Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Drivers license surcharge.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Drivers license surcharge.

    Money grab, double jeopardy, legit?

    Discuss.

    Originally posted by DMN
    AUSTIN — When cash-strapped Texas lawmakers approved their ambitious plan a decade ago, they thought they’d hit the jackpot.

    The Driver Responsibility Program was the answer to several nagging problems: the increase in drunken driving, the large number of uninsured drivers and the lack of money for hospital trauma care and new highways. The program would levy steep surcharges for certain driving offenses to encourage more responsible driving and would provide millions at a time when state revenues were scarce.

    Ten years later, alcohol-related offenses are still climbing. Millions still drive without insurance. Highways got no extra funding. Trauma centers received a fraction of what was promised.

    And 60 percent of drivers slapped with surcharges have been unable or unwilling to pay the $1.7 billion they owe the state. That means 1.3 million drivers are now on the road without a valid license.

    Now, criminal-justice advocates and lawmakers, including one who originally helped create it, want to eliminate the program. They face a conflict, though, with hospital representatives who say the Driver Responsibility Program is too valuable, even if it hasn’t met expectations.

    “This is a classic example of legislation that had incredible unintended consequences,” said Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth, who wants to repeal the program. “It is dysfunctional. It is not working, and we’ve got to change it.”

    Burnam said lower-income Texans “struggling to keep their heads above water” suffer acutely under the program. Many cannot afford the thousands of dollars in surcharges the state has levied, and that, he said, makes them part of a “new criminal class in Texas” — unlicensed and uninsured.

    Fewer convictions

    Rep. Larry Gonzales, R-Round Rock, said he fears a sharp increase in the number of uninsured drivers on the road, putting insured drivers at risk and increasing the cost for all motorists. Texans now pay an estimated $1 billion a year to protect themselves from those who have no coverage.

    Gonzales also noted that two original goals of the Driver Responsibility Program — a reduction in alcohol-related offenses and substantial funding for trauma centers — never materialized.

    In fact, the Senate Criminal Justice Committee found that the 2003 law has actually decreased conviction rates and increased dismissal rates for driving while intoxicated.

    Thousands of defendants sought trials to avoid the DWI surcharges, forcing prosecutors with huge caseloads to accept plea bargains for lesser offenses such as reckless driving, obstruction of a highway or public intoxication.

    “It is important for us to recognize when government programs have not worked,” said Gonzales, who is sponsoring legislation with Burnam to repeal the 10-year-old program.

    DWI offenses carry the biggest surcharges: $1,000 a year for three years on the first conviction and $2,000 a year if a conviction involved ablood alcohol content of twice the legal limit. Drivers who lack car insurance or have an invalid driver’s license face a $250-a-year surcharge for three years.

    Those surcharges must be paid on top of the regular fines assessed for those violations. Critics complain that many of the affected drivers are first-time offenders, students, single parents and low-income residents.

    The Texas Criminal Justice Coalition, which sees numerous failings in the law, lobbies for an end to it.

    Ana Yanez-Correa, executive director of the coalition, said the percentage of fatal crashes involving alcohol in Texas sharply increased between 2003 — when the law was passed — and 2011, from 26 percent to 34 percent.

    Further, she noted, DWI conviction rates declined 10 percent during the period. In 2011 alone, an additional 7,000 drivers arrested and charged with DWI were not convicted.

    “This makes Texans less safe because many programs to change drivers’ behavior and reduce DWI recidivism are typically required as a condition for probation, a common penalty for first-time DWI convictions,” she said.

    She also argued that the surcharges represent “double jeopardy” because drivers pay them on top of criminal fines and other penalties.

    Co-author seeks repeal

    Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, was an original co-author of the Driver Responsibility Program. He now rejects it after seeing its unintended consequences, and has filed legislation to repeal it.

    “It was a good idea that had a very bad outcome,” he said.

    Some of Turner’s constituents owe thousands of dollars in surcharges and have lost their driver’s licenses. But they are in a bind. They must drive to work to support themselves and pay the fees, he said.

    The Texas Hospital Association fights abolition of the program because it would cut off funding for indigent patients treated at trauma centers. However, those funding levels are a fraction of what was promised when the law was passed.

    Critics suggest alternative revenue sources for trauma centers, such as a higher cigarette tax or higher state taxes on alcohol.

    Turner pointed out that the state trauma fund now has $380 million in unallocated funds that could adequately fund trauma care for several years. Lawmakers could tap that money and search for another revenue sources down the line, he said.

    In early 2011, the state offered amnesty to hundreds of thousands of drivers who were paying surcharges. Just one in seven applied to have surcharges forgiven.

    The state did not publicize the amnesty, so most eligible drivers apparently didn’t know about it.

  • #2
    Interesting.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by talisman View Post
      Interesting.
      If I remember correctly, one of the members on the boards got caught up in the surcharge stuff because he paid his fines, but not the surcharge and had a hell of a time getting it straightened out. The whole surcharge thing seems like horseshit to me.

      Comment


      • #4
        i owe surcharges now for getting a couple of speeding tickets in too short of time or some shit. they can come get it.

        god bless.
        It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men -Frederick Douglass

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ELVIS View Post
          i owe surcharges now for getting a couple of speeding tickets in too short of time or some shit. they can come get it.

          god bless.
          You're allowed 6 points over 3 years, each moving violation is 2 points and 3 points if involved a crash. Minimum surcharge $100/yr for 3yrs. What a fucking racket.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by racrguy View Post
            You're allowed 6 points over 3 years, each moving violation is 2 points and 3 points if involved a crash. Minimum surcharge $100/yr for 3yrs. What a fucking racket.
            with driving to houston all time and the "no right on red" sign i missed the DAY they put it up at the 35 and royal lane intersection taking Jr to soccer im sure i have my 6

            god bless.
            It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men -Frederick Douglass

            Comment


            • #7
              I thought they were kicking this shit to the curb last year but I guess they haven't yet.
              Whos your Daddy?

              Comment


              • #8
                Fuck the surcharge. I got a no insurance ticket like 2 weeks after this law took effect back in 2003 and the court never mentioned any surcharge bullshit at the time. They didn't file that ticket iwth the state until 2006 and that started the ball rolling on them trying to collect the surcharge.

                I would up paying one year worth of surcharge, then never heard from them again.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Its always been a tax on the poor that they can't afford.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It is nice to at least hear them acknowledge that it is a scam to collect money, rather than make the roads safe.

                    You are about to see this same situation develop with Obamacare on a national basis. Politicians have a hard time understanding the fact that poor people don't have any money and if they happen to get some, they aren't going to spend it on useless bullshit mandated by the government.
                    Originally posted by racrguy
                    What's your beef with NPR, because their listeners are typically more informed than others?
                    Originally posted by racrguy
                    Voting is a constitutional right, overthrowing the government isn't.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Broncojohnny View Post
                      It is nice to at least hear them acknowledge that it is a scam to collect money, rather than make the roads safe.

                      You are about to see this same situation develop with Obamacare on a national basis. Politicians have a hard time understanding the fact that poor people don't have any money and if they happen to get some, they aren't going to spend it on useless bullshit mandated by the government.
                      Right on. Like Barry-Care, it's no coincidence that this was authored by a democrat who now wants to repeal it.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Broncojohnny View Post
                        It is nice to at least hear them acknowledge that it is a scam to collect money, rather than make the roads safe.

                        You are about to see this same situation develop with Obamacare on a national basis. Politicians have a hard time understanding the fact that poor people don't have any money and if they happen to get some, they aren't going to spend it on useless bullshit mandated by the government.
                        DWLI is one of those offense that needs to go out the door with it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The surcharges do seem to be a failure...What do ya'll suggest to help rid the roads of shitty and drunk drivers?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by dcs13 View Post
                            The surcharges do seem to be a failure...What do ya'll suggest to help rid the roads of shitty and drunk drivers?
                            $5000 fine first offense and suspend their DL for a year; $10k and 5 years in jail for the second.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Vertnut View Post
                              $5000 fine first offense and suspend their DL for a year; $10k and 5 years in jail for the second.
                              Damn bro, how am I supposed to get home from the bar?
                              Wanna see my care face???

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X