Isn’t that exactly the issue, though? This particular methodology is being abused – not only in its re-purposing, but also in that it’s gaming the system. Thus, if the object is revenue, make the methodology fit the purpose and have it do so fairly.
Speedtrapahoma passed some law years back stipulating that the Department (sheriff, police, whatever) couldn’t bring in more than x% of revenue from the fines. And that they needed to fund the police with local tax dollars - to some cut off.
The annoying speed traps (speed limit PLUNGES and coincidentally a local cop is sitting there) eased up and mysteriously certain areas were safe to drive through at higher speeds. I’m pretty sure I saw the same phenomenon in West Texas…
Oops -looks like they repealed the prohibition. Argh!
It worked…
You’re preaching to the choir. We passed a HUGE property tax increase for my city to fund the school system. They went on a building replacement spree that in my opinion was unnecessary. Apparently it’s cheaper to tear down a 30 year old building and build a completely new one rather than deal with asbestos. Anyway, the school system turned around and asked for the same increase AGAIN to fund the cost overruns.
I’m also the first person to bitch about speed traps. I suppose I should write a letter to the city manager when I get screwed by a ticket but I simply take my business elsewhere (in silence).
It isn’t checks and balances at all. Checks and balances are about making sure the various branches of government do not monopolize a certain power. In the case you’ve cited, the judicial branch served as a check on the others by throwing out the red light tickets of nearly 200 people.
Your proposal is implicitly saying that devolution of power to local authority – as has been protected in the Constitution and practiced for two centuries – cannot work because voters are too lazy to react when they’re being screwed. That sentiment is only American in the sense that more people are tending to view democratic processes as a waste of a person’s time.
I agree with the OP 100 percent. I hear the cops around here (and on this board) go on and on about how the local government doesn’t make any money off of traffic fines, and it is for my safety and (*sniff) my 4 year old daughter’s safety that I get a ticket for driving 32 in a 25 zone, so let’s do what the OP said, with a slight twist.
Take all of the fines and donate them to St. Judes to pay for the care of children hurt in auto accidents. Then let each locality decide where it will allocate its police resources. My strong guess is that with the money incentive removed, they will be more likely to go after real crimes instead of trying to catch me with a taillight out.
But, all things being equal, I will be happy to admit my mistake if it is discovered that, in the end, that is the best use of local police resources. But I will bet it won’t be…