Senate Votes to Lift Speed Limit to 65 : Would Allow States to Raise Maximum on Rural Highways

The Senate, acknowledging that the 55-m.p.h. speed limit is making lawbreakers out of most American motorists, voted Tuesday to let states raise the maximum speed to 65 m.p.h. on rural interstate highways.

Led by senators from the expansive West, including both Californians, the Senate agreed by a vote of 65 to 33 to increase the limit, despite concerns that it would add to the death toll on the nation’s highways.

“This is a law broken daily by everybody,” Sen. Alan K. Simpson (R-Wyo.) said in urging his colleagues to allow the states to set their own speed limits.

Sections in California

Under the measure, states would get back the authority to set speed limits on interstate highways outside communities that have populations of fewer than 50,000.

In California, that could mean a speed limit of as much as 65 m.p.h. on about 1,400 miles of highway, including sections of Interstate 5 north of Bakersfield, Interstate 10 east of San Bernardino, Interstate 15 north of San Bernardino and Interstate 8 east of San Diego.

Tuesday’s vote, which attached the speed limit provision to a massive $52.4-billion highway construction bill, marks the Senate’s second attempt to win approval of the higher limit.

The first failed at the end of the last congressional session when the House and Senate could not agree on a similar highway spending bill that contained a speed limit amendment--leaving many states without funds needed for thousands of construction projects.

The Senate bill, with the speed limit amendment attached, could win passage as early as today. The House version of the highway construction bill, passed Jan. 21, would not change the current 55-m.p.h. speed limit.

Prospects Uncertain

Prospects for the speed limit change in House-Senate conference committee are uncertain. House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.) opposes raising the limit, crediting the lower speed with saving 48,000 lives since it was set in 1973. Rep. James J. Howard (D-N.J.), chairman of the House Public Works and Transportation Committee, also favors retaining the lower speed limit. Last August, the House voted against raising the speed limit on a 218-198 vote.

Opponents of the 65-m.p.h. limit say that in addition to causing as many as 1,000 more traffic deaths a year, the higher speeds would burn up $2 billion more in fuel while saving motorists an average of only minutes a day.

“There can be no dispute that raising the limit will cost lives,” Sen. John C. Danforth (R-Mo.) said. “A minute a day really means nothing. Six hundred to 1,000 lives mean a great deal.”

The 55-m.p.h. speed limit was imposed by the federal government in 1974 when the nation was faced with a severe oil shortage. The lower speed immediately resulted in a reduction of fuel consumption and traffic deaths.

During the last 13 years, however, motorists have gradually increased their speeds to the point that an estimated three-fourths of the nation’s drivers now exceed the 55-m.p.h. limit, surveys show.

‘Laws That Breed Contempt’

Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Tex.) argued that the states should have the authority to raise the speed limit, saying: “We ought not to have laws that breed contempt for the law.”

The House measure would authorize $91.6 billion for transportation projects over a five-year period and includes money for many local projects that the Senate opposes. The Senate bill proposes to spend $52.4 billion over a four-year period.

President Reagan, who supports the 65-m.p.h. limit on rural interstate highways, has threatened to veto the highway bill if it exceeds $77 million in highway spending.

The delay in passage has brought pressure from the states and the highway construction industry, which are eagerly awaiting approval so that they can begin construction programs this spring.

Support in West

The speed limit amendment was most strongly supported by senators representing Western states, where long straight highways stretch for miles through the farmland and deserts. California’s senators, Democrat Alan Cranston and Republican Pete Wilson, voted for the measure.

Sen. Steven D. Symms (R-Ida.), the sponsor of the speed limit proposal, argued that it would not lead to more accidents on the highways because motorists are already traveling at 65 m.p.h. or more.

In addition, he said, raising the limit would free law enforcement officers to pursue more serious violators, such as drunk drivers, who pose the greatest safety hazard. “To really save lives, we need to get the drunks off the highways,” Symms said.