I actually work in transportation. I like the concept and I don't like that we need it. Here's why it's needed:
1. Our driver's licensure process is too easy. It doesn't require "safe driving competency", just knowledge of operating a motor vehicle in the most common circumstances.
2. Renewing a license is rarely more than an administrative process. Over the age of 70 drivers MAY be required to pass a vision test.
3. Use of motor vehicles is legally a revocable privilege, but gross violators of traffic law are continually allowed to drive because our transportation infrastructure all but requires the use of a personal automobile outside of specific communities in California.
4. With the visible lack of traffic enforcement, people are running stop signs, red lights, and traveling beyond the speed limit more frequently and more brazenly.
5. Over 90% of adults in California have smartphones and a large (but unknown) proportion use them while operating vehicles. Their use contributes to collision frequency.
6. Traffic law/safety enforcement is almost non-existent throughout California since 2020 due to the various laws and initiatives making it more difficult or arduous to stop someone for any reason on the road.
Is it really that bad? YES. Recently, the California legislature approved the enforcement of bus lane violations, bike lane violations (parking in...), and excessive speed via camera and mailed citations instead of via in-person enforcement because of the desire to minimize interactions with those breaking the law. California has effectively neutered its traffic enforcement (and to a certain extent, law enforcement efforts in general) and needs SOME OTHER METHOD to mitigate the rate at which people are killing themselves and others on the road. Thus, speed limiters.
Now, to fix some of the widely spread myths from other comments on this article:
"Driving slower than the speed limit is more dangerous than driving above the speed limit."
This is literally never true when drivers on the road are attentive. In fact, if you're on a 2-lane road (one in each direction) with a speed limit of 45, the person ahead of you is doing 40, and you're doing 55, the person ahead of you has the right of way and is fully within their legal right to go that speed. As the person on approach YOU are creating the speed differential. As the person on approach, YOU have full control of your speed and should be able to tell that you're gaining on the vehicle.
If safe and legal, you can pass that person or you can slow down and follow at a safe distance. If you crash into that person, you will be entirely at fault.
This goes for every road user. If you see a bicyclist legally riding in the general travel lane and you hit them from behind, you are at fault because you should have simply slowed your vehicle, changed, lanes, and safely passed with 3+ feet between the outermost edge of any part of the vehicle and the bicycle.
"Speed differential, not SPEED is the unsafe issue."
That's actually correct, but people draw the wrong conclusions from it. Capping speeds mitigates reduces the maximum speed differential and thus this statement actually is supportive of a speed restrictor.
"It's illegal to go slow!"
No it's not. If you want to go 50 in a 55, that's 100% OK, but you need to be ready to pull off to the side when 5 or more vehicles have accumulated behind you on a two-lane road.
"You can lose control at any speed. Limiting speed won't prevent crashes."
This is objectively false. If we had a universal restricted speed of 5 mph, there would obviously be fewer collisions (and fewer SEVERE) collisions than with the current system. Why? Because everyone would be traveling slow enough that even the most negligent people would have enough time to respond to potential conflicts up ahead. That same principle stands when you increase the speed restriction level until the point where a person's reaction time can no longer compensate for the speed. What is that speed? It's different per person (age, experience, disabilities, etc.) and vehicle (condition, performance). Generally speaking, it's somewhere between 50mph and 80mph and it's on a curve with fewer and fewer people being competent at the higher speeds.
Giving our EXTREMELY lax licensure standards, it make sense to treat everyone as "less competent".
"This is big brother trying to control you/me!"
Kinda, but only because the siblings as a whole can't get their act together.