COLUMN: RAGE OVER DRIVER FEES HAS VA. LEGISLATORS ASKING, 'HUH?'
By Marc Fisher

Nobody in Richmond predicted that Virginians would rise up in a hot summer snit, cussing and seething over the injustice of spanking the state's most reckless drivers with big, fat fees.
See, the politicians thought they were doing what they do best -- threading the needle of transportation funding to make no one very happy but keep the grumbling to a minimum and sort of get the job done.

But the imposition of abuser fees -- charges that can soar to thousands of dollars for those who get caught driving recklessly or commit other major traffic offenses -- has instead sparked a firestorm that has stunned state legislators. Now, just a few days before they move into full-time campaigning to keep their jobs, many lawmakers still don't get why the abuser fees issue exploded as it has.

Since when do ordinary people take up the cause of offenders such as the 5 percent of drivers who are eligible for abuser fees because of their bad records? Since when do Virginia's supposedly hard-core anti-tax voters slam their lawmakers for avoiding a general tax increase by slipping in fees aimed at some small group?

Well, since the Internet changed the speed and power flow in politics, says Del. David Albo, the Fairfax Republican who finds himself the target of much of the popular rage. Albo has the misfortune to be the guy who pushed through the abuser fees and the double trouble of making his living as a lawyer specializing in traffic cases.

In the wild world of Virginia political blogs, that made Albo Public Enemy No. 1 -- accused of concocting a dishonest way to raise money for transportation projects, making it extra unfair by exempting out-of-state drivers from the fees and topping it off by working in a field in which he stood to profit from an increase in court battles over these fees.

Quite a way to build a client base!

JAS

Fined drivers owe state an extra $620M
Penalties fund trauma care; some say amounts may discourage payment
11:30 PM CDT on Friday, October 12, 2007

By TERRENCE STUTZ / The Dallas Morning News


AUSTIN � More than 750,000 Texas drivers haven't paid mandatory annual surcharges on their traffic violations, forcing them to drive without valid licenses and depriving the state treasury of nearly $620 million � much of which was supposed to be used for trauma care.

Figures compiled by the Texas Department of Public Safety and provided to The Dallas Morning News indicate that the state has collected only 32 percent of the surcharges assessed against drivers for offenses such as driving while intoxicated, failure to have insurance and driving without a valid license.

DWI offenses carry the biggest surcharges � $1,000 a year for three years on the first conviction and $1,500 a year for a second conviction. Any DWI conviction in which the blood alcohol content is twice the legal limit draws a $2,000-a-year surcharge.

Those fines are assessed under the Texas Driver Responsibility Program, which was approved by the Legislature and implemented by DPS in September 2004.

The idea was to levy hefty fines for certain violations to discourage those types of offenses and at the same time raise funding for pressing needs such as trauma care. But the imposition of big fines hasn't worked out.

"There are a number of reasons why people don't comply with the law, but personal finances is probably the main reason," said Tela Mange, a DPS spokeswoman. "Many drivers just don't have the money. Paying $1,000 a year for three years is a lot of money for some people."

In other cases, she noted, some drivers decide to gamble that they won't get stopped for a traffic violation � the main way that those who haven't paid fines are nabbed by law enforcement officers.

When they are caught, the fines mount because their licenses have already been suspended for nonpayment of the surcharges and they are driving illegally.

To get more drivers to pay up, state officials are considering several options authorized by the Legislature, including hiring collection agencies, giving greater leeway in setting up installment payments for drivers, and implementing periodic amnesty programs � including surcharge reductions for bad drivers who change their behavior.

Sen. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, who sponsored the legislation, said the massive noncompliance with the surcharges exemplifies a "big problem" for state government.

"If we could only collect all the fines and fees the state is owed, we could cut taxes because we would have a lot more money than we have now," he said.

Mr. Ogden said earlier that the hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid surcharges have not caused serious problems for the state budget yet because collection of sales taxes and other state taxes is up. "But it could cause problems in the future," he warned.

Revenue from the surcharges is earmarked for the state trauma centers fund as well as the general revenue fund. So the nonpayment under the Driver Responsibility Program means that revenue from other sources has to be used to pay for trauma care � much of it from local taxpayers where trauma centers are.

Mr. Ogden and other lawmakers have questioned whether the financial penalties are so high that they provide an incentive for people not to pay.

But the Legislature took no action to lower the surcharges, leaving it to DPS to devise ways to boost payments.

Besides allowing the department to use collection agencies � which could be paid up to 30 percent of what they collect � and such carrots as installment payments and partial amnesty programs, DPS officials also can consider increased consequences.

Ms. Mange said the department is working on a plan to improve collection and hopes to implement changes either late this year or in early 2008.

"We are exploring all the options," she said, noting that no decision has been made yet on whether to contract with a collection agency.

Drivers who haven't paid who are waiting for an amnesty period, Ms. Mange cautioned, shouldn't hang their fate on that possibility.

"I would not recommend that anybody wait for something that may or may not happen," she said, pointing out that those drivers are already at risk because their licenses have been suspended. "You can get arrested if you're pulled over for other traffic violations, and the more infractions you have, the less the judge will be impressed with your driving record."

She added that the state has never allowed amnesty periods for traffic fines before, but DPS will look at the experiences of other agencies in using such incentives.

The analysis from DPS � covering the three-year period from Sept. 1, 2004, through Sept. 1, 2007 � showed that the lowest rate of compliance is by drivers cited for not having a valid license. Just 26 percent have paid their surcharges of $250 a year for three years.

At the next lowest level of compliance � 38 percent � are drivers ticketed for not having insurance. Statistics from DPS and the insurance industry indicate that as many as 25 percent of motorists in Texas are ignoring a state law that requires them to carry minimum liability insurance.

Among those convicted of DWI, 39 percent have paid or are continuing to pay.

The highest rate of payment was by those who have accrued at least six points in a three-year period under the state's point system for various traffic offenses. Nearly 68 percent of those drivers have paid.

It seems to me that these fees have done nothing more than force more drivers 'underground', so to speak. And if you do not have a valid license, you cannot get auto insurance. What are they going to do, lock you up? Sure, then we in Texas will start having problems with our jails just like California where someone with a 120 day sentence goes to jail for just a day or so. How are you going to lock up an additional 750,000 people or deal with them in court?

If someone already does not have a license, why would they bother paying the fees to begin with?

The concern that I have is that many agencies and entities are counting on this money to fulfull their budgetary requirements and if the money does not come through (which it hasn't and won't), then they will be forced to either cut back on services or get the money from some other source. But no other source will be available until the next legislative session in two years, so what are they going to do for money in the mean time??

The fact that budget deficits loom is disturbing, but the thought that one in four drivers has no insurance makes defensive driving critical. Sooner or later the number of permanently suspended licenses (for failure to pay a judgment) will no doubt grow dramatically.