Resurrected & Rejected: Redux of the Abuser Fees Redux

Rationale #1 - Only In-State "Road Abuser's" Should Pay "Abuser Fees"
Back in the day when "Abuser Fees" were thought to be cool, Delegate Dave Albo proudly claimed that requiring those who "abuse the roads" to pay for them was a rational way to pay for the costs of congestion and raise road construction revenue.

Rationale #2 - 98% Agree that "Road Abuser's" Should Pay "Liquidated Damages"
After the massive abuser fee flameout this past summer, Delegate Dave Albo attempted to save "Abuser Fees" by proposing new "liquidated damages" this session with HB 161 claiming that "I just sent a letter to my constituents about the abuser fee program, and 98% of the people who responded said they wouldn't mind the program if out-of-state drivers were included."

Rationale #3 - Hey Don't Vote With Me "to Cut Taxes on Criminals"!
After it became apparent that was going nowhere, he himself voted to repeal his own abuser fees (see video here in AMG, An Abuser Fee U-Turn or a Detour (Jan. 21, 2008)), and then attacked people who voted with him for favoring "tax cuts on criminals."

Rationale #4 - "This Is About Deterrence"
Only after it became apparent that his new bill was going absolutely nowhere, he introduced a floor substitute requiring mandatory minimum fines (not fees) of $2,250 for all DWI's and serious vehicular felonies. This time we found out that this isn't about raising road money or "taxing criminals," but now "it's about deterrence." So if this entire exercise was about deterrence - why didn't you just introduce a bill with big constitutional fines in the first place?

Today, Delegate Dave Albo's third incarnation of abuser fees bit the dust in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee. In today's Roanoke Times, Senator Creigh Deeds hits the nail on the head:

Sen. Creigh Deeds, D-Bath County, said the fees enacted last year didn’t accomplish that. “There’s absolutely no evidence that it deterred any behavior in the last six months of last year,” Deeds said. “Well, what are we accomplishing here except resurrecting … an abuser fee idea that wasn’t good?” Fees or Fines, the result is the same: lawmaker's proposal rejected, The Roanoke Times (Mar. 3, 2008).

Right on.

That's because HB 161 in all of its various incarnations had nothing to do with deterrence and everything to do with Delegate Albo trying to save face for one of the biggest Virginia public policy debacles in recent memory which just culminated Friday with the largest funding component being found completely unconstitutional by a unanimous Supreme Court of Virginia.

Delegate Albo: Its time to stop the bogus rationales, stop the sloganeering, demagoguery, and the spin. It's now time get something done. Stop trying to be too cute, stop Legislative Twister Games, and focus on some fair, time tested solutions that don't violate the Virginia Constitution.

How about a modest gas tax proposal?
Maybe apply the sales tax to gas?

HOW ABOUT SOME REAL GOOD GOVERNMENT AND SOME REAL RESULTS FOR THE PEOPLE OF SPRINGFIELD AND LORTON?