Local Government
CCTV Cameras Pt. II: Ineffective at raising revenue
Those of us in Illinois have been seeing more and more municipalities put up red light cameras at intersections all around the Chicago and suburban area. The aim, as stated by those city government administrators supporting these cameras, is to increase safety and reduce accidents. I have to question these motives when newspapers report on city officials who are stunned that their million dollar investments are seeing no financial returns…
Naperville will gives its red-light camera vendor two weeks to prove it can live up to expectations, or it will be looking for another vendor… In September, the council approved a $1 million, three-year contract with Traffipax for eight cameras at four intersections…
The city originally projected bringing in $2.4 million from the cameras, though the figure was decreased significantly as delays continued. The city still has not issued any citations, angering several councilmen.
Simply astounding!
$1,000,000 for 8 cameras at four intersections? At that rate, with Naperville being a town of over 120,000 people, I couldn’t imagine what the total cost of equipping every intersection in the city with these stupid contraptions would be.
$1,000,000 and not a single citation was issued. An approximate financial return of $0 compared to an estimated $2.4 million dollars. Our country is bankrupt. Our states are bankrupt. And now our cities are becoming bankrupt. At $250,000 per intersection, I’m not surprised.
I have even read studies that red light cameras increase accidents because motorists are quick to slam on the brakes, causing pile ups, rather than face a hefty fine that they will be unable to fight. I’ve blogged on the law of unintended consequences before, and here we go again.
I’ll be keeping a close eye on round two of Naperville’s camera extravaganza.
Categories
- Abortion
- Academia
- Awesome Americana
- Barack Obama
- books
- British Politics
- California
- Campaign 2008
- Campaign McCain
- China
- Christian Thought
- Cinema
- Congress
- Conservative Activism
- Conservative Movement
- Cults
- Cultural Reformation
- Defense Policy
- Emergent China
- European Union
- Foreign Policy
- General Election
- Glittery Ephemera
- Hillary Clinton
- Historical Backgrounders
- History
- Homeland Security
- Hotlinks
- Immigration
- John McCain
- Liberal Netroots
- Liberalism (Bites)
- Local Government
- Marriage and Family
- media bias
- Mental Mojo
- Militant Islam
- Missile Defense
- Moonbats
- New Russian Empire
- Reformed Christianity
- root of all evil
- SCOTUS
- Second Amendment
- Specious Liberal Arguments
- The Environment
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- United Nations
- War in Iraq
- War on Terror
Blogroll
- Ace of Spades
- Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
- Army of Epiphenomenon
- BadgerMum
- BatesLine
- Bored Melo
- Brandywine Books
- Cassy Fiano
- Challies
- Classical Values
- Comment Me No Comment
- Dean’s World
- Hugh Hewitt
- IMAO
- Lintefiniel Musing
- Lonely Conservative
- Michelle Malkin
- Parenting Freedom
- Pro-Life Blogs
- Publius Pundit
- Pyromaniacs
- Rabe Ramblings
- The Rough Woodsman
- Thinklings
- TruePravda
- Walk Thru History
Recent Comments
- melo on Interview on The Death of the Grown-up: How America’s Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization on National Review Online
- Iron Chef Klingon on music to my ears
- pgepps on an encouraging day
- Mrs. B on an encouraging day
- Mrs. B on because stirring the pot is fun
Most Emailed
- Leave Barry Alone! - 14 emails
- Lead Story: “Christian Street” Erupts Over Verhoeven Jesus Book - 9 emails
- Conservative Activism: Reduce, Reuse, Reprotest - 3 emails
- Can’t Shake the Devil’s Hand and Say You’re Only Kidding. - 2 emails
- Republicans and Evangelicals Have Babies, Democrats and Seculars Buy Small Dogs - 2 emails
The same thing happened here in Dallas. They’re not seeing a return on their investment and have actually taken down some of their cameras. Several of our suburbs have done away with the program altogether.
Score another one for the law of unintended consequences — the best friend a conservative ever had.
Same deal as sin taxes. The stated goals are to tax something in order to raise money for healthcare AND reduce the occurrence of the “sin.”
If you are deliberately attempting to raise more revenue than the existence of the sin costs in healthcare, you go negative the day the tax “works” as a disincentive, and the first person quits. And that must be the case, because when sin tax revenues go down, lo and behold, the rates get raised. Why raise the rates if it’s “working” so well as it is? Answer: because when people quit smoking (or whatever), the money is still needed for the non-smoking-related healthcare costs that the tax was designed (though not publicized this way) to cover.
What I always find amazing about sin taxes and lotteries is that the people who are most offended by “regressive taxation” are usually the most excited about cigarette taxes and state run lotteries. Yeah, lets put the tax burden on working-class addicts and people desperate to get out of poverty through gambling. THAT’S progressive.