Opposition to Virginia's Civil Remedial Fees
By Bryan AultVirginia's General Assembly recently passed House Bill 3202, which imposes stringent "civil remedial fees" for certain driving offenses. In response to this bill, I started an online petition to demonstrate opposition to this law amongst Virginia's citizens to lawmakers.
There are numerous reasons for my opposition to this bill.
First, the fines for many of the offenses are disproportionate to the degree of the offense. For example, driving 80 mph will result in $1050 in fees in addition to the base price of the ticket. Please do not misunderstand- people who drive 80 deserve speeding tickets, but if someone is driving 80 in a 65 zone when traffic is actually moving at 70-75, $1050 is an outrageous fee when compared to the degree of the offense. Article 1 Section 9 of Virginia's constitution explicitly prohibits "excessive fees." When compared to a person's ability to pay and what similar offenses cost in other states, these fees certainly qualify as excessive.Second, this bill is NOT about traffic safety- it is about generating revenue. This is not political rhetoric or my personal opinion- the exact phrase "generate revenue" appears in the text of House Bill 3202. In passing this bill, the General Assembly is mixing revenue generation with traffic safety measures, and putting the two in direct conflict. As traffic safety increases, revenue will go down. However, the state needs revenue- so where is the Commonwealth's motivation to discourage unsafe driving? If the General Assembly was serious about traffic safety, they would find a way to increase traffic safety education and put more police officers on the street to enforce traffic laws under the original fee schedule.
Third, the new fees apply ONLY to Virginia residents. Virginia is full of out-of-state drivers. People commute into Virginia from Maryland, DC and West Virginia every day. There are a large number of military personnel who live in Virginia but are not legal residents. And there is all the East Coast traffic passing through via I-95. These people contribute little or nothing to Virginia's tax revenue, but use our roads. I find it appalling that the General Assembly would impose these fines on their own constituents while essentially subsidizing out-of-state drivers. Some have even suggested that this violates the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution. I do not have the knowledge of constitutional law to comment extensively on this issue, but having drastically different penalties for the exact same offense certainly seems unconstitutional.
Fourth, the bill's sponsor in the House of Delegates, Del. David Albo, stands to benefit personally from this, via his law firm, Albo & Oblon LLP. Delegate Albo would like to have you believe that no one would pay his law firm $1200 to get out of a $1000 ticket, but the reality is that the new fees mean a DUI ticket will cost between $2250 and $3000 MORE than what it currently costs. Faced with those kinds of fees and the prospects of losing their license, people who have the money will be hiring lawyers like Albo to challenge the tickets. The "free consultations" offered by Albo and Oblon certainly will not discourage people with DUI from at least inquiring about his services. Regardless of Delegate Albo's personal business ventures, this legislation is bad public policy. Virginia needs money for roads, but Virginia's citizens don't want to pay it and the General Assembly refuses to show the leadership to make them pay it.
Supporters of the bill like Albo say the fees do not affect people who do not "drive like idiots", but that does not make these fees fair or constitutional. So-called "abusers" are not the only ones who use the roads, and this legislation affects more than just habitual abusers, even if that was not the General Assembly's original intent. While I do not like the idea of mixing safety legislation with revenue legislation, I would not be opposed to more moderate (MUCH more moderate) "abuser fees" that apply to EVERYONE ticketed in Virginia as a compromise and as one form of generating revenue.
Some legislators are fundamentally opposed to raising taxes, yet they still want to do something about Virginia's transportation problems. This is simply not realistic. If the General Assembly truly needs money for transportation, they should enact a tax that is as close to a user fee as possible. For example, they could increase the price of vehicle registration and add a moderate gas tax. A gas tax would also generate revenue from some of the out-of-state travelers on Virginia roads. It could also result in positive externalities, such as more people carpooling or taking public transportation (hence reducing traffic) or people purchasing more fuel-efficient vehicles.
(Side note: a tax credit can be given to those at the lowest end of the income scale to offset the economic impact for those with the least ability to absorb any new tax).
I'd like to thank everyone who supported my petition. Delegate Bob Marshall from Prince William County is drawing up a bill to repeal the "abuser fees", and Delegate Jeff Frederick of Woodbridge has sent a letter to Governor Tim Kaine requesting a Special Session of the General Assembly to change/repeal this bill.
Virginia residents can find their state senator and state delegate by going to the following website: http://conview.state...
I encourage you to contact your delegates individually regarding this issue, and if change does not happen by November, I encourage you to make it an election issue and show your displeasure at the polls.
In the interest of full disclosure, I do not have any traffic tickets in the state of Virginia, nor have I received any tickets in any state since I moved to Virginia. I only have two tickets in my entire life, and the most recent one was over six years ago.
Both of them voted against the bill when it first came through, in part because of the fees. Both of them voted in favor of the bill as it came back from the Governor. Both of them felt it was necessary to get a bill passed, even if it was imperfect. Both of them felt that the bill as a whole accomplished some things that were good news.
As we try to figure out what our response to individual legislators should be, it is important that we NOT lump folks like David and Creigh in with Dave Albo and those who seem to regard the fees as affirmative good things.
One way to look at it is that a 1 cent gas tax increase would have brought in more revenue than the CRF's will. But the Republicans had absolutely dug in their heels -- no gas tax increase.
Let's throw some of the real bums out and then we'll try to get it right. Every bit of energy that we spend spitting at folks who will vote our way if the issue comes back is a distraction from the real battles that we need to be fighting.