Lower Speed Limits

I recently (11-13-08) read an article in the Wichita Eagle entitled, “Idea to lower speed limits runs out of gas”, by David Klepper.

I was disappointed in the decision and the way the decision was apparently made. The Kansas Energy Council dropped proposed recommendations for lowering speed limits and proposed recommendations to increase speed limit enforcement and raise fines for speeding.

The article indicated that the Council received comments from 138 people and 103 opposed the move. And our local State Senator, Jay Emler, R. Lindsborg, as member of the Council said, “The constituents I’ve talked to are just adamantly opposed.” Whoa here, an important decision affecting the whole State was decided by 103 negative comments and some constituents members talked to – that is a little scary.

Senator Emler is also credited with suggesting that the proposal needed to pass the Legislature, where it likely would have been a nonstarter.

I’d like to know who these 103 powerful people were and who Senator Emler talked to – hopefully it wasn’t just members of trucker lobby?

The U.S. Department of Energy calculates that gas mileage decreases rapidly at speeds above 60 mph – each 5 mph over 60 is like adding an extra 30 cents to the cost of every gallon of gas. That is a pretty substantial savings for all of us. And, maybe more importantly, a significant savings on use of fossil fuels which we all should be willing to consider.

“Speed kills” – enough said.

Wear and tear on vehicles and roads was not discussed, but I would guess that along with weight and weather, speed makes a difference.

I think it is interesting to figure the time difference at different speeds. In a 30 mile interstate trip going 60 mph vs. 70 mph, the time difference is about 4 1/4 minutes. With a 60 mile trip the time difference is about 8 1/2 minutes. With a 300 mile trip the difference is about 42 minutes. I don’t consider these differences significant vs.what one gains. I understand that it would be an issue for over the road truckers. But, actually, these time differences probably wouldn’t be as stated above in that it is nearly impossible to average 70 mph on most trips.

Personally, I’d be willing to accept the following, not because I like it, but because it seems to me a pretty painless way for each of us to sacrifice to reduce dependence on foreign oil:
60 mph on interstates – with 10% grace.
55 mph on 2 lane hard surface roads – with 10% grace.
50 mph on gravel roads.
Leaving each town, city, and county to set lower ones in their jurisdiction.

If the State Legislature decides that these reductions don’t make sense and/or the majority of the driving public in Kansas don’t want these reductions that is fine with me. I can keep up with most or choose to do my part in saving money and resources on my own.

However, our form of government is a republic. We elect legislators to go to Topeka and decide the best course for our State – to lead. Sometimes they might have to step up and do what’s best even if it is not popular, especially if it saves lives, money, and resources. But, to hide behind “the old saw”, “the people have spoken,” let it be more than 103 negative comments and the word of a few constituents. If they want to avoid “tough calls” maybe we should use scientific polls or have special elections (we are getting close to being able to doing this quickly and easily with computer age) to make legislative decisions. I hope we never do that, but if electability is the key factor in decision making, maybe we should.