Wouldnt a county initiative to roll back traffic fines make for an interesting election?

Excessive traffic fines is something that noone supports.

People would vote to over turn this decision if it was on the ballot, if they know that the money will be used to pay for the illegals' medical care.

can we get the OCYR's to pull their misguided premature endorsement of janet Nguyen yet? I mean come on. First she demonizes all latinos and now she is voting to pay for healthcare for Illegal Aliens? What is this? Opposite day or something?

For a blog that usually has a lot more law and order rhetoric, I am shocked to see that increasing penalties meant to discourage breaking the law are now seen as burdensome. Is anybody here going to say that 3-Strikes is now too extreme? If you don't want to pay high penalties for breaking the law, then simply don't break the law!

I have no position on the increases in traffic fines. My problem is that the additional revenue will be used on the uninsured, which are mostly undocumented people.

Why can't the extra 20% goes to traffic relief or paving roads?

Tomahawk, for once, you are making some sense. It would be more practical for traffic-related fines to go towards traffic relief. Perhaps we could fund health insurance by assessing smokers, through their purchases of cigarettes, who unfairly burden our health-care providers through their self-destructive actions.

I think people are missing the point. The County of Orange already suffers the cost of paying the emergency medical costs of the uninsured. Adding this tax to the price people pay for traffic penalties gives the BOS an income stream to draw from when the bill for this medical cost arrives. And it only affects the crazy drivers whose behavior is bad enough to require a ticket.

It would be nice to know just when Squire John voiced his discontent to this vote. With a four to one passage, his voice doesn't much matter to this item one way or another. Did John even offer an alternative?

John was famous for always wanting to vote last as Treasurer and county rep on the OCERS Board of Directors. As soon as an item had the necessary votes, he would oppose in a valiant effort support the tax payer. John's all show and no go. Someone ought to ask him about the traffic fines he has had to pay. That's probably the driving force behind his opposition

Well said Sentinel!

Oh please, don't give me this whole "if you don't want to pay the extra 20%, don't break the law" rhetoric.

I agree with Tomahawk. I am apalled at this vote. I don't have a problem with the increase as long as it goes to something related to traffic/infrastructure, but as an income generating tool to pay for uninsureds this is nothing but a tax increase. These supervisors should have just raised property taxes; it would have at least been a more honest move.

Oh and yes, I can absolutely see the hit mailers on Janet next year over this one. Who is advising this poor woman?!?

OCYR should retract the endorsement for Janet! She always leave bad imprints..... We thank Janet for extra 20% ticket fees to help out "unlicensed and illegal" drivers to be on our streets.

Oh my goodness, my stomach hurts so bad from laughing. Maybe I should go to the ER and get looked at. Of course I will use my insurance to cover the expense.

Infrastructure - what do you think a hospital is considered? Roads, sewers, and power plants all comprise infrastructure. You say you want to increase property tax? Do you think the uninsured own property? At best, they own a car and are much more likely to get tagged with a traffic violation than ever own a piece of property in Orange County.

Traffic collisions cause injury. Injuries send people to the hospital, even the uninsured. This action may not be the best approach, but at least it is a measured approach. Maybe we should consider debtor's prison instead of a tax. Oh yeah, jails and prisons are another essential component of infrastructure.

I’m beginning to see the possibility of working to get the OCYR Endorsement pulled from janet as a worthy effort. This woman has not shown a single demos ratable trait of a "Conservative" Republican.

As a YR Myself, I am feeling very disappointed and basically duped by this woman. I mean I understand that janet has been involved in the YR's and been very active but what the heck?

If we can’t stand up for our own principals for the sake of protecting an incumbent in a technically non-partisan office, why are we even a charted club in OCRP and YRA?

Tomahawk, can you look into the bylaws of the OCYR and see if pulling the endorsement for now until at least April or May in time for the primary to see if maybe for once janet will stop acting like a democrat?

I mean she opened a welfare office on the county's dime. Tried to have an incumbent Republican on the GG school board recalled. Has lined up with the unions by hiring their lawyer. I can go on and on. But now she wants to give free healthcare to illegal aliens by dinging licensed American Citizens for more money when they get caught by one of those Big Brother red light cameras?

I would like to ask you Tomahawk, about getting the OCYR endorsement pulled from janet at least for the time being. And after we find out if it’s possible to get it done.

I would also like to ask for a second on this motion from the blogosphere.
Please email OCYR President Shawn Fago himself at the email address below to let him know how we feel about janets behavior.

Shawn Fago / President / president@ocyr.org

Janet is unfairly being singled out for this vote. It was a 4-1 vote. If you do the math, that would mean 3 other Supervisors voted for this. Where are the expressions of disgust towards Campbell, Norby and Bates?

To Anon 4:58 PM -- I'm a blogger on Red County, not a member of OCYR.

Tomohawk,
Sorry. I assumed you might be young enough to be a memeber.

Anon 557pm;
None of the other supervisors have asked for and gottent the endorsement of the OCYR ofr their re-election yet. Another indication of Janets immaturity.

Hey Anon,

Bill Campbell asked and also got the endorsment. and he is the only other Supervisor up for re-election.

Janet has been singled out by me because she has been consistently making wrong decisions.
Hence, underserving her constituents and our republican party.

Then I would hold Bill campbells feet to the fire as well anon 815.
Thaks for the correction on Sups seeking the endorsement of OCYR. I forgot about campbell in all the hoopla surounding janet. but none the less. campbell is campbell. he is somewhat of a squish and tends to bend left. janet is a frequent offender and in her short time in office has ran afoul of our prinipals more than campbell has in his whole political career.

10:44 PM, your bias is so sad!

There is a vast difference between people who are convicted of crimes and sent to jail (three strikes law) and people who get fined for simple traffic violations.

The whole idea of the fines is to keep them low enough so people dont fight them in court yet high enough to deter behavior. Once the fine gets too high, you might as well fight it in traffic court and tie up resources.

Don't do the crime if you can't pay the fine...

I see two issues on this blog. One demonstrably biased Janet-hater using any blog topic to attack her without regard to fairness of criticism of others who also voted for the increases.

The other issue is that it seems that traffic fines go up, Board Members get pay increases, fees go up all over the place for services, gas prices rise/fall/rise but are still considerably higher than a couple of years ago. The prices of goods and services continue to rise. But heck, my salary doesn't go far enough to cover all this.

Will I be living under one of those unsafe bridges being dependent on this increase for my health care soon? Catch-22.