Yes, Do Test Elderly Drivers

The statistics are undeniable: As motorists advance through their 70s they are increasingly likely to have accidents. The incidence increases between 75 and 79 and climbs steeply after that. The accident rate for drivers 85 and older is far higher than that of teenagers.

Considering that record, it’s reasonable to subject older drivers to more frequent and intense examinations. But there is strong opposition to a bill sponsored by Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Los Angeles) to do that.

The Hayden measure, SB 335, would require drivers 75 to 79 to pass road tests as well as written and vision tests to get their licenses renewed, and the renewal would be for four years, not the usual five. At 80, the renewal would be for three years, dropping to one year for drivers 90 and older.

These requirements do not constitute the harsh imposition that opponents of the bill claim. The state Department of Motor Vehicles already requires drivers 70 and older to take an eye exam and a written test. And SB 335 requires that eyesight be corrected to only 20/200 in the best eye, the present rule for everyone.

It’s been suggested that Hayden might have to weaken the bill--to have it become effective at age 80 rather than 75--to win passage. But the accident statistics argue strongly for passing the bill in its present form. The Senate-approved measure faces a critical test before the Assembly Transportation Committee Aug. 16.

In California, mobility depends largely on the automobile. For senior citizens, especially those who live alone, the car is a physical link to the rest of the world. Losing that freedom can be a devastating blow. The Hayden bill recognizes this and requires the DMV “to foster a positive atmosphere conducive to encouraging a driver over age 75 to succeed in passing the tests this bill imposes.” It also requires the state Business, Transportation and Housing Agency to study state and local transit programs for seniors. This is important. If we want more unsafe elderly drivers off the road we have to make sure there are adequate ways for them to get around.

The proposed law would expire in 10 years if not renewed by the Legislature. Opponents say the Hayden bill unfairly discriminates on the basis of age. That would be true if driver’s licenses were yanked just because of age. Licenses would be denied only if drivers failed the test, and they could appeal the decision.

The opponents point out that young drivers too have high accident rates. But a law passed last year already forbids newly licensed teenagers to drive at night or in underage groups.

Old age is a factor in driving, and it’s simply disingenuous to suggest it is not. A DMV study says that accident risk increases with worsening vision, confusion and other age-related conditions. This is sufficient to justify the Hayden bill. As much as the automobile is the icon and vehicle of California’s freewheeling lifestyle, driving remains a privilege. The state is responsible for ensuring that licensed drivers are capable of driving safely.