Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Fortune) 6/7/84; site dmsd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!hplabs!hpda!dmsd!bass
From: bass@dmsd.UUCP (John Bass)
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.auto,net.consumers
Subject: Re: Congressmen propose relaxation of 55mph speed limit in rural
Message-ID: <190@dmsd.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 6-Apr-85 06:04:10 EST
Article-I.D.: dmsd.190
Posted: Sat Apr  6 06:04:10 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 9-Apr-85 01:02:19 EST
References: <1545@ut-ngp.UUCP> <215@osiris.UUCP> <254@h-sc1.UUCP>
Distribution: net.consumers
Lines: 49
Xref: linus net.legal:1126 net.auto:5147 net.consumers:1560

The claim is that 9,000 - 10,000 lives a year are saved by 55 vs 65
and we spend about $80,000/year per hiway patrolman to make sure
each state gets it's funding.

The claim is that OVER half of the 125,000 highway deaths each year are
alcohol-related and some number more due to other drugs now classified
as DUI but not well tested for. Radar and Flying patrols are useless in
catching all these affenders and the deaths they cause. I wonder how
many officers hiding on off ramps can tell the DUI drivers from the
rest -- many DUI drivers don't speed or drive carelessly.

The claim is that up to 75,000 deaths each year are related to asbestos
exposure. Claims of many times that for smoking related cancer deaths
are made ... and they are probably LOW.

Multiply out the cost of 55 -- we have more than 10,000 unecessary patrolmen
doing speed enforcement at a cost of 10,000 x $80,000 = $800,000,000.00
per year -- that is ONE BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR  --- or about $80,000
per life saved in DIRECT COST. The indirect cost is MUCH higher --- lost
time and productivity. It takes 20% longer in travel time to travel at
55 vs 65 (based on a net average of 50 and 60 including stops and traffic).
That adds 20% to the delivery cost of trucked freight -- nearly everything.
For the millions of people that drive more than 5,000 mi/yr on the hiways
for work that is BILLIONS more dollars wasted each year picked up by both
goverment and private sector employers.

I bet that if the SAME 10,000 officers were assigned to watch known places
to find DUI drivers and some FEDERAL law was to remove state funding based
on DUI offences that we could save maybe 100,000 or more of the DUI related
deaths. THAT IS A 10 TIMES BETTER WAY TO SAVE LIVES

If the same ONE billion dollars was invested in an anti-tobaco
campain we could reduce lung cancer deaths for even more lives saved per
year.

I am tired of hearing that it saves lives and oil. There are much more
effective ways of saving lives -- infact the same goverment PAYS the
tabacco growers to kill 10 times that many smokers. For the cost
of saving that oil -- we can BUY several times that much oil on the
open market. That is a FALSE savings given that OIL ISN"T A SCARCE
economic resource in todays market.

I wish the dumb public would catch on to the goverments tune of:

	We saved 30 lives today in our 55 program. We also pleased
	some farmers and manufacturers with our subsidy program at
	only a cost of 450 lives a day.

John Bass