There are many aspects of California, which I strongly dislike: exorbitant state and local taxes, perennial devastating wildfires, the Democratic monopolist majority in Sacramento, drought, a proposed gasoline-powered car ban (2035), DEI, sanctuary cities, earthquakes, water mismanagement, horrendous Los Angeles traffic congestion, bullet trains to nowhere and a $1.6 trillion state debt, which Governor Gavin Newson wanted to increase to $6.38 billion (Proposition 1) on February 13, 2024, ad nauseum.
However, I must give partial credit to where credit is due.
I read in the New York Post on April 1 that Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA), who has aspirations of becoming the next Democratic presidential nominee in 2028, endorsed a San Francisco program managed by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency that “will issue speeding tickets based on income.”
I think that this sounds like a good idea for the remainder of the U.S. to emulate but with some serious modifications.
San Francisco initiated the new program on March 20, with a total of 33 speeding cameras around the city, but only around “half of them are operational.” That does not surprise me because of the city’s poor finances, but these cameras will certainly bring in a lot of much-needed revenue for the self-inflicted cash-strapped city.
Perhaps the extra revenue can help clean up and sanitize the city, like when President Xi of Communist China briefly visited on November 15, 2023? That is when the streets were clean, the homeless people were gone, and the city actually looked extremely livable.
According to the Post, “after a sixty-day probationary period, violators will receive fines only if their vehicle drives more than 11 mph over the speed limit.”
San Francisco has wisely installed these speed cameras only in “high injury” areas, where “12% of streets account for 68% of severe injuries or fatalities that are traffic-related.” In 2026, Los Angeles plans to introduce a similar program with one minor difference on fine repayment by replacing it with community service, which seems reasonable.
San Francisco personally stipulates that speeding violators can only receive fines ranging from “$50 to $500.” However, people living “at or below 200% of the federal poverty level are eligible for a 50% discount” while “Indigent persons …, who are homeless, are eligible for an 80% discount on the speeding ticket.”
In my opinion, this is a misguided policy since all people, including the indigent, should be paying the same fine regardless of income or homelessness, except for the upper middle class and wealthy, especially the top 10%. I oppose this policy for people for making below an upper middle-class income because the fines will be much less severe, and will only encourage drivers to speed even more among San Francisco city streets while endangering both drivers and pedestrians.
That is because human nature when no pain or penalty is involved, financial or otherwise, in stopping an undesirable behavior will only encourage that negative behavior.
I think that it is much fairer, egalitarian, and NOT socialistic that people making more than $50,000 per year or higher (or whatever dollar amount may be fairly agreed upon) to pay a much higher graduated progressive percentage of their annual income for speeding violations and other DUI violations. This fine should be based on a person’s last five years of their IRS tax and state returns, in addition to other assets for a DUI or speeding violation.
Plus, this would be a great way for a cash-strapped city like San Francisco or other near-bankrupt California cities to increase their revenue, considering that the U.S. national debt is quickly approaching $37 trillion. That is because Uncle Sam is running out of money because of increased spending despite the DOFE cuts, and the interest on the national debt is increasing $1 trillion every 100 days.
I find it extremely unfair that someone, for example, who makes $300,000 per year or more in the San Francisco Bay Area or Silicon Valley should be paying the same fine as someone who is making only $30,000 per year. It is simply not fair.
That is because speeding tickets to wealthy people are basically small coin and not a financial deterrent to future speeding tickets and other DMV violations.
Virginia needs to enact similar legislation, which would impose a more egalitarian penalty for being convicted of a DUI or driving under the under the influence of alcohol or some intoxicating substance.
A new San Francisco program backed by Newsom will issue speeding tickets based on income.
California gives speeding tickets based on income.
Trace Gallagher of Fox News calls it socialism. I call it egalitarianism fairness.
Robert L. Maronic