Victories Mounting in State Litigation Reform

By Shannon Newton, president of the Arkansas Trucking Association and immediate past chair of the Trucking Association Executives Council.

On February 11, Arkansas Governor Sarah Sanders signed Act 28 into law, addressing litigation reform in the state relating to large truck crashes. The Bill eliminates phantom damages from medical expense recoveries. This significant legislation defines recoverable medical charges based on amounts actually paid and accepted, rather than inflated billed amounts.

Phantom damages—the difference between billed charges and actual payments—have been artificially inflating settlements and increasing costs across multiple industries, including transportation. While ensuring injured parties remain fully and appropriately compensated, the new law will not affect other damage categories or impact subrogation rights.

Though some state news coverage labeled the bill “tort reform-lite,” this victory is far from insignificant for trucking. What makes this achievement particularly noteworthy is the persistence with which it was secured. This isn’t the first time Arkansas has attempted to address phantom damages. The legislation that ultimately passed with 46 cosponsors is practically identical to one that failed in 2023.

Arkansas’s success may be attributable partly to a new champion. House Speaker Rep. Brian Evans, a logistics business owner, understands the industry and the effects of an unjust judicial system on businesses, as well as the downstream effects on customers and citizens who ultimately pay inflated prices.

This victory in Arkansas is part of a growing wave of reform across the country. In 2023, Florida scored a major triumph when the state eliminated one-way attorney’s fees and fee multipliers. Working closely with Gov. Ron DeSantis, the Florida Trucking Association and its allies secured passage of a law that addresses transparency of medical damages and requires consideration of fault in assessing liability.  The Florida law also reduces the statute of limitations from four to two years in order to discourage less meritorious lawsuits and focus resources on legitimate cases.

In the same year, Iowa capped non-economic damages to $5 million per plaintiff in trucking cases and eliminated liability for negligent hiring claims when drivers are acting within the scope of their duties. These successes required strong buy-in from Senate leadership.

The Nebraska and Maryland’s Legislatures are currently taking up bills to cap non-economic damages. Nebraska senators have also filed bills to allow evidence that a person was not wearing a seat belt to be admissible in civil proceedings determining liability, to reduce the statute of limitations in personal injury cases and to disclose third-party financing in litigation.

These state-by-state victories are the direct result of an initiative that began six years ago when American Trucking Associations named lawsuit abuse a tier one advocacy priority. The initiative required restructuring and inverting their advocacy approach to empower state associations in a state-by-state fight.

ATA’s prioritization on this topic has generated crucial momentum. Since 2019, over half of U.S. states have filed reform bills, with twelve successfully enacting meaningful reforms.

This strategy is necessary because each state’s legal environment and legislative opportunities for change differ significantly. Despite our interstate industry’s preference for uniformity, reform on this issue must happen state-by-state, with advocacy strategies tailored to local opportunities. The Arkansas Trucking Association is proud to put the first victory of 2025 on the board, doing our part to make our corner of the map a better place to operate. As more states join this movement, the scales of justice come a little closer back into balance.

Truck Parking Fund Available for Investment

Investment opportunity in our premium truck parking fund, addressing one of the most pressing needs in the U.S. supply chain. With only one parking space for every 11 trucks, demand for secure parking is at an all-time high.

Our single fund offers land and business operations:
✔ 33.9% expected IRR with 2 Year MInimum Exit on Land

✔ 16.6% expected IRR with 5 Year MInimum Exit on Truck Parking Operations

✔ Recurring revenue from long-term contracts

✔ Minimum investment: $500K

If this aligns with your portfolio,  Contact Us

‘A matter of public safety’: Rep. Bost reintroduces bill to expand truck parking capacity

Tyson Fisher

In 2020, Rep. Mike Bost, R-Ill., introduced a new bill that would devote funding for the creation of more truck parking. Five years later, he’s not giving up.

On Thursday, Feb. 27, Bost – along with Reps. Angie Craig, D-Minn., Pete Stauber, R-Minn., and Salud Carbajal, D-Calif. – reintroduced the Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act. If signed into law, the bill, HR1659, would dedicate $755 million to expanding parking capacity.

“I grew up in a family trucking business,” Bost said. “I know firsthand how difficult, and oftentimes dangerous, it can be when America’s truckers are forced to push that extra mile in search of a safe place to park. By expanding access to parking options for truckers, we are making our roads safer for all commuters and ensuring that goods and supplies are shipped to market in the most efficient way possible. This is a matter of public safety for everyone, and I’m committed to do all I can to drive this legislation over the finish line.”

Right out of the gate, the Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act has 26 co-sponsors. That includes a bipartisan, 50/50 split of 13 Democrats and 13 Republicans, ranging from Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., representing urban Kansas City to Rep. Jeff Hurd, R-Colo., who represents mostly rural Western Colorado.

Bost first introduced the bill in March 2020.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association worked closely with Bost to develop meaningful truck parking legislation that would garner support throughout the industry. OOIDA President Todd Spencer thanked Bost and Craig for continuing their efforts to address the nationwide parking crisis.

“Lack of safe truck parking has been a top concern of truckers for decades, and as a former truck driver, I can tell you firsthand that when truckers don’t have a safe place to park, we are put in a no-win situation,” Spencer said. “We must either continue to drive while fatigued or out of legal driving time or park in an undesignated and unsafe location like the side of the road or abandoned lot. It forces truck drivers to make a choice between safety and following federal hours-of-service rules. The current situation isn’t safe for the truck driver, and it’s not safe for others on the road.”

This will be Congress’ fourth chance to address truck parking by dedicating money that is already available to projects that increase capacity. The bill was first introduced in March 2020 in the 116th Congress. Although it died in committee with 14 bipartisan co-sponsors, the bill has gained more traction each year it was reintroduced.

In the 117th Congress, the truck parking bill picked up 39 co-sponsors and cleared the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. However, it never made it to a vote by the full House.

The last version of the bill attracted 53 co-sponsors – 27 Democrats and 26 Republicans – and had a similar fate. It passed the committee with a 60-4 vote but never reached the full House.

The four committee votes against the parking bill were Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky.; Scott Perry, R-Pa.; Chuck Edwards, R-N.C.; and Eric Burlison, R-Mo.

The Senate version, spearheaded by Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., appeared in the last two Congresses. Although it picked up only two co-sponsors in 2022, more than a dozen signed on last year.

The Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act has enjoyed broad support from the trucking industry. Last year, more than a dozen trucking industry stakeholders led by OOIDA urged the House to move forward with the bill.

“Accessing safe and secure truck parking is an integral part of daily life for professional drivers, many of whom travel the nation’s interstates for weeks at a time,” the coalition told House leadership. “Members of Congress from every corner of the country and across the political spectrum have supported HR2367 because they understand their constituents are affected by truck drivers’ ability to meet necessary rest requirements and operate as safely as possible.”

Regulatory and Legislative Update

Asectt

FMCSA reopens comment period on broker transparency

In a sign that the Trump administration is considering expanded broker transparency in some form, FMCSA has reopened the comment period on the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) issued last November despite a halt on almost all other federal regulatory activity initiated during the Biden administration. As is typical with a change in the party controlling the executive branch, President Trump ordered a broad regulatory freeze immediately after taking office on January 20.

(See article below.)

Comments were due January 21, but FMCSA has reopened the comment period for another 30 days until March 20 at the request of the Small Business in Transportation Coalition. The agency also said that it would consider comments submitted between January 21 and the February 18 comment period reopening.

Reopening the comment alone would not necessarily mean that FMCSA under the Trump administration still adheres to the approach expressed by the Biden administration’s FMCSA in November. However, a separate email message distributed to industry stakeholders on February 18 is further evidence that the change in the White House has not shifted the agency’s thinking. The final paragraph of that email message states:

“Broker transparency is intended to enable efficient outcomes in the transportation industry by providing the material information necessary for the transacting parties to make informed business decisions. Broker transparency also supports the efficient resolution of disputes between parties. Though the current regulations are meant to provide broker transparency, the Agency believes that Regulation and Enforcement Regulatory and Legislative Update – February 2025 2 broker transparency is rare in practice. By reinforcing the regulations, the Agency believes that broker transparency, and its benefits, would become more common.” For the Federal Register notice extending the comment period, visit https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2025-02707 . For the NPRM and comments submitted already, visit https://www.regulations.gov/document/FMCSA-2023-0257-0001.

Truck Leasing Task Force issues final report opposing lease-purchase programs

On the final full business day of the Biden administration, FMCSA’s Truck Leasing Task Force (TLTF) issued its final report, focusing on issues related to lease-purchase programs. A separate report was submitted by the staff of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which had been retained as a consultant to the TLTF.

The TLTF report unequivocally opposes lease-purchase programs. The report states that the task force began with a range of perspectives, including members who believed such programs could provide an important avenue to truck and small business ownership. “Over the last year and half, however, the comments drivers and non-driver industry stakeholders provided in public meetings and submitted to the public docket, as well as data reviewed by TLTF, told a consistent and increasingly troubling story: lease-purchase programs cause widespread harm without offering meaningful scale opportunities for truck and small business ownership.” The report goes on to state that “such arrangements, whereby a motor carrier controls the work, compensation, and debts of the driver, should be prohibited.

For further discussion of the TLTF report, see the “Advocacy and Comment” section below. For the TLTF and CFPB staff reports, visit https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/mission/advisory-committees/tltf/final-report.

DOT appoints several FMCSA officials

Although FMCSA does not yet have an administrator or nominee, the position already has a designated senior advisor. Recently confirmed DOT Secretary Sean Duffy has announced numerous staff appointments within DOT and its modal agencies, including several at FMCSA.

The most senior position announced is Jesse Elison as chief counsel. Elison has worked in various legal capacities over the past 20 years, including stints both at law firms and at trucking operations, including Watkins and Shepard, Quality Distribution, Montgomery Transport LLC, and the Bennett Family of Companies. He most recently was a partner with Taylor and Nelson PL in Atlanta.

Duffy named Adrienne Camire senior advisor to the FMCSA administrator. Camire served as chief counsel for the Federal Highway Administration late in the first Trump presidency. Previously, she was as an adjunct professor at New England Law in Boston and worked in banking for about 15 years.

Matt Schuck has joined FMCSA as director of communications and senior governmental affairs officer. Schuck has held numerous positions over the past 14 years in communications and public relations, including a brief stint as communications director for then-U.S. Rep. Sean Duffy.

FMCSA withdraws two pending rulemakings following regulatory freeze

In keeping with the usual practice following a partisan change in the White House, President Trump on January 20 issued a broad 60-day regulatory freeze that includes not only rules and proposed rules issued by the Biden administration but also “any agency statement of general applicability and future effect that sets forth a policy on a statutory, regulatory, or technical issue or an interpretation of a statutory or regulatory issue.”

For FMCSA, the freeze resulted in the withdrawal of two rulemaking proceedings that had been under review by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). One was a proposed rule that had been under OMB review for more than a year to make changes in regulations governing commercial motor vehicle (CMV) operations, inspection, repair, and maintenance to ensure safe and secure operations of CMVs equipped with automated driving systems. The proposed rule would have been a step toward a federal regulatory regime for autonomous CMVs.

The other proceeding was an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) submitted for OMB review just four days before the end of the Biden administration. According to DOT’s regulatory agenda published last fall, the ANPRM would have sought information how FMCSA could enhance the physical safety of women truck drivers and trainees and address the negative impacts of workplace sexual harassment. It also would have addressed the safety of vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians and bicyclists.

Nomination hearing for Trump’s DOL pick held February 19

Although the Senate has already confirmed most cabinet secretaries, including several that have been widely controversial, the nomination of Lori Chavez-DeRemer is still pending as secretary of the Department of Labor (DOL). The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions held a February 19 hearing on Chavez DeRemer’s nomination.

Among the general public, Chavez-DeRemer’s nomination is not as high profile as several others, but President-elect Trump’s pick following the election raised concerns in the business community, including in the trucking industry. As a member of Congress in the most recent session, she was one of only three Republicans to co-sponsor the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act. Among the many elements of the pro-union PRO Act is a restrictive ABC test for worker classification similar to the one in California’s AB 5 law.

Although President Trump’s nomination of Chavez-DeRemer is at odds with expectations for a Republican nomination for DOL secretary, the action appears to square with other Trump positions recently. For example, he sided with the labor union in its dispute with management over automation and job security at intermodal container ports on the East and Gulf Coasts. To view a video stream of the Senate confirmation hearing for Chavez-DeRemer, visit https://www.help.senate.gov/hearings/nomination-of-lori-m-chavez-deremer-to-serve-as-secretary-of-labor.

Trump orders 10-for-1 deregulation initiative

Building on a 2-for-1 initiative rolled out in his first administration, President Trump in late January issued an executive order directing that before issuing a new rule, regulation, or guidance document, federal agencies must identify at least 10 existing rules, regulations, or guidance documents to be repealed. For fiscal 2025, the total incremental cost of all new regulations including the savings from repealed regulations must be “significantly less than zero.” The White House Office of Management and Budget will ensure standardized measurement and estimation of regulatory costs.

EPA refers Biden administration’s CARB waivers to Congress

In a move that sets the stage for a possible legal battle with California, the Environmental Protection Agency said that it will be transmitting to Congress for its review the Biden administration “rules” granting waivers under the Clean Air Act that allowed the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to implement its own emissions standards on commercial vehicles as well as passenger cars.

For trucking, the CARB regulations at issue are the Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) rule and the heavy duty Omnibus Low NOx rule. The ACT rule requires that an increasing share of commercial trucks sold in California qualify as “zero-emissions vehicles” or ZEVs. The low NOx rule sets an emissions standard that differs from the federal standards set to take effect in 2027. EPA granted a waiver for the ACT rule in April 2023, and it granted a low NOx rule waiver last December.

In a news release, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin characterized the Biden administration as having “failed to send the rules on California’s waivers to Congress, preventing Members of Congress from deciding on extremely consequential actions that have massive impacts and costs across the entire United States.” However, according to a report issued in August by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, EPA’s waivers to California under CAA are not reviewable by Congress under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) because they are “orders,” which are not subject to the CRA, and not “rules.”

Regardless of what happens to the waivers, truck and engine manufacturers might still have to abide by the requirements of CARB’s ACT and low NOx in California. In July 2023, CARB and all the medium- and heavy-duty manufacturers signed the Clean Truck Partnership (CTP), which, among other things, requires manufacturers to abide by the ACT and NOx requirements even if California ultimately is deemed not to have the authority to impose them by regulation.

The latest developments related to the ACT rule come after CARB in January withdrew a waiver request for its Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) rule, which would have required fleets operating in the state to purchase ZEVs. CARB withdrew the required due to certain disapproval from the Trump administration. CARB’s withdrawal of the ACF rule creates an odd situation in that manufacturers must ensure that an increasing percentage of trucks are ZEVs, but fleets are not required to buy those trucks.

Bills on FMCSA enforcement authority introduced in the House and Senate

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) and Rep. Mike Ezell (R-Mississippi), along with 13 other co-sponsors, have reintroduced into the 119th Congress their legislation (H.R. 880) to clarify FMCSA’s authority to enforce commercial regulations and impose civil penalties on bad actors. Also, Sens. Deb Fischer (R-Nebraska) and Tammy Duckworth (D-Illinois) – both members of the key Senate Commerce Committee – introduced the legislation (S. 337) in the Senate.

H.R. 880/S. 337, which is billed as focusing on household goods shipments, also would require FMCSA to ensure that regulated entities have physical principal places of businesses before receiving authority. In addition, the bill requires entities seeking broker or freight forwarder authority to disclose any relationship involving common ownership, management, control, or familial relationship with other carriers, brokers, or forwarders if they occurred within the past three years. Motor carrier applicants for authority already are subject to such a requirement. For more information on H.R. 880, visit https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/880. For more information on S. 337, visit https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/337.

Retrospective and the Road Ahead

Chaos from the Congressional lame-duck session has focused attention on the economic realities and unintended consequences of the past eight years of enforcement by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA or Agency) relating to rules of commerce and safety. With respect to our four major issues – safety, regulatory reform, fraud prevention, and labor/owner operator issues – the FMCSA’s track record for rulemaking ranges between poor and none.

Economic Realities and Unintended Consequences

1. Safety Fitness Determinations With regard to adopting a new safety fitness rule, the Agency is stuck on the continuing notion that Safety Measurement System (SMS) methodology can somehow be rebooted. Yet it has been soundly rejected by Congress and acknowledged by the Agency’s court settlement as not a safety fitness determination. Furthermore, SMS methodology, when informally used as a vetting process, has resulted in only 12,079 Advocacy and Comment Legislation Regulatory and Legislative Update – February 2025 5 carriers profiled for a safety audit per year, of whom only approximately 362 were assigned an unsatisfactory safety rating.

The Agency has suggested at various times over the past several years that artificial intelligence can augment a reboot of SMS, and has made efforts to encourage a “Beyond Compliance” initiative which has not proven fruitful. Based on its unofficial “listening sessions” without comprehensive notices of proposed rulemaking, it appears that the Agency has problems satisfying the requirements for a cost benefit analysis, particularly when possible use of new technology is involved. When and if a new, comprehensive safety fitness determination (SFD) rule will be proposed is unknown.

1. Fraud

Without instituting rulemaking, the Agency has identified its Office of Registration as responsible for fighting fraud through the use of a new registration system. The proposed system is intended to provide for better vetting of new applicants with focused attention on facial recognition and increased data security. This initiative is intended to address the so-called bait-and-switch scams which arise from fraudulent applications by brokers and carriers. Yet this is but one type of fraud and embezzlement schemes which plague the industry.

This program is being advanced without rulemaking. It has been consistently objected to as piecemeal in the context of the Agency’s admission that rulemaking for new applicant vetting will be necessary in the future, and that this initiative involves substantial and material questions of fact and law that have not been properly addressed.

Unfortunately, none of the Agency’s pending formal and informal initiatives address the compelling need for criminal prosecution of fraud arising out of federal statutes involving truck transportation. The piecemeal handling of miscellaneous initiatives, such as “transparency” and on-line registration with “smart logic,” palpably ignore the extent and nature of fraud and the compelling need for FMCSA and DOT involvement.

Notwithstanding the precedent for criminal prosecution and cooperative undertakings with sister agencies, FMCSA offers no victim assistance. In response to Congressional overtures, its limited participation in criminal prosecutions has focused on safety-related issues, with only reluctant agreement to assume some responsibility for enforcing civil penalties. Pending Congressional bills, that seek to confirm the Agency’s already existing authority to impose civil fines and place bait-and-switch offenders out of service, cannot alone address the scope of the problem.

Other peripheral Agency initiatives, such as the bond replenishment requirement, do not adequately address the fraud issue. In fact they have unintended consequences such as the added cost of the bond, withdrawal of willing sureties from the market, and increased leverage for freight charge collectors seeking recourse against unknowing shippers and consignees.

1. Attack on Owner-Operator Model

In the closing days of the last Administration, a Truck Leasing Task Force Report was issued. See https://search.app/n4dbUrgkeLoB8Qkr5. This report was a political creation by pro-labor advocates. Far from being a comprehensive evaluation of “common truck lease agreements and their terms” under the six criteria specified on April 7, 2022 by the former Secretary of Transportation, the Task Force Report aims at alleged abuses of owner-operators in certain categories of agreements with carriers.

The task force members were apparently cherry-picked and no advocate of the owner-operator model was chosen. The resulting 51-page report reads like a plaintiff’s advocate brief, not an impartial review. It focuses on a handful of abuses in certain types of equipment lease-purchase contracts and is not supported by any statistical support.

In this regard, the owner operator / independent contractor model is governed by the truth-in-leasing regulations at 49 CFR Part 376, which creates a carve-out that shifts compliance burdens from lease operators to motor carriers and provides that carriers can use independent contractors without re-designating them as “employees.” Compliant contracts under Part 376 allow owner operators to leverage their contract relationships with the carrier that can handle the safety, insurance, and solicitation of round-trip freight. Such contracts require 15 day minimum payment terms, and create a valuable small business opportunity that can withstand analysis of alleged “employee” status.

Clearly, the role of the FMCSA under its regulations and the National Transportation Policy is to encourage blue-collar entrepreneurship and access to financing as well as insurance, safety compliance, and loads without forced dispatch. Yet the report makes no mention of the efficacy of the existing rules nor of the model’s importance in encouraging small businesses.

Also missing is any statistical analysis of the amount of leased equipment subject to the truth-in-leasing carve out, nor of the various lease-to-own financing protocols which allow owner operators to leverage their owner operator contracts with carriers to assume or enter truck leases. These protocols, like a mortgage, provide “skin in the game,” allowing drivers to purchase equipment over time based upon an amortization chart with portability and the right to complete the purchase at any time. This is a far more secure opportunity than is available for employees who may be terminated at any time and left without a job or benefits.

ATA has estimated there are an estimated 1.4 million independent contractors. Lease-purchase agreements are a standard way of financing the purchase of their new and used equipment. Many carriers, both large and small, help facilitate the lease-purchase of equipment by employee drivers who wish to set their own hours and own schedules. Nowhere does the report treat the importance of the owner operator model, nor consider the economic realities of how carriers and owner operators can work together to mutual advantage.

Clearly, the Task Force Report was not intended as an objective analysis of the types of financial arrangements that exist for purchases of equipment between owner-operators and their carrier partners. The only focus is on alleged bad actors and on alleged violations of the truth-in-leasing regulations. Without a survey of the types and nature of the leasing arrangements, including the number of owner-operators and carriers that use them successfully on a win-win basis, the study is of little conclusionary value.

The Need for Common Sense Solutions

In sum, there is no pending rulemaking nor are there any serious answers to the pressing need for a new safety fitness rating, for addressing systemic fraud, or for dealing effectively with the challenges to the owner operator model. These issues beg for common-sense solutions. Clearly, listening sessions are no substitute for administrative due process and rules which can meet the standards for judicial review. Fragmentary treatment of tangential issues like the new bond requirements, the transparency rulemaking, and the pending new application procedure have a piecemeal effect and do not address in systematic fashion the major issues requiring rulemaking.

As a matter of advocacy, now is the time to consider the road ahead and alternative proposals which can best address these basic issues.

1. Safety Fitness Alternative

After SMS methodology, based on roadside inspections, was withdrawn in 2017, the Secretary of Transportation requested regulatory reform proposals in Docket No. DOT-OSB-2017-0069. Therein, a simpler and more straightforward alternative to the use of SMS was presented but has not been acted upon. The proposal involves use of the so-called desktop audit, which was developed to replace on-site compliance reviews during the COVID pandemic and is still in use today. If adopted with modifications, this program would result in the pre-grant interviewing and testing of new applicants using existing federal and state inspectors. The reasonable fixed cost could be passed on to the new applicant; the resulting safety fitness finding of “fit to operate” could eliminate the red light / green light issue facing the shipping public, and could result in lower insurance costs by virtue of the new carriers having been vetted for safety.

1. Fighting Fraud

As part of the proposed pre-application audit for carrier safety, the same pre-grant scrutiny could provide hands-on vetting of new broker, forwarder, and carrier applicants for compliance with commercial regulations and for authentication under the Agency’s fraud initiatives. This existing system could be adopted on an annual or biennial basis and conducted as part of the registrants’ regular update for both safety and fraud purposes.

1. Need for Criminal Prosecution of Supply Chain Fraud in Truck Transportation

The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) has not taken an active role in monitoring, policing, or prosecuting violations of federal criminal law with respect to felonies involving interstate trucking. Fraud enforcement tools clearly are available to the U.S. DOT through FMCSA’s specific recordkeeping requirements, including the segregation of funds and expenses, and the creation of a constructive trust. These tools create access to FMCSA registrant data necessary to establish a prima facie case of fraud, embezzlement, and related remedies. The Agency’s express jurisdiction includes not only civil remedies but the clear authority to work with DOJ and sister agencies in developing criminal indictments, marshalling evidence, and aiding in the prosecution of perpetrators of not only regulated entities but also third-party accomplices. Coordinated interagency participation is necessary to address this issue. Congressional oversight in support will be needed.

1. The Owner Operator Issue and Related Pro-Labor Initiatives

A large part of our advocacy has been addressed to participating in U.S. DOT and state law initiatives to protect the small business rights and remedies of owner-operators. Active support for the existing court standards on independent-contractor treatment, for the importance of the Part 376 carve-out, and for the need to oppose divergent state laws like AB5 in California requires continuing effort. Positive signs for success in future advocacy include (1) the previous support by the new President for an economic realities test at the Department of Labor; and (2) favorable court precedent in the so-called Chevron deference decision and other recent cases that indicate traditional precedent will apply to review of bureaucratic overreach. Advocacy supporting federal preemption of inconsistent state initiatives affecting needed uniformity also should be encouraged. Readers with interest in supporting advocacy issues are welcome to send their contact information and questions to asectt@gmail.com.

In Defense of the FMCSA

Luke Kibby

In an era where government efficiency programs like DOGE increasingly scrutinize federal agencies for waste and inefficiencies, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) finds itself under the microscope.

Critics argue that the agency’s regulatory reach is excessive and its spending inefficient, calling for budget cuts and policy rollbacks.

However, such criticisms often overlook the essential role FMCSA plays in safeguarding public safety and supporting the economic infrastructure of the United States.

Let’s take a deeper look at FMCSA and talk about where the scrutiny lies with the agency.

The FMCSA’s Mission and Impact

The FMCSA was established in 2000 with a clear mandate: to reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities involving large trucks and buses. This mission is not merely bureaucratic rhetoric; it addresses a critical public safety issue.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), large trucks were involved in 5,237 fatal crashes in 2022 alone. These incidents not only result in tragic loss of life but also cost billions in economic damages each year.

By enforcing safety regulations, the FMCSA directly contributes to reducing these numbers, thereby saving lives and minimizing economic losses.

But what exactly does FMCSA do?

Operational Efficiency and Corporate-Like Structure

Did you know that FMCSA runs more like a small corporation versus a large over-staffed agency? It’s true.

The FMCSA operates with a streamlined, corporate-like organizational structure, comprising specialized offices that manage safety programs, legal compliance, financial oversight, policy formulation, and technological advancements. These are the different offices:

• Office of the Administrator: Oversees the agency’s overall operations and strategic direction.
• Office of Administration: Manages human resources, facilities, and administrative services.
• Office of Chief Counsel: Provides legal guidance and support.
• Office of Chief Financial Officer: Handles budgeting, financial management, and resource allocation.
• Office of Safety: Focuses on developing and enforcing safety regulations.
• Office of Policy: Formulates policies to enhance motor carrier safety and efficiency.
• Office of Research and Information Technology: Conducts research and manages IT systems to support the agency’s mission.

This division of labor ensures focused expertise and operational efficiency.

For example, the Office of Research and Information Technology drives data-driven decision-making by leveraging telematics and predictive analytics to identify high-risk carriers. This approach enables the agency to allocate resources more effectively, enhancing enforcement precision while reducing unnecessary regulatory burdens on compliant carriers.

Addressing Concerns of Waste and Misallocated Funding

Critics often cite waste and misallocated funding as reasons to downsize federal agencies.

For example, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that in fiscal year 2023, the federal government made an estimated $236 billion in improper payments, which include overpayments, underpayments, and payments with insufficient documentation. While this figure encompasses all federal agencies, it underscores the potential for financial mismanagement within large organizations.

However, the FMCSA has consistently demonstrated fiscal responsibility.

According to the Department of Transportation’s Office of Inspector General, the FMCSA has implemented robust internal controls to monitor grant disbursements and minimize improper payments.

Additionally, the agency’s strategic investment in technology—such as the Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) program—has optimized safety enforcement, ensuring that resources are directed toward carriers posing the highest safety risks. And this program is in the process of being improved.

Balancing Regulation with Industry Needs

One of the primary criticisms against FMCSA is the perceived overreach in regulatory measures, such as Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) and Hours-of-Service (HOS) regulations… and rightly so.

Saving 96 lives by mandating long-haul truckers to have a telematics device in their truck does seem like overreach.

However, fatigue is a leading cause of truck-involved accidents, and HOS regulations are scientifically formulated to combat this issue.

The FMCSA has shown flexibility by amending these rules based on stakeholder feedback, including adjustments to accommodate adverse driving conditions and short-haul exemptions.

This adaptive approach illustrates the agency’s commitment to balancing safety needs with operational realities.

Beyond safety, FMCSA’s regulatory framework supports economic stability.

The trucking industry is the backbone of the American economy, transporting over 70% of all freight tonnage annually. Ensuring a safe and efficient transportation network not only prevents costly accidents but also sustains supply chain reliability.

The FMCSA’s policies, therefore, protect both public safety and economic interests, creating a secure environment for commerce to thrive.

A Necessary Agency for Safety and Economic Security

The FMCSA is not just reactive; it proactively invests in research and technological innovation.

The agency is exploring advanced safety technologies such as Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) systems and vehicle-to-vehicle communication to further enhance road safety.

Additionally, FMCSA collaborates with industry stakeholders to develop regulatory frameworks for autonomous commercial vehicles, positioning the U.S. as a leader in the global transportation technology race.

Amidst growing calls for government downsizing, it is crucial to recognize the indispensable role FMCSA plays in safeguarding American roads and supporting the economy.

Far from being a wasteful bureaucracy, the FMCSA exemplifies responsible governance through its strategic, data-driven, and adaptive regulatory approach. Its continued existence and adequate funding are essential not only for public safety but also for maintaining economic stability in an interconnected, logistics-driven economy.

As debates over federal spending intensify, we should at least have a better appreciation for FMCSA workers across the United States.