Posted on 08/12/2007 4:30:08 PM PDT by RDTF
The labor pains were coming, so Jessica Hodges got going. The 26-year-old bank teller from Burke sped toward Inova Fairfax Hospital, but before she got there, the law got her -- 57 mph in a 35 zone. Reckless driving.
Hodges's labor pains subsided -- they turned out to be a false alarm -- but the agony from her ticket is mounting. She was found guilty of the July 3 offense and given a $1,050 civil fee on top of a judge-imposed $100 fine and court costs, making her one of the first to be hit with Virginia's new "abusive driver fees," which have been greeted by widespread public outrage.
-snip-
Anger and exasperation have been common sentiments recently in Fairfax General District Court, where fee-facing drivers such as Hodges have started to join the daily swarm of traffic offenders. After waiting hours to give their side of the story to judges -- several of whom seemed just as annoyed with the fees as defendants -- many nevertheless left owing enormous sums that they said would be difficult to pay.
-snip-
The fees, which range from $750 to $3,000, were passed by the General Assembly in the spring as part of a package aimed at funding scores of transportation projects. Backers said the fees would both raise money and improve highway safety by targeting the state's worst drivers -- those guilty of severe traffic offenses such as DUI, reckless driving and driving on a suspended license.
But the fees have since been vilified by an angry public (more than 170,000 people have signed an online petition to repeal them), denounced by lawmakers who once supported them and ruled unconstitutional by judges in two localities who said they violate equal protection rights guaranteed under the 14th Amendment.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Virginia is entering the liberal side of things gradually.I hate to say it, but this is not an example of VA turning Lib. The "tax" was introduced by a Republican delegate and voted up by a Republican majority.
Virginia is bloody fascist when it comes to the road law: no radar detectors, stupidly low speed limits on local roads (ever tried to argue with V-DOT about the inane 35mph on the I-66 overpass along Rte 29? Aka "speed trap"), and waay unnecessarily aggressive enforcement.
This law is not liberal. It's just stupid, and VA conservatives ought to be damned embarrassed by it.
Maybe. This seems to me like one of those bridges that need to be crossed when we get there, not something that should bat down the law out of the gate.
Look, ideas have consequences and so do taxes-—whatever you call them. Didn’t we just have a report come out that the new cig tax has caused cig sales to go down? So now the guvmint will have to look elsewhere for the formerly cig tax money.
That’s just the way it is.
You have a substantive reason-—the impact you conclude this financial scheme might have on law enforcement-—for your points. More power to you!
What I have reacted against on this thread is the bare idea that somehow the state is “coercing” people to pay “taxes” simply by fining individual traffic law violators. That’s nonsense (assuming we never get to your hypothetical of wholesale ticketing of “innocents”).
No, but a river starts with a single drop. Or something like that.
I won’t be unhappy if some of these yahoos stop endangering innocent people with their truly abusive driving.
I guess we’ve never heard of that little Latin phrase . . . something about reducing . . . absurd . . .
More government that they voted for.The voters have no-one to blame but themselves.
I explained that the reason that I knew I wasn't speeding was because I had stopped for coffee a couple miles up the road and the folks there were talking about the speed trap.
So I made sure that I was actually going a few miles below the limit.
The cop looked at me funny for a couple seconds and announced he was giving me a warning this time but that I should not speed in the future.
This new law is stupid and corrupt. What if they had made the fine $10,000 or $100,000? Would some of you just-follow-the-law types start to agree that maybe these amounts would be too excessive?
Some of you folks are really gullible. This new law was not passed for the good of anybody. It's just a new tax.
I saw this young wife interviewed on local television tonight. She has a very, very new baby now, so clearly she was close to term when the ticket was given. It's pretty darn difficult to tell the difference between some early contractions and the ones that are going to go all the way, even if you're an experienced mother, and she's not. Some of us have to go to the hospital two or three times before the contractions continue and we deliver.
Burke Lake Road, where she was pulled over, is a smooth four-lane divided road. Is going 57 there too fast? Probably. But it's hardly a sin worth a thousand dollar fine.
And if you're wondering, yes, I've been speeding during medical emergencies. Many years ago I had a very bad asthma attack. Knew I was in serious trouble. No one was around to take me to the hospital, so I drove myself, at 2 a.m. Got pulled over by a cop for going way, way too fast through the middle of the small town where the hospital was. He saw what was wrong and escorted me to the ER. He did not give me a thousand-dollar ticket.
Was this woman wrong? I'm withholding judgment on that. But whatever she was doing, it was not worth a thousand bucks. That's madness. I'm sympathetic toward a scared young mother who is in pain, about to have the biggest experience of her life, and panics. Twenty years ago I might have done the same thing. Under those circumstances I can't imagine what kind of person could actually drive at a sedate 35 down a wide road. She might even have figured that if a cop stopped her he'd be supportive, as the cop who stopped me was.
You seem to have missed the point that the VA legislators didn't raise taxes for everyone precisely because they knew THAT would get their thieving little behinds voted right out of office. So your "question" to several of the posters means doodley-squat.
I am curious, how does a $3,500 fine compare to the average state income tax paid by a Virginia wage earner?
I bet the fine is more.
Ok, let us take the national - the next speeding tiket you get, will cost more than what you sent the IRS last year.
Sounds like cruel and unusual to me.
Oh, and illegal aliens are exempt - they didn’t send money to the IRS, anyway.
What a piece-of-garbage law.
Wow, you are really stepping in it on this thread. For starters, the fees are not being used to pay for additional services/costs caused by bad drivers, but for roads. There is simply no argument that bad drivers have any more of an adverse impact on roads than good drivers. Therefore, all drivers should pay taxes to improve the roads.
Also, you may not have any problem with the law not applying to everyone equally or with excessive fines, but the US Constitution, which guarantees equal protection under the law, and the Virginia Constitution, which specifically prohibits excessive fines and taxes that aren't equally applied to all those in similar circumstances, do.
It's actually 81 in a 65. Virginia calls anything over 80, regardless of posted speed limit, or twenty miles over the posted speed limit as reckless driving. Many cops will reduce the ticket to 79 to avoid the reckless driving charge, but not the p*icks who patrol 66 in Fairfax County.
Only Virginia residents are subject to the fines. Out of staters get regular fines with out the tax.
They can't because in order to do so they would have to call it a fine rather than a "civil assessment." Once it is a fine, the fees have to be used for education under the Literacy Amendment of the VA Constitution. Thus, they would be unable to use the money for road improvements.
The power to tax is the power to destroy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/13/AR2007081300619.html?nav=printbox
Va. Drivers’ Fees Upheld by Circuit Court Judge
Richmond Judge Reverses Ruling by Lower Court
By Tim Craig
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 13, 2007; 11:42 AM
In response to today's ruling, legislative leaders said they will push during the 2008 General Assembly session amend the new fines to include out-of-state drivers.
"In January, we will make changes that would apply abusive driver fees to both Virginia and out-of-state drivers, as was the original intent of the General Assembly. We also remain committed to enacting this change, as well as to making whatever changes necessary to ensure this safety measure applies only to the most egregious and regular abusers of the rules and laws of Virginia's roads," according to a joint statement by House Speaker William Howell, R-Stafford, and Senate Majority Leader Walter Stosch, R-Henrico
http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=130211&ran=7969
Personally, I've found a very good use for online petitions. If you combine them with a buck or five, you can buy a coffee.
What makes you think that is evidence that I “missed the point”?
The fact is that, for whatever reason, the legislator did NOT raise taxes for everyone. It’s not relevant to this discussion WHY they did not raise taxes for everyone. They did not. Hence my question: would you rather that they had?
Pretty simple question. The state was going to raise revenue one way or the other. Which way do you think is more appropriate or better?
P.S. Are you really naive enough to believe that you are the only one who might view these fines as “taxes in disguise” (ummm, I believe the Legislature came right out and stated that the purpose of the fines was to raise revenue for highway projects)?
IOW, do you actually believe that the even the Legislature, which, as I noted, came right out and stated the purpose of the fines was to raise revenues without raising taxes on everyone, thought they would escape scrutiny for this scheme?
Isn’t the Legislature taking heat for this either way?
You bet. So it had nothing to do with some supposed attempt to fool the masses, an attempt that only a few (such as yourself) are smart enough to see through.
The fact is that the Legislature stated it was going to raise revenue for highway projects. Period. When, *for whatever reason,* there were not enough votes to raise taxes, they came up with this alternative. That’s no secret.
So you seem to have missed the point that it means doodley-squat WHY VA legislators didn’t raise taxes. They still raised revenues and will still take whatever political heat that that revenue scheme engenders. So what?
My question remains, and don’t answer by changing the premise that the Legislature was going to raise revenue one way or the other: given that premise, is it your view that it would have been better to go ahead and raise taxes on everyone than to raise fines for traffic violators?
So much for that "equal before the law" stuff, huh? Or that the laws should be reasonable?
Yep - the law is the law is the law... Even if sometimes it IS an ass, to paraphrase Mark Twain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.