Bid for 65-M.P.H. Limit Gains Speed : Federal Ceiling of 55 Faces Its Toughest Test in Congress

The federal 55-m.p.h. speed limit, ignored by motorists and scorned by many lawmakers, is facing its toughest test in Congress since it was adopted 13 years ago.

A proposal to let states raise the limit to 65 m.p.h. on rural interstate highways is picking up momentum and even the most ardent supporters of the 55-m.p.h. limit say they may not be able to put on the brakes.

Backers of the movement to increase the speed limit include President Reagan, the American Automobile Assn., Gov. George Deukmejian and many other politicians from the West.

‘Give Them Their Shot’

Rep. James J. Howard (D-N.J.), who, as chairman of the House Public Works and Transportation Committee, has been the biggest roadblock in Congress to the 65-m.p.h. limit, admits: “I may lose. We’re going to give them their shot.”

Legislation that would allow the states to set higher speed limits on rural interstates has been attached to the Senate version of a massive highway construction bill. The House has voted against a similar provision in the past and the proposal may not survive a two-house conference committee that convenes this week. But Howard said the issue will come right back next month, when a House subcommittee has scheduled hearings on the measure and is expected to draft an alternate measure.

Unlike many issues that make their way to Capitol Hill, there is no powerful organized group lobbying members of Congress to change the speed limit. Rather, lawmakers perceive that over the last year pressure to raise the limit has been building among drivers for whom it has become an emotional issue.

The American Automobile Assn., long an opponent of the 65-m.p.h. speed limit, reversed its position in January after polls commissioned by the organization found support for the lower speed limit had dropped. In 1986, an auto club poll found that only 43% of motorists favored the 55-m.p.h. speed limit, while 56% of those surveyed endorsed it the year before.

Fuel-Saving Measure

Although the 55-m.p.h. limit was instituted in 1974 during the Arab oil embargo as a fuel-saving measure, many motorists in these days of ample gasoline now see the lower speed as an unjustified infringement on their driving freedom. Such conservative, anti-government resentment of the speed limit is most prevalent in the West, where boredom is among the most common hazards motorists face on long stretches of straight, empty highways.

According to California Highway Patrol Commissioner James E. Smith, more than half the drivers on California interstates now exceed 55 m.p.h. On some rural highways, such as Interstate 5 in the Central Valley, 90% of the vehicles are speeding, he said.

Smith said the law is creating the impression that exceeding the speed limit is acceptable on other roads, including some not designed to handle high-speed traffic.

“You can’t force an unwilling public to comply with a law they don’t believe in,” said Smith, who favors raising the limit on rural highways. “The vast majority of the people should be made law-abiding citizens by the speed limit being raised.”

Likened to Prohibition

“It’s like Prohibition,” said Murray Flander, press secretary for Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.), who recently changed his position to favor the 65-m.p.h. limit. “It violates the whole concept of law.”

While fuel conservation was the reason for imposing the 55-m.p.h. speed limit, safety is now the main argument for keeping it.

Opponents of the 65-m.p.h. proposal, including insurance firms, doctors and trucking companies, warn that setting the higher limit on rural interstates would cost between 600 and 1,000 lives a year across the nation.

Since it was enacted on all interstates, the lower speed limit has saved 2,000 to 4,000 lives a year, the National Academy of Sciences has estimated, and Howard says that raising it would save each driver an average of only a minute a day.

Furthermore, Howard asserts that Americans should not assume that energy shortages and gas station lines are a thing of the past.

Waste of Gasoline Seen

“It would be stupid to increase the speed limit and waste another 7 million gallons of gasoline a day,” he said.

The debate has divided Congress largely along regional lines. In the Senate, where the sparsely populated Western states are more strongly represented, sentiment for the higher limit has been strong and senators have twice voted to raise the limit. The House of Representatives, with a higher proportion of Eastern, urban members, so far has been successful in resisting it, rejecting it last year by a margin of 218 to 198. Backers of the proposal hope the election of 50 new House members in November will tip the balance in their favor.

Howard said that the speed limit proposal is likely to be removed from the highway bill because it is too controversial to be resolved quickly and lawmakers do not want to risk delaying the road construction money urgently needed by many states.

Its chance of passing as a separate measure, likely to come from the Public Works and Transportation subcommittee on surface transportation chaired by Rep. Glenn M. Anderson (D-San Pedro), would be greater.

Safety Measures Urged

One possible compromise foreseen by some officials would be to offset the higher speed limit with measures to reduce the number of traffic deaths--such as requiring motorists to wear seat belts and to strictly obey the 65-m.p.h. limit.

However, conservative Sen. Steven D. Symms (R-Ida.), who has sponsored the 65-m.p.h. speed limit legislation in the Senate, argues that raising the limit would actually enhance safety because law enforcement agencies would be allowed to devote more of their resources to catching serious violators, such as drunk drivers. And any rise in the death toll would be unlikely, he said, because drivers are already driving at higher speeds.

Symms’ proposal would allow states to raise the speed limit on approximately 34,000 miles of the nation’s 43,291-mile interstate highway network.

For California, passage of the legislation could mean raising the speed limit to 65 m.p.h. on about 1,300 miles of highway, including sections of Interstate 5 from Bakersfield to Oregon, Interstate 10 from San Bernardino to Arizona and Interstate 40 from Barstow to Arizona.

In addition to pleasing many drivers, a higher speed limit would bring relief to many states that are in danger of losing federal highway funds.

Arizona Loses Funds

Under the federal system that penalizes a state if more than half of its motorists are clocked over the speed limit in surveys, Arizona lost $510,000 in federal funding in January.

The Department of Transportation has warned California it could lose up to $30 million in federal funds if its drivers continue to violate the law.

Last year, the governors of 10 Western states endorsed a resolution sponsored by Gov. Deukmejian that calls on Congress to raise the speed limit on rural highways.

The American Trucking Assn., which supports the 55-m.p.h. limit, acknowledges that the tide seems to be turning against its cause.

“Some political people are responding to their constituents, who in some cases may not be well informed about the dangers,” said association spokesman Robert Mann. “Some politicians are doing the popular thing, even if it’s not the best thing.”