National speed limit pushed as gas saver

[#98QBKiller]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/03/warner.speed.limit.ap/index.html

National speed limit pushed as gas saver

WASHINGTON (AP) -- An influential Republican senator suggested Thursday that Congress might want to consider reimposing a national speed limit to save gasoline and possibly ease fuel prices.

Sen. John Warner, R-Virginia, asked Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman to look into what speed limit would provide optimum gasoline efficiency given current technology. He said he wants to know if the administration might support efforts in Congress to require a lower speed limit.

Congress in 1974 set a national 55 mph speed limit because of energy shortages caused by the Arab oil embargo. The speed limit was repealed in 1995 when crude oil dipped to $17 a barrel and gasoline cost $1.10 a gallon.

As motorists headed on trips for this Fourth of July weekend, gasoline averaged $4.10 a gallon nationwide, with oil hovering around $145 a barrel.

Warner cited studies that showed the 55 mph speed limit saved 167,000 barrels of oil a day, or 2 percent of the country's highway fuel consumption, while avoiding up to 4,000 traffic deaths a year.

"Given the significant increase in the number of vehicles on America's highway system from 1974 to 2008, one could assume that the amount of fuel that could be conserved today is far greater," Warner wrote Bodman.

Warner asked the department to determine at what speeds vehicles would be most fuel efficient, how much fuel savings would be achieved, and whether it would be reasonable to assume there would be a reduction in prices at the pump if the speed limit were lowered.

Energy Department spokeswoman Angela Hill said the department will review Warner's letter but added, "If Congress is serious about addressing gasoline prices, they must take action on expanding domestic oil and natural gas production."

The department's Web site says that fuel efficiency decreases rapidly when traveling faster than 60 mph. Every additional 5 mph over that threshold is estimated to cost motorists "essentially an additional 30 cents per gallon in fuel costs," Warner said in his letter, citing the DOE data.

[Fergasun]

You've got to be kidding me, if this happens we should go ballistic, this is effing ridiculous! We can drive slower if we want to save gas or drive faster if we value our time more than the gas savings. This is such an unconstitutional over-stepping of Federal power that whoever suggested this needs to be recalled in an election in November!

[Duckus]

You've got to be kidding me, if this happens we should go ballistic, this is effing ridiculous! We can drive slower if we want to save gas or drive faster if we value our time more than the gas savings. This is such an unconstitutional over-stepping of Federal power that whoever suggested this needs to be recalled in an election in November!

Unconstitutional :laugh: . Now, I agree the law would be stupid. But the government has the right to regulate the speed at which people can drive on public roads.

The Republican whose idea it is, is not seeking re-election this time.

[SkinsOrlando]

I Can't Drive 55!!!!!!

[Raub]

Worst. Idea. Ever.

[pvkeeper19]

The advantage is overstated. I have tested this, and in my car (1999 Ford Crown Victoria), I get 23 highway MPG whether I drive 55 or 70. Other cars may differ.

[Brad89]

I Can't Drive 55!!!!!!

I drove up to jersey last weekend, and I feel comfortable saying that everyone above Va(including DC) thinks the speed limit is just a suggestion. I doubt it would change much, aside from creating more revenue from speeding tickets.

[Tastes Like Chicken]

I think this is a good idea. Going 70 instead of 60 will save you only a couple minutes on a typical commute anyways.

[Renegade7]

Don't cars normally eat up less gas when they drive faster as opposed to driving slower? I've been told it depends on how you drive, but when I'm on the interstate I like to get up 10 to 15 over the limit and cruise till I get back to the speed limit. Harder to do that the slower I drive.

Stupid idea, imo.

[joeknows]

I drove up to jersey last weekend, and I feel comfortable saying that everyone above Va(including DC) thinks the speed limit is just a suggestion. I doubt it would change much, aside from creating more revenue from speeding tickets.

hahahah yup when i served the navy in CT back in the 90's i was amazed especially in new york at how fast yall drive up there....... whoohoo i could tell you some stories .......

but didnt we try this 55 thing once before? doesnt save **** for gas,,, wastes valuable time and is also a way for the states to cash in from fines.....

[Duckus]

Don't cars normally eat up less gas when they drive faster as opposed to driving slower?

No, it is supposed to use less gas the slower you drive (until a certain speed). But as other people have said, I don't think it makes that much of a difference. But maybe other people have a better idea of the statistics on it.

[SnyderShrugged]

Unconstitutional :laugh: . Now, I agree the law would be stupid. But the government has the right to regulate the speed at which people can drive on public roads.

The Republican whose idea it is, is not seeking re-election this time.

No, the government does NOT have the right to regulate speed on public roads. It is not an enumerated power and thus the province of the states.

Gosh, it gets frustrating that most folks dont seem to undertstand the limits the founders put upon a federal governemnt.

[Tastes Like Chicken]

I think there's a certain sweet spot where you're basically coasting, not accelerating much anymore, but not flying like speed racer, either.

On a side note, I never understood why cars have speedometers that go well over 100mph when the legal limit is 55-65 most places. Makes you feel like you're wasting your car's capabilities.

[BlueinBuf]

I get my best mileage going 70ish with cruise control on, I think it is totally dependent on what kind of car you drive.

[Duckus]

No, the government does NOT have the right to regulate speed on public roads. It is not an enumerated power and thus the province of the states.

Gosh, it gets frustrating that most folks dont seem to undertstand the limits the founders put upon a federal governemnt.

They do have the power, because they can choose how and where to spend the national transportation money. No state has a right to that money. Every state has to have it. Just like the drinking age, the national government could say - make this your speed limit or no money for your highways. Hence they have the power, and can do it if they want.

Just like the drinking age they could tie benefits to lower speed limits. The lower you move your speed limit to a national standard, the more bonus % funding you get. The power is where the money is.

Addition - I believe in 1988 it was ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court to do this.

[Fergasun]

Personally I'd like to see states try to stand up when the federal government tries to bully them around... but none of them do it because they "need the money"... its horrible... no?

[Duckus]

Personally I'd like to see states try to stand up when the federal government tries to bully them around... but none of them do it because they "need the money"... its horrible... no?

I agree with that - but we are talking about a crap load of money. So it is really hard for states to stand up on these things.

Good thing for us - I don't think this will have a chance

[PokerPacker]

Personally I'd like to see states try to stand up when the federal government tries to bully them around... but none of them do it because they "need the money"... its horrible... no?

what really pisses me off, is where does the federal government get that money from in the first place that it holds over the states' heads? THE STATES! :mad:

I am sick and tired of the games that our government is playing to get around the constitution.

[Fergasun]

I suppose the "tipping" point would be if states allow their constituents to not pay federal income tax and provide immunity... in fact they could allow the constituents to pay 50% of what they pay to the feds to the state to make up for the funding shortfall...

[Springfield]

This is why the "speed limit" was initally imposed. To save gas during the last gas crisis.

Stupid idea if you ask me. But I don't have a voice in this. The government knows what's best for all of us, right?

[PokerPacker]

I suppose the "tipping" point would be if states allow their constituents to not pay federal income tax and provide immunity... in fact they could allow the constituents to pay 50% of what they pay to the feds to the state to make up for the funding shortfall...

that would be AWESOME! The states need more checks on the Federal government.

[SnyderShrugged]

They do have the power, because they can choose how and where to spend the national transportation money. No state has a right to that money. Every state has to have it. Just like the drinking age, the national government could say - make this your speed limit or no money for your highways. Hence they have the power, and can do it if they want.

Just like the drinking age they could tie benefits to lower speed limits. The lower you move your speed limit to a national standard, the more bonus % funding you get. The power is where the money is.

Addition - I believe in 1988 it was ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court to do this.

We weren't discussing Federal extortion, we were speaking specifically of the "Right" to impose a national speed limit, which is not granted via the constitution.

[artmonkforHOF]

what cars where they driving taht got better fuel milage at 55 mph than 65mph? My car gets the best gas milage between 68-75mph. I would lose close to 100 miles per tank if I drove slower.

[Sarge]

I wouldn't call John Warner a Republican these days

Or you could say that he's turned into the kind of Republican that has gotten the party its ass handed to it the last few years in the elections

[praise_gibbs]

I drove up to jersey last weekend, and I feel comfortable saying that everyone above Va(including DC) thinks the speed limit is just a suggestion. I doubt it would change much, aside from creating more revenue from speeding tickets.

:laugh: :laugh:

Couldn't be anymore true!