Document
Copyright & Fair-use Agreement
UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.Information
Digital ID
Permalink
Transcription
United States of America Congressional Record tb PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 99 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION VoL 132 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, JUNE 17, 1986 No. 82 Senate Mr. HECHT. Mr. President, on January 31, 1985, I introduced legislation, S. 329, for the purpose of changing the 55-mile-per-hour speed limit law. My reasoning for doing so stemmed from seemingly endless pleas of the citizens of Nevada for relief from this law which they felt to be unnecessary, an intrusion in the lives of free spirited Americans, and, overall, a nuisance. Today, more than ever before, the need for this legislation is obvious as we witness a wholesale violation of the 55-mile-per-hour law by a nation that will not comply and by States which have found it to be unenforceable and almost universally ignored. There can be no question, Mr. President, that the time is right for Congress to take a long overdue look at the state of the 55-mile-per-hour law and realize that the law today is a joke and must be modified. And this discussion is even more pertinent today, Mr. President, because just within the last few weeks, the States of Arizona and Vermont experienced the long arm of our Government reaching out and taking away highway construction funds. The only crime committed by these two States is that their motorists exceed the law while enforcement continues to be virtually impossible. Mr. President, we are all aware that when the 55-mile-per-hour law was passed, the United States was experiencing a period of national crisis. There is also no question that upon enactment of 55, highway fatalities decreased 15 percent. But it is an equally established tact that, over the life of s 55, motorists have continually driven faster, and, contrary to the speed kills argument, highway fatality rates have actually declined. In fact, for numerous reasons, America's fatality rate is [ lower today than the period immediately following enactment of 55. Obvi-i ously, linking speed to fatalities does not stand the test. j One other reason for changing the 55-mile-per-hour speed limit, and I think the most important, Mr. President, is the simple matter of States rights. Upon placing 55 on the books, the Federal Government once again entered into the private lives of each and every one of us. Washington stepped in to tell us what we could and could not do; and, even more distressing, the Federal Government threatened to take away highway funding if States failed to enforce 55. At a time when we are placing premier emphasis on returning government back to the people, Congress continues to maintain a law that smacks of unneeded intrusion into our daily lives, this must be changed. Mr. President, compliance figures show that over 75 percent of all drivers today exceed the 55rmile-per-hour limit. Obviously, something must be changed, which is why I introduced S. 329. I believe we must bring this issue back into focus before Secretary Dole is forced to take away highway funds from every State in the Union. The 55-mile-per-hour speed limits' time has come and gone, Mr. President, and I hope Congress will act this year.