions and we explained more. Turned out he was an electrical engineer for the Federal Aviation Administration. Safety, he said, was very important. He wished us well in our project and said he was glad we were going to speak to members of Congress. Just before his stop he stood up, waiting by the door. My sister asked him to promise to be safe, and he said he promised. Then she hugged him and he hugged her back while I teared up over the compassion of a stranger.

Train pulls in.

Train pulls in.

Coming back from the Hill tonight I noticed a young man having trouble getting his card to let him enter the platform area. He was trying to use it on an entrance that was closed, so I explained how it worked and helped him get through the gate. Later, down on the platform I saw him trying to read a tiny metro map in the dim light, so I asked him where he was going. Turns out it was just a couple stops from where we were going, so I told him to stick with us. (But I didn’t tell him about us going in the wrong direction that morning!)

During our ride the three of us talked. He asked if we were local, we said no. He asked about the badges we were wearing that said “NO larger trucks!” and we explained why we were there, telling him about dad and our work with the Truck Safety Coalition. He was from Sweden, just visiting, and had spent the day in the Capitol gallery watching the House and Senate discuss and debate. He said he had been interested in American politics since he was a boy, and he was very excited that we had just come from seeing Senator Durbin. I was very interested that he had even heard of Senator Durbin! I ended up giving him my Truck Safety business card, and he wished us well and told us we were doing important work as he stepped off the train.

It’s so heartwarming when complete strangers take the time to talk about the thing we are so impassioned about. When they genuinely wish us well. When they thank us for doing the work. I wish we could have that one on one conversation with every American. Maybe then we’d get them all to join us to demand safer roads from those working on the Hill.

Wouldn’t that be something.

Long way up.

Long way up.


12 Comments

Night lights and hope

Arlington lights

Arlington lights

I’m here in the hotel room while my husband is walking to the grocery store. I should be working on the speeches I will be giving over the weekend, but I don’t want to. So I went out on the balcony and photographed the buildings all lit up around us.

That was pretty fun.

We haven’t gone into DC yet, we’re still out in Arlington at The Truck Safety Coalition office, checking awards, printing data sheets, stuffing folders, making calls, verifying participants, making appointments, rewriting speeches and discussing session outlines. There’s a lot to do.

This will be our biggest conference ever, the most participants and the most confirmed appointments with Members and agencies on the Hill. The very important bill we’re worried about (Transportation Reauthorization Bill) is being “marked up” (worked on) this Thursday in committee, so our timing turns out to be perfect. We will be talking to Congressional staff and committee members on Monday and Tuesday; our views should be up front and center in the minds of committee members as they work on the bill Thursday.

We’ll do the best we can to convince everyone that federal law allowing 33 foot double trailers should not overrun more than 20 states that currently prohibit the longer trailers. Everywhere I go here in DC Congressional staff tell me that issues I want resolved should be decided ‘at the state level.’ And now the American Trucking Association wants the federal government to grant them permission to run their longer trailers right over state laws. And worse, many members of Congress are quite willing to do that!

So. Tonight I am tired but optimistic. And to take a break from all this truck stuff I stand on my dark balcony pointing the camera at a dazzling quilt of light. My fervent hope is that the light will finally come on in Congressional and Agency heads and hearts and that they will make decisions based on safety rather than industry profits or campaign contributions.

This time please let safety win.

Daddy

Daddy


8 Comments

Working in the nation’s capitol

Sunset in Washington DC

Sunset in Washington DC

The sun is going down, glowing pink on the condos and office buildings near our hotel. I wish I was just a tourist here. I wish I was going to spend tomorrow taking pictures of monuments, going on tours, walking leisurely through Georgetown. But that’s not why I’m here this time. This time I’m here to work.

Day one preparing for this weekend’s conference is complete. Speeches written, calls made, agendas discussed and revised. Tomorrow is another day as we nail down more details.

As those of you on Facebook know, I fell while crossing the street on Sunday and scraped up my knee on one leg, twisted my ankle on the other. So I’m icing the ankle every night and hoping that by the time I need to walk to meetings on Capitol Hill I’ll be able to walk without a limp.

Such is the life of a middle-aged person not looking where she’s going. But I’ve got my eyes focused on truck safety issues as we work through this week. I look forward to the volunteers that will be arriving on Friday. I know we will be noticed. I hope our message is taken to heart by a few more politicians and that we can start to see movement toward safety in upcoming bills.

I hope you will send good thoughts our way as we begin again to climb the very big mountain in front of us.

Talk to you tomorrow, dad.

Talk to you tomorrow, dad.