Time to raise the speed limit on Route 3

Speed limits are good things.  Speed limits make our roads safer.  The Massachusetts Highway Department, in its 2005 “Procedures for Speed Zoning on State and Municipal Roadways,” makes this highly persuasive argument. “The principal benefit of properly established speed zoning is to provide a means for police officers to apply enforcement to those who do not conform to speeds considered reasonable and proper by the majority of the motoring public. Public opinion will be on the side of the police who are enforcing a reasonable maximum speed.  The former federally mandated 55 mile per hour national speed limit on the Interstate System clearly shows that an unreasonably low speed limit is neither enforceable nor has the long term support of the general public.”

So, why is the speed limit on U.S. Route 3 still set at 55 miles per hour?

Clearly, the current speed limit on Route 3 cannot be supported by the procedures for setting speed limits outlined in the state’s own document.  According to the state, “a prerequisite to establishing speed regulations… is a comprehensive engineering study.”  The goal of the study is to “establish a speed limit that is safe, reasonable, and self-enforcing.” 

The engineering study is based on the assumption that 85% of people, left to their own devices, will drive at a safe and reasonable speed over a stretch of highway.  The people who are flying past 85% of the traffic are the drivers who are not conforming to a reasonable and proper speed, and should be subject to police enforcement.  The state procedures manual explains that, “this method is based on numerous studies that indicate that the majority of motorists are prudent and capable of selecting safe speeds.”  The state further explains that this method “is the national standard for establishing safe speed limits.”

State procedures for speed checks specify measurements on “average weekdays at off –peak hours and under ideal weather conditions.”  As a Route 3 commuter, I don’t have the radar gun or laser gun specified by the state engineers for the purposes of collecting data on vehicular speed.  However, I do have a car, and I can sit in the middle lane, choose a speed, and observe the traffic around me.

Driving 55 miles per hour in the middle lane of Route 3 makes one feel like a boulder in the middle of a stream.  Cars, trucks, school buses, practically the entire world is moving right or left to avoid the mid-stream obstruction.  It’s easy to tell that you are not traveling faster than the federal standard of 85% of the other drivers; you are lucky to be traveling faster than two percent of the drivers on the road.

Speed up to 65 miles per hour, and you are passing some slower drivers, but you are also being passed by an equal number of drivers.  I suspect that 65 miles per hour is somewhere in the middle of the distribution of highway speeds, nowhere near the 85%ile requirement for setting a speed limit.  You need to speed up to about 75 miles per hour before you get the sense that you are one of the faster cars on the road, and still there are enough people passing to think you haven’t cracked the 85% threshold.

Clearly, the Route 3 speed limit does not conform to state and federal standards.  While this is the most egregious case in the Commonwealth, it is not unique.  The state legislature adopted a 65 miles per hour maximum in 1992, following the repeal of the nationally-mandated 55 miles per hour limit. The state bureaucracy, however, did not see fit to raise speed limits.  The legislature forced the issue in 1996, when it enacted legislation that set the speed limit on 400 miles of highways to 65 miles per hour.

At that time, Route 3 was left off the list of highways for legislative intervention because it was still a narrow, four-lane road that threaded its way between lots of rocky obstacles.  Since then, Route 3 was widened to six lanes, the rocky median has been removed, and we now have a road with wide lanes, gentle curves, and expansive sight lines.  Despite its extraordinary design, the road is stuck with an unreasonably low speed limit that is neither enforceable nor has the long term support of the general public.

A legislative remedy is at hand. A bill has been introduced by Representative Sean Garballey (H-914) and Senator Kenneth Donnelly (S-1734) to add Route 3 to the list of legislatively-mandated 65 mile per hour zones.  Given the state bureaucracy’s refusal to follow its own procedures for setting a speed limit on Route 3, this legislative action is necessary to allow safe and reasonable drivers to conform to a more reasonable speed law.  Let’s hope the general court acts on this common-sense legislation soon, and brings some regulatory reasonableness to this important highway.

IMAGES:  A 2005 Massachusetts Highway Department interoffice memorandum, recommending a 65 MPH speed limit on Route 3.

Solving the Designated Hitter problem for MLB

MLB is looking at realignment. Now that inter-league play has become a part of the game, MLB is looking at balancing the leagues and divisions.

Right now, there are 30 teams in Major League Baseball, 16 in the National League and 14 in the American League. There are six teams in the NL Central, four teams in the AL West, and five teams in the other divisions. NL Central fans don't like this (you need to beat out five teams to win the division), and it makes it easier for an AL West team to win the division (you only need to beat out three other teams).

Even numbers are important when building a schedule, as you need two teams to hold one game. If there are an odd number of teams, one team must be left on the sideline on any given day. That's why you can't just move a NL team to the AL, balance out the divisions, without changing the schedule.

You could have an odd number of teams in each league if there is at least one inter-league game on any given day. Instead of a cluster of inter-league games in the middle of the season, there would need to be a minimum of 162 inter-league games spread out across the year. Mathematically, each team (assuming two 15-team leagues) would need to play a minimum of 12 inter-league games to make realignment work. (Presently, in the American League, each team plays 18 games. In the National League, teams play from 12-18 inter-league games, for a total of 252 inter-league games.)

Some folks hate inter-league play, and I understand their arguments. However, I see the benefits, as Cubs-White Sox, Yankees-Mets, Dodgers-Angels, Giants-Athletics, and other cross-league geographic rivalries are good for the game. I also hate 10:05 p.m. starts on the west coast. As a loyal fan of our Red Sox, I am happy when we play the Cubs, Pirates, Phillies, Nationals, or any other NL team where it's easy to do a quick road trip to see my beloved team. Besides, as a lefty progressive, it is certainly green to replace trips to the west coast with games against more local rivals.

More east coast games? Less travel to the west coast and fewer 10:05 p.m. starts? What could be bad? What's the problem?

The DH.

Yes, the Designated Hitter rule in the AL makes things difficult for AL teams in NL ball parks. We truly can't make inter-league play work if there are two sets of rules. You can't build an AL team around a DH if you can't use him for six, nine, or twelve games (or more) during the season.

National League fans, however, have a valid reason for resisting the DH. National League games are filled with double switches and all kinds of interesting strategy surrounding a pitching change. They are right. It's lots more fun to watch a game when pitching changes have an impact on the lineup.

My solution is a modified DH rule that would apply to both leagues.

Instead of the current rule, where the DH position substitutes for the pitcher's position in the lineup, let's have the DH substitute for A pitcher. Simply stated, as long as the starting pitcher is in the game, the DH can bat for him. Once you remove the starting pitcher from the game, the DH who was batting in his place is also out of the game.

There are lots of potential impacts to the game by having a modified DH. The trend in many AL teams, where the DH is a way to rest a position player, would be supported by the change. Chances are, if you have a really good DH, you would put him in the first slot on the batting order, giving him more at bats in a game. There are lots of other potential implications for managerial strategy, and I think the game would be better for the change. In both leagues.

So, let's get the Modified DH movement going!