New York's Cashless Toll Road Program a Recipe for Surveillance Abuse

License plate readers, facial recognition software, and registration suspensions-a dangerous combination.

Andre Jenny Stock Connection Worldwide/Newscom

New York City is getting rid of its toll booths, but it will be replacing them with more state troopers, more surveillance, and more government enforcement, and it's probably going to end up hurting the people who can afford it the least.

The state of New York and Gov. Andrew Cuomo are promoting a shift to a cashless toll road system for convenience, but seem to be downplaying some of the potential bad consequences (perhaps because it will serve the state).

While there's nothing inherently bad about an E-Z Pass system reducing the friction of drivers getting from place to place, Cuomo and New York are taking it up a notch. They're going to capture the license plates of everybody passing through crossings. One purpose is to send monthly bills to those who don't participate in the pass system. That still doesn't seem to be a problem, but then there's this: The license scanning isn't just for billing. It will check drivers' records, and New York will assign 150 state troopers to chase down those who have a history of not paying right then and there.

And they're jacking up penalties to get more money. Here's where it gets nasty, via the New York Daily News:

Also next month, new laws to crack down on toll violators will go into effect. One suspends the vehicle registration of drivers who beats tolls three times in five years. Another law hikes toll violation penalties to $100 from $50. There will be an increased State Police presence at the crossings, with the agency adding 150 troopers to the force in January.

So people who don't pay the toll risk losing the ability to drive their cars, a terrible, terrible way of policing this problem. Who is going to be more likely to be repeat offenders for not paying tolls and who is going to be more likely to be hurt by having their registration suspended? C.J. Ciaramella noted earlier in December how suspending driver's licenses in states places a very serious burden on low-income people.

It's very easy to imagine such a side effect here as well. And given that police will be monitoring all cars passing in real time, imagine the consequence of attempting to continue driving on these toll roads with a suspended registration. They'll be caught immediately. More fines! And possibly imprisonment. This may cost people their jobs, and therefore their incomes, and leave them trapped in a bad situation.

And there's no reason to believe that these spot checks are going to remain confined to toll checking, because they're also planning to implement facial recognition software for "tighter security." You'd have to be naïve to think that those 150 troopers are just going to be pulling drivers over for non-payment.

Read more here.

Comments

[$park? is totally a Swifty]

Welcome to Massachusetts.

[SomeGuy]

BTW I have messaged Reason and EFF several times over the last 2 or 3 years and they have yet to report about it.

But IL IPASS takes your photo every time you go through whether you pay or not and keeps this record at the IL Police head quarters and local LEOs can request access to it.

I found out about this from a North Aurora cop who taught criminal justice classes i was taking for my own education of my enemy 😀 know thy enemy of course.

I also ready in a Pop Science hack your stuff section about 5 years ago the reason IPass never beeps anymore is because they turned it into a tracking device.

The guy at pop science put a beeper in it and had a WTF moment when it constantly went off as he drove around. He realized it was a tracking system set up to log and map the IPASS movement...essentially you.

Again Reason and EFF still have been ignoring this for some reason.

I assume it is those white rectangles every quarter mile on the highway that scan the IPASSes.

[SomeGuy]

I constantly give it knife hands, middle fingers, holding my hand rifle shooting it (USMC thing), drive blind with my hands over my eyes, drove through it with a yeti costume on i bought off amazon, hanged myself, budd dwyered myself and so many other obscene things so they have 100s if not 1000s of funny photos of me.

I would FIOA request all my photos and make a funny photo book out of it and post it online but i don't really know how to FIOA request that or if they would just pretend it doesn't exist or say for privacy reasont hey can't release MY photos to ME. :/

It was annoying enough to FOIA a dashcam that was conveniently half missing with the important sounds of the officer saying highly illegal shit missing. I wanted to sue them for illegally detaining me for nearly 30 mins in 34F weather because i asked several neighbors if they were missing a dog. Fucking slavers. Sadly a lawyer said unless i get shot or beaten judges dont care....so as long as its only inconveniencing and highly illegal it is okay. Anything is good to a judge as long as i am not beaten or killed....fuck i hate people

[Brochettaward = (((pants)))]

It's really getting hard to go out and murder a prostitute these days.

[Austrian Anarchy]

Use some imagination. Imagine alternate routes.

[Get To Da Chippah]

So people who don't pay the toll risk losing the ability to drive their cars, a terrible, terrible way of policing this problem.

It would be interesting to see Scott's proposed alternative. Libertarians by and large seem to prefer use fees for roads over gas taxes, but you would need to ensure that users actually pay said fees, and those who don't pay are punished. Driving on public roads isn't a right, so impacting their ability to use roads without legal obstacle seems reasonable to me.

Naturally I distrust the government when it comes to covertly or overtly surveilling everyone, given their history of secretly keeping information and using it in other ways about which the public likely isn't informed.

[Brochettaward = (((pants)))]

Libertarians by and large seem to prefer use fees for roads over gas taxes

Oh. So is the state going to give drivers paying use fees a break on their gas taxes? No? And a private company would have the ability to go and strip a person of the right to drive anywhere, even on roads they have already helped to pay for?

[Citizen X]

Isn't it funny how public-private partnerships always end up embodying the worst aspects of both?

[AddictionMyth]

It is funny. It really is, CX.

[Lurk Diggler]

Thanks Bernie, just run on a free roads perspective.

[DesigNate]

What?

[SIV]

Libertarians by and large seem to prefer use fees for roads over gas taxes

I hate those guys.

[Homple]

Gas taxes are a pretty good proxy for road fees,and dead simple to collect.

[Juice]

I think gas taxes (that pay for automobile infrastructure and nothing else) are one of the least objectionable taxes out there.

[Greg F]

I think gas taxes (that pay for automobile infrastructure and nothing else) are one of the least objectionable taxes out there.

Unfortunately some of that money takes a detour into the pockets of mass transit.

[Loss of Reason]

I don't know. So we drive less or have more fuel efficient cars. You support rising the gas tax?

[kbolino]

Nah, just cut back "scale" wages.

[NotAnotherSkippy]

More fuel efficient cars generally mean lighter cars which have significantly less wear on the roads. Similarly, driving less also means less wear on the roads. So in both cases you have someone using less of the roads paying less for the roads. Where's the problem?

[R C Dean]

I hear ya, SIV. Good thing Reason doesn't have any on staff, amirite?

[Bronson, Missouri]

That was my first reaction as well. This is a tricky one. Even if you think full-privatization, anybody who doesn't pay the toll is essentially "stealing" the road. lt's an abuse of property rights, so the road owner should be protected by the govt in that case. Somebody would have to collect the thief's information and the police would have to investigate and enforce. It is one step removed from the govt having all the data, so that's a positive, but it seems like some kind of monitoring would have to exist to enforce the property rights of the owner of the road.

[You ARE a Prog (MJG)]

It depends on the company. They may generate revenue or collect tolls in a different way, and tolerate a certain amount of freeloaders.

Or they may have meticulous surveillance systems and demand payment from every driver. Who knows!

[Austrian Anarchy]

So what about those of us who rarely travel to those shitholes?

Besides being more reason to avoid them, when I approach one of these stupid booth-free toll places I get to be in the gaggle of other clueless out-of-towners who stop and scratch our heads with o choice but to run through and wait for some massive bill to arrive in the mail, maybe.

Or maybe the warrant arrives first.

Thanks shrink bags!

[neoteny]

Driving on public roads isn't a right

"The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another's rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct." -- Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11

Apparently there are several other court decisions which state that driving on a public road is indeed a right, at least in the USA.

[Juice]

So, according to this, I can drive a horsedrawn carriage on the interstate?

[Austrian Anarchy]

Yes, just not one that receives federal funds.

[Eman]

How do you get your hands on a federally funded horse drawn carriage?

[Austrian Anarchy]

I was talking about the road. Once you find an interstate without federal funding, you are in business.

It is the same scam every US government works with roads.

[John]

Yes it is. But I thought Libertarians love user fees. Isn't this more efficient? And don't tell me "but the government shouldn't be owning roads" because the exact same issues would arise if it were a privately owned road. If someone is collecting the information, the government will take it if it want to. See the third party doctrine for an example of what I am talking about.

[Brochettaward = (((pants)))]

Or, the government could and probably will just end up installing cameras and license plate readers on roads even where tolls aren't present and tracking you that way. They're going to have the data one way or the other. At least a private provider isn't likely to send an armed goon your way to fine you or strip you of your vehicle registration.

In some ideal world, we'd simply have actual roadblocks to our government sucking up all the data they can. But we don't live in that type of place. This same sort of problem is going to present itself with most technological developments in the 21st century, and libertarians are probably going to lose. It's not really special to toll roads.

[$park? is totally a Swifty]

At least a private provider isn't likely to send an armed goon your way to fine you or strip you of your vehicle registration.

So what would they do? If you've made use of something they own and refuse to pay, what options do they have to get the money?

[Brochettaward = (((pants)))]

I don't know - the same options available to any other private service provider?

[$park? is totally a Swifty]

Like maybe taking someone to court?

[Brochettaward = (((pants)))]

Or, just denying them service. Because the actual fees involved here aren't high enough to even waste time in court.

Even then, it's disingenuous to compare civil cases to enforcement of traffic laws. How many people died as a result of the enforcement of civil law last year?

[$park? is totally a Swifty]

So would it be bad for the government to deny people the use of toll roads?

[Brochettaward = (((pants)))]

Ok, you're fucking with me right now, right?

[Citizen X]

$park? is feeling pretty sassy today.

[$park? is totally a Swifty]

I didn't think it was a difficult question. I'm not trying to play gotcha here, I'm just trying to get thoughts on why it would be bad for government to do something that it wouldn't be for a private owner to do. Unless I've misunderstood something in one of your statements, which is a possibility.

[DesigNate]

Does the government own the toll road or does a private company?

[chemjeff]

Toll road owner demands payment up front, or else no driving on the road. What is the issue?

[Lurk Diggler]

What if they don't? Restaraunt owners don't demand payment up front.

[chemjeff]

Yeah, and those restaurants that don't demand payment up front generally cost more than those that do (e.g. fast food joints), in part to cover the losses associated with people stealing their services.

It's not necessary to photograph every license plate in the parking lot of an Applebee's restaurant in order to catch the few deadbeats.

[Bronson, Missouri]

I really, really don't think that the difference in price between sit-down restaurants and fast food is driven at all by stealing. What rate of stealing at a sit-down place would be necessary for that to be a factor? 25%? 15%? That doesn't seem to be in-line with anything I've observes.

People pay because of social norms.

[DesigNate]

With boothless toll roads, they don't demand payment up front, they bill you after the fact.

[chemjeff]

If a private toll booth operator in Libertopia says "if you want to use my fancy hassle-free boothless toll road system you have to give me your personal information", then I am free to decide yes or no. If I choose no, it is because in part I value my privacy over convenience and I can choose the more burdensome toll booth method. What is the problem?

[DesigNate]

"What is the problem?"

We don't live in Libertopia.

(I was just pointing out that they don't actually demand payment up front, not making a judgement of the system.)

[The Late P Brooks]

Desperation has its own stench. Have a whiff-

With the electoral votes cast and the last effort to stop a Trump presidency exhausted, opponents of the incoming administration are dusting off Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. The emoluments clause is all the rage, so much so that the Brookings Institution has released a 23-page report examining the clause and its applicability to Donald Trump's impending presidency. Their conclusion? Unless both Trump and his children divest themselves of all stakes in the Trump Corporation, Trump will be violating the Constitution from the moment he is sworn into office.

--------

This is not to say laws and rules and ethics don't matter. Of course they do. They are the foundation for building a political case. But opponents of Trump need to understand that politics ? that is, power ? determines what is possible.

Right now, what is possible is not a lot. The incoming Republican Congress will almost certainly be beyond persuasion when it comes to reining in a Trump presidency. They showed as much during the election, refusing, with rare exception, to vocally oppose the nominee. Trump's victory gave them power. They're not turning on him any time soon, especially if he gives them space to transform America into an "Atlas Shrugged" theme park.

[Kurmudgeonly Kristen]

Republican Congress will almost certainly be beyond persuasion when it comes to reining in a Trump presidency

They were beyond persuasion in reining in the Obama Presidency, so no reason for them to cock block someone with an R after their name.

[Brochettaward = (((pants)))]

The actual text of the Constitution, as typically is the case with progressives, doesn't really support their interpretation.

[Col. Chestbridge]

"Atlas Shrugged" theme park
Isn't this what the progressives want? Modeled after the federal government from Atlas, of course.

[R C Dean]

Unless both Trump and his children divest themselves of all stakes in the Trump Corporation,

Let's take a gander at the clause:

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Well, unless Trump appoints his kids to an Office of Profit or Trust, it doesn't apply to them.

I can see saying it means "directly or indirectly", so a politician couldn't get around it be setting up, say, a foundation that accepted money from foreign countries. However, it doesn't prevent a business in which a politician holds an interest from doing business with foreign governments. Being paid for goods and services is not a "present . . . Office or Title". Nor is it an "Emolument" for a business you own to be paid:

Emolument is a legal term which refers to all wages and other benefits received as compensation in return for holding an office or performance of an employment.

Paying a business for goods or services is not compensation for holding an office. Not entirely sure about "performance of an employment", technically as it was meant at the time, but using modern terminology, you can only employ a natural person, not a corporation, so it wouldn't apply there, either.

[PapayaSF]

so a politician couldn't get around it by setting up, say, a foundation that accepted money from foreign countries

I see what you did there.

[R C Dean]

One wonders, though, what rights John Kerry has to his wife's rather gargantuan fortune (which is undoubtedly invested in many businesses which do business with foreign governments), and why not giving up those rights isn't a violation of the emoluments clause, but Trump's keeping his investments in corporations that do business with foreign governments is a violation.

[DesigNate]

Or say, a different presidential candidate actually being paid by foreign governments through her "charity".

[Holger da Dane]

'especially if he gives them space to transform America into an "Atlas Shrugged" theme park.'

It's cute they think the GOP are not every bit as crony capitalist as they are.. Or maybe they just never read the book.

[Mickey Rat]

It does not matter if they read it, they seem incapable ofunderstanding it.

[Mickey Rat]

The Left's version of "Birthers" this cycle. There is always some fraction of the losing side t hst hopes they can rules lawyer their way out of defeat.

[C. S. P. Schofield]

Here's to them wasting a great deal of time and treasure chasing that particular fantasy. The more they expend on this kind of crap, the less they will have to fight for causes that aren't already lost.

[AddictionMyth]

I feel safer already.

[AddictionMyth]

Maybe they can contract with Palantir to do the data analysis and software recognition.

[The Late P Brooks]

I especially like the "Atlas Shrugged theme park" jab. Totally lethal.

[$park? is totally a Swifty]

Worst park ever. Except maybe for the sandwiches.

[Citizen X]

There's only one "ride," and it's a train that goes in a circle around the park. There is also a seven-hour lecture about Great Men. You are not allowed to leave until it is over.

[Ska]

Since profit is obviously the ultimate goal here, a highest bidder "make it stahp!" auction could be introduced.

[Citizen X]

I hope you're not imputing logical consistency or concern for the desires of others to Objectivists.

[Ska]

Sorry, I was letting that glass half full side get to me. Chalk it up to Basil Hayden's at lunch.

[Fist of Etiquette]

Government databases are always bad. Why do you think police departments refuse to feed the ones on officer-involved shootings?

[AddictionMyth]

Wow my little anarcho-frankentrumpkensteins are on point today. Good work!

[Holger da Dane]

Let me guess, you're all Negan?

[Kurmudgeonly Kristen]

OT: Steve Martin deleted the Tweet he wrote in honor of Carrie Fisher because of SJW bullshit. I think he should have stood up to those assholes and told them to fuck off.

[Brochettaward = (((pants)))]

This is always the response to take with them. They are like rats or ants who can sense any food left lying around (I refuse to compare them to sharks). You don't give it to them, they fuck off. Apologizing simply empowers their pathetic little lynch mobs and makes regular people who wouldn't normally care think you actually did something wrong.

I hold that Trump's biggest mistake during the campaign was apologizing after they leaked the tape with Billy Bush. He should have continued to double down on being an asshole.

[10mm]

Once I am dictator, I will also tweet heartfelt statements such as Steve did. The ensuing rage will help me identify the most egregious snowflakes to be rounded up and sent to woodchipper camp.

[The Late P Brooks]

you would need to ensure that users actually pay said fees

Not shutting down the (cash) toll booths would be a good way to do this.

[PapayaSF]

Nope, scofflaws will still use the other lanes without a FasTrack. I know someone who went through incredible DMV hassle due to sharing a name with another woman (an immigration attorney[!] in SF) who repeatedly did that.

[AddictionMyth]

OH GOD I can't wait for Obozo to leave office already.

[Your Majesty]

Add to NYC's extensive network of EZ Pass readers across the city, and it's clear they're setting up one heckuva surveillance state there.

Fines aside, there's also that EZ Pass annual fee. If NYC and NYS do not waive it, then it's just another case of soaking drivers -- because by definition there is no "EZ Pass discount" on a cashless system.

[Brochettaward = (((pants)))]

One thing I'd point to above is that the surveillance doesn't require any EZ pass system at all and was probably coming regardless. The counter to that is, eventually it's probably going to get to the point where they just starting making all roads tolls for extra revenue. And probably weaponized in some other ways.

[Citizen X]

If you get into arrears, your self-driving car will automatically take you to the nearest payment-processing location and then shut itself off until you pay the toll.

[Kurmudgeonly Kristen]

eventually it's probably going to get to the point where they just starting making all roads tolls

And the Progressives will cheer this on despite its adverse effect on poor people, who they claim to care for.

[DesigNate]

Well those people can still ride the bus and the subway. Duh!

[Hyperion]

"This may cost people their jobs, and therefore their incomes, and leave them trapped in a bad situation"

The state can never have enough serfs and criminals. Progress!

[JayU]

Yeah, sending people bills to whatever address the DMV has on file is sure to not result in any problems whatsoever.

[Hyperion]

I went through the toll booths when going south through the bay tunnel in Baltimore once and didn't have any cash on me, so they supposedly sent me the bill. I never got it, but fortunately remembered, looked it up by my license plate number and paid it online. I of course took a screenshot of my receipt and payment number and saved it. Trusting the DMV with anything is a big mistake.

[DOOMco]

Colorado has em.
470, the easiest way to the airport from me, is booth less tolls. sent through dmv to my house.

[JayU]

Do they send you a bill every single time, or do they wait and send you all your uses from one month or something?

[DOOMco]

haven't needed to go too much. they sent 2 bills a day apart, i drove there and back on the toll road 5 days apart. i assume its a 48 hour period.
you can pay online right away, or wait 2 weeks or so for the mail

[JayU]

That's annoying as hell if you drive through one of those tolls twice a day for work.

[dschwar]

If you do that, you're getting the automatic transponder thing.

[Loss of Reason]

We have EZ Pass In Houston too. I went paperless so I just check once a month. If you use what you have in there, they charge/deposit from your account another 10 in.

No issues so far

[ScareCroWoodChippeRepair]

What happens when tourists without EZ Pass cards? If there's no way to pay with cash, check, credit card, or anything similar, of the only way to pay is an AZ Pass card?

[Hyperion]

I'm sure that means you pay more when they send you the bill. Feature, not bug.

[Juice]

Yep. Instead of $2, they send you a "fine" of $20 or something like that in the mail. If you're a tourist from out of state you can basically throw it in the trash.

[Citizen X]

Protip: speech-to-text apps work better if you don't have a mouthful of sandwich or pennies or whatever.

[ScareCroWoodChippeRepair]

Naw, I'm just a natural klutz.

[The Late P Brooks]

eventually it's probably going to get to the point where they just starting making all roads tolls

Once they achieve their ultimate goal of doing away with the dreaded internal combustion engine, it will be inescapable.

[The Late P Brooks]

There will be an increased State Police presence at the crossings, with the agency adding 150 troopers to the force in January.

What are the odds this is more expensive than just paying toll collectors to sit there and take the money?

[Eman]

It might cost a little more, but at least there's more potential for abuse.

[GroundTruth]

Ha! Massachusetts beat 'em! We started the full-fascist turnpike plan late this fall. So glad to be on the cutting edge.

NOT!

[Loss of Reason]

I agree this - "One suspends the vehicle registration of drivers who beats tolls three times in five years." is harsh but what is the other issue here?

I can't go to a store and take something without paying. (Ok, fine I can charge it and never pay).
If I go to a restaurant and don't pay, there are issues and yes they can see me.

"The license scanning isn't just for billing. It will check drivers' records, and New York will assign 150 state troopers to chase down those who have a history of not paying right then and there."

So how would you make them pay than? If say someone used it 100 times without paying, a bill won't do anything.

I understand the concern about big brother, digital footprints and everything but some of the concerns here are just over the top.

[DesigNate]

If someone doesn't pay me for my design work, I sue them. The same thing could work here and Isn't that a more legitimate use of the court system as opposed to suing because coffee is hot?

[The artist known Dunphy]

I'm all for suing.

I've won 3 lawsuits in last couple of years. But get fucking real.

You seriously think the state should take every single person who doesn't pay their toll to small claims court?

You think govt. is inefficient now?

and almost every time the people who haven't paid the tolls would no show on the small claims case

even assuming they could make a prima facie case and get a judgment with the respondent in absentia, how are they going to COLLECT?

they already aren't paying their toll...

Loss of Reason is right... it will be just another bill they don't pay

what then? Find them in contempt and throw them in jail for civil contempt?

so now taxpayers are shelling out more money when the point of tolls is to COLLECT money to defray wear and tear on the roads by the people who use the road as well as defray the initial costs/

Do you seriously think DesigNate that having the state take people to small claims for not paying tolls would WORK ?

ASSUMING you could collect (big assumption), you'd spend more $$ paying for the court related costs and the court system would have to expand MASSIVELY to accommodate the toll skip cases.

you would create a much larger and much less efficient govt.

for fuck's sake, man.

[DesigNate]

I think a business owning a toll road can suck a dick if they don't want to take things to small claims court and do things the proper way instead of immediately moving to using the threat of government force.

And I think the state shouldn't get to own a goddamn toll road if I'm already being taxed to build and maintain infrastructure. (Personally, this is my major problem with the idea of toll roads in the first place.)

[SIV]

I hate cold coffee. That's part of why I favor lynching trial lawyers

[GroundTruth]

I understand the concern about big brother, digital footprints and everything but some of the concerns here are just over the top.

So, just how much concern about surveillance is over the top? When they start monitoring you going in and out of your house? When they start monitoring you inside your house? How bout when you close the bathroom door? Or when they put a camera in your bedroom? Maybe you can wear a mic and camera like the contestants on some "reality show", and they can watch you and your spouse doing the deed. Would that be too much?

It's a slippery slope, and we're already sliding way too fast.

[The artist known Dunphy]

Shackford seems like some sort of weird mashup of SJW and Libertarian.

the latter is cool

the former sucks!

I would agree suspending registrations (or driving license etc) for non driving related stuff is bogus, like jurisdictions that suspend driver's license for stuff totally unrelated to driving (many states suspend for failure to pay child support or other court ordered stuff).

But this? Oh Noes!!!! Somebody's vehicle registration can get suspended if they don't pay the tolls .

so fucking what?

Libertarians are supposed to like toll roads (people who USE the roads pay for it vs distributing the costs across society as a whole).

Unlike taxes, etc. its not a greater or lesser amount based on income.. it's based on USING THE DAMN ROAD

Use it more - pay more. And if it's like many systems, the cost is related to Axle/Weight as well .... Big Rigs place more wear and tear on the roads and they thus pay more.

Not paying the toll is a form of theft in the same way that skipping out on a dinner tab is, or failing to pay for any other product or service you would buy in the private sector.

What should NY do instead? Should they gum up the Small Claims Court system by Filing a small claims case against every single person who skips out on paying the toll?

[The artist known Dunphy]

Suspending the registration upon multiple violations is ENTIRELY reasonable.

Here's a fucking hint for Social Justice Shackford... ANYTHING that costs money tends to "hurt the people who can least afford to pay it".

fucking duh

that's how money works.

is he proposing some sort of socialist road toll system where we are fined based on a percentage of our net worth ? and yes, iirc, there have been leftie regimes in Europe that graduate traffic tickets based on %age of driver's income/worth...

Btw. we have a similar system to what is being described here in WA state and it works just fine.

Here's another fucking hint ... cars come with many costs besides the initial purchase and if you can't afford the toll - DON'T DRIVE THE FUCKING ROAD.

I thought personal responsibility was supposed to be a libertarian ideal? In Shackford's twisted SJW world, penalties for theft are cosmically unfair because LIKE ANYTHING ELSE THAT COSTS $$$$$ they "hurt" people who don't have tons of money less than those who do.

welcome to the real world, and a capitalistic system. one of the incentives that drives us to seek to develop better skills is to get better paying jobs so we can better afford the stuff we want.

it's SUPPOSED to work this way.

[Yeckos]

Come visit western mass, where you pay tolls on the pike and it goes for the bigdig.

[Holger da Dane]

'Libertarians are supposed to like toll roads'

Impressive. You could thatch all the rooftops in your village with that amount of straw.

[Longtobefree]

At least we all know that there have never, ever, been any mistakes made by a computerized system. And, to date, no government data base has been hacked, so the data remains private.

FYI, somewhere on the web is a bunch of photos of toll cheaters risking their lives to beat the cameras. Things like bikers leaning forward to cover the plate with their feet, guys hanging out of the hatchback to put cardboard over the plate and so forth. To lazy to find it again.

[Nick W B]

When North Carolina built their first toll road a few years ago, they didn't build toll booths. They just have EasyPass or "Pay By Mail" where they send the bill to the owner of the license plate. The latter starts off twice as expensive as EasyPass and grow much more expensive if, sorry, when you forget to pay on time. No need for some new crazy ass police force.

[C. S. P. Schofield]

As far as 'facial recognition' goes, my personal bet is that it will be implemented briefly, and than quietly ashcanned after, say, the first dozen cases of false-positives that resulted in multimillion dollar lawsuits. Facial recognition may well work under controlled conditions when supervised by the techno-geeks who wrote the software, but will it when used in the real world by low level civil service drones? I have strong doubts.