After years of progress in the area of automobile safety, Maine appears poised to take a major step backwards.

Following several unsuccessful efforts to pass seat belt legislation, Maine voters finally approved a law by referendum in 2001. This made the non-wearing of a seat belt a secondary offense. In 2007, the law was enhanced to a “primary offense.”

At the time, there was no hue and cry; there was no call for a “people’s veto.”

Not surprisingly, there was a demonstrable decrease in highway deaths and injuries. That meant there was considerable savings in medical and long-term care expenses.

With LD64, the non-use of a seat belt would revert to a secondary offense. The major argument is that this is an issue of freedom versus governmental intervention — the major objection to seat belt measures for the past 25 years.

I think that while your home may be your castle, your car is not, not while you are out on a public road. We expect the municipal or state or federal government to keep roads safe and to assist us in an emergency. Trauma care has improved, but not without cost. We all pay for it one way or another.

At a time of economic hardship, while medical expenses are still rising at a great rate, why are we even considering a measure that would augment those costs? Why are we cutting back on a standard that has for the most part become socially acceptable?

Edward Walworth, MD, Lewiston