Citation Nation

[cpzilliacus]

CityJournal.com: Citation Nation - How America turned into a gigantic speed-trap.

In April 2013, when California resident Derick Neal rolled through a red light, it was no surprise that he received a ticket. What did surprise Neal was how much his mistake would cost him. While the base rate for his infraction was $100, he ultimately was on the hook for nearly $500 by the time state assessment fees ($100), county assessment fees ($70), court construction fees ($50), emergency medical-services fees ($20), and more got tacked on.

Neal's ticket was no isolated incident. Local governments increasingly are using tickets, fines, and fees to generate income, rather than to deter crime or enhance public safety. The funds derived from these sources are treated as part of the annual revenue base, and sometimes even built into governments' budget baselines. This phenomenon, which has been dubbed "taxation by citation,"  has troubling implications. While most citizens understand that penalties and fines are key components of effective law enforcement and public-safety protocols, few are likely aware that governments use citations as a means to enact stealth tax increases. 

[SP Cook]

Yes, of course. 

The reason for so many tacked on "fees" and "court costs" is that many states require actual fines go to the school board.  This was designed to take the profit motive out of police work, but no court has had the balls to say "no a 'fee' is part of the fine, it goes to the school board". 

Police should simply never ever never be used to make money.  Never.  It takes police time away from serious useful work.  It teaches disrespect for the police (because revenue traffic work is UNDESERVING of respect).  It corrupts (because there will always be the insider that gets off, and cops in most places are allowed to sell these wink wink nod nod stickers that we all know are get out of jail free cards, imagine if your kids teacher sold you a sticker not that it wink wink would affect her grades.)  It makes police hypocrites (because I'm pretty sure 99.9% of police have never violated serious criminal laws, and that the same number violates idiotic traffic laws they turn around and enforce daily.)  It empower police and courthouse in an improper way (maybe it is a "random tax" and maybe not, maybe you were DWB, or maybe it was that gay equal sign sticker, or maybe it was your Trump sitcker or your Auburn alumni sticker.)  And it creates a us vs. them mentality between police and socitety. 

It simply should end.  Everywhere and for all time. 

[oscar]

Yes, of course. 

The reason for so many tacked on "fees" and "court costs" is that many states require actual fines go to the school board.  This was designed to take the profit motive out of police work, but no court has had the balls to say "no a 'fee' is part of the fine, it goes to the school board".

Of course not. Not when the court system takes its own cut of the fees, in California (where the courts constantly complain about being under-funded) and elsewhere.

[kalvado]

More breaking news: sky is blue!!! and milk is white!!!!
Stay tuned for more updates.

[SP Cook]

Of course not. Not when the court system takes its own cut of the fees, in California (where the courts constantly complain about being under-funded) and elsewhere.

Court costs should be proportional to the actual time spent by court employees on the case in question.  The charging of a random tax of upwards of $100 for something that actually takes a few cents worth of court time is illigitmate.

As is 99.99% of traffic enforcement.

[nexus73]

Port Orford OR is a small city and big speed trap on Oregon's south coast (US 101).  Maybe things have changed but the city budget used to include receiving $160K a year from traffic violations.  Needless to say the cops sat on the main drag during the day and did practically nothing at night, which let the criminals have free reign. 

In my area (Coos Bay/North Bend OR), the police are too busy with calls for service to spend time running radar all over the place.  Traffic flows along nicely with 5 MPH over seeming to be where the public settles in.  Speed limits are not unreasonably low either.  We're still overrun with criminals though since the county jail only has about 50 beds and they're mostly taken.  We can't win for losing on that front...LOL! 

Rick

[AsphaltPlanet]

Of course not. Not when the court system takes its own cut of the fees, in California (where the courts constantly complain about being under-funded) and elsewhere.

Court costs should be proportional to the actual time spent by court employees on the case in question.  The charging of a random tax of upwards of $100 for something that actually takes a few cents worth of court time is illigitmate.

As is 99.99% of traffic enforcement.

I'm not defending using policing as a revenue generating service, but the idea that any part of the court process actually costs just cents is ludicrous.  Nothing about due process is inexpensive.

[cpzilliacus]

Yes, of course. 

The reason for so many tacked on "fees" and "court costs" is that many states require actual fines go to the school board.  This was designed to take the profit motive out of police work, but no court has had the balls to say "no a 'fee' is part of the fine, it goes to the school board". 

Police should simply never ever never be used to make money.  Never.  It takes police time away from serious useful work.  It teaches disrespect for the police (because revenue traffic work is UNDESERVING of respect).  It corrupts (because there will always be the insider that gets off, and cops in most places are allowed to sell these wink wink nod nod stickers that we all know are get out of jail free cards, imagine if your kids teacher sold you a sticker not that it wink wink would affect her grades.)  It makes police hypocrites (because I'm pretty sure 99.9% of police have never violated serious criminal laws, and that the same number violates idiotic traffic laws they turn around and enforce daily.) 

Virginia, at least for tickets issued by the VSP, as well as tickets issued by county and municipal officers for violations of state traffic laws, send nearly all of the revenue to the Literacy Fund, where it is used to purchase school textbooks and library books.  The only exception is revenue from truck overweight tickets, where the money goes to VDOT for pavement and bridge repairs.

Unfortunately, Virginia allows local governments to write their own traffic ordinances, which then means that the revenue from those tickets is used however the local board of supervisors or municipal council desires.

[SP Cook]

I'm not defending using policing as a revenue generating service, but the idea that any part of the court process actually costs just cents is ludicrous.  Nothing about due process is inexpensive.

Going to a window and giving cash to some drone clerk is all the "due process" that 99.9% of these traffic offense cases get.  There is no hearing, no jury, no involvement by any judicial officer (even a non-lawyer magistrate or justice of the peace) no involvement by the prosecutor, nothing.  Just a poor random tax victim going to a window and paying up. 

In fact, several states have (Unconstitutionally, BTW) come up with the legal theory that traffic cases are not really "criminal" and thus the random tax victim is not entitled to "due process". 

The idea that that costs the court $1, let along $100, in its time is rediculious.

[vdeane]

Plus, many states are now charging simply to go to court regardless of whether you're found guilty or not, which is insane.  One should not have to pay a cent if they are found not guilty.

[wxfree]

This is part of the American mentality.  It has a lot of facets and is really fascinating.  Part of it is that Americans are law-and-order people.  They like tough punitive laws and like to see offenders suffer.  Whether it's just or does any good is beside the point.  They hold fair trials as sacred, but don't actually want trials to be fair because then it might not end with a conviction.  They want laws that regulate everything, while complaining about the loss of personal freedom.  They like laws that are so restrictive they're nearly impossible to comply with and then they disrespect those laws because they're absurd.  They hold police in high regard and also complain about them doing their jobs enforcing absurd laws.  The American attitude about law seems to be a combination of child-like simplicity in principle, but cynical and defiant in practice.  They feel like good citizens by supporting strict laws, and then feel entitled to ignore those laws because they're too strict.

[briantroutman]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

[Bickendan]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

It got pulled over and cited.

[formulanone]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

Whether a $500 ticket or owning that vehicle, the punishment does not fit the crime.

I'm surprised there wasn't a Ford Infraction or Pontiac Sentence.

[Duke87]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

And I expected it to be about Wikipedia.

[SP Cook]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

I'm surprised there wasn't a Ford Infraction or Pontiac Sentence.

Actually there was an Edsel (Ford) Citation before Chevy used the name.  I assume the reference was to the racehorse.    Edsel also made a Pacer, which AMC recycled for that malpractice of a car and a Ranger, which Ford itself used for its ultracrap small pickups.

I'm not old enough to remember Edsel, but I sure do remember the Chevy Citation.  Hyped as "the first Chevy of the 80s" in 1979, it was, in my lifetime the first time I noticed GM's eternal ad theme of "well the car we sold you last time was a piece of crap, but NOW!!!" 

GM has been telling the same lie for 35 years.

[nexus73]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

I'm surprised there wasn't a Ford Infraction or Pontiac Sentence.

Actually there was an Edsel (Ford) Citation before Chevy used the name.  I assume the reference was to the racehorse.    Edsel also made a Pacer, which AMC recycled for that malpractice of a car and a Ranger, which Ford itself used for its ultracrap small pickups.

I'm not old enough to remember Edsel, but I sure do remember the Chevy Citation.  Hyped as "the first Chevy of the 80s" in 1979, it was, in my lifetime the first time I noticed GM's eternal ad theme of "well the car we sold you last time was a piece of crap, but NOW!!!" 

GM has been telling the same lie for 35 years.

Ranger was also used on full-sized Ford pickups in the Seventies.  It was a top of the line package for those times.  Today it would be no better than the base model XL...LOL!  Pickups of today are fancier than Cadillacs and Lincolns used to be and full of enough performance to make a classic muscle car driver take notice when you buy the appropriate editions. 

Rick

[inkyatari]

Wow.  What an infuriating article.

I think it just gave illinois legislators some ideas.

[Brandon]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

Which is actually named after a horse.  As was the Edsel.

[formulanone]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

Which is actually named after a horse.  As was the Edsel.

On second thought, "Chrysler Tri-Jet" does have a rather future-retro feel to it.

[sparker]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

Which is actually named after a horse.  As was the Edsel.

On second thought, "Chrysler Tri-Jet" does have a rather future-retro feel to it.

I always thought Edsel was the name of one of the Ford sons (& heirs); it's likely any horse connected to the family was named after the kid!

[Brandon]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

Which is actually named after a horse.  As was the Edsel.

On second thought, "Chrysler Tri-Jet" does have a rather future-retro feel to it.

I always thought Edsel was the name of one of the Ford sons (& heirs); it's likely any horse connected to the family was named after the kid!

Edsel was the name of Edsel Ford, Henry's son.  The horse was Citation, winner of the 1948 Triple Crown.  Hence the Edsel Citation and the Chevrolet Citation.

[sparker]

Edsel was the name of Edsel Ford, Henry's son.  The horse was Citation, winner of the 1948 Triple Crown.  Hence the Edsel Citation and the Chevrolet Citation.

Don't forget about the Harman-Kardon Citation line of audio amplification!

[cpzilliacus]

Plus, many states are now charging simply to go to court regardless of whether you're found guilty or not, which is insane.  One should not have to pay a cent if they are found not guilty.

I agree.  Courts should be funded out of general funds (in other words, broad-based taxes like income, real property and sales taxes), and should not be charging for their services.   

I can see higher-level courts (as in state and federal appellate courts) charging filing fees (but waiving them for people that cannot afford same).

[cpzilliacus]

I opened this thread expecting to find a loving paean to the Chevy Citation.

Depends on the state.  Some states call their traffic tickets summonses, others call them citations, and I suppose there are still other words and phrases (notice of infraction?) used to describe tickets out there.