[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: 55 now 70, =$
I agree with Mr. Field's analysis. As they said during the Watergate
investigation, ". . . follow the money." My guess that the oil
companies see a golden opportunity to increase revenue through
increased consumption. The "pro-market" congress (less regulation, no
matter what the issue) is ripe for influencing.
Althought I don't agree with the notion that all regulation is bad I'm
happy to see the posted speed limits may change to reflect the speeds
that 80 percent of the drivers drive.
my $.02
DAvid
On Fri, 22 Sep 1995, Jerry FIELDS wrote:
> C'mon, guys and girls, you havn't thought this through...
>
> Higher speed means less MPG. More gasoline sold, govt collects more
> tax $. My current state of residence (Wisconsin) is contemplating a 4
> - 5 cent per gallon additional gas tax; we're already the 2nd highest
> in the nation. Since the current speed limit isn't being enforced
> (much) there will be very little loss of revenue from tickets; after
> all, they can still ticket the people who exceed the new limit to get
> that same money.
>
> The change in the speed limit question is less about safety,
> capability of cars or drivers, and convenience than it is about
> political posing and money. A very unpopular congress, Republican and
> Democrat, is looking for a popular issue at the start of the primary
> voting season. Big oil producing states have a lot of electoral
> votes...and campaign contributors...
>
> With EPA mandating higher MPG figures, the only way to keep
> consumption high is to drive faster...
>
> A mostly tounge-in-cheek observation on the current political climate
> by
>
> Jerry Fields
>
> jerry.fields@ccmail.adp.wisc.edu
>
>
davidder@teleport.COM Public Access User --- Not affiliated with TECHbooks
Public Access UNIX and Internet at (503) 220-1016 (2400-14400, N81)
- References:
- 55 now 70, =$
- From: "Jerry FIELDS" <Jerry.Fields@ccmail.adp.wisc.edu>