# No Interstates in Alaska? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [June 7, 2006, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-interstates-in-alaska/359736 "2006-06-07T14:10:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Bytegeist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9dc877/32.png) [@Bytegeist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bytegeist)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2006, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-interstates-in-alaska/359736/21 "2006-06-14T14:47:10Z")
> [@Who\_me?](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > I-595 (not signed as interstate) Maryland (link)19.97 miles [1]; a “secret” designation along US 50/301 from I-495 near Washington, D. C. to MD 70 near Annapolis, Md. It’s not signed Interstate 595 … > > [http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/i595.html](http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/i595.html) A road with a _secret name_? This has to be one of the silliest things I’ve heard all decade. I hereby declare MD Route 197, connecting Laurel and Bowie, to be the _Bytegeist Be Excellent to Each Other Parkway_. Of course, you won’t find signs or maps anywhere calling it that. But really, that’s its name anyway. Ggggaaah! Since this absurdity is coming from the government, I suppose what it means is that in funding bills and the like, this particular stretch of road is officially designated “I-595”. For example: _Provision 53c: $21 million from FY 2006 to set up orange traffic cones along I-595, closing the left lane for no earthly reason. An additional $5 million to be reserved for cleaning and inspecting cones._ Perhaps “I-595” is an artifact left over from how the road was originally built, or which pot of money it came from. Still, other state and federal roads manage to get by just fine, so I fail to see the point of the interstate that isn’t an interstate. No point, that is, except to give me a chuckle next time I’m driving on it. ---
**Author:** ![Mathochist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c89c15/32.png) [@Mathochist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mathochist)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2006, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-interstates-in-alaska/359736/22 "2006-06-14T15:20:06Z")
> [@Bytegeist](#): > > A road with a _secret name_? This has to be one of the silliest things I’ve heard all decade. “Secret” is overstating it. It’s just unmarked. It’s already called two other things, so why add a third sign? > [@](#): > > I hereby declare MD Route 197, connecting Laurel and Bowie, to be the _Bytegeist Be Excellent to Each Other Parkway_. Of course, you won’t find signs or maps anywhere calling it that. But really, that’s its name anyway. And you’re the MD state senator from where? > [@](#): > > Since this absurdity is coming from the government, I suppose what it means is that in funding bills and the like, this particular stretch of road is officially designated “I-595”. For example: _Provision 53c: $21 million from FY 2006 to set up orange traffic cones along I-595, closing the left lane for no earthly reason. An additional $5 million to be reserved for cleaning and inspecting cones._ What it _means_ is that the stretch of road is part of the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System, and as such is eligible for federal maintenance funds designated for such use, among other things. > [@](#): > > Perhaps “I-595” is an artifact left over from how the road was originally built, or which pot of money it came from. Nope, it’s from the _upgrade_, which was pretty clearly mentioned in **Who\_me?**'s quote. > [@](#): > > Still, other state and federal roads manage to get by just fine, so I fail to see the point of the interstate that isn’t an interstate. The point is that it’s part of the system, and so has access to certain classes of funds. It’s not marked as such because a decision was made that it was already so well-known as 50 _and_ as 301 that it would just be confusing to add a third designation. It’s not uncommon. There are a number of unsigned chunks of the interstate, though this is the longest such chunk. What’s the shortest? If I recall correctly, it’s that little connector between I395 and I295? Welcome to the DC stretch of I695, the only interstate to pass through _zero_ states. (n.b.: I295 is \*not the B/W Parkway, though it’s a continuation of that from DC down to the beltway) ---
**Author:** ![Bytegeist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9dc877/32.png) [@Bytegeist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bytegeist)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2006, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-interstates-in-alaska/359736/23 "2006-06-14T17:06:35Z")
> [@Mathochist](#): > > “Secret” is overstating it. It’s just unmarked. It’s already called two other things, so why add a third sign? Yes, _given_ that the road now has three names, I certainly agree that two publicized names are enough already. That doesn’t immediately explain why anyone, under any circumstances, even official circumstances, should also feel the need to add the designation “I-595” for that stretch of road — unless there’s some legalistic reason. I can imagine plenty of possible legalistic reasons. _It’s still funny._ > [@](#): > > And you’re the MD state senator from where? You surely recognized that as a joke. > [@](#): > > What it _means_ is that the stretch of road is part of the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System, and as such is eligible for federal maintenance funds designated for such use, among other things. […] > > Nope, it’s from the _upgrade_, which was pretty clearly mentioned in **Who\_me?**'s quote. Apologies for speculating on the history when the history was already given. I take it then that Maryland couldn’t simply get federal assistance to upgrade MD-50/301 as a mere state highway — not even when this highway connected DC to Annapolis, and was pretty obviously in Washington’s interest to upgrade anyway. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-interstates-in-alaska/359736.md?page=1)