Got one of these in the mail the other day…more than a month after the alleged violation. Eh…make that the confirmed violation.
Yes, it’s a ticket. A red-light camera ticket. And unlike the curbside 5-o, this method of traffic enforcement is really covert, and thereby, really effective. But really effective at what? Reducing accidents? Or just documenting offenders like me and issuing them $90 citations?
Bingo to the latter.
Of course, at this realization, dollar signs start appearing in the eyes of revenue-strapped politicians everywhere. Mayor Daley, never an exception to this rule, instituted a red-light camera program that collected nearly $20-million in 2006 alone.
Alas, drivers aren’t excited. Some take on arguably extreme measures, like the man who fired three rounds at a red-light camera in Knoxville, Tennessee, last November. Others employ more civil methods, like the three individuals that filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Chicago’s red-light cameras. Their argument? Car owners are ticketed regardless of whether or not they are behind the wheel. As it turns out, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit last week.
Now, I don’t necessarily disagree with the ruling, which revolves around owner responsibility. But, as I’ve made clear, I’m also not naive as to the political motivation for implementing red-light cameras in the first place. It’s all about revenue and hardly at all about public safety.
So, with that said, here’s a website that maps out the exact location of every red-light camera in Chicago, as well as those in every other major US city. Nice.
At the tail end of my post Monday, I referenced Mayor Menino’s opposition to retailers like CVS opening medical clinics inside their stores. His reasoning again:
“Allowing retailers to make money off of sick people is wrong.”
My short response suggested that the overall quality of health care decreases without the profit motive. An argument of consequentialism or pragmatism.
But, to be fair, I think the Boston mayor was less interested in the ends involved (convenient, quality health care) and more concerned about the means used (free enterprise) to achieve those ends, which – according to the mayor – are exploitative. I’m not sure why Menino limited his target to “retailers”, but in any case, for him, personal autonomy is compromised when the free enterprise system attempts to treat illness. When health care becomes a business.
In an article entitled “Hating Free Enterprise“, John Stossel rallies against this line of thinking, defending personal autonomy, and thereby the use of free enterprise, in an area where the support of “government and professional societies” is not: human organ sales. Check it out.
And if this doesn’t satisfy your philosophical proclivities, take a look at John Stacey Taylor’s Stakes and Kidneys: Why Markets in Human Body Parts Are Morally Imperative. I got the chance to see Dr. Taylor speak at an IHS seminar in 2006. Seriously? It changed my understanding of the human condition. Autonomy!
Mayor Bloomberg enjoys Cheez-Its. So do I. They’re a delicious snack that really deliver a cheese explosion. I’m not sure what it is about them; maybe it’s the half-gram of trans fat found in every serving. Who knows. All I know is that I’m a fan. A big fan.
But Mayor Bloomberg, the trans fat foe? The same guy who successfully spearheaded its total ban in New York City restaurants? That seems odd. I thought making something illegal generally reflected personal and moral opposition to that thing and its use. But, eh…I suppose I shouldn’t be that surprised. Consistency was never a strong suit for paternalists.
But jumping on the bandwagon? Oh yeah. It’s a collectivist impulse! And Boston is the latest city planning to follow suit. As the Boston Herald reports:
The Boston Public Health Commission took a major step toward banning harmful trans fats from all city eateries yesterday, when members officially opened a two-month public comment session on their proposed health measure. If all goes as commissioners plan, in about 18 months, all city schools, restaurants and hospitals will be prohibited from using the artery-clogging artificial substance in their foods.
Unfortunately, the freedom to eat what you want isn’t the only freedom fading away for Bostonians. How about the freedom to get health care where you want? Not if Boston’s mayor gets his way! As the Boston Globe reports:
Mayor Thomas M. Menino today blasted a state decision that paves the way for CVS. corp and other retailers to open medical clinics inside their stores.
The justification? In the mayor’s own words: “Allowing retailers to make money off of sick people is wrong.”
Really? Really?!
Hmm….I’d love to see the quality of health care after adopting that moral presciption.
Chicago alderman got a cost-of-living pay increase January 1st. I’m not sure what that makes their salary now but, according to the Better Government Association, it was $100,971 in ‘07.
But, no joke, the raise is totally necessary! I mean, how else are they supposed to afford all the new taxes they sign into law? Like the bottled water tax.
It went into effect on the 1st, the same day as the alderman pay raise. Five cents on every bottle of water you purchase. Seriously, check out the first item on the receipt below.
Yep, right there. Naked and out in the open. Given Chicago politics, I suppose I should be thankful for such transparency…
However, the city may not be able to rely on the 7-day-old source of revenue much longer. As the Sun-Times reports:
The American Beverage Association, the International Bottled Water Association, the Illinois Retail Merchants Association and the Illinois Food Retailers Association are suing the city of Chicago, alleging the tax is invalid and violates the Illinois Constitution, according to a suit filed in Cook County Circuit Court.
I’m rallying for the industry groups. Now how do we go about lowering the alderman’s salaries…
