Should trucks and buses have their own speed limits?

Federal agencies hope to cap speed limits for large trucks and buses on US highways, the US Department of Transportation announced Friday. 

Ted S. Warren/AP
Truck and automobile traffic mix on Interstate 5, headed north through Fife, Wash., near the Port of Tacoma.

Federal agencies hope to cap speed limits for large trucks and buses on US highways, the US Department of Transportation announced Friday. 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) suggest a national proposal that would require all newly manufactured US cars, buses, and trucks weighing more than 26,000 pounds to come with a speed-limiting device. 

The public can provide input on the speed limits, but the agencies are currently suggesting limits of 60, 65, and 68 miles per hour. In some states, speed limits are as high as 85 miles per hour. 

“There are significant safety benefits to this proposed rulemaking,” US Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said in a press release. “In addition to saving lives, the projected fuel and emissions savings make this proposal a win for safety, energy conservation, and our environment.” 

The US Department of Transportation suggests that such restrictions could save $1.1 billion in fuel costs and millions of gallons of fuel each year. 

“This is basic physics,” adds NHTSA Administrator Mark Rosekind. “Even small increases in speed have large effects on the force of impact. Setting the speed limit on heavy vehicles makes sense for safety and the environment.”

The American Trucking Association (ATA), the largest national trade association for the trucking industry, says the proposal has been a long time coming. 

“We are pleased NHTSA and FMCSA have, almost 10 years after we first petitioned them, released this proposal to mandate the electronic limiting of commercial vehicle speeds,” Chris Spear, the president of the ATA, tells The Hill. “Speed is a major contributor to truck accidents and by reducing speeds, we believe we can contribute to a reduction in accidents and fatalities on our highways.” 

It’s true – several studies have proven a direct correlation between vehicle speed and crash fatality. Regulators say such a speed cap could reduce the 1,115 fatal truck crashes each year.

And according to a report by the Associated Press, which was released last year, trucks in 14 states now drive faster than their tires can handle. Tractor-trailers’ tires are designed for maximum speeds of 75 miles per hour, but now several states have speed limits of 75, 80, or 85 on some highways. 

However, Great Britain reversed the same speed restrictions on trucks that the US now hopes to implement. 

Up until 2014, trucks were restricted to 40 miles per hour on two-lane highways – far slower than all other cars’ limit of 60 miles per hour. 

But Great Britain chose to up trucks’ speed limit to 50 miles per hour in early 2015, after realizing several crashes were the result of faster passenger cars attempting to pass the slower trucks. And while officials did not cite financial reasons for the change, the speed hike will save the trucking industry a lot of time, which means it will save a lot of money (potentially $18.7 million). 

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) agrees with Great Britain: mandating slower speeds for trucks is not a good idea.

“Highways are safest when all vehicles travel at the same relative speed,” OOIDA Vice President Todd Spencer said in a statement. “This wisdom has always been true and has not ever changed.” 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Should trucks and buses have their own speed limits?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today