"Post my face wanted dead or alive … Take my license, all that jive … I can't drive 55!"

The year was 1984. "I Can't Drive 55" was Sammy Hagar's biggest hit before he joined the mega-band Van Halen. He was upset with efforts to lower the speed limit and he found significant support.

Years later, once the speed limit had risen in some states to 75 mph, talk returned about a reduction to 65 mph. Hagar's answer was to cut a 2001 version of his hit titled "I Can't Drive 65." Again, he received support.

That might now become a sort of national anthem as talk has bubbled up across the nation, in response to costly crude, to reduce the speed limit.

The North Dakota Motor Carriers Association has joined a national effort to reduce the speed limit to 65 mph, to save gasoline, fossil resources and money, improve the environment through a reduction of potentially harmful emissions, and improve safety.

All of that sounds great, but speed limit regulation is only a piecemeal approach to a concern that needs much more thought in forming a national environmental and energy policy.

Speed limit regulation might make more sense as part of an overall strategy, but will make little if any significant difference alone; the talk of reduction is a knee-jerk overreaction.

Government regulation often seems a good idea, but can have bad effects. People don't like to be told what they can or can't do, especially when something is being taken away that they previously "owned."

The personal choice argument has been used in situations of regulation in the past. In other words, it is my choice if I want to wear a motorcycle helmet or not. But regulators claim those who don't wear helmets can contribute to the rising cost of health care should they not have insurance, or adequate coverage, and are injured when a helmet would have prevented an injury and uncovered medical costs.

But then arguments can be made for or against just about anything.

Those against a speed-limit reduction claim it isn't needed and is costly. They say drivers already have the option to drive slower - at 65 mph - if they are so inclined, and that we don't need no stinkin' government intervention.

We agree.

Rock on, Sammy.