Finally, a breath of fresh air from Washington, D.C.! At long last we may be able to increase speed limits on our state highways without the fear of losing highway funding.
I have a suggestion, however, regarding the proposed increase: I move that the change be done in kilometers per hour instead of mph. Before naysayers downplay the suggestion, I would like to point out that virtually all states have agreed to convert to metric provided the federal government supplies the leadership. Indeed, federal leadership is not only necessary, but required for a move of this sort.Some readers might be interested in knowing that the interstate between Tucson, Ariz., and Nogales, Mexico, has been signed in metric for well over 12 years as a demonstration project.
I learned the metric system in grade school more than 25 years ago. We were the generation raised for a metric future. The U.S. government increasingly uses metric for all record-keeping activities. Even the military has converted to metric. Why not the public?
The move to metric highway signs has been encoded into an international treaty: NAFTA specifically mentions the "harmonization" of road-sign-related standards no later than three years following the ratification of the agreement. As Canada and Mexico use the metric system exclusively, I doubt they will switch back to assuage our concerns.
Also, note a bit of irony: No one, to the best of my knowledge, is complaining about the cost of changing speed limit signs if done in mph. Mention the switch to the metric system, however, and that is the argument made: It simply costs too much. So does converting the signage to a speed above 65 mph. In the meantime, I'll continue driving down I-15 at 90 km/h.
Mark P. Neumann
Provo