Possibly an unpopular notion, but one shouldn't simply ignore proferred evidence:
Evidence.. ??
The article is based on a simple numbers game, where only some of the numbers are deemed relevant. They state: "In 1974, the authors wrote, the US federal government passed the National Maximum Speed Law, which limited driving speeds to 55 miles per hour. The intent was to lower fuel consumption in the aftermath of skyrocketing Arab oil prices after the Yom Kippur War, but in fact, US road fatalities declined from 54,052 in 1973 to 45,196 the following year."
This is classic tunnel vision. I was there. People stopped driving because of gas unavailability, particularly evenings and weekends. Recreational travel was curtailed. If you drove further than one half a gas tank, there was a real possibility you couldn't get back because gas might not be available. There were far fewer drivers and cars on the road. Less people drove, less people on the highways, less fatalities. Why didn't they factor that into their numbers?
But, I question why the arbitrary benchmark of 55MPH? Why not 45 or 20 or Zero? I'd bet money any of these lower choices would save even more lives! If nothing else, much shorter trips would be taken due to time constraints! Certainly lower speeds would be an incentive to just stay home? I speculate the slightly lower number (55) is simply to desensitize in prep for another speed reduction. Also, the speed reduction is more about revenue from a higher population of violators, than about saving lives. I feel the ploy is just subterfuge, really. What they are really lobbying for is spy cameras all over the transportation system. And, someone is going to make a great deal of money for that contract!
As to the safety aspect, the real issue is driver skill, not arbitrary limits. In reality, there are some people that can't handle 30 MPH, much less 55 safely. Yet these people get driver's licenses as a matter of course. I could speculate that lots of incomes; federal, state, and local, depend on having the maximum number of licensed drivers in circulation.
Why is it that there is no real skill required to operate a motor vehicle?
I just got sent, by mail, a new California driver's license good for another four years. No test, either written or demonstrated was required. OK, I haven't had any tickets in quite a long while. They also had absolutely no record that I had driven a vehicle for the last 10 tears. It was just a sign-here-and-pay- us-our-money deal, and the new license showed up a couple weeks later, with the same 8 year old picture on it. Yes, it was convenient for me. But, it sure seems like the overall quality of drivers on the highway continue to diminish, and is often appalling. Many are simply unsafe at any speed.
As I recall, when the speed limits were raised here the US nationwide, the predicted blood bath on the highways didn't materialize. Actually, the fatality rate declined initially, but it has been slowly climbing since. Most stats fail to make mention the difference in the number of cars or drivers that have been added to the highways since 1996.
If you put one marble in a big box, then shake it, it will only hit the walls now and then. As you add marbles the chances of it hitting another marble goes up. If you you put enough marbles in the box, the odds of them hitting each other become pretty frequent.
From Wiki-pedia:
Population of drivers/ Cars (millions) in 1996 - 180/206
Population of drivers/ Cars (millions) in 2003 - 186/231
Wiki-answers states that, "there's more than 5.7 million miles of paved highway in the USA". Ask your self how many new roads have been added along with the increased auto and driver population?
Given that your are packing more drivers and more cars onto the same roads, that makes for a tighter auto/driver density. Note there have been no increases in training regimen. If anything, driver training has become more lax, instead of increasing the driver knowledge base to compensate for the increased risks inherent with higher density.
Is it any wonder that there are more fatal accidents as the population base increases? Particularly when you consider that many of them have lost their marbles?
So, instead of educating/training the drivers that can't perform correctly, the idea is to punish those that CAN maintain good driver performance by making EVERYONE drive incrementally slower, until an acceptable fatality rate is achieved?
And, by the way, it's really best we can keep an eye on all you miscreant non-conformants, too! You need to be watched so you won't step out of line!
