Running Head: PUBLIC POLICY 1 Argument Mapping Rodriko Sankey Dr. Jacqueline Thomas Public Policy Analysis & Planning October 22, 2017 PUBLIC POLICY 2 According to Friedman & Hedeker (2009), the law was an answer to the 1973 oil embargo as well it aimed to lower fuel consumption, and this was effective when there was a dramatic reduction of the road fatalities, and this was major because of the enactment of the National Maximum Speed Law. Primarily, in 1974, the U.S federal government passed the National Maximum Speed Law which offered restriction of vehicles to have a speed limit of 55 miles per hour on every interstate road in the country. The law was also meant to curb the aggressive driving including the over speeding, rapid acceleration as well as braking wastes gas in the country. On the other hand, it was meant to enhance sensible driving which can reduce the gas mileage, and it is also safer for both the driver and the other passengers, and this will save more than the gas money. The United States demand for gasoline products has been reasonably low at approximately 8.3 million barrels daily currently, and this can be compared with the more 9 million barrels every day. Another recognized expert also asserts that the reduction of the highway speeds to 60 mph would lower the gasoline consumption rate to between 2% and 3%. This, therefore, could translate to a reduced price of as much as 10%. However, James Baxter, who is the current president of the National Motorists Association which is responsible for lobbying and preserving the driver’s rights, strongly oppose this argument. According to Baxter, vehicles which are going 55 mph usually get obviously better mileage than those that go as fast as 75 mph. Therefore, with the existence of the arbitrary, low, speed limits, the benefit is lowered by the government’s interrupted traffic flows, darting, weaving, braking as well as acceleration as quickly as traffic beats its path through the slower traffic scattered all through the highway lanes. Contrast this with a highway with a more reasonable together with the accommodating speed limit where the traffic is moving more in a sync, and there is less driver braking along with PUBLIC POLICY 3 acceleration; the slower traffic will stay out of the left-most passing lane. His main argument was that the lower speed is not able to have any significant influence on the consumption of fuels, other than being ignored by the many motorists. He also continued to argue that only 20-25 percent of all traffic volume is on the highways having speed limits above 55mph and this prevailing traffic is already realizing a significant fuel economy to that of traffic plodding along in the urban as well as suburban areas. He further highlighted that in such situations or conditions like congestion as well as bad weather where the speed limits usually become even more unnecessary. It should be apparent that the change of the speed limits number on roads where probably 15% of the total fuel consumed will probably not give way to the nirvana of the dependence of energy. He also alluded that any person who would propose an improvement in the speed limit to save time as well as being on time has significantly ignored the evident cost slowing down the whole nation (Baxter, 1999). Sen. John Warner, on his rebuttals, he cited research by the Congressional Research Service which indicated that the 1974 law which established a national speed limit of 55 mph actually saved more than 167,000 barrels of oil daily, 2 percent of America highway fuel consumption. "Given the significant increase in the number of vehicles on America's highway system from 1974 to 2008, one could assume that the amount of fuel that could be conserved today is far greater," (Coile, 2008). It was evident that several states strongly objected the 1974 law while some of the states including the Montana and Kansas barely allowed the national speed law in the 1970s. This was mainly because the bill significantly threatened to hold back the feral highway resources and even risked having their highway project funds shifted to the transportation safety and education projects if at all they declined to comply with the new bill. PUBLIC POLICY 4 Assume that the first qualifier was certainly; show whether the qualifier changes as we shift from a simple, static, uncontested thought to a complex, dynamic and contested argument. Several Consumer Reports examined the impact of the higher speeds on the gas mileage. David Champion, who is also the director of auto testing, realized the enhancing the highway speed of company’s 2006 Toyota Camry model dramatically reduced the gasoline mileage. Notably, every individual could lower their driving by merely 10%, and the savings would be approximately being 1 million barrels of gasoline daily. If at all the federal government was serious concerning their efforts to critically lower the motor fuel consumptions, it would be necessary to begin by redirecting the resource which is being wasted on the multiple tickets as well as related wages and salaries where there is always occurrence of the fuel consumption. According to Baxter (2009), “there are huge savings to be realized by simply synchronizing and coordinating traffic signal systems.” Cities and towns which have begun the process are not only reaping from some of the advantages like the reduction of the use of fuels but also meeting enhanced air quality, significantly quicker commute periods, far less jamming as well as much less wear and tear of the cars. Write a one (1) page analysis that uses critical thinking to assess the overall plausibility of the claim: “The conflict in Bosnia is somebody else’s trouble. The U.S. should not intervene militarily.” The United States of America lack strategic interest in the Balkans which also justified the ongoing war in the area. Unlike Saddam Hussein, Milosevic has no threat to the supply of oil among other significant natural resources to the world. Nonetheless, he poses no military threat PUBLIC POLICY 5 to the United States of America allies. It is exciting that America’s administration has decided not to get involved in either way in the Balkan conflicts. The American military had fought the Gulf War in the 1990s, and after finishing the war, the Bush Administration decided that the conflicts in the Balkans should be managed and settled by the European powers. This was appreciated and encouraged by the European Union who intervened to solve the Balkan’s issue as opposed to the United States. However, the United States changed its tactics and decided to take up the leadership duty in ending the Bosnia war after Europe failed to handle the various atrocities done in the country. The muddling strategy which was mainly used by the U.S since the beginning of the conflict was indeed not productive. The president then decided to get out of the box which was developed through an unworkable diplomatic strategy of providing superior concessions ever to Serb President Milosevic with the aim of getting the Bosnian Serbs to the table to solve the conflict. Notably, the United States, being a sole superpower, must always lead in the efforts of redressing the intervention. First and foremost, U.S.A must establish a National Security Strategy together with a National Military Strategy which is based on precisely defined interests (OngWebb, 2009). Moreover, one of the major reasons why the U.S military should not be involved in the Bosnia conflict is because the country is always being negatively affected. It is usually appealing that the United States government is always ready to offer any assistance, but the country is not ready to support all through. Furthermore, if the emotion along with the opinions is taken away it normally comes down to whether or not it is legal or even justified under the UN charter for America to intervene in the crisis. Therefore, I believe that the country should not get involved in the Bosnia conflict because it is more of an internal issue which does not affect U.S. in any way. PUBLIC POLICY 6 Claim The United States should not intervene in the Balkans Information Warrant Qualifier The United States does not have strategic interest in the Balkans war. The Balkans is friendly toward the European Union as well as the U.S. The Balkans conflict is considered a Civil War as it involves the Bosnians and the Serbs and the intervention by the West may lead to the Russians doing the same Backing References In case the U.S. intervenes in the Balkans, the Russians may hit back and we might experience a Cold War. Objection The war might spread if America does not intervene. Besides, if the U.S. does not intervene we can have an ethnic cleansing. Rebuttal There has been an improving cooperation among the E.U and the Balkans. PUBLIC POLICY 7 References Baxter, James. (2009). 55 MPH Speed Limit Is Unenforceable and Counterproductive. Retrieved on April 25, 2015; from: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2009/07/27/55-mph-speedlimit-is-unenforceable-and-counterproductive Coile, Zachary. (2008). Speier seeks national speed limit to save gas. Retrieved on April 25, 2015; from: http://www.saferoads.org/speier-seeks-national-speed-limit-save-gas-0 Environmental Protection Agency. (2011). Driving More Efficiently. Retrieved on April 24, 2013’ from :http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/drivehabits.shtml Dunn, W. N. (2012). Public policy analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Friedman, L. S., & Hedeker, D. (2009). Long-Term Effects of Repealing the National Maximum Speed Limit in the United States. American Journal Of Public Health, 99(9), 1626-1631. Ong-Webb, Graham(2009).Credibility over Courage: NATO’s Mis-Intervention in Kosovo. Retrieved on April 26, 2015; from: http://www.academia.edu/412046/Credibility_over_ Courage-NATOs-Mis-Intervention-in-Kosovo Smith, F.E. (2005-2011). War in Bosnia. Retrieved April 26th, 2015, from Macro history and Word Report :http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch35-3.htm
Purchase answer to see full attachment