Abuser Fee Battle Lingers
Posted by Chap at 1/25/2008 1:35 PM and is filed under uncategorized 
Just got off the Senate floor where we had a fight over ... abuser fees?
This year, the Senate and House have been unanimous in our desire to deep-six the controversial fees that ushered several incumbents into oblivion in 2007. Measures to repeal the fees, including my SB 443, have sped through Committee with no opposition.
Today, however, the Republicans offered an amendment to Senate Bill 1 which would limit the benefits of repeal only to those who prove that their underlying offenses did not "endanger life or limb." Well that exception covers pretty much every reckless driving conviction.
Which puts us right back where we started.
We don't need a repeal that forces every convicted driver to return to court to prove he deserves relief from abuser fees. We need a clean repeal. Senate Democrats voted for that. We also voted to apply an "emergency clause" so that the repeal applies immediately.
Monday, when we cast our recorded vote for the clean repeal, we'll see if the whole chamber agrees with us.
Stay with it Chap. You'll win this one, for sure.
Irv
These fees were a giant step too far. Repeal a few more driver fees while you are at it Chap, Virginia is too hard on drivers who make minor errors.
Go for the clean repeal Chap! This was an egregious overstep by the previous state legislature. They didn't properly vett this with the citizens! Maybe I wasn't tuned in...but I am now.
Are you the first Virginia legislator to blog and allow comments? I always thought that was a little dangerous for a pol because you could get blamed for something nasty that someone else posted.
But so far everyone is keeping it clean!
Jonathan:
Thanks for your question. Actually, Delegates Kris Amundson and Bob Brink started a blog last year. I don't know the name but I'm sure someone here does (and feel free to post it).
I have no problem with positive or negative comments. Trust me. My only request is that folks keep it civil as children (including my own) are apt to peek in.
The original bill was a revenue measure, not a criminal penalty. It was quantified as a part of a "package" to pay for "roads." The penalty was clearly draconian and was not uniform - out of state was immune. Courts, joined at the hip, ratified it as legal in VA against Virginians. It was a tax that had random enforcement against a puished minority - it had revenue goals, not traffic goals. The revenue was forecast. The traffic criminals were thought to have little sympathy, thus they were ripe targets for a hungry legislature. Any one class could be targeted next. Criminal law is meant to enforce conduct - to make it a revenue measure is an act of government tyranny. Haphazard enforcement is aberrent taxation. Tax bills are for revenue. They can be debated and voted on. People understand that. People also understand that the legislature changed police into armed tax collectors who were out to contribute revenue. It was bad for the police, for the citizenry. It was government's lurch toward tyranny, and all of us could be whipsawed next on some issue. It was the prime issue that got Chap elected. Getting rid of the bill is laudatory. Raise the stakes; raise the debate. Law is not the private reserve of government; it belongs to the people. When excess appears, the people can change that power. Last election , they did just that. Having travelled the world, I am a Virginian.
Chap,
You've got the right view on the abusive driver fee issue! The law should be repealed. All the fines assessed should be forgiven and any fines collected should be returned to those who paid them, WITHOUT making them jump through a bunch of legal hoops. Sure, returning the fine revenue already collected will be a "hit" to the State's transportation coffers. But, that will serve as a good lesson to help make sure our representatives in Richmond think long and hard before passing ill conceived and unfair legislation in the future.
Chap,
Great work on this. Refund the fees already paid. Also, if the courts feel they can limit the legislature in this matter of halting the program, take the refund fees from the court budget. Every once in a while the legislature needs to remind the courts that the legislators speak for the people. Checks and balances. How this passed legal muster in the first instance was most puzzling. The legislature does not have to file briefs for appeals. Change the law and brush the bench off the field. Great job on rushing this through! No - I didn't get a ticket. My fellow Virginians did, however, and that is why I have been so interested in this.