Ed Bobit's Publisher's Page

Often an editor and his staff are open to frequent indict­ments of literary malfeasance, grammatical maladies and charges of outright ignorance. Despite such allegations it should be known that we make every effort to remain accurately informed as well as literary in our coverage of the automotive fleet market.

Any accusation that we might be inclined toward white lies, small distortions, innocent fictions or even outright fabrications is undoubtedly true if and when the facts are: (a) not available in time to meet a close deadline, (b) more boring than fiction, or, (c) prejudicial to the position that we are currently supporting, but we don't let that happen.

Unlike some members of the fourth estate, we make every attempt to search out the truth, producing reams of copy that often appear to be endless monologues on any­thing pertinent ranging from a new hub cap to the confes­sions of an unsuccessful paper dealer.

In searching for truth and hopefully avoiding the "boredom threshold" of our readers, we daily peruse the Federal Register, the Journal, dealer publications, various automotive newsletters and all the other information disseminated by associations allied with the automotive industry. All these are essential reading in order to report accurately on what is now being called the "$20-billion rip-off," i.e., DOT Secretary Brock Adams' decision to make either air bags or passive belts mandatory on all 1984 model cars, and commencing with the 1982 model "big" cars.

All four car makers have questioned the decision reached and its potential for saving lives, particularly in view of what mandatory seat-belt-use laws have been able to accom­plish. Ford has been most articulate, saying, "The decision to force the substitution of unproven, automatic-protection devices for proven, reliable and effective active-safety re­straint systems is so fraught with error as to be both lacking in rational basis and unsupported by substantial evidence in the rule-making record."

Ford also stated that DOT fails to admit that seat belt usage can be increased above the present 20-percent level, even when the department has evidence to the contrary. Nor will they admit that inadvertent deployments of air bags of up to 7,000 per year will result in adverse public reaction. Additionally, Ford noted that DOT consistently fails to mention that air bags require use of a lap belt to be as effective as DOT suggests they will be. The other three makers all questioned the validity of the data base DOT used to defend the decision.

Michigan Senator Robert Griffin and Pennsylvania U.S. Representative E.G. Shuster have introduced legislation to overturn the mandatory air bag portion of Adams' ruling. Further congressional action is expected when Congress reconvenes after Labor Day. If anything is going to be done to overturn the ruling, it must be done by October 10 not, it becomes a rule that will be solidly enforced, and a cost of approximately $20-billion. And has anybody though about GM's Pete Estes' estimate of $700 to replace an air bag that has been deployed?