7-11-08 by dugan
Rep. Jackie Speier of California will get points from greenies, and from me personally, for suggesting a 60 mph speed limit to cut national oil consumption. But for a lot of reasons it won’t happen, at least not soon.
The most obvious political reasons: Speier is a freshman in Congress, and her colleagues are unlikely to flock to her for that reason alone. And Congress, especially the Senate, is much more partisan than it was in 1974, when the 55 mph limit was ordered by President Richard Nixon, put in place under President Gerald Ford and ultimately enforced by President Jimmy Carter.
On the practical level, there were actual lines around the block for gasoline in the early 1970s, because of the "Arab oil embargo" that caused nationwide shortages–a real reason for price spikes. Now we’re paying $4.50 for gasoline, and there are plenty of predictions of $5.00 soon, but no shortages. (That’s another story, considering that crude oil shot to $147 a barrel today on little more than"simmering geopolitical tensions" over Iran.)
It’s also an election year, and most politicians won’t do anything that might enrage a majority, or even a loud minority, of voters–think National Rifle Association. Wide-open states like Montana would certainly balk.
Montana, as some will recall, had no speed limit, none, in 1974 and almost refused the 55 mph limit. It settled on making infractions a $5 fine, with no points against the driver’s license. Most highway police didn’t bother. I lived there in the 70’s, and many people thought 90 was a moderate highway speed.
So it’s a great idea, likely to cut another 2% or 3% from national gasoline consumption, on top of the 2% or 3% that drivers have already cut themselves, and make highways safer. Given that most truck lines are cutting their top speed to 55, it would definitely be safer to cut auto speeds.
Yet given that the price of oil hasn’t budged in response to U.S. and European consumption cuts, I wonder if another 2% cut in the U.S. would matter on price. Maybe not, when "simmering geopolitical tensions" not actual supply, seems to control prices.