The Air Bag/Seat Belt Controversy: How the States Voted
In the late 1980s, a frustrated effort by federal regulators to require auto producers to mandate air-bag equipped cats, the Secretary of Transportation called on the states to settle the issue. The states were told to establish mandatory seat belt laws. If state voters failed to provide seat-belt protection for two-thirds of the nation's population, passive restraints (air bags) would be mandated. The resulting votes provide an opportunity to examine two Public Choice theories. Conventional theory claims that economic interests will prevail in determining outcomes. The newer theory of expressive voting claims that voters will support popular icons, like auto safety, instead of voting on narrow economic grounds. This article examines the votes and tests these two theories. The conventional interpretation is the most robust.
Volume (Year): 22 (1996)
Issue (Month): 2 (Spring)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (201) 684-7346
Web page: http://www.ramapo.edu/eea/journal.htmlEmail:
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eej:eeconj:v:22:y:1996:i:2:p:147-160. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Victor Matheson, College of the Holy Cross)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.