On many major roads in the US, refusing to exceed the speed limit is unsafe behavior.
With respect to speed, safety comes from matching your speed to that of the surrounding traffic, even if the surrounding traffic is on average exceeding the posted limit. Road-raging vigilante behaviors by drivers intent on enforcing their (incorrect) ideas about safety (i.e., deliberately driving slowly or occupying a passing lane to try to force passing traffic to slow) is actually far more dangerous and in many states is illegal and ticketable.
I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I want to see the law that states you can be given a ticket for driving 65 in a 65 just because traffic in the left lane is going 80.
Many states (including Kansas, where I used to live) have enforceable minimums as well as maximums on major highways. All states can pull over and ticket vehicles for, in the judgment of an officer, traveling at a speed slow enough to be unsafe (witness the stories a little while back about self-driving cars getting into trouble for obstructing traffic by being too slow). In recent years there's been a big push to begin enforcing this on highways, largely because of the rise of road-raging self-appointed "enforcers" who try to force other traffic to obey their personal interpretations of traffic laws.
And in all 50 states it is now some type of infraction to be anywhere but the rightmost lane when travelling slower than other traffic, even if by "slower" you mean "exactly the posted limit". This year-old article has some notes on the left-lane stuff, including the fact that yes, you could be ticketed for doing 65 in a 65 if the passing traffic is doing 80 and your slower driving is interfering with that:
And also points out what was already well-known to everyone except vigilante traffic rangers: that doing only the speed limit, when everyone else is faster, is demonstrably unsafe.
Yeah, but those minimums are usually 40 or 45mph. You can absolutely be ticketed in many states for going at the speed limit in the left hand lane if you're blocking faster traffic although I expect that's fairly rare. I'd have to see someone driving at the speed limit in the right hand lane be ticketed for going slower than the flow of traffic to believe it. That would be a definite man bites dog event.
(a) Notwithstanding the prima facie speed limits, any
vehicle proceeding upon a highway at a speed less than the normal
speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time shall be
driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable
to the right-hand edge or curb, except when overtaking and passing
another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing
for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or
driveway.
(b) If a vehicle is being driven at a speed less than the normal
speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time, and is
not being driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as
practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, it shall constitute prima
facie evidence that the driver is operating the vehicle in violation
of subdivision (a) of this section.
I suppose it is conceivable that going 65 in the right lane when all the other right lane and merging traffic is expecting to go 70 or 75 could still be unsafe. If there's a big gap ahead of you and a long line of cars behind, it's probably a good idea to speed up regardless of lane (assuming weather's good and your car can handle it).
What's really frustrating and unsafe though is when drivers try to merge onto the freeway going 35 or 45 and traffic is going 70 in a 70 or 75 zone.
With respect to speed, safety comes from matching your speed to that of the surrounding traffic, even if the surrounding traffic is on average exceeding the posted limit. Road-raging vigilante behaviors by drivers intent on enforcing their (incorrect) ideas about safety (i.e., deliberately driving slowly or occupying a passing lane to try to force passing traffic to slow) is actually far more dangerous and in many states is illegal and ticketable.