Your postings on these abusive fees are fantastic and helping the public far more then the legislature and the Governor are doing about this issue at this time.

It is time to send all those signatures to the Governor's office and demand an executive order to halt implementation of that law till it is further studied, using Michigan and New Jersey laws as the source.

I will be writing my Delegate and State Senator to encourage the Governor to issue an executive order.

After sending you previous emails against any increase in driver penalty fees, you sign the Transportation bill to include abuser fees of $3,500. Now you are appearing every where promoting those fees.

Just like President Bush was in high regard after 9/11, you were in high regard in your first year of office.

Just as President Bush fell after invading Iraq, you will be failing if you allow these fees to go forward.

It was disappointing talking to some legislatures who were voting against the transportation bill till you used "Tom Delay" tactics on them, to get them to change their vote.

There are over 150,000 signatures on the blog "Raising Kaine" against the abuser fees and I know your associates have told you this. Are you going to be stubborn like George Bush and not admit a mistake.

If you are not like George Bush, then I suggest you issue an executive order "Not to enforce the user fees till January or order a Special Session."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
PS; email to Abbitt and Deeds was also sent.

Outstanding work by the Post on this topic.  It's dispicable that when drafting this amendment, Albo and Rust couldn't be bothered to do what Tim Craig did while drafting this article: call lawmakers in New Jersey and Michigan, and ask the opinions of elected Commonwealth Attorneys, our appointed judges and our magistrates.

Clearly, the entire omnibus legislation is fatally flawed if the amendment related to the abuser fees will not increase public safety and the associated $65 million in annual revenue is uncollectable without severely affecting the welfare of thousands of Virginians.  I hope democratic challengers will follow Brian Moran's lead and hammer their opponents on this issue from now until election day.  The transportation plan must be revisited in its entirity next year at the earliest convenience, and we need to make sure we have new leadership in the GA addressing this issue; we cannot afford to let the House GOP take another bite at this apple.  This was the best plan they could come up with in 2 years!  I shudder to think of what their second-best plan might be....

So our esteemed law makers here in Virginia have cited abuser fees in other states as one of the reasons why they wanted these fees, but did they actually call anyone in NJ or MI to find out if the fees work?  Sounds like they didn't.  Certainly Rep. Pearce didn't get a call.  Brilliant, just brilliant.

If you're going to copy someone else's law, how about talking to them to see if it works or not.  Is that too much to ask?

Well, I suppose it didn't matter anyway.  With Albo pushing laws that line his attorney pockets with more money, the other flat earth Republican ideologues fighting against common sense solutions, and a handful of Democrats blinded by desperation (to pass any transportation bill), it didn't matter really what NJ or MI said.  This garbage was going to pass come hell or high water.

if they'd bothered to talk to people who represent criminal defendants, especially poor ones, in traffic court.  I asked many of my colleagues what they thought of the new law and the answer was uniformly that it was the most ill-considered and counter-productive thing they'd ever seen.  We've already seen people driving while suspended for failure to pay the formerly modest fees owed to the courts.  We were horrified at the thought that someone who struggles to pay $200 in fines and fees would now have to pay thousands.  Poor and lower middle class people need their cars for work and to help their family members.  A desperate person who's been suspended for failing to pay fees will continue to drive, but without insurance and with a strong fear of being stopped by the police. 

Remember, these fines are issued against those stopped while driving, not for those convicted of unsafe driving.  It's not much different then fining those who are dating for date-rape. These are civil fines and there's no criminal burden of proof, no right to an attorney, no requirement of conviction. 

I looked at the summary of the new law on the Supreme Court of Virginia's Web Site http://www.courts.st....  According to the summary, the fees are assesed after the motorist is convicted.  Thus, the burden of proof and right to an attorney have already been part of the system.

In traffic court, a judge can assess one set of penaties without the other, or can assess civil penalties if the motorist plea-bargains or pleads "no contest," or "guilty with an explanation."

My understanding is that while the fee itself is not subject to judiciary discretion or collected by the courst, conviction nevertheless remains a precondition for imposition of said fees because that's it is determined that the individual is subject to the fee.  Just like you will never be assessed a vehicle registration fee unless you go to the DMV and register your car, you will never be assessed an abuser fee unless a court of law decides that you violated a statute that makes you subject to said fees.

Unless I missed that they forgot to add that part, in which case we should seriously consider storming Richmond with pitchforks.

The outstanding Washington post article is in no small part thanks to my diligence in providing them with the contact information to these legislators and judges in MI, along with transcripts soon of the hearings that were held on how destructive they are to low income peoples lives.

As I said in other postings, there is already a lawsuit pending in the MI supreme court to try and have this law thrown out as an unconstitutional tax. Whether it's the same in your situation or not, in MI, the DMV is not the one who collects the fee, it is the TREASURY who sends you the bill once they see the offence posted at the DMV. And the treasury has the ability to snoop into your tax refund and levy wages to collect the fee if you refuse to pay.

And yes, it has made the roads in every state that this type of law is in, more dangerous. People are scared of getting pulled over if they KNOW their license is suspended, and the ones who don't know, end up getting arrested for having it suspended, then getting another fee tacked on and it becomes a never ending cycle of debt. And who knows how many people have lost their jobs and are on welfare or state assitance, which ends up costing the state MORE than they would have gotten back from the driver fee.

And don't think for one second that your online petition will have any impact on these legislators. They're stubborn and the only way to fight is with a lawsuit at the federal level. Like MI is embroiled in. Hopefully it could be resolved this year and could set a precedent for other states to get their laws like this removed from the books, and have the money refunded. Imagine if NJ had to refund the $1 billion they claim to have collected over the past 13 years? There'd be a collective legislative run to the diaper store.

Attorney who is fighting this law:

Atty. Henry Guikema
125 Ottawa Ave NW #333
Grand Rapids MI 49503
616-235-2601

Brief filed with the court explaining the stupidity of this law
http://woodtv.triton...
http://woodtv.triton...

Wood tv 8 news video on trying to repeal our law, unfortunately the one with Judge Buhl's statements is not on there anymore I believe.
http://video.woodtv....
http://video.woodtv....

Are there any studies/stats that would back up the increased road danger assertion?  Everything I've seen so far, both saying that the roads will be safer (because people drive slower) and the roads will be more dangerous (unlicensed drivers and those that run from the law) sounds logical but neither side has backed it up with hard data.  Do you know of any such studies?

Here is the task force report from NJ. Beware, it's 70+ pages http://www.state.nj....

They claim it typically takes 4 years to do a report like this to assess the stats of a law. Well MI is just now coming into its 4th year of having this law, so a report should be coming up soon.

I've contacted I don't know HOW many newspapers and news agencies, and none of them seem interested in the topic.

I'm glad the Washington post had enough insight and intelligence to report on the information I gave them.