Policy without empirical rationalism or public discussion leads to dealy outcomes

On May 1, 2020 I posted Look both ways and hold onto to your wallet.  Atlanta City Council, in the midst of Covid lock downs and without debate or public discussion, passed an ordinance lowering speed limits from 30 to 25 MPH per the Vision Zero fad out of Sweden.

There was much to criticize about the process.  And I did.  

Among the issues was whether the legislation would indeed reduce the death rate from 73 (in 2019) to zero.  In the original post, I pointed out that only perhaps 25 deaths of the 73 occurred in areas with speed limits of 30.  The reduction in speed limits would not get the city close to Vision Zero and there were good reasons, based on the experience of other cities to anticipate there would be no reduction in deaths.  And some cities had experienced an increase of deaths under Vision Zero policies.

Rereading that post today, approaching five years later, made me wonder what had been the outcome.  How many people die in traffic accidents in the City of Atlanta in 2024?  Even taking into account that the size of the city's population is estimated to have risen about 5% since 2019. 

The City Council increased the cost of traffic in Atlanta and increased the time it takes to get anywhere.  What has been the benefit of that legislation?  How much was the death rate reduced from 73?

From Atlanta is the worst U.S. city for driving in 2024 by Josh Green.  From this study, it appears that there were 90 traffic deaths in Atlanta in 2024.  Up nearly 25% from 2019.  The per capita death rate is the third worst on the list.  

City Council spends a lot of money marking down speed limits, makes transportation in the City more expensive and slower and still sees a 20-25% increase in deaths.  

An outcome fully anticipated in that original post.