Commenter kjb434 passed along an interesting Wall Street Journal article by Holman Jenkins to us on red-light cameras, entitled “The war on short yellows.” As Jenkins notes, voters don’t much like red-light cameras, although pols craving revenue certainly do:
One Arizona sheriff recently proved you could get elected by opposing speed cameras. Meanwhile, the state legislature is considering bills to dismantle the system created by Gov. Janet Napolitano when she faced a gaping budget deficit, before she escaped to the Obama Department of Homeland Security. Petitioners in Arizona are also gathering signatures to put the question directly before voters — speed cameras have never won when submitted to voters.
Even the Scottsdale City Council recently voted not to oppose the anti-camera bills in the state legislature.
Why is this important? Because Arizona, specifically Scottsdale, is home to the two biggest companies, American Traffic Solutions and Redflex Traffic Systems, in the incestuous world of promoting and operating traffic cameras for revenue-hungry governments.
Laid to rest long ago should have been the pretense that the goal is “safety,” not chasing cash.
We’ve long argued against Houston’s red-light cameras on due-process grounds, and we certainly don’t believe any Houston pol who suggests that revenues played no part in our own red-light camera scheme. What do you think?
