Comment from David Martino

I am a US citizen living in New Hampshire, a state well known for being balanced between republicans and democrats. I share a common view among people living in NH that we object to any technology that records video or audio of people inside of our motor vehicles. The mass surveillance of millions of US citizens is unconstitutional. Any surveillance must be specific and time limited, the warrant identifying the specific individuals in question by judicial authority on a case by case basis is a necessary safeguard; it is a protected constitutional right. Not only are there technologies and tools available that cover the same concern without video and audio surveillance, such as motion sensors for contact with the steering wheel while the car is in motion, but the vulnerabilities from hacking cameras by starkers, terrorists, targeted marketing (such as dynamic pricing), or government censorship create more legal and safety problems then they solve. In respect to the last example, it can target people based on political affiliation such as that conducted in the People's Republic of China via their social credit scoring system. We have seen arrests this year of Chinese clandestine police stations in NYC this year 2026 and the PRC is far from the only country that has digital tools capable of hacking cloud servers or AI tools the US uses. Every year, cloud and AI systems show they are just as vulnerable as any other system, from hospital medical records held ransom to the US government's social security system. We already have extensive evidence of different levels of US government, using taxpayer money to pay 3rd party services, to try to track people without their knowledge or consent who are seeking abortion or people trying to exercise their 2nd amendment rights; folks across the political spectrum have strong reasons to object to this proposal. We are building out a reliance on digital technology that is not prioritizing the humanity and constitutional rights of US citizens. Measures such as mandated video cameras or audio in cars for any purpose is always going to create legal and constitutional problems that are wrong and are far too easy to obfuscate from the users ability to track or retain ownership of. Worse still, the companies that design these technology will continue to use their leverage to maximize their control and ownership of these technologies and data while shifting liabilities that are created by their products and services onto the users or innocent passers by. In June 2026, we have already seen a Waymo car obstruct emergency services that were trying to confront a fire. Is it rational to blame this on the people riding in the car and passers by or the company that designed and claims ownership of the operating system? This government proposal for cameras and audio recording in cars has too many red flags. Even with appropriate legislation, it is far too easy for government to abuse and target their political foes or for government to undermine what needs to be enforced by cutting/interrupting funding (shutdowns or layoffs) to key government departments that would be in charge of enforcement to protect US citizens. Companies do the same with dynamic pricing, dynamic insurance rates, selling said data to 3rd parties, etc. Within the last decade, US courts have thrown out tickets made by officers that marked people's cars with chalk on people's tires to mark if they had remained too long in a parking spot. Why would we consent to digital recordings from our vehicles and property when courts have dismissed washable chalk as a viable police enforcement strategy? It crosses a line of the 4th amendment to have our cars searched without a warrant. If it works, a big if, for every 1 drunk driver it "might" catch, it is guaranteed to force dozens of others to become victims to other criminal activity of an economic, social, or even life threatening nature. We cannot think of any sound rational for regulations or laws that would increase criminal or unconstitutional conduct in other areas. In NH, we will always choose to live free in NH over any alternative and we will continue to vote that way.