Traffic Camera Debate (Final Draft)

The Traffic Camera Debate

With a new session of the state legislature beginning soon, traffic cameras will be a hot topic for discussion. Bills are being introduced in both the House and Senate to decide if cities should be allowed to install traffic cameras. This issue has divided Iowans across the state into two groups: those who support the traffic cameras and those who are against them.

Supporters of traffic cameras feel safety is the most important issue concerning the use of these cameras. They often cite a large amount of factual data to back up their arguments on allowing traffic cameras in the state. The former Cedar Rapids Chief of Police, Greg Graham, sent information to the city council on how the red light cameras have impacted traffic since they were implemented. According to the data, traffic crashes in Cedar Rapids have decreased 22% overall, with crashes in the downtown area of I-380 reduced by 75% and declining 82% through the S-curves. City wide, crash injuries are down 19% and fatalities have fallen by 80%. Graham also stated there was an average of two fatalities per year on the downtown curves but since the city installed the cameras two years ago, there has not been a fatality (Smith). These results do not just pertain to Cedar Rapids but other communities where studies have seen similar results. A 2011 study conducted by the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety found that large cities with traffic cameras have reduced their crash rate by an average of 24 percent. These same cities have also seen a reduction of crashes at intersections where no camera is present indicating a change in driver behavior ("Q&A: Red Light Cameras.").  

Backers of the cameras also mention that cameras not only reduce traffic problems but they also free up more officers to patrol city neighborhoods. Only one officer is needed to verify the camera tickets whereas several officers would be required to monitor the same intersections for traffic violations. In Cedar Rapids, Graham said that since officers have more free time to check up on neighborhoods, violent crime is down two percent and property crime is down four percent (Smith).

On the other hand, there is a group of Iowans that feel traffic cameras are one more step towards a “big brother is watching” attitude that is invading our society. Supporters of the ban are against this government intrusion in our lives and view it as unconstitutional.  For example, in 2008, Iowa Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins, argued the cameras were unconstitutional because there was not a way for traffic laws to be enforced uniformly. He stated that “a motorist who gets 5 tickets from speed cameras in Davenport is still allowed to drive, even though it is a state policy to suspend a license after three moving violations in 12 months”. Traffic camera tickets are considered civil violations and not moving violations. Someone ticketed by a police officer for running a red light would receive a moving violation whereas that same person if ticketed by the red light camera would have a clean record. Another argument by those opposing the cameras is how the tickets are issued to the car and not to the driver. If you were to allow someone else to drive your car and they were caught by the camera, the owner of the car is legally responsible for the ticket and not the person who was driving at that time (Tecklenburg).

Supporters of the ban feel that the traffic cameras are more for money generating purposes than for safety. They fear misuse will occur when communities become reliant on the revenue generated by the cameras. The devices do have the potential to generate a large amount of revenue. For example in Cedar Rapids in the first year after installation the cameras made 2.3 million dollars (Tecklenburg).

The use of traffic cameras is an issue that affects us all. Five cities in Iowa already have the cameras in place and at least two more (Iowa City and Dubuque) are considering the installation of them. The cameras are also becoming more popular across the country with 24 states allowing their use ("States Using…”). Supporters cite the safety aspect of the cameras, whereas the opposition argues the constitutionality of them. By the end of the legislature session we will see who comes out on top.