A legislative tuneup in the works could improve safety on the roads sooner rather than later by removing regulatory obstacles holding back the cars of the future.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., chairman of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, and Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., announced last month a new effort to find ways to help the innovators behind self-driving vehicle technology reach their "full potential."

"More than any other automotive technology in history, self-driving vehicles have the potential to dramatically reduce the more than 35,000 lives lost on our roads and highways every year and fundamentally transform the way we get around," the senators said in a statement. "Ensuring American innovators can safely develop and implement this technology will not only save lives, but also solidify our nation's position as the world leader in the future of mobility."

The lawmakers say current federal vehicle safety standards are outdated because they were created with a human driver in mind.

Federal safety standards dictating car construction and performance require such things as steering wheels, break pedals and gas pedals be installed in every vehicle even as auto manufacturers work toward a future of driving without the need for any human control. Autonomous vehicle makers can apply for an exemption from the rules, but only 2,500 exemptions are allowed in a 12-month period.

Many car companies are looking to bring fleets of semi-autonomous cars to the streets in just a few years which still allow for some human control, but full automation likely won't be far behind. Boston Consulting Group predicts that by 2035, there may be 12 million fully autonomous units sold a year worldwide.

"Left on its own, the slow pace of regulation could become a significant obstacle to the development of new and safer vehicle technology in the United States," the senators wrote. "We are particularly interested in ways to improve regulatory flexibility for testing and development of self-driving vehicles without changes to regulations that would affect conventional autos."

Regulatory hurdles are also in the crosshairs of the auto industry, which desires flexibility in how autonomous technology achieves improved safety. Representatives from companies such as General Motors, Toyota and Volvo made the case before a House subcommittee last month.

Gill Pratt, executive technical adviser and CEO of the Toyota Research Institute, called for an "evidence-based approach" in which "the government sets what the criteria are for performance, and that that's done at the federal level, but does not dictate what the ways are to meet that particular level of performance."

"We wouldn't want to see the government taking steps to specify a specific technology or specific solution," said Mike Ableson, vice president of global strategy at General Motors.

Instead, he said the voluntary guidelines published last year by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which include a 15-point checklist to "further guide the safe testing and deployment" of automated vehicles, would be a good starting point for future regulations because they "don't specify a technology, but specify what the expectations are before vehicles are deployed in a driverless fashion."

The Trump administration says it is re-evaluating these Obama-era guidelines in order to "ensure that it strikes the right balance." During her first major speech as transportation secretary, Elaine Chao told the National Governors Assocation: "There's a lot at stake in getting this technology right," and the administration wants to ensure it is a "catalyst for safe, efficient technologies, not an impediment."

Another component of Thune and Peters' effort will explore how to address the "existing patchwork" of laws and regulations put in place by states in the absence of federal law that in some cases are a headache for the companies working to perfect self-driving tech.

Eleven states and Washington, D.C., have passed legislation related to self-driving cars, notes the National Conference of State Legislatures. Governors in Arizona and Massachusetts have issued executive orders impacting the technology. Some of these regulations are stricter that others.

In California, for example, testing self-driving cars requires a company to prove it has $5 million in insurance and that all test drivers are trained, according to the NCSL. Meanwhile, a 2015 executive order in Arizona told state agencies to "undertake any necessary steps to support the testing and operation of self-driving vehicles on public roads within Arizona."

A series of bills being considered in a handful of states — Tennessee, Georgia, Illinois and Maryland — would restrict self-driving car deployment to companies that manufacture cars, which is troubling for companies that don't make cars but are developing and testing self-driving technology.

This sort of "patchwork" of state laws, Volvo's Anders Karrberg told House lawmakers last month, "will delay making roads safer in America. It's also a competitive disadvantage. This is a race for jobs. I've discussed lots of regulations with politicians in the U.S., Europe and China. Six years ago, I put the U.S. in the lead. Seeing the patchwork, I'm not so sure."