Virginia’s "Abuser Fees" Get Dumped… For The Moment

January 28th, 2008 Posted in Corruption

By Eric Peters, Automotive Columnist

lotsofmoney Sometimes, the frog leaps before he’s cooked.

Remember the story about the frog and the pot of boiling water? So long as you raise the water temperature gradually, Mr. Frog doesn’t notice the increasing temperature until it’s too late too get away.

The analogy is used to convey, in easy to understand language, the process of "government creep." We don’t go from freedom to fascism overnight; statism creeps up on us incrementally — one step at a time. And each step, by itself, doesn’t seem all that bad; just another annoyance to deal with — or avoid, if you can. But one day you find yourself  living in a country that looks more like Orwell’s "1984" than the place envisioned by the authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Government — its laws, its minions, its petty harassments and endless rigmarole — is an omnipresence that is inescapable.

Which brings us to the matter of Virginia’s "abuser fees" — the brainchild of a state lawmaker named Dave Albo.

Albo, who just happened to be a big-time lawyer connected with a firm that specializes in (surprise) defending traffic cases, pushed for — and got — a new law that went into effect last January that imposed unprecedented fines on motorists for traffic infractions, including routine speeding, that ranged as high as $3,000 per incident — on top of whatever fine the court levied for the infraction.

The justification given was that the fees would help fund transportation improvements — and of course, "safety" — that well-worn bray that’s still remarkably effective, despite the obvious cynicism with which it is deployed.  

But Albo and his backers made a mistake. They went for broke — and all at once.

Not only were the fines outrageously high relative to the offense(s); not only did they constitute a "double tap" (violators paid, in effect, two fines) but to add insult to injury, they only applied to in-state drivers. A Virginia motorist convicted of driving 80-something mph on a Virginia highway with a posted speed limit of 65 mph faced a "reckless driving" charge, a court fine of several hundred dollars — plus an "abuser fee" of more than $1,000. But an out of state driver caught doing exactly the same thing only got the court fine; the "abuser fees" weren’t applicable.

Seem fair to you?

Virginians felt the same way — and lawmakers got an earful of a different sort of abuse. Just one year after Albo’s Law went into effect, it is on the verge of being repealed in total. State lawmakers are even taking the rare procedural step of seeing to it that when the law repealing the fees is passed, it will go into effect immediately. No waiting until January 2009.

The water is that hot.

So the "abuser fees" will go; but it may be only a temporary victory. Albo and his friends will realize, if they haven’t already, that they overplayed their hand. Gradualism is the key. Next time, the "abuser fees" will only apply to indefensible acts — DWI, vehicular manslaughter resulting from gross negligence — etc. Then, the law will be expanded to the next-down category of offenses. Things not quite so bad — but still hard to make excuses for. Few will complain. It will become accepted practice — and precedent. Other states will pass similar laws. There will be uniformity — and reciprocity.

A few years will pass. Then, someone — perhaps Albo himself — will propose that the fines be applied to yet more offenses. "Public safety!" will be the cry. And just as seat belt laws went from no-argument laws requiring that small children be restrained to "primary enforcement" laws that empower police to pull adults over for failing to "buckle up" — so, too, will the "abuser fees" eventually encompass routine (and purely technical) infractions such as simple speeding.

And we will have come full circle.

There’s just too much money at stake; too much potential control over the Masses to be passed up for long.

To paraphrase Arnold: They’ll be back. Count on it.

And next time, we will probably not notice the water’s getting warm again; at least, not before it’s too late to jump.

Comments?
www.ericpetersautos.com

Other Related Articles


Join The Discussion: The New NMA Forums

  1. 13 Responses to “Virginia’s "Abuser Fees" Get Dumped… For The Moment”

  2. By RICK GOLD on Jan 28, 2008

    FOLKS,

    ANOTHER GREAT ESSAY FROM NMA THAT JUST HITS THE NAIL ON THE HEAD; EVEN TO THE POINT OF DESCRIBING THE FUTURE SCENARIO(S) BLOW BY BLOW.

    THE NUMBED, HARRIED, OVERWORKED CITIZEN AS PROFIT CENTER REVISITED. CASH REGISTER
    JUST-US ON DISPLAY FOR ALL TO SEE.

    THE STATE AUTHORITIES IN VA SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME. THEY’RE DRAGGING US INCREMENTALLY CLOSER TO “AMERIKA” NOT THE “LAND OF THE FREE” WE’VE BEEN PROMISED. MR. ALBO SHOULD BE DRUMMED OUT OF THE CORP AND NEVER HOLD ANY TITLE HIGHER THAN DOG CATCHER; OF COURSE HE’D PROBABLY “SCREW THE POOCH” THERE AS WELL. JUST DEPLORABLE, USURIOUS, REPRENSIBLE BEHAVIOUR BY A STATIST OVERLORD TRYING TO MAKES SERFS OF US ALL.

    IT MAKES ME SICK.

    REGARDS ALL.

    RICK GOLD

  3. By dan on Jan 29, 2008

    If you’ld like to see the government brought under control then you need to start at the top. Go to RonPaul.com and learn about his views on the issues. Anyone who has a problem with the way our rights are being usurped, or the ever more controlling and militant manners of government at all levels, then I think you’ld agree Ron Paul is our man.

  4. By E. Meyers on Jan 29, 2008

    If this isn’t fascism, then whats the difference between this and the real thing.

    An American freedom fighter is someone who pleads not guilty to a parking ticket.

  5. By paula martin on Jan 29, 2008

    1-29-08

    Isn’t this unethical?
    If the lawyer is practicing as a defence attorney what is he doing promoting hefty fines for those he is supposed to be representing?
    As the old saying goes with friends like this who needs enemies?
    Has this been reported to the American Bar Association in his state? If so what was their response?

  6. By steve on Jan 29, 2008

    I hope VA lawmakers learned from the heat we gave them. VA traffic laws, and VA laws in general are screwed up. Hope this has some lasting effect

  7. By phil on Feb 8, 2008

    I have to say the implication that Albo would personally profit from these fees is completely spurious. Your equation assumes that traffic violations remain the same and fees go up, resulting in more business for lawyers. But the point of any law is to alter behavior. If people drive more carefully because of the threat of high fines, then it’s likely the effect is to lessen the number of driving violations. From what I understand, Reckless Driving violations decreased by 11% while the abusive driver fees were in effect. This means less, not more business for lawyers.

  8. By paula martin on Feb 8, 2008

    2-9-08

    Instead of being cited for exceeding the speed limit or failure to signal or yield right of way a driver in Virginia can also be cited for reckless driving.
    Do I have this right?

    Reckless Driving in Virginia

    VA Code § 46.2-852. Reckless driving; general rule
    Irrespective of the maximum speeds permitted by law, any person who drives a vehicle on any highway recklessly or at a speed or in a manner so as to endanger the life, limb, or property of any person shall be guilty of reckless driving in Virginia.

    VA Code § 46.2-853. Driving vehicle which is not under control; faulty brakes
    VA Code § 46.2-854. Passing on or at the crest of a grade or on a curve
    VA Code § 46.2-855. Driving with driver’s view obstructed or control impaired
    VA Code § 46.2-856. Passing two vehicles abreast
    VA Code § 46.2-857. Driving two abreast in a single lane
    VA Code § 46.2-858. Passing at a railroad grade crossing.
    VA Code § 46.2-860. Failing to give proper signals
    VA Code § 46.2-861. Driving too fast for highway and traffic conditions
    A person shall be guilty of reckless driving in Virginia who exceeds a reasonable speed under the circumstances and traffic conditions existing at the time, regardless of any posted speed limit.
    VA Code § 46.2-862. Exceeding speed limit
    A person shall be guilty of reckless driving who drives a motor vehicle on the highways in the Commonwealth (i) at a speed of twenty miles per hour or more in excess of the applicable maximum speed limit or (ii) in excess of eighty miles per hour regardless of the applicable maximum speed limit.
    VA Code § 46.2-863. Failure to yield right-of-way
    A person shall be guilty of reckless driving in Virginia who fails to bring his vehicle to a stop immediately before entering a highway from a side road when there is traffic approaching on such highway within 500 feet of such point of entrance, unless (i) a “Yield Right-of-Way” sign is posted or (ii) where such sign is posted, fails, upon entering such highway, to yield the right-of-way to the driver of a vehicle approaching on such highway from either direction.
    VA Code § 46.2-864. Reckless driving on parking lots, etc.
    VA Code § 46.2-865. Racing
    VA Code § 46.2-865.1. Injuring persons while engaging in a race
    VA Code § 46.2-866. Racing; aiders or abettors
    Any person in Virginia, although not engaged in a race as defined in§ 46.2-865, who aids or abets any such race, shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
    VA Code § 46.2-867. Racing;
    ***********************************

    Do drivers as they reach for the keys to their car even think about fines?
    Or do drivers just want to get from one place to another without injury to themselves or their car?
    ***********************************

    The leading causes of accidents are Distractions to the driver(80%) Driving while exhausted,Inclement weather,Drunk Driving,not driving 20 miles over the speed limit or failure to signal, violations which are enough to have a reckless driving violation in Virginia.

    It would be interesting to have the study mentioned by Phil posted on this site to see what factors were involved in a reduction of violations other than abusive driver penalties and WHO the study was done by.

    If the number of violations (guilty verdicts) are the criteria on which the study bases it’s 11% decrease this is different than the study being based on how many drivers were CITED for Reckless Driving in Virginia.

    The decrease may be due to drivers facing serious penalties retaining a lawyer who was able to get the abusive driver charges dismissed.

    Lawyers taking cases that involve serious penalties can charge a higher fee and handle less cases with the same amount of income or more.A reduction in cases doesn’t = a reduction in income necessarily.

    It stands to reason if a lawyer is handling traffic ticket cases he would benfit from stiffer penalties given to drivers for violating a vehicle code.
    Cited drivers who would normally pay the fine if the fine was less bother than fighting a traffic ticket are much more likely to have a lawyer handle his case if the penalties are high.

    If a lawyer were truly concerned about defending his clients he should be recommending laws that give the cited driver more rights and the ABOLISHMENT OF charging a driver with reckless driving when the driver is cited for speeding, failure to signal, failure to yield where there is clearly no apparent danger at the time the driver is cited.

    The lawyer should be pushing that the driver be cited in these cases for reckless driving ONLY when an accident has occurred or there is absolute evidence that another driver was forced off the road, laid rubber or had to take extreme action to avoid an accident.

  9. By Robert on Feb 11, 2008

    Listen, as believers in an incentive based economy, it is impossible to argue that rational economic participants are unaffected by a financial incentive to obey traffic laws. If this were the case, then individuals would act completely independent of the law. In actuality, drivers weigh the externalities associated with following the traffic law in comparison to the set of consequences for not following the given laws. When consequences and the possibility of being caught are low, drivers are more likely to act “recklessly”. For instance, we may speed late at night while passing a rolling farmland because we either assume that the consequences of speeding only impact ourselves or because we assume that our chances of being pulled over are small. Creating incentives for good driving is an economically smart decision regardless of the number of accidents caused by “distractions.” This simply indicates that no law can stop all individuals, all of the time. How intuitive!

    More than what Phil has stated, since the Abuser Fees were enacted, citations for reckless driving dropped 26%, indicating a decrease in the number of reckless drivers, the willingness of the state to prosecute drivers for reckless behavior, or some combination of the two.

    Abuser fees begot fewer reckless drivers begot less traffic cases.

    p.s. The claim that abuser fees made some individuals shell out $3,000 per instances is a drastic misrepresentation of the bills language. This fine only applies to those convicted of a felony.

  10. By Jamey Parsons on Mar 14, 2008

    This act as is the one in Texas now in place is a complete violation of our constitutional rights(Article petitthe seventh [Amendment V] and under Texas’s own Constitution’s bill of rights Article 1 - BILL OF RIGHTS Section 14 - DOUBLE JEOPARDY). Please if you live in TX (Texans only please) sign this petition. I am planning to fight the Texas Drivers Responsibility act tooth and nail. I have already written to a number of state representatives and signed this petition. I need to get as many signatures as possible on this so I can try my best to get this thing repealed. I need at least Ten Thousand signatures on this thing to be heard.

  11. By Jim W. on Mar 26, 2008

    VA wants money for roads, etc. The first place to find money is to cut the cost of government.

  12. By JOE on Mar 26, 2008

    OK Robert now that you’ve established that economic theory, doesn’t that also apply to the municipalities that use the cameras and the companies renting them? It is no accident that millions of dollars start rolling into municipal coffers after the cameras start rolling. Are you then going to tell us that there’s no incentive on this side of the argument?

    This greed for revenue is resulting in all sorts of abuse such as examples of shortening the yellow light timing to increase the citations and the resulting revenue. Do you believe this abuse is OK?

  13. By sam on Jun 8, 2008

    I am charged of reckless driving-46-2-852.I drove into a one way lane by mistake.This is my first ticket in my 1.5 years driving history.If I plead guilty in court what wud be the total expense including fines i will have to bear?Shud i hire an attorney?Will he help me from not geting any hike in my insurance?

  14. By NA on Jun 22, 2008

    NOVA breeds the scum-of-the-earth bottom feeders who watch these laws become statutes (e.g. Micky Warner, Timmy Kaine, Jimmy “Hothead” Webb, Albo, the Morans)…

    VA’s manageability rating might be high, but it’s goin’ down the tubes…I’m tired of these weaselly Big Whigs pocketing my money…It’s gonna stop, but NOT b/f these sleazy pencil-pushers are put out of business for good!
    (NC’s lookin’ more and more attractive every day.)

Post a Comment