ATA asks Texas to reconsider 85 mph highway

| September 11, 2012

The American Trucking Associations on Monday, Sept. 10, asked the Texas Transportation Commission to reverse its decision to allow vehicles to travel 85 miles per hour on a privately-managed stretch of State Highway 130 linking Austin and San Antonio, and cautioned other states against following the Lone Star State’s example.

“At the end of the day, excessive speed is the greatest threat to highway safety,” said Bill Graves, ATA president chief executive officer. “By giving motorists carte blanche to put the pedal to the metal, Texas is raising the risk of more crashes, as well as more severe crashes.”

ATA has been a vocal advocate, not just for the use of technology to regulate maximum truck speeds at 65 mph, but for states to promote greater highway safety by adopting maximum speed limits of 65 mph for all vehicles.

“Higher speeds dramatically increase the risks of a catastrophic crash,” Graves said. “On today’s busy and congested highways, it is simply unfathomable that a state would allow drivers to put themselves and others at risk by increasing speed limits to such excessive heights. The state’s obvious attempt to generate more traffic and greater profit from tolls for private investors, at the public’s expense, highlights the trade-offs associated with relying too much on the private sector to finance highways. I would hope that Texas will quickly see the error in its policy and reverse course.”

  • jsha1

    Bill Graves should be fired for such asinine statements.

  • Gateway

    Apparently Mr. Graves has never been into the western United States where many highways have little to no issues with “busy and congested” areas. More often it is much more likely to not see any traffic rather than to much. Further like many alarmists, Mr. Graves misstates the problem, after 2 million miles – accident free, I am of the opinion that it is a difference of speed between vehicles rather than a higher rate of speed which is to blame for many highway accidents.

  • DCC

    I totaly agree with Gateway and jsha1! I think it is unfortunate people like Graves think their opinion should be the law of the land based totaly on their opinion.

  • LEL

    excessive speed is the greatest threat to highway safety, NOT THE SPEED LIMIT

  • Jesse Wood

    bill graves represents big mega carries and care nothing about owner operators

  • 4btrans

    The current section of 130 that is open is NOT conjested. The danger will be Bill Graves 62 mph trucks getting ass ended while taking 10 miles to pass each other. This guy has no common sense and too much power….I don’t care to run 85 but if I wish to pass someone and do 70 that’s my business..NOT BILL GRAVES!!!!

  • fisslebot

    He like many others is in the big boys pocket and the insurance company’s dictate the truck speeds. I have over 3 million miles with no accidents. The truck manufactures, and owners can reduce their fuel mileage by simply using the correct gear ratio. Think hard if you put a bigger gear in it takes less RPM to turn the wheels, thus less fuel for the same speed.Look at racing. In NASCAR or NHRA you change gears for certain tracks to get what? Better fuel mileage. Same speed and thats what wins races. There are cars that get 40 mpg and those that get 20 mpg and at the same speed. I still truly am convinced that the auto makers are in with the oil company’s one way or the other. Yes Bill Graves needs to stop thinking he rules the world of trucking and the way to do it is for all ALL drivers to to let your congress and senate (state and federal) to know the real facts.

  • Steve Heglmeier

    130 is not only not congested, but when I pay my $ to travel it, there are times I don’t see anyone as far as the eye can see, in front or behind. I usually travel 57 mph and get 8.32 mpg at that speed. If someone runs into the back of me, that is easily defensible as long as I’m at least doing the minimum.
    In the unlikely event that I need to pass someone, my truck will do triple digits, so 85 mph is not a problem, and I don’t hold up the Billy Big Riggers. If something happened causing me to be in a time crunch, I would be more likely to pay the money so I could do the 85 mph to make up time. That rarely happens to me, as I try to plan well, but there are times when delays do happen.
    I’d rather though that they kept it at 70mph and lowered the toll. It’s a very expensive road, that’s why they don’t have the traffic to support it.

  • Marty Marsh

    ATA is so predictable,if you look at who is on the board they all have slow trucks.They are trying to get all trucks down to 65,why?Because they already have problems getting drivers,it makes the playing field more even for them even if they don’t pay anything.Not to mention like 4btrans said, they will get run over.All these guys are is rich clowns,but they think the rest of us are stupid.

  • Marty Marsh

    That is ATA’s opinion,look who’s on their board. strives to maintain an open forum for reader opinions. Click here to read our comment policy.