How Much did Bill Clinton Destroy the Planet by Raising the Speed Limit?

Question

A car typically gets about 20% more mpg when driven at 55 mph instead of 70 mph.


Was Bill trying to support terrorists by keeping the demand for oil high?

Answer 1

I like Star's answer. Personally I like 68. -- it is like 69 but you owe her one.

Answer 2

While it is true that most combustion engines work best in a certain range (in a recent cross-country trip, my car got the best mileage between 55 and 65, with slightly lower at either end of that range), it is up to the individual driver to operate his/her car in the most efficient manner possible; nobody forces drivers to drive up to the posted limit (need it be said that most drive well beyond that? in that aforementioned trip, with the cruise control set at 65 or 70, I was passed easily by everything from motorcycles to cars with trailers to 18-wheelers), although some roads and highways post a minimum speed limit, as well.

Furthermore, more gas is wasted idling at unnecessary traffic lights (have you ever been in any town at 3am when there is no traffic, whatsoever, and, yet, had to sit at a red light for a seeming eternity?), not to mention poorly (if at all) policed construction zones or accidents causing back-ups, sometimes for miles.

As for anyone purposely supporting terrorists by keeping the demand for oil high, political rhetoric aside, again, we need only look at ourselves: Nobody is forcing us to drive a block to dump the garbage or get the mail!

And, without taking "sides" (more or less!), notice that the price of diesel has skyrocketed well beyond that of regular gas for the first time in American history. To keep the price of reg gas low, more refining is necessary, which means that truckers suffer (i.e., diesel is further refined (at more expense, BTW) to automotive gasoline, so there is lower diesel supplies, thus higher diesel prices, while higher gas supplies translate to lower gas prices, relatively speaking). Politicians around the world have made the decision for the people that their constituents would rather drive cars at lower cost than to keep the cost of transportable food and other consumables low, so the cost of the former is lower to drive our cars on inefficient and unnecessary trips (mine was important and cheaper in both cost and time than flying . . . honest!), so we shouldn't be surprised that the cost to put a meal on the table is higher, due to the more expensive costs for the big rigs to bring it to our supermarkets. The more sensible thing would be to make the cost of transporting necessary goods as low as possible by producing more diesel fuel, and raise the price of all grades of gasoline to instill some sense of responsibility to the average consumer: if we all kept our car at home just one day a week, the benefits to our bank accounts and the planet would be incredible!

So, don't point the finger at any specific politician, even the ones who have made their fortunes on the oil industry (thus endeth the rant!); to paraphrase a familiar adage, "We have met the enemy, and they is us!" Or, if you prefer, "The fault, is not in our stars, but in ourselves", in that we have only ourselves to blame for electing incompetent officials who are incapable of making intelligent decisions (you know who I'm talking about! Okay, NOW endeth the rant!). ;)

Answer 3

Give it a rest already. Gas was cheap when Clinton was Pres. Speed limits are set by local jurisdictions, not by the Pres.

Answer 4

You can always drive 55 if you wish to save gas, remember, it's a speed LIMIT.

Answer 5

Nobody was driving 55 anyway- Bill simply realized it was an ineffective, non-enforced law.

Answer 6

Not as much damage T. Lott did to representative government:

EARMARKING FRENZY: Lott has acquired a reputation for his zeal in pork spending. In his book, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) quoted Lott as stating, "Balancing the budget is a nice idea, but I got an election to win." "The way I do it is, I fold them into bills where you can't find it. ... I've been around here long enough to know how to bury it," Lott explained. In 2006, Lott cosponsored a notorious $700 million "Railroad to Nowhere" in the emergency supplemental bill, reportedly the largest earmark ever. "I'll just say this about the so-called porkbusters. I'm getting damn tired of hearing from them. They have been nothing but trouble ever since Katrina," Lott said about the opposition to his railroad. After Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Coburn introduced legislation to create a public database "exposing hundreds of billions in annual spending" in 2006, Lott used Senate rules to "kill it on procedural grounds."

Answer 7

WOW .. You are an icon for the Republican party .. You Could be President ... And then we all Wake up !!

Answer 8

Bill didn't but the Repbulican controlled Congress did.

Answer 9

Hmmm. Never thought of that. I don't think he was trying to destroy the planet though. So, no he really didn't at all.

Answer 10

Well that's one way to look at it lol.