The BDN Editorial Board operates independently from the newsroom, and does not set policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
Do you want to require vehicle manufacturers to standardize on-board diagnostic systems and provide remote access to those systems and mechanical data to owners and independent repair facilities?
Question 4 seeks to enshrine a so-called “right to repair” to ensure that vehicle owners can turn to independent shops and not be reliant on dealerships and manufacturers for service and repairs. We support this concept, and hope it will be safeguarded and standardized for the entire country through federal legislation.
A statewide referendum here in Maine, however, is not the way to address this nationwide issue. This question presented to voters oversimplifies a complicated and technical conversation, and the detailed proposal it contains raises a host of concerns — not just for the auto industry, but for those of us who want to see this addressed for consumers in a uniform way at the federal level rather than piecemeal across the country.
We have long-standing concerns about trying to address detailed policy matters through ballot questions, and Question 4 presents yet another example of this. Despite the undeniable appeal of safeguarding an automotive right to repair, we hope Maine voters realize this referendum is not the only way to achieve that. Rather, this is the wrong way to do so, and we urge a no vote on Question 4.
If you listen to both sides of this debate, and we have at length, you’ll probably hear two drastically different versions of the same current reality. Supporters of Question 4 would likely describe a “monopoly” in which automakers and dealerships essentially control access to wireless data, sometimes referred to as “telematics,” increasingly needed in the vehicle service and repair process. Opponents, on the other hand, would likely counter that this diagnostic information is already available to independent repair shops, which fix and service vehicles daily. So which is it?
As best we can tell, it is a little of both. Generally speaking, it seems that independent shops can access the information they need to do most if not all vehicle repairs. Do they sometimes have to pay for tools or subscriptions to access that data, and do they have to know where to look? Yes and yes. But there are avenues to access it.
The real question then, and the crux of the issue for us, is what happens moving forward as vehicles become more technical and reliant on telematics. Independent repair shops typically have ways to access this information currently, but as industry technology and practices advance, will that continue to be the case? It makes sense for lawmakers, regulators, consumer advocates and the various industries involved to come together to safeguard this access in a predictable and workable way for everyone involved.
That was the general spirit of a July agreement reached by automakers, some associations that represent independent repairers and others. That type of approach should be written into federal statute to make absolutely sure it is durable and binding, and contains sufficient protections for vehicle owners and their data. Maine moving forward on this alone, and the specific proposal to do so with Question 4, raises a host of concerns ranging from the security of car owners’ data and increased costs — costs that surely will be passed along to consumers at some point.
Yes, a single state law in Massachusetts led to a nationwide memorandum of understanding that made some (incomplete) progress on this issue in the past decade, so it’s not as if laws in one state don’t have an impact on the auto industry nationwide. And the more recent agreement was an extension of those Massachusetts efforts as well. But what is really needed now is federal law that codifies the spirit of these agreements in a meaningful and binding fashion. It is one thing for automakers to sign a voluntary agreement; they also should all be bound specifically by federal law on this issue.
We support the idea behind an automotive right to repair (and for other industries, for that matter, which are increasingly seeing some needed buy-in from manufacturers). But please don’t let the format of this referendum question fool you: There is not only one way to safeguard the current ability to seek independent vehicle repair. This is not the right proposal, and it is not being proposed at the right level of government. We recommend a no vote on Question 4.