R Street Testimony in Opposition to AK House Bill 217
Testimony from:
Steven Greenhut, Western Region Director, R Street Institute
In OPPOSITION to House Bill 217: “An Act regulating autonomous vehicles; and providing for an effective date.”
May 12, 2026
Senate Transportation Committee
Chairman Bjorkman and members of the committee,
My name is Steven Greenhut. I am Western region director for the R Street Institute, a free-market think tank that works on a variety of issues, including ones related to autonomous vehicles and other technologies. The institute opposes House Bill 217, which would forbid AVs from engaging in “the transport of interstate commerce, goods or passengers” without a human operator. This is one of the most expansive bans introduced anywhere in the United States, as it halts all driverless operations for commercial vehicles including driverless operation of robotaxis.
This is a troubling idea that would squelch a technology that offers not only great potential for improving transportation choices for Alaskans — but for improving road safety. Although the concept of driverless cars is hard to wrap one’s head around, the technology already is operating in a variety of states. There’s significant enough data to analyze its potential. And it’s clear that robots are safer drivers than human beings. Robots are not distracted by cellphones, don’t use intoxicating substances and are programmed to follow the traffic rules. Plus the technology is improving rapidly.
Research from Swiss Re, a major reinsurance company, evaluates the safety of Waymo self-driving cars compared to vehicles driven by human drivers — based on 500,000 insurance claims. Per its 2024 report, autonomous vehicles showed “an 88% reduction in property damage claims and 92% reduction in bodily injury claims. In real numbers, across 25.3 million miles, the Waymo driver was involved in just nine property damage claims and two bodily injury claims.”
Like with any technology, AVs have had some hiccups — such as stalled vehicles in San Francisco following a power outage. But in that case, the company developed a quick and successful fix. However, Alaska lawmakers shouldn’t let some of the industry’s growing pains — or the pleas of those who would squelch this promising technology for short-sighted job-protection reasons — detract from its vast lifesaving potential. There are more than 37,000 annual motor-vehicle fatalities in the United States each year, with 67 of them in Alaska last year. Reason Foundation explains that Alaska has the worst rural highway fatality rate in the country, so the status quo isn’t working.
Obviously, requiring a human driver defeats the purpose of the technology. Supporters point to Alaska’s snowy road conditions as a rationale for limiting AVs on the state’s roads and note that most AV operations are focused on warm-weather locales. However, AV companies are rapidly improving their winter-weather capabilities. As the Chamber of Progress noted, Alaska’s particular road conditions — winter weather, fog, prolonged darkness, wild animals — “are precisely the kinds of conditions where advanced vehicle technology can outperform human perception.”
We urge the committee to reject House Bill 217.
Thank you for your consideration.
Best regards,
Steven Greenhut
Western Region Director
R Street Institute
sgreenhut@rstreet.org