Industry Trades Reject SELF DRIVE Act in Its Current Form

Federal lawmakers are actively engaging in discussions surrounding various legislative measures aimed at the rapidly evolving automobile industry. These proposed bills address critical issues such as consumer data rights, parts and repair, pedestrian safety, driver-assistance technology, and even the growing concern of catalytic-converter theft.

In anticipation of a hearing scheduled for January 13, insurance industry trade associations have submitted letters to the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade. These letters provide feedback on each of the proposed bills, most of which have garnered initial support from the industry, with the exception of one concerning the deployment of autonomous vehicles (AVs).

The legislation in question, known as the SELF DRIVE Act, aims to establish a federal role in overseeing safety and data related to autonomous vehicles. Subcommittee chairman Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., emphasized the need for the U.S. to “successfully compete against communist China,” which he claims is aggressively promoting its self-driving technology worldwide.

Bilirakis stated, “AVs are not just a luxury; they can be a lifeline. By reducing human error, which causes the vast majority of crashes, we can prevent tragedies before they happen. AVs can also empower seniors and people with disabilities to be mobile and regain their independence.”

Originally introduced in 2017, the SELF DRIVE Act is now presented as a discussion draft, co-sponsored by Rep. Bob Latta, a Republican from Ohio, and Rep. Debbie Dingell, a Democrat from Michigan. However, industry trade associations have expressed concerns regarding certain language that may infringe upon state insurance requirements and the use of data by third parties, including insurers.

The American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA) has voiced its opposition to the bill’s passage “as currently written,” citing concerns that some provisions in the SELF DRIVE Act could preempt state laws. Similarly, the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) hopes to collaborate with the bill’s sponsors to avoid potential conflicts.

“While the bill makes no direct references to insurance, we are very concerned with the vague and broad nature” of a specific section that would prohibit “any law, rule, regulation, requirement, standard, or other provision” limiting automated driving systems, provided the manufacturer meets other safety standards. NAMIC argues that this could infringe on state authority regarding legislation, licensing, operation, and insurance requirements.

APCIA supports the protection of rights related to cybersecurity, privacy, and intellectual property but emphasizes that these goals must be balanced with the equally important objectives of safety and the insurability of evolving risk profiles presented by new technology. Insurers require access to vehicle data to achieve these goals.

Legislation that has received support from both APCIA and NAMIC includes:

• REPAIR Act (HR 1566) – Ensures consumer and independent repairer access to vehicle data and tools, promoting a competitive repair market.
• DRIVER Act (HR 6687) – Empowers vehicle owners with control over their data while enhancing privacy protections.
• AV Safety Data Act (HR 4376) – Mandates transparency through required reporting on autonomous vehicle safety performance.
• Driver Technology and Pedestrian Safety Act (HR 3360) – Initiates a study on the effects of driver-controlled technology.
• Safe Streets for Everyone Act of 2026 – Updates standards for crash avoidance and pedestrian safety technologies.
• ADAS Functionality Act (HR 6688) – Establishes guidelines for advanced driver assistance systems to lower repair costs and enhance safety.
• PART Act (HR 5221) – Addresses catalytic converter theft with traceable identifiers to reduce crime and claims costs.

*list provided by APCIA

Federal lawmakers are actively engaging in discussions surrounding various legislative measures aimed at the rapidly evolving automobile industry. These proposed bills address critical issues such as consumer data rights, parts and repair, pedestrian safety, driver-assistance technology, and even the growing concern of catalytic-converter theft.

In anticipation of a hearing scheduled for January 13, insurance industry trade associations have submitted letters to the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade. These letters provide feedback on each of the proposed bills, most of which have garnered initial support from the industry, with the exception of one concerning the deployment of autonomous vehicles (AVs).

The legislation in question, known as the SELF DRIVE Act, aims to establish a federal role in overseeing safety and data related to autonomous vehicles. Subcommittee chairman Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., emphasized the need for the U.S. to “successfully compete against communist China,” which he claims is aggressively promoting its self-driving technology worldwide.

Bilirakis stated, “AVs are not just a luxury; they can be a lifeline. By reducing human error, which causes the vast majority of crashes, we can prevent tragedies before they happen. AVs can also empower seniors and people with disabilities to be mobile and regain their independence.”

Originally introduced in 2017, the SELF DRIVE Act is now presented as a discussion draft, co-sponsored by Rep. Bob Latta, a Republican from Ohio, and Rep. Debbie Dingell, a Democrat from Michigan. However, industry trade associations have expressed concerns regarding certain language that may infringe upon state insurance requirements and the use of data by third parties, including insurers.

The American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA) has voiced its opposition to the bill’s passage “as currently written,” citing concerns that some provisions in the SELF DRIVE Act could preempt state laws. Similarly, the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) hopes to collaborate with the bill’s sponsors to avoid potential conflicts.

“While the bill makes no direct references to insurance, we are very concerned with the vague and broad nature” of a specific section that would prohibit “any law, rule, regulation, requirement, standard, or other provision” limiting automated driving systems, provided the manufacturer meets other safety standards. NAMIC argues that this could infringe on state authority regarding legislation, licensing, operation, and insurance requirements.

APCIA supports the protection of rights related to cybersecurity, privacy, and intellectual property but emphasizes that these goals must be balanced with the equally important objectives of safety and the insurability of evolving risk profiles presented by new technology. Insurers require access to vehicle data to achieve these goals.

Legislation that has received support from both APCIA and NAMIC includes:

• REPAIR Act (HR 1566) – Ensures consumer and independent repairer access to vehicle data and tools, promoting a competitive repair market.
• DRIVER Act (HR 6687) – Empowers vehicle owners with control over their data while enhancing privacy protections.
• AV Safety Data Act (HR 4376) – Mandates transparency through required reporting on autonomous vehicle safety performance.
• Driver Technology and Pedestrian Safety Act (HR 3360) – Initiates a study on the effects of driver-controlled technology.
• Safe Streets for Everyone Act of 2026 – Updates standards for crash avoidance and pedestrian safety technologies.
• ADAS Functionality Act (HR 6688) – Establishes guidelines for advanced driver assistance systems to lower repair costs and enhance safety.
• PART Act (HR 5221) – Addresses catalytic converter theft with traceable identifiers to reduce crime and claims costs.

*list provided by APCIA