Traffic accidents and drivers suspected for drug influence

All records from the Danish Medicolegal Council concerning drivers suspected for drug influences were examined for the 5 year period 1981-1985. 461 records were included, 62 women and 399 men. In 250 cases drugs from more than one of ten groups had been taken thus making 786 combinations of drug/driving. The major drug group was benzodiazepines, accounting for 65% of all drug intake. Opioids also contributed substantially, found in 38% of the cases. A traffic accident had occurred in 180 (39%) of the records. Drivers who had been taking antidepressives were involved in an accident in 67%, significantly above the mean. For benzodiazepines, the corresponding percentage was 43%, while for opioids it was only 23%, significantly below the mean. This striking difference has been demonstrated in most of the studies concerning drugs in traffic. It may support the hypothesis that opioids do not necessarily make driving dangerous, as do antidepressives, barbiturates and especially benzodiazepines.     

Federal Reimbursement for Mandates on State and Local Governments

One of the remedies sought by state and local officials for the growing burden of federal mandates is a mandate reimbursement law. A major purpose of mandate reimbursement is to deter Congress from imposing excessive costs on state and local governments by making it fully accountable for its actions. The paper begins by extending the economic theory of grants to mandates and reimbursed mandates. It goes on to assess the benefits and costs of mandate reimbursement, and to distinguish mandates that should be reimbursed, should a reimbursement program prove desirable, from those that should not. Then, using the economic theory of grants and mandates, the paper compares reimbursed mandates with two alternatives for accomplishing the same objective, compensating grants and procedural rules. It concludes that the latter are more promising than mandate reimbursement.     

A Prospect Theory Analysis of California's Initiatives in Implementation of its Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV) Mandate1

In 1990, the state of California passed the pioneering mandate on zero emission vehicles (ZEV). This technology‐forcing regulation is aimed at improvement of air quality and protection of public health from the adverse effects of air pollutants from automobiles. Facing severe opposition from the auto industry, the mandate has been revised a number of times, most recently in 2003, whereby the requirement for ZEVs have been made to align with the pace of technology development. Review of strategies used in implementation of the mandate has revealed greater emphasis on the economic incentives for rather than on environmental merits of ZEVs. Using prospect theory as the framework for analysis, the reasons have been explored. The findings of the study help us to understand how decisions are made with respect with to deviations from a mental anchor point and through the process of evaluation of losses and gains.