ShareThis Page
Nation

Senate seeks safety review of longer trailers

| Tuesday, Nov. 10, 2015, 8:30 p.m.

WASHINGTON — The Senate went on record Tuesday against a federal mandate that would force all states to allow trucks with extra-long double trailers on interstates, saying it first must be shown that the vehicles don't undermine safety.

By a vote of 56-31, the Senate instructed negotiators assigned to work out the final language of a sweeping transportation bill to allow individual trailer lengths to increase from 28 feet to 33 feet only after the Transportation Department completes a safety study and determines the trucks would cause no statistically significant decrease in safety.

Earlier this year, a Senate committee approved an amendment to a separate spending bill requiring all states to allow the longer double trailers. A similar provision was added to a spending bill that passed the House.

Safety advocates said they were concerned negotiators will add the same truck provision to the transportation bill even though the provision wasn't included in versions of the transportation bill passed by the House last week and the Senate in July. That's why they supported the motion by Sens. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to instruct negotiators to make longer trucks on federal interstates contingent on the government first showing they are safe.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me