NMA Alerts & Email Newsletters


February 9, 2012

NMA Ohio Alert: Bill Would Ban Smoking in Vehicles

Ohio’s smoking ban may expand to vehicles with young children, if a Columbus Senator has her way.

Senate Bill 27, sponsored by Sen. Charleta Tavares, calls for fines starting at $500 for motorists caught lighting up in a vehicle with children under the age of six on board. Similar measures have passed in other states including Louisiana, Maine and California.

The National Motorists Association categorically opposes this bill. Smoking is a personal decision, and individuals should retain the freedom and responsibility to make choices affecting their own well-being and the well-being of their families. If passed, this bill would represent yet another step down the slippery slope that began with secondary seatbelt legislation.

SB 27 is currently under review in the Senate Highways and Transportation Committee. We encourage you to contact the committee members as well as your local Senator to let them know what you think. Don’t let policymakers continue to chip away at your rights.

Posted by email 
February 5, 2012

NMA E-Newsletter #161 - Ticket Amnesty Schemes: Misguided and Perpetual

Policymakers love to use amnesty programs to demonstrate their magnanimity toward perceived rule-breakers or, more likely, to encourage them to fork over some of what they owe. Typical amnesty programs target things like delinquent taxes, overdue library fines and of course traffic enforcement fines.

Traffic ticket amnesty programs are widespread and take many shapes. California kicked off its most recent program in January by offering a 50 percent discount on old, unpaid tickets. News accounts have hyped the program as a "win-win" for drivers and the state. Yet, the program is expected to reduce outstanding traffic fines by only two percent.

Washington D.C. just wrapped up a program that waived penalty fees if drivers paid the outstanding amounts of their original fines. But even as the District threatened to turn its in-house collections agency (ominously known as the Central Collection Unit) loose on non-payers, the program barely made a dent in the District’s backlog of unpaid traffic fines.

And Texas completed an amnesty program last year for drivers hit with surcharges from the state's Driver Responsibility Program. By paying pennies on the dollar, drivers could settle up and get their licenses reinstated. Despite the favorable terms, only 14 percent of the more than 700,000 eligible drivers took advantage.

Why do people resist such schemes? Maybe they simply ignore them, or maybe they understand the inherent unfairness that permeates the system and refuse to support it, even though they end up benefiting from the amnesty. That unfairness extends to the amnesty programs themselves because they exclude drivers who have dutifully paid their fines on-time.

These drivers may not be so responsive the next time, banking on another amnesty to bail them out. (This phenomenon is akin to the moral hazard associated with the large-scale bank bailouts of a few years back.) And therein lies the problem. Amnesties can exacerbate the problem they're trying to fix. And that leads to more amnesties.

We're not discouraging drivers from participating in amnesty programs. If they can clean up their driving records and catch a financial break, so much the better. But amnesties are no "win-win." They are a symptom of a broken traffic enforcement system. They will never restore justice for traffic defendants. For that, we would need a system based on the following principles taken from the NMA's Motorist Bill of Rights:

  • Traffic laws based on sound engineering and public consensus
  • Fair and consistent enforcement not motivated by revenue generation
  • Reasonable fines/penalties free of surcharges, fees and taxes
  • Guarantees that traffic revenue will be used solely for roadway improvements
  • Court systems that protect the due-process rights of traffic defendants

As a result, more drivers would stand up for themselves in court and receive more equitable outcomes. This would ultimately negate the need for further government-sponsored carrots and sticks. ♦

February 3, 2012

NMA Pennsylvania Alert: Stop Expansion of Radar and Laser Use

Pennsylvania is the only state (or commonwealth) in the country that prohibits municipal police from enforcing speed limits with radar. Since 1961, only state troopers have been allowed to use radar and laser for speed enforcement.

Now three related bills seek to change that distinction. Senate Bill 526 and House Bill 1475 would permit local police agencies to use both radar and laser for speed enforcement. House Bill 1041 would authorize the use of radar only.

The NMA opposes the use of radar and laser devices. Both technologies have inherent flaws making them unrelilable for speed enforcement, and their use encourages the proliferation of speed traps, which are fundamentally unfair to motorists.

All three bills have been referred to their respective Transportation Committees. We encourage you to contact the committee members along with your local Senate and House members to let them know what you think.

Posted by email 





Join National Motorists Association

© National Motorists Association