How do you know when a law is unreasonable and unjust? When an additional fine is added on to whatever punishment a judge determines in a court; when the law is made for the purposes of short-term revenue collection; when the fine is so hefty that it has to be repaid in installments; and when the initial enforcement of the infringement is arbitrary and situational.

From the WaPo, Hefty Fees In Store for Misbehaving Va. Drivers:

Say you are driving 78 mph on the Capital Beltway and a state trooper tickets you for "reckless driving -- speeding 20 mph over." You will probably be fined $200 by the judge. But then you will receive a new, additional $1,050 fine from the Old Dominion, payable in three convenient installments. So convenient that you must pay the first one immediately, at the courthouse.

and:

As part of the plan to fund the annual $1 billion transportation package approved this year, state legislators endorsed a new set of "civil remedial fees" for all misdemeanor and felony traffic violations, such as speeding 20 mph above the limit, reckless driving and, in some cases, driving with faulty brakes.

Drivers with points on their licenses -- a speeding ticket usually earns four points -- will be hit for $75 for every point above eight and $100 for having that many points in the first place.

Australia has a problem with fines for speeding being absurd and unreasonable. It looks like America, and in particular, Virginia, is keen to replicate that same form of bad governance.

A Henrico District Court Judge has decided that the fees on Virginian drivers which are in addition to the normal penalties are unconstitutional. Too often the judicial ends up being the last barrier between bad laws and bad policy; legislators and the executive force this state of affairs. The decision was immediately appealed by commonwealth lawyers.

Via Virginia Lawyers Weekly I think this is the actual ruling [pdf] of the Commonwealth vs Anthony Price. Note that several US states are established as commonwealths, including Virginia and Pennsylvania.

The Judge found Price guilty of driving without a licence (for the fifth time) and was fined $200 and given twelve months jail. The recently passed Virginia law - to pay for road improvement through fees on abusive drivers - required another $750.00 to be added on to the fees. Price's lawyer challenged that:

The sole issue presented by the defendant is whether such assessment on residents of Virginia, but not on non-residents, violates the Equal Protection Clauses of the Constitutions of the United States and Virginia.

It should be noted at the outset that at oral argument it was agreed by both parties that the additional fees for excessive demerit points in paragraph G of the statute are not at issue.

It was further agreed that the only issue to be decided by this Court was whether the statute bears a rational relationship to a legitimate legislative purpose, and thereby does not violate the Equal Protection Clauses.

The United States Supreme Court requires that equal protection does not judge the policy basis for a legislative decision. Under separation of powers the judicial is blind to the legislative reasons or basis for a bill. Yet the decision notes that the Virginian bill for this put the purpose of the statue in the legislation itself. This did not impact the decision.

The court rejects the speculations postulated by the Commonwealth, and mindful of its obligation to do so, has exhausted its speculation quotient in trying to conceive of any others that would be a rational basis for the distinction between resident and nonresident "dangerous drivers."

If Virginia's legislation does not distinguish or discriminate between Virginian drivers and out of state drivers then it will be constitutional by that decision. It appears the Governor Kaine will be plugging that hole.

This does not change the fact that this is bad legislation.

Virginian Politics

Virginia is a bicameral gubernatorial system. Like party politics in the United States it is dominated by the Republican and Democratic parties; but unlike the absolute nature of Australian party discipline the (D) or (R) against a senators or delegates name is no guarantee of voting intentions.

As an example this is a listing of which representatives are for repealing the speeding fines and those against it. Those that would repeal include eight democrats, five republicans and one independent. Note that the Republicans control the legislature (the governor is a Democrat). Also note that those that voted for it crossed party boundaries.

My local Senator voted against it (D), while my Delegate voted for it (R). The Republican legislature is running hard on no taxes, so they tend to hide budget increases in debt or fees. There is no doubt that North Virginia has infrastructure problems due to the rapid increase in population in the last fifteen years. If they do not want to hit the sales tax again, as they did with Mark Warner, then increasing the cost of petrol is a good form of user pays taxation.

One of our town councilors is running against the Delegate who is the incumbent. His platform is that our current delegate, despite his seniority, has not got the money or projects for transport infrastructure that this area needs. He has a sympathetic ear locally. Traffic is bad.

As voting on the bill showed support for this legislation was bipartisan as was dissent. Voting crossed party boundaries - which ironically, give voters an easy way to determine their voting for representatives without having to worry about the D, R or I next to their name on the ballot. As a liberal representative democracy should be.

Update - A judge at the Richmond General District Court has ruled it unconstitutional for the same reasons as it breaks equal protection under the law. Apparently the Governor and Legislature have just removed the discrimination against out of state drivers and plan on reintroducing the bill.

Update - It appears that the ease with which the legislation failed under equal protection (14th Amendement) will lead to more challenges to the law's constitutionality.

There is a business backlash against Loudoun County council policies to punish illegal immigration. One of the interesting comments was from Tony Howard of the Loudoun County Chamber of Commerce.

He is quoted as saying:

Howard said that the Chamber wants its members to obey the law, but 85 percent are small businesses - employing 25 people or less - and have limited resources to verify immigration status under the current system.

"This is an issue for very small businesses, not a problem for AOL," Howard said.

AOL has their world headquarters in Loudoun. Howard is right as AOL employs high cost skilled labor. As someone else commented in the article if immigration policies were enforced and business licenses removed then cleaning, construction and IMO landscaping businesses would be shutting down left, right and centre.

The economic demands are overriding the nation-state's ability to police immigration. It appears this is true at the local level as well.

This article from the WaPo has a comprehensive rundown of all the issues involved with the increasing hispanic population in NoVA. I suspect in fifty years time the hispanic population of the US will be seen in the same light as the Irish population is now. Ironically I have an Irish American from Long Island living on one side of me, and a hispanic family on the other.

He had an important message about the upcoming Virginia elections. I hung up. I hate robocalls. If I could vote in Virginia Kaine would not be getting a tick on the ballot from me. He supported and signed into law the unconstitutional act which failed the equal establishment clause aimed at out of state drivers. I do not believe a separate executive exists to pass unconstitutional laws. They have a moral responsibility to acts as a rights referee and veto anything that contravenes a bill of rights. The 14th Amendment in the US Constitution is one of the few that obligates the states. Hence, in my opinion, Kaine failed his responsibilities.

I also don't like how President Bush is using the veto pen to force policy. Between that and a Republican party in the Senate that is filibustering as a minority, it is making difficult for the majority house in congress to pass a legislative agenda. The veto pen from the executive should be limited to tyrannical acts, not political acts or policy acts that the executive disagrees with. The veto is a relief valve to stop legislative tyranny, not stop legislative policy.

In other local news, the incumbent Senator for my area, Mark Herring, has progressed from County Government to the State Senate. This is his first term. he voted against the Virginia driving laws. I received literature from him recently in my mailbox which announced he was proud he voted against it. I had dealings with Herring when he was in County Government when we had issues with a road behind our house.

The local election also has one of our town councillors, Marty Martinez, running for the Virginian house. The town I live in is exceptionally well governed. It has followed that American ideal of keeping taxes low without services suffering. I think there are some services in the town that are unnecessary, however, in comparison to the county, state and federal government, the town is exceptionally tight in terms of governance.

Both Mark and Marty have been in my house when we have had local issues that have required political help and advice. If I could vote in this local district, they both would get my vote. Kaine, however, would not.

Virginia is of interest to me as up until November of last year I lived in Northern Virginia. It was my home for six years or so. I was all part of the changes occurring in Virginia as out of state skilled workers come into the northern areas of Virginia and work in the wider Washington DC telecommunications, government and defense industries. So it was interesting to watch Virginia start red during the night and slowly go blue as the northern county polling stations started adding to the state totals.

From a county map the state looks to be largely red. And it is. This is the difference between NoVA and RoVA as the schism is called. Where NoVA is Northern Virginia and RoVA is condescendingly known as the Rest Of Virginia.

In the suburbs tightly around DC the counties went to Obama by about 10% with difference between the northern counties and southern counties being population. Fairfax County has a population of 500,000 while Smyth County in the lower left of the state has a population of 16,000. This is why the northern counties controlled who the electoral college votes went to.

Heavy urbanization in modern American means a political lean to blue as a rule of thumb.

Some more data from the NY Times maps. This the voting by population bubbles. It makes it pretty obvious how the northern counties affect the voting outcomes.

And another map showing the shift. The almost uniform swing to the Democrats is more like a Westminster style election than a Washingtonian one.

This was an election of the Republican Party losing support almost uniformly across the nation.

Autoblog comments on that cul-de-sacs in the new Virginian suburbs may be legislated against in future. It is a bit of a segue, the laws are actually for more through streets.

The rise of culs-de-sac occurred when suburban city planners and private developers decided it was better to have a few roads act as central spines instead of connecting all roads in a grid. Unfortunately, the result has been that the large thoroughfares connecting all those culs-de-sac suffer from traffic jams, high maintenance costs, as well as a constant need for widening as populations increase.

Autoblog argues that cul-de-sacs are safer, but if I recall correctly they actually aren't as more low speed accidents occur, such as backing over people and so forth. The WaPo article notes that houses in cul-de-sacs are often the first to be sold. As someone who grew up in a cul-de-sac in Australia, and owned a house in a cul-de-sac street in Virginia, I don't see them disappearing quickly.