The Need For Speed Vs The Need For $$

Our state officially turned off the freeway photo radar speed cameras last night at 11:59 pm.  The cameras were installed two years ago, with the promise of reducing accidents and bringing in much needed cash.  They have done both.

But a consistent, loud minority got their way.  The need-for-speed group had two main objections: one, that the cameras were only there to make $$ for the state and the second that the cameras were an invasion of privacy.  First, the cameras did make $$, just not as much as was projected ($39m per year vs $90m that was estimated).  But what they tried to ignore was the fact that the freeways with cameras became safer. Fewer accidents, injuries and loss of life.  Second, what expectation of privacy can you have while driving on a public street surrounded by other driver's prying eyes?

So why turn the cameras off?  The interim governor is running for election for a full term and needs her base to like her best.  And the head of the department of public safety (who she appointed) was concerned about the public image of his department.  Really?  He wanted to put more officers on the roads to enforce the laws.  What he didn't explain is where he would get them.  His department is understaffed with vacant positions because of a hiring freeze.  Public image vs safety?  We'll see.

And about the loss of $39m a year in the face of a budget crisis?  The governor's spokesman replied with a smile: "The governor has taken that into account in her budget".  Translation:  we just threw away $39m to appease those with a need for speed.