An Act to create 347.40 (4) of the statutes; Relating to: camera monitor systems as an alternative to mirrors for commercial motor vehicles.
Summary
SB273 would amend Wisconsin law governing vehicle equipment to allow commercial motor vehicles to use a federally approved camera monitor system instead of traditional side mirrors. The bill creates a new subsection in the state traffic code stating that, notwithstanding existing mirror requirements and the referenced federal regulation, a CMV may be equipped with a camera monitor system approved by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration as an alternative to mirrors.
In practical terms, the bill would align state law with an existing FMCSA exemption for certain camera-based rear-visibility systems. It does not broadly eliminate mirror requirements for all vehicles; rather, it applies specifically to commercial motor vehicles and only when the camera monitor system has federal approval. The measure appears intended to modernize equipment standards and give carriers another compliance option while preserving rear-visibility safety requirements.
Impact
The bill would create s. 347.40 (4) of the Wisconsin Statutes and carve out an exception to the state mirror requirement for commercial motor vehicles. It would also override the otherwise applicable state rule and the cited federal mirror regulation to the extent necessary to permit FMCSA-approved camera monitor systems as substitutes for mirrors on CMVs. The affected parties would primarily be commercial motor vehicle operators, trucking companies, and vehicle equipment manufacturers or installers offering camera-based visibility systems.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded vote debate, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to assess directly. Based on the bill’s text and its introduction by multiple bipartisan cosponsors, the measure appears to have been framed as a technical, modernization-oriented transportation bill rather than a controversial policy change. However, the bill ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1, indicating it did not advance to enactment.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. The most likely issue, based on the subject matter, would be whether camera monitor systems provide safety and reliability equivalent to traditional mirrors, and whether state law should expressly defer to federal approval standards. Any disagreement would likely have centered on transportation safety, equipment costs, and regulatory consistency for commercial carriers rather than on broader policy disputes.
Crossfiled
An Act to create 347.40 (4) of the statutes; Relating to: camera monitor systems as an alternative to mirrors for commercial motor vehicles.