Across the country, lawmakers and transportation officials are quietly rewriting the rules of the road, and the next change many drivers will notice is on the speed limit sign. Some states are preparing to slow traffic in the name of safety, while others are weighing targeted increases on rural highways, creating a patchwork of policies that could reshape how fast people travel from one state line to the next.
Behind those numbers is a deeper debate over what speed limits are for: reflecting how fast people already drive, or deliberately nudging them to go slower. As I look at the latest proposals, it is clear that the next wave of changes will not be a simple story of higher or lower limits, but a broader rethink of how states balance safety, mobility, and local control.
Why speed limits are suddenly back on the legislative agenda
Speed limits have long been treated as a technical detail, but they are now at the center of a political and safety conversation that stretches from small city councils to state capitols. Lawmakers are responding to a spike in road deaths and to pressure from communities that say the old way of setting speeds, built around how fast the fastest drivers already go, is not working for people walking, biking, or riding transit. That shift is pushing states to revisit long standing statutes that once locked in higher limits on highways and tied local hands on neighborhood streets.
At the same time, I see legislators using speed policy as a tool to address congestion and freight movement, especially on rural interstates where trucking groups argue that slightly higher limits could improve traffic flow. A recent look at how multiple states may be changing their speed limits highlighted how bills S1500 in the Senate and A3571 in the Assembly are part of a broader wave of proposals that would either raise or lower limits depending on context, with both chambers in Dec treating speed as a lever for safety and mobility rather than a fixed number.
The 85th percentile under fire and the Federal Highway Administration’s nudge
For decades, engineers have leaned on the “85th percentile” rule, which sets limits near the speed that 85 percent of drivers travel at or below, on the theory that most people naturally choose a safe speed. That practice is now facing sharp criticism from safety advocates and some transportation officials who argue that it effectively lets the fastest drivers dictate policy and can ratchet limits upward over time. One expert captured the frustration by saying the 85th percentile should not be treated as the “Holy Grail” or the “Bible,” underscoring a growing belief that it is a useful data point but not a complete safety strategy.
Federal officials are quietly backing that reassessment. Amid a recent spike in road deaths across the country, the Federal Highway Administration has urged states to give less automatic weight to the 85th percentile and more attention to people outside of cars, land use, and crash history when setting limits. In a separate analysis, critics stressed that the 85th percentile should not be the “Holy Grail” or the “Bible,” arguing that it can be part of the toolkit but is not enough on its own to protect vulnerable road users, a point that has filtered into state level debates through reporting on how Holy Grail and Bible language has been used to describe the old approach.
Colorado’s push to slow traffic on dangerous corridors
Colorado is one of the clearest examples of a state moving to lower speeds on specific roads rather than across the board. Transportation officials there have been reexamining how they set limits on state highways, especially in places where high speeds collide with dense development, transit stops, or heavy pedestrian activity. The state’s evolving policy is part of a broader conversation about how fast traffic should move through growing communities in the Colorado Front Range and on mountain corridors that see both commuters and tourists.
That debate came into sharp focus when the Colorado Department of Transportation explored lowering limits on certain state roads, a move that mirrors a proposed change to federal road design standards and explicitly rejects the status quo 85th percentile model as the sole guide. The official who oversees CDOT’s speed management program has described how the state is shifting toward a more context sensitive approach, aligning with national guidance that encourages engineers to consider land use, crash patterns, and vulnerable users when deciding whether to slow traffic, as detailed in reporting on how Sep changes could lower speed limits on a Colorado road near you.
Maryland and North Carolina test new rules for state highways
On the East Coast, Maryland is emerging as a bellwether for how states might rewrite their speed statutes. House lawmakers in Maryland have advanced a bill that would revise speed limit rules, giving transportation officials more flexibility to adjust limits based on safety studies rather than rigid formulas. The measure is already halfway through the statehouse, with its next stop in Senate Judicial Proceedings, a sign that the debate has moved beyond the conceptual stage and into concrete legislative language.
The same reporting notes that, meanwhile in Maryland, the House has been weighing how to balance statewide consistency with local needs, a tension that mirrors what is happening in neighboring states. In North Carolina, lawmakers are also considering changes, with one proposal focused on stretches of interstate where drivers are already traveling above 70 mph and where the state may want to align posted limits with actual behavior. The North Carolina Legislature is preparing to revisit these questions as it enters the second year of its two year session, and reporting on North Carolina shows how legislators are using speed policy to respond to both safety concerns and driver expectations.
Ohio, Wisconsin and the Midwest rethink how fast is too fast
In the Midwest, Ohio is quietly rewriting the playbook on how it sets speed limits, and other states are watching. Transportation officials there have updated their guidelines to give more weight to roadway context, allowing cities to reduce limits on streets that function more like urban boulevards than high speed arterials. That shift is particularly important in places where local leaders want to slow traffic near schools, transit stops, or business districts but have historically been constrained by state rules that prioritized the 85th percentile.
Reporting on how states are rethinking long held practices notes that And Ohio’s guidelines are evolving to consider what other states are doing, signaling that the state is not acting in isolation but as part of a broader regional trend. The same analysis highlights how And Ohio is looking at crash data and land use alongside driver behavior, a model that could influence neighboring states like Ohio‘s peers in the region. In Wisconsin, where cities like Madison are grappling with growth and congestion, state level discussions about speed limits intersect with local efforts to redesign streets, a dynamic reflected in coverage of how Wisconsin communities are rethinking their arterials.
New York, California and the urban experiment with slower streets
Big coastal states are taking a different tack, focusing less on rural interstates and more on city streets where crashes involving people walking and biking have surged. In New York, lawmakers and local officials are exploring lower default limits in dense urban areas, building on earlier moves to slow traffic on neighborhood streets and around schools. The state level conversation is increasingly tied to what is happening in New York City and other large metros, where advocates argue that shaving a few miles per hour off the top can mean the difference between a survivable crash and a fatal one.
Those debates are playing out against the backdrop of broader policy shifts in New York, where state lawmakers are weighing how much authority to delegate to cities on speed and street design. On the West Coast, California is seeing similar tensions, particularly in cities like Oakland that are experimenting with slower corridors and traffic calming. Statewide, California has already given local governments more flexibility to lower limits on certain streets, and ongoing discussions in California suggest that lawmakers are open to further refinements, a trend reflected in coverage of how California‘s cities are using new tools to manage speed.
Virginia, Falls Church and the rise of local control
Virginia offers a window into how suburban communities are using new state authority to reshape their streets. The state has updated its laws to give localities more say over speed limits on certain roads, a change that cities and towns have quickly put to use. In Northern Virginia, for example, the independent city of Falls Church has been at the forefront of efforts to slow traffic on neighborhood streets and near commercial corridors, reflecting resident concerns about cut through traffic and safety.
Statewide, Virginia’s evolving approach is part of a broader pattern in which legislatures set the outer bounds of speed policy while leaving the details to local engineers and councils. Reporting on how Virginia communities are using that flexibility shows that some are lowering limits in walkable downtowns while others are maintaining higher speeds on commuter routes. The result is a patchwork even within a single metro area, where drivers can move from a 25 mph main street to a 45 mph arterial in a matter of blocks, a pattern that underscores why clear signage and public communication are becoming as important as the legal changes themselves.
Targeted rural increases and variable zones on high speed highways
Not every jurisdiction is focused on slowing traffic; some are looking at carefully targeted increases on rural highways where engineers believe higher limits can be managed safely. Several states are considering or have introduced bills that would raise limits on multi lane highways outside cities, often in response to complaints that current limits are out of step with driver behavior and modern vehicle technology. These proposals typically come with conditions, such as requiring engineering and traffic investigations to show that the road can handle higher speeds without a spike in crashes.
One recent overview of these efforts described how states may soon gear up to change speed limits by designating special zones when studies show that slow speeds on a portion of the highway are no longer justified. In some cases, that means allowing slightly higher limits on wide, straight rural interstates, while keeping tighter controls near interchanges and urban fringes, a balance reflected in reporting that highlighted how Nov discussions have focused on multi lane highways outside cities. At the same time, states are experimenting with variable speed zones that can be lowered during bad weather or heavy congestion, a tool that allows more nuance than a single static number on a sign.
Cities like Bozeman and Madison show where local streets are headed
While statehouses debate statutes, many of the most visible changes are happening at the city level, where local leaders are using new authority to redesign streets and reset expectations about how fast people should drive. In July, Bozeman, Montana passed an ordinance that recommends lowering speed limits on city controlled arterials, explicitly tying the change to the safety of people walking and biking. That move reflects a growing recognition that wide, fast roads cutting through neighborhoods can be deadly for pedestrians and cyclists, even if they move car traffic efficiently.
Other cities are following similar paths. In the Midwest, Madison has been rethinking its arterials and collectors, often in partnership with state transportation agencies that control key corridors. A national roundup of local actions noted that, in July, Bozeman, Montana passed an ordinance recommending lower limits on city controlled arterials to protect people who walk and cyclists who use it, a move that has been cited as an example for other communities. That same analysis highlighted how jurisdictions around the country are lowering speed limits as part of broader “Vision Zero” style strategies, with In July, Bozeman, Montana serving as a case study in how local ordinances can move faster than state law.
What drivers should expect next as states recalibrate
For drivers, the practical effect of all these debates will show up in subtle but important ways. On some trips, especially across the rural West and South, people may see higher limits on long, straight stretches of interstate, reflecting legislative decisions that prioritize travel time and freight efficiency. On others, particularly in and around cities, they are more likely to encounter lower limits on arterials, new 25 mph zones in downtowns, and school or safety corridors where enforcement is stepped up.
The challenge for policymakers is to make those changes coherent rather than confusing. As states like Colorado, Maryland, New York, Ohio, California, Virginia and Wisconsin recalibrate their rules, they are also updating signage standards, public education campaigns, and enforcement strategies to match. A national review of state practices emphasized that either way, states are taking a fresh look at how they set and enforce limits, with bills like S1500 and A3571 in New York and evolving guidelines in Ohio serving as early indicators of where the next round of changes could land.
More from MorningOverview