Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site encore.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!wanginst!vaxine!encore!drelles
From: drelles@encore.UUCP (Robert Drelles)
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Re: 65MPH
Message-ID: <281@encore.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Feb-86 09:57:38 EST
Article-I.D.: encore.281
Posted: Tue Feb 25 09:57:38 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 1-Mar-86 01:32:54 EST
References: <594@drutx.UUCP>
Reply-To: drelles@encore.UUCP (Robert Drelles)
Organization: Encore Computer Corp., Marlboro, MA
Lines: 43
Summary: 

In article <594@drutx.UUCP> pagiven@drutx.UUCP (GivenP) writes:

>There is one issue, however, that I have not seen  discussed  here,
>or  more  generally,  in  any  of the popular media.  And that is a
>State's rights issue.  The Federal government has been granted cer-
>tain  powers  by the Consitution of the United States and ALL other
>powers are resevered for the several States.   Although  I  confess
>complete  ignorance  of Constitutional law, I submit to you, gentle
>reader, that adjusting automobile speed limits is not one of  those
>special powers granted to our central government.

While the 55mph speed limit may represent questionable public policy,
it is clearly constitutional.

(1) Technically, the law does not forbid states from setting a speed
limit higher than 55mph.  It requires that states comply
with the 55mph limit if they receive federal highway money.  If a
state has a non-compliance rate of greater than 50%, their funds
"can" be cut off.  This has never happened.  A while back, Vermont state
officials refused to strengthen its enforcement of the 55,
observing that the cost of enforcement was higher than the
estimated $1 million in highway funds at risk.

(2) The federal government clearly has the right to set speed limits
as part of binding uniform national traffic regulations.  This is
because a large amount of traffic moves across state borders, justifying
a national law on the grounds of the interstate commerce clause of the
constitution.  This is not a "technicality" -- the Boston commuting
radius covers parts of four states.

I don't approve of the 55, except perhaps as an emergency stand-by
regulation in the event of an oil supply shock.  But it is a valid
use of the federal government's power.  I, for one, would like to see
the 55 debate shift from abstract theories of the limits of government
to whether or not this regulation's alleged safety benefits really
offset the costs to long-distance motorists and its frequent use as
a shield for improper police behavior.

Robert Drelles

Disclaimer:
This posting represents the personal views of its author, and not the
views of his employer, co-workers, or anybody else who might take offense.