Is the era of speed limit increases over?

[Ted$8roadFan]

I doubt there will be any speed limit increases in New England anytime soon. IIRC, only Maine has a max speed over 65.

[hotdogPi]

I doubt there will be any speed limit increases in New England anytime soon. IIRC, only Maine has a max speed over 65.

There are some 70s in New Hampshire.

[Rothman]

Meanwhile, in Québec, we're still stuck at 100 km/h, or 62 mph. Not that people don't go 120 km/h (75 mph) anyways...

Driving in Canada with their confoundingly low speed limits is an interesting experience...

[kphoger]

ID, MT, NV, OK, SD, TX (in small places), UT, and WY currently allow 80 on their freeways. I find it very surprising that KS hasn't returned to that number, since I remember it being used (prior to the NMSL being adopted) by studying old atlases.

But, as you may observe, none of those states border Kansas—except for Oklahoma, where none of the 80mph turnpikes connect to any Kansas highway.  All that is to say, not a single 80mph highway anywhere hits the Kansas state line.

[vdeane]

The complete list is below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_the_United_States

I'm surprised ND hasn't been able to pass an increase to 80 mph seeing as it's flat and has a low population.

ID, MT, NV, OK, SD, TX (in small places), UT, and WY currently allow 80 on their freeways. I find it very surprising that KS hasn't returned to that number, since I remember it being used (prior to the NMSL being adopted) by studying old atlases. Also, I think AZ, NE and NM should at least consider joining the 80 club.

AZ has the issue of the super speeder law being 85. Unless that changes, don't expect AZ to raise their limit. ND recently tried and failed. Nebraska tried in the late 2010s and also failed. NM hasn't been tried, but I wouldn't expect it given state politics. At this point, I'd be surprised if even any of the 70 states jump to 75. Ohio looked at it but shelved, ME and MI have maxed out where it is reasonable, the west coast will never (despite WA law allowing up to 75).

These are good examples of why the paradigm of "the speed limit is 10 mph slower than what we want traffic to actually go" needs to die.  75 mph is a very comfortable speed to drive on rural interstates everywhere, even in the northeast.  But because they don't want you to go faster than that, they sign the limit at 65 instead.   And that "super speeder" law wouldn't be an issue for raising the limit to 80 if you did it with the understanding that traffic speeds are to remain unchanged (like Wyoming did, where it's very possible to get a ticket for speeding even when only going 3 over in the 80 zones).

Honestly, I'd rather have pervasive speed cameras with reasonable limits instead of lax enforcement plus unreasonably low limits, but I seem to be in the minority on that.  Why someone would rather break a rule and get away with it most but not all of the time instead of following a rule all the time (and therefore never get punished for breaking the rule) is beyond me (not just on this issue, but with respect to life in general).

(personal opinion)

[GaryV]

But, as you may observe, none of those states border Kansas

No state that borders Michigan had a 75mph speed limit when Michigan increased it. And no 75mph freeway connects to another state.

[wxfree]

801(C) only applies to controlled-access highways.  That a "speed limit of seventy-five (75) miles per hour may be set in locations ... [where] that speed is determined to be safe and reasonable after a traffic or engineering study" does seem to mean that no speed limit above 75 mph is permitted to be set on controlled-access highways.  That is, it appears to be the maximum allowed under 801(C).  And if that's the case, then only non-controlled-access highways remain without a legally permitted maximum.

That would make sense if subsection B1 (wrong section, thought it was A for some reason lol) still specified the maximum lawful speed limits numerically. California does this to some extent, as no vehicle may exceed 65mph on any roadway. CalTrans has the specific authority to post 70mph on freeways where an engineering study specifies this speed is safe. Technically they're not explicitly prohibited from posting 75+mph, but the law stating that no vehicle may exceed 65mph overrides whatever the sign says unless it's 70mph, leading to a potentially serious legal concern. However, in Oklahoma, the default speed limits listed in paragraphs following only apply in certain situations and can also be altered up or down without limitation.

This is an interesting legal discussion lol      I like where this is going 

(I am not a lawyer nor have I consulted with one as a part of this conversation)

For anyone else wanting to give this a read, https://oksenate.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/os47.pdf and go to §47-11-801

Speed limit laws, one of my favorite things!

Read each line and take everything in context.  Section 801 A is the basic speed law, worded as "careful and prudent."

801 B says "Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with subsection A of this section, the limits specified by law or established as hereinafter authorized shall be maximum lawful speeds, and no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed in excess of the following maximum limits:"

This tells us how maximum speeds are set.  It can be a numerical value or a result of a speed study.  Speed study limits can be capped.

801 B 1 gives the first speed limit: "On a highway or part of a highway, unless otherwise established in law, a speed established by the Department of Transportation on the basis of engineering and traffic investigations used to determine the speed that is reasonable and safe under the conditions found to exist on the highway or part of the highway."

This is where numerical limits would generally be listed, such as "on a divided highway, 65" or "on a rural Interstate highway, 75."  No numbers are listed.  The department will set the limits in accordance with traffic engineering principles, without a defined cap.

801 C says: "A speed limit of seventy-five (75) miles per hour may be set in locations comprising rural segments of the interstate highway system by the Commission."

This looks like an exception to a general maximum.  Years ago in Texas we had a maximum of 70 with two exceptions, 75 in low-population counties and 80 on defined stretches of Interstates.  Subsection D gives OTA authority to set a speed limit of 80.  Whether this is intended to present a cap is uncertain.  If there were a lower numerical limit and these were higher exceptions, then it would be clear.

802 says: "Whenever the State Highway Commission shall determine upon the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation that any maximum speed hereinbefore set forth is greater or less than is reasonable or safe under the conditions found to exist at any intersection or other place or upon any part of the state highway system, said Commission may determine and declare a reasonable and safe maximum limit thereat which, when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected, shall be effective at all times, or during hours of daylight or darkness or at such other times as may be determined at such intersection or other place or part of the highway."

This is from 1961, so it isn't a recent change.  It appears to override any cap set before.  My reading of this is that the department always had authority to set higher limits.  It could be read to say that a speed limit of 50 can be raised to 60, numbers below a cap.  Given that there are no caps given anywhere, only exceptions to caps that may have existed before, and that this section says "any" [with emphasis] maximum speed given (which would include caps), can be changed, and does not specify another limit, I would say that the department doesn't have numerical limits (and under this section, has not since at least 1961).  To me, that's the clear meaning of this section, and only thing it can mean unless you assume it means something other than what it says.  As for whether this is what the department understands the statute to mean, I can't say.  This section doesn't apply to the OTA, so for them the matter is less clear.

Texas statute, for comparison, gives a default speed of 70 and the authority to alter limits.  It clearly states that the commission may not establish a speed limit of higher than 75, with clear exceptions for a speed limit of 80 on particular parts of Interstates and a limit of no higher than 85 authorized in another subsection.  That structure, which has the most effect on me, is how I understand speed laws, which affects how I read any such statute.

[kphoger]

But, as you may observe, none of those states border Kansas

No state that borders Michigan had a 75mph speed limit when Michigan increased it. And no 75mph freeway connects to another state.

True.  And, if Michigan hadn't raised their speed limit to 75 mph, then I wouldn't have found it "very surprising" because of that very fact.

[wxfree]

Honestly, I'd rather have pervasive speed cameras with reasonable limits instead of lax enforcement plus unreasonably low limits, but I seem to be in the minority on that.  Why someone would rather break a rule and get away with it most but not all of the time instead of following a rule all the time (and therefore never get punished for breaking the rule) is beyond me (not just on this issue, but with respect to life in general).

(personal opinion)

I'm with you there.  Give us proper speed limits, such that safe and reasonable drivers are not in violation of the law, and enforce them strictly, penalizing unsafe and unreasonable driving.

I also see it in a broader context, such as tipping.  People like to put tipping in terms of being cheap and not being willing to pay for service.  To me, it isn't about that.  It's pointed out that menu prices would be raised if tipping went away, and I think that would be good.  Paying for service should not be optional.  You don't pay a mechanic or a plumber for the parts they use and then pay for the labor if you thought the service was good.  You know the cost upfront.  Another problem is that bringing me scrambled eggs should not be worth less than bringing me steak.  It's the same labor and shouldn't pay based on the value of the order.  My main objection is that I have no idea what labor is worth.  A percentage of the check doesn't make sense, because cheap options don't require less time and effort than expensive ones.  It isn't my job to know what the individual elements cost, that's the manager's job.  The manager then sets the prices and I decide whether I want to pay that amount for that item.  I'm not going to pay 20 cents more for a club sandwich because the tomatoes were really good.  To me, tipping is like that.  I tip well, by the way.  I'm not complaining because I don't want to pay, I'm complaining because I don't know (and shouldn't have to know) how much the service is worth.  In the same way I don't know and shouldn't have to know what the "real" speed limit is, the speed at which you won't be stopped.

[kphoger]

Another problem is that bringing me scrambled eggs should not be worth less than bringing me steak.  It's the same labor and shouldn't pay based on the value of the order.  My main objection is that I have no idea what labor is worth.  A percentage of the check doesn't make sense, because cheap options don't require less time and effort than expensive ones.  It isn't my job to know what the individual elements cost, that's the manager's job.  The manager then sets the prices and I decide whether I want to pay that amount for that item.  I'm not going to pay 20 cents more for a club sandwich because the tomatoes were really good.  To me, tipping is like that.  I tip well, by the way.  I'm not complaining because I don't want to pay, I'm complaining because I don't know (and shouldn't have to know) how much the service is worth.

I agree in principle.  But it might also be less of a problem than it first appears.

In general, a restaurant whose food costs more will tend to have better waitstaff.  Chances are, if a restaurant serves a $35 steak, then I'm probably not eating a $4 plate of scrambled eggs, and the waiter is probably not a total doofus (exceptions exist!).  Even if I'm not eating the steak, my meal is still in the mid-upper price range.

[Rothman]

Makes me wonder about the flak over McDonald's since it started paying its workers about $15/hr and the complaints that it is now "expensive."

People talk a good game in terms of paying more if you get rid of tips.  Not so much in reality.


And then you have the good, high-tip-chasing waitstaff that says they prefer tips...

[kphoger]

Makes me wonder about the flak over McDonald's since it started paying its workers about $15/hr and the complaints that it is now "expensive."

People talk a good game in terms of paying more if you get rid of tips.  Not so much in reality.

I still always tip at McDonald's anyway.

[Rothman]

Makes me wonder about the flak over McDonald's since it started paying its workers about $15/hr and the complaints that it is now "expensive."

People talk a good game in terms of paying more if you get rid of tips.  Not so much in reality.

I still always tip at McDonald's anyway.

The person behind the counter or drive-thru?  That's semi-unique.

[jeffandnicole]

Makes me wonder about the flak over McDonald's since it started paying its workers about $15/hr and the complaints that it is now "expensive."

People talk a good game in terms of paying more if you get rid of tips.  Not so much in reality.

I still always tip at McDonald's anyway.

Can employees even accept tips at McDonalds?

[Molandfreak]

Meanwhile, in Québec, we're still stuck at 100 km/h, or 62 mph. Not that people don't go 120 km/h (75 mph) anyways...

Driving in Canada with their confoundingly low speed limits is an interesting experience...

It's outrageous. Ontario did throw a bone and increase the limit to 110 on freeways, but the desolate highways of Northern Ontario are still stuck at 90. Even the twinned section of the TCH from Thunder Bay to Nipigon is stuck at 90. These highways were good enough for 60 mph before the oil crisis—100 km/h is more than reasonable today.

[ElishaGOtis]

The complete list is below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_the_United_States

I'm surprised ND hasn't been able to pass an increase to 80 mph seeing as it's flat and has a low population.

ID, MT, NV, OK, SD, TX (in small places), UT, and WY currently allow 80 on their freeways. I find it very surprising that KS hasn't returned to that number, since I remember it being used (prior to the NMSL being adopted) by studying old atlases. Also, I think AZ, NE and NM should at least consider joining the 80 club.

AZ has the issue of the super speeder law being 85. Unless that changes, don't expect AZ to raise their limit. ND recently tried and failed. Nebraska tried in the late 2010s and also failed. NM hasn't been tried, but I wouldn't expect it given state politics. At this point, I'd be surprised if even any of the 70 states jump to 75. Ohio looked at it but shelved, ME and MI have maxed out where it is reasonable, the west coast will never (despite WA law allowing up to 75).

These are good examples of why the paradigm of "the speed limit is 10 mph slower than what we want traffic to actually go" needs to die.  75 mph is a very comfortable speed to drive on rural interstates everywhere, even in the northeast.  But because they don't want you to go faster than that, they sign the limit at 65 instead.

Ironically this was one of many justifications why Florida's attempt at allowing 75mph was stopped. Sign 75 and "everyone" will be driving 85. And goodness forbid the "think of the children" argument was used due to concerns over teen drivers going 85+. Not too long ago I was one of those teen drivers, and 85 was freaking slow for my peers...

I also find it ironic that in Florida the argument tends to change a lot about what "everyone" does with respect to a posted speed limit. Sometimes I hear "everyone" goes 5 over (ok I'll admit I'm in this group), other times I'll hear that "everyone" goes 10 over, and more recently I've been hearing "everyone" goes 15 over.

Also, if "everyone" goes 10-15 over and that was the justification for keeping the 70 cap, why do I know people who have gotten ticketed for 76-78 in the 70?

Honestly, I'd rather have pervasive speed cameras with reasonable limits instead of lax enforcement plus unreasonably low limits, but I seem to be in the minority on that.  Why someone would rather break a rule and get away with it most but not all of the time instead of following a rule all the time (and therefore never get punished for breaking the rule) is beyond me (not just on this issue, but with respect to life in general).

(personal opinion)

Ironically some European countries now allow speed limits of 150km/h if the motorway section is equipped with Average Speed Cameras. None are currently posted as such but they are legal as of a few years ago.

[michiganguy123]

It's hilarious how low speed limits are in cities outside of Michigan.
You can fly through downtown Grand Rapids at 70mph with a sharp 50mph advisory curve but god forbid you go over 60mph on a completely straight limited access highway in Toledo, OH. Last time I drove through there I had cars flying past going 80mph just like in Michigan but the speed differential was a lot different. The second I hit the Michigan border I crank the cruise control up to 80mph.

Same thing with Indiana making US freeways only 65mph while interstates get to be 70 like a little badge makes the freeway less safe.

[cl94]

Honestly, I'd rather have pervasive speed cameras with reasonable limits instead of lax enforcement plus unreasonably low limits, but I seem to be in the minority on that.  Why someone would rather break a rule and get away with it most but not all of the time instead of following a rule all the time (and therefore never get punished for breaking the rule) is beyond me (not just on this issue, but with respect to life in general).

This is generally how enforcement works in Europe. Sure, motorways in most European countries have 120-140 km/h limits, but there is zero tolerance and strict enforcement, with enough cameras to ensure that you will get nabbed. The UK is an exception, generally following the standard US policy of underposting.

[Road Hog]

Gonna be hard to increase speeds on most of the German autobahns when the speed limit is already c

[ElishaGOtis]

Gonna be hard to increase speeds on most of the German autobahns when the speed limit is already c

You could increase the advisory speed to 140-160 or something idk 

[ElishaGOtis]

IT'S HAPPENING 

ND House passes 80mph bill https://www.kxnet.com/news/local-news/north-dakota-state-house-once-again-passes-speed-limit-increase/amp/

[epzik8]

IT'S HAPPENING 

ND House passes 80mph bill https://www.kxnet.com/news/local-news/north-dakota-state-house-once-again-passes-speed-limit-increase/amp/

One of their representatives must have seen this thread

[ElishaGOtis]

IT'S HAPPENING 

ND House passes 80mph bill https://www.kxnet.com/news/local-news/north-dakota-state-house-once-again-passes-speed-limit-increase/amp/

One of their representatives must have seen this thread

Well...

I'm wondering if it may be useful to write your state legislator and at least ask the question. You can't win the lottery if you don't play, after all. 

...Someone did 

[kphoger]

Makes me wonder about the flak over McDonald's since it started paying its workers about $15/hr and the complaints that it is now "expensive."

People talk a good game in terms of paying more if you get rid of tips.  Not so much in reality.

I still always tip at McDonald's anyway.

The person behind the counter or drive-thru?  That's semi-unique.

Can employees even accept tips at McDonalds?

The truth is that I almost never go to McDonald's.  Maybe once a year?  Pretty much only ever because we're meeting someone there.

[Rothman]

Makes me wonder about the flak over McDonald's since it started paying its workers about $15/hr and the complaints that it is now "expensive."

People talk a good game in terms of paying more if you get rid of tips.  Not so much in reality.

I still always tip at McDonald's anyway.

The person behind the counter or drive-thru?  That's semi-unique.

Can employees even accept tips at McDonalds?

The truth is that I almost never go to McDonald's.  Maybe once a year?  Pretty much only ever because we're meeting someone there.

Stay out of stand-up and keep your day job.