The law that “The U.S. should return to the 55 miles per hour (mph) speed limit to conserve fuel and save lives" aimed at reacting to the oil restraint of 1973 while targeting to minimize fuel consumption. The enactment of the National Maximum Speed Law by the federal government in 1974 saw the number of deaths on roads between 1973 and 1974 reduce by 16.4 percent from 54,052 to 45,196 respectively. The law instituted limitations of the maximum allowable speed limit to 55 mph on all United States' interstate roads. Assumptions by the Environmental Protection Agency reveal that for every 5 mph people drive over 50 mph, they end up paying an extra $0.25 for every gallon of gas. Also, every car reaches prime fuel economy at distinct speeds with gas mileage declining rapidly when drivers go past the recommended 50 mph. Acts of aggressive driving, such as hurried acceleration, speeding, and instant breaking waste gas (Farmer, 2017). However, sensible driving reduces gas mileage, which saves more money while at the same time ensuring the safety of the driver and others. Estimates reveal that in recent years, the demand for gasoline in the U.S. has declined to approximately 8.3 million barrels daily compared to over 9 million barrels in the past. Experts claim that minimizing highway speeds from 70 mph to around 60 mph would lessen the consumption of gasoline by between 2 percent and 3 percent. The process would lead to a reduction in price by approximately 10 percent at current prices of about 38 cents per gallon. In a Congressional Research Service study, the 1974 law, which advocated for a 55 mph speed limit countrywide, saved around 167 oil barrels daily. It represented around 2 percent of fuel consumption on highways in the U.S. Owing to the rising number of vehicles in the highway system of the U.S. between 1974 and 2008, it is apparent that the present society would realize significant fuel savings. While states, such as Kansas and Montana complied with the countrywide speed limit law during the 1970s, the new bill threatened to withhold highway funds. It even threatened to direct the funds for highway construction in such states to education and transportation safety projects if they declined from complying with the law (Davis, Hacker, Savolainen, & Gates, 2017). Overall, the return of the U.S. to a 55 mph speed limit would save lives and conserve fuel. The shift from the simple, stagnant, unchallenged argument to a sophisticated, dynamic, and disputed argument leads the qualifier to change. A test on the implications of higher speeds on gas mileage by Consumer Reports revealed that improving a 2006 Toyota Camry’s highway speed reduced gasoline mileage significantly. On an assumed 1,900-mile round trip to Florida’s Disney World from New York City, the Camry utilized around 47 gallons of gas while moving at 55 mph. However, at 75 mph, it burned approximately 64 gallons, leading to a difference of $70. The report stipulated that if all individuals minimized their driving by only 10 percent, the savings realized would amount to around a million gallons daily. According to the report, the government would show its seriousness in minimizing fuel consumption by directing funds wasted on campaigns, ticket writing, stealth cruisers, laser guns, ticket cameras, and associated wages to investment approaches that would ensure that traffic moves smoothly in suburban and urban environments. These are the areas showing increased fuel consumption. Coordinating and synchronizing traffic signal systems would lead to significant savings. The cities following the approach have realized benefits attributed to declined fuel use in line with improving air quality, less congestion, faster commute times, and reduced vehicle wear and tear (Anastasopoulos & Mannering, 2016). Eradicating obstacles to streamline traffic flow, such as various devices to calm traffic and stop signs, as well as eliminating other approaches that disrupt and interrupt traffic would improve fuel economy significantly for the whole vehicle fleet. Various criticisms exist on the Balkans’ intervention by the U.S. while benefits are also evident. The U.S. is a superpower and ensures to upholds its interests worldwide always. It focuses on ensuring that various countries in the world adopt its values while world leaders respect the rights of humans. Thus, the U.S. sees the need for doing anything probable to make sure that the world is peaceful and safe for all. Nevertheless, various world leaders object to the interventions of the U.S. and its objectives. Those kinds of leaders have maintained dictatorial leadership. Others have sided with terrorist groups to cause chaos worldwide, including Al Qaeda. The groups pose immense dangers worldwide (Janzekovic, 2017). The interference of the U.S. in the Balkans resulted in the attainment of stability and peace together with terrorist events in the area. However, despite the advantages associated with the U.S. intervention in the Balkans, various concerns have emerged. For instance, critics claim that the U.S. keeps instituting authoritative power over other countries in the world while acting as an international police officer. Many regard the interventions of America in the Balkans as an initiative destined to fail while it risked the emergence of worse skirmishes in the region (Xhudo, 2016). The drive by the U.S. to institute a totalitarian policy overseas faces criticisms as inappropriate since it leads to the emergence of such totalitarianism domestically. Most American citizens object to the continued military intervention of the U.S. government abroad. Many Americans have portrayed mixed feelings concerning the government’s moves with most of them opposing military involvement. The situation in Bosnia is sophisticated because of the circumstances and forces behind the entire issue. Diverse complexities surround the case of Bosnia, especially when it comes to confusion in defining the inside and outside actors. Categorizing the Bosnia intervention follows distinct forms, including diplomatic/peacekeeping missions to develop a solution, offering humanitarian relief, and sustaining agreements that the involved parties reach. Maintenance of peace by the military aimed at ensuring the enforcement of the UN's decisions with the parties involved in the conflict not participating. Since the Cold War's end, various regional conflicts have emerged and the trend might continue in the coming years. The participation of the U.S. in the skirmishes appears a significant duty for the country (Cimbala & Forster, 2016). However, the U.S. has other objects it anticipates realizing with its existing resources. Whereas the U.S. has instituted military interventions severally in numerous regional conflicts, the initiative is ill-advised in most cases. The involvement of the American military in diverse regional conflicts does not offer a lasting solution. Thus, the U.S. involvement in Bosnia would end up in the failure of the effort while at the same time costing significant resources as well as human life. The sophisticated state of the Bosnia conflict would pose challenges for the U.S. to attain its objectives successfully. Three major sides participate in the conflict, including the Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian Muslims, and Bosnian Croats based on ancient ethnic and religious issues. Bosnia-Hercegonia’s artificial state features independent and multiethnic complications (Meernik, 2018). Therefore, the intervention by the U.S. military cannot resolve the existing conflict easily with the three warring sides not showing willingness to abandon their objectives.
References
Anastasopoulos, P. C., & Mannering, F. L. (2016). The effect of speed limits on drivers' choice of speed: a random parameters seemingly unrelated equations approach. Analytic Methods in Accident Research, 10 (1), 1-11.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Cimbala, S. J., & Forster, P. K. (2016). Multinational military intervention: NATO policy, strategy and burden sharing. New York: Routledge.
Davis, A., Hacker, E., Savolainen, P. T., & Gates, T. J. (2017). Longitudinal analysis of rural interstate fatalities in relation to speed limit policies. Transportation Research Record, 2514 (1), 21-31.
Farmer, C. M. (2017). Relationship of traffic fatality rates to maximum state speed limits. Traffic Injury Prevention, 18 (4), 375-380.
Janzekovic, J. (2017). The use of force in humanitarian intervention: morality and practicalities. New York: Routledge.
Meernik, J. D. (2018). The political use of military force in US foreign policy. New York: Routledge.
Xhudo, G. (2016). Diplomacy and crisis management in the Balkans: a US foreign policy perspective. New York: Springer.
