55 MPH Speed Limit Is Unenforceable and Counterproductive

Impressed with your input. It shows how studies and our intuition could be wrong. I would intuitively support a 55 mph speed limit, nationwide, federal, state, and local roads. Now, I am conflicted. I like that. However, I don't think lack of compliance and insufficient effort/technology are the right reasons to throw this out. I'd rather try a 2-5 state pilot, which is what I think Congress should be doing a lot more of with small and/or single change instead of these sweeping bills no one can read. Wouldn't be a kick in the pants if all insurance companies were required to cover pre-existing conditions with the result that healthcare cost for all of us including insurance companies went down, including our uninsured costs (e.g., hospitals covering uninsured)? Medium term I'm convinced that would happen.

Let's try a 5 state pilot (one in each major Region of country) because

-it is one way we can communicate to ourselves and the world that we are beginning to get serious about reducing CO2 (even if not major impact)

-55mph means, for many of us, we drive 60 to 65 mph; 65 mph means we drive 70 to 75 mph--lower speeds do mean less death and less injury or injury severity

-In a world with less than 30 years of oil left, we better get good at compliance fast--auto trap, ticket gets sent to you like running a red now (and I do hate the poor execution of those citations; need flash at time, clear picture of driver & plate within 2 weeks of infraction sent electronically and 30 days by mail, but need to get a point on license)

-With serious efforts on compliance (local and state treasuries sure need the money), we could really see a reduction in cost of gas, % decrease in foreign oil dependence, and even a slight reduction in the trade deficit

Maybe 55 mph would help get sustainability more mainstream.

Debbie Deland of FL 6:12PM December 30, 2011

I was asked about this question by a Minister of Highways years ago.

First you have to understand that 'Mission Creep' comes from people trying to justify their time 'in charge; and having a 'heritage' : a political fact of life as well as rampant and unmitigated b.s. That's why 'leaving well enough alone' is a hard sell.

But lawyers aren't plumbers and know next to nothing about Flow Dynamics.

Firstly...all the research one could wish has been done already on the Autobahn. The net result of European practice is to quit monkeying around allowing increases in speed at about 130kph : 78 mph. Even racers seldom drive over 85 mph on public highways : too much unpredictability.

But slowing traffic means another fact that should strike one in the face. It means all those mothers and grandmothers with cars and vans full of antsy miscreants are on the road longer...adding numbers of vehicles and reducing distance between them !

The scofflaws...are travelling at speeds which are at a greater variance with the general run of traffic...working more to gain fractions of seconds and stunting and disrupting flow patterns at a great rate.

There is nothing that messes up flow worse than idiots. Make their action relatively worse and so will 'problems'.

opit 4:08PM August 05, 2009

All the 1973 thru 1990's 55 speed limit did was to enrich the courts and F* traffic cops, and jack up insurance rates due to tickets. Repassing it again would yeild the same result. The cities/courts are just looking for a way to steal--I mean ticket-- the public and generate revenue. It also helps to build contempt for the cops who are used a money collectors and not as true policemen.

Andrew Jackson of OH 4:18PM August 03, 2009

Is 55 MPH safer and more economical than 65+ - Yup, without a doubt.

Does co2 cause global warming? Nope. Notwithstanding Climate Guru Gore - there is no evidence that co2, anthropogenic or otherwise, causes climate change.

In the interest of furthering the debate I will provide a few suggestions;

1. Compromise on 60 mph. on all but the most rural highways.

2. Synchronize traffic signals... Millions of gallons are wasted by vehicles idling at un-synchronized traffic controls annually.

3. All signals at other than major intersections put on flashing red or yellow from 10 pm through 6 am. Again millions of gallons saved every year.

4. Raise the driving age to 17.5 - No exceptions. Millions of gallons of fuel are wasted by teens cruising around town. Curtailing driving among teens would also; save lives, reduce crime, graffiti, drug use, pollution and unwanted pregnancies STD's and abortion.

5. Drill Alaska and off shore. Off shore drilling is extremely safe and actually reduces "natural" oil seepage from the seabed. We have a century or more of oil off our shores. Mammals in Alaska have shown no aversion to drilling or pipelines. Polar bear and caribou have actually increased in number since the Alaskan pipeline was built in the '70's.

6. Use more "Yield" signs and fewer stop signs.

7. Re-examine intersections with "4 Way Stops" - many are unnecessary and again, millions of gallons of fuel are wasted stopping and re-accelerating. Replace with "Stop" or "Yield" signs on only one road.

8. Tax incentives for those who buy vehicles getting more than 30 mpg.

9. Focus on fuel economy not emissions and safety. Europe has done this and, on average, their vehicles get about 10 percent better mileage than ours. A vehicle that gets 10% better fuel economy, but produces 1% more pollution per gallon is a winner for air quality.

10. Pass laws that treat all "Stop" signs as "Yield" signs for purposes of making a right hand turn. Coming to a full stop, with no traffic in sight, is an extreme waste of energy and brake linings just to avoid a ticket.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 11:51PM July 28, 2009