Governor Gavin Newsom is on site. The California Senate on Monday passed a bill requiring human drivers to drive autonomous trucks on state roads for at least the next five years. The Legislature says it is concerned about security. The governor's office says it's concerned about innovation.
It is now up to Newsom to veto the bill or sign it. All signs point to a veto. Go-Biz, the California governor's business development office, wrote a letter to the bill's sponsor arguing that its passage would hamper the state's competitiveness, limit supply chain innovation and undermine existing oversight.
The legislation, Assembly Bill 316, passed the Senate by a vote of 36 to 2. It would essentially require driverless trucks, weighing between 10,000 and 80,000 pounds, to have a human driver on board. The requirement would remain in effect for at least five years, but advocates say the Legislature could eliminate it sooner if it has reasonable confidence in the vehicles' safety.
The bill was sponsored by Assemblywoman Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D-Winters). “There is a reason why local elected and public safety officials, local firefighters and police officers, and state highway patrol officers support AB 316. They, and we, want a collaborative and truly public process between the Legislature , local officials and the “The executive branch must make these decisions that impact the safety of millions of California travelers and hundreds of thousands of jobs,” he said after Monday's vote.
The two “no” votes came from Sens. Brian Dahle (R-Bieber) and Steve Glazer (D-Orinda). Glazer said requiring human drivers in experimental robot trucks was equivalent to requiring people to use typewriters.
Because the Teamsters truckers union is a big supporter of the bill, opponents say the problem is really job loss. Advocates say that's a concern, too, but the key is making sure large trucks can operate safely on state highways.
The safety issue came to the fore after San Francisco police officers and the city's fire chief complained in August that driverless taxis deployed by Cruise and Waymo persistently impede emergency vehicles and paramedics. lifeguards. Those companies requested and received approval from the California Public Utilities Commission on Aug. 10 for a rapid expansion of their business operations in the city. All five members of the commission are appointed by Newsom.
One member, John Reynolds, was Cruise's top attorney before joining the CPUC. He cast his vote, which is legal under current state law, but said he saw no conflict of interest.
Newsom's administration has also come under sustained criticism for the way the California Department of Motor Vehicles regulates the safety of self-driving vehicles. He allows Tesla to test its driverless vehicle technology (called Full-Self Driving) on public roads, but says that because drivers are told to pay attention, the cars are not truly autonomous.
The DMV has said it is investigating whether the company is violating DMV rules that prohibit a company from marketing autonomous technology when it does not allow full self-driving. The investigation has been ongoing for two and a half years.
Several lawmakers said during the debate that they do not trust the DMV's public safety oversight of robotic vehicles.
Newsom, a self-described friend of Elon Musk who appears to be positioning himself to run for president should President Biden leave office, has a lot at stake if his decision to prioritize autonomous vehicle innovation over public safety hurts him again.
