By Jeremiah Mosteller | Due Process Institute | Policy Counsel
More than 1.2 million North Carolinians, 600,000 Tennesseans, and 200,000 South Carolinians cannot drive their cars because they have a suspended driver’s license. They cannot take their kids to school, drive to work, attend church, or stop by the store. Why? It is not because they have too many speeding tickets, drove recklessly, or that law enforcement believes they are a public safety risk. It is solely because they cannot afford the court debt that has been imposed by their state or local government. These debts begin as a small fine connected with a speeding or parking ticket, a misdemeanor crime, or a violation of a local ordinance and grow into thousands of dollars after fees and interest.
The Scope of Driver’s License Suspension for Court Debt
Driver’s license suspension was historically used to target and reduce unsafe driving behaviors. Today, 42 states and the District of Columbia suspend or revoke an individual’s driver’s license simply because they cannot afford to pay a debt they owe their local or state court systems. It is estimated that these laws impact at least 11 million individuals but there is insufficient data to accurately calculate the full impact of these policies due to states improperly tracking how they are implementing these policies.
While individuals who live in large urban areas can usually access robust public transportation to fulfill their daily commitments, those living in rural or suburban areas across our country rely on their personal vehicles as their only means of transportation. In 2020, COVID-19 has ended this component of our country’s urban-rural divide by causing public transit to be neither reliable nor safe for many users. This has only forced our country to become even more reliant on personal vehicles and imposes an even greater burden on individuals who have their driver’s license suspended.
A Counterproductive Policy
These driver’s license suspension policies are premised on a theory that we need some enforcement mechanism to ensure individuals who owe a debt to our courts will pay them. This argument is valid in theory, but any policy must also be considered in the context of its impact, outcomes, and unintended consequences. The financial hardships caused by these policies create incentives that counter their stated goals.
Many individuals who have a suspended license already face challenges paying court debts or they would not have been suspended in the first place. By removing an individual’s ability to drive, you limit their ability to get to and from work, reduce their opportunities for professional advancement, and cause them to risk unemployment. One study from New Jersey found that 42% of individuals lost their jobs after having their driver’s license suspended. This further hampers their ability to pay these debts and pushes them into a cycle of poverty that is very difficult to escape.
Many drivers will continue to drive with a suspended license after weighing the risk of being caught against the importance of keeping their job and providing for their families. Eventually, those who cannot pay these debts will likely be arrested or incarcerated for a failure to pay the initial debts or driving with a suspended license. This will burden them with the many barriers associated with a criminal record. This is a counterproductive way to ensure these individuals pay restitution to victims, support their children, or pay the fines imposed by our justice system. These policies criminalize poverty rather than behavior or actions that impact public safety.
A Questionable Revenue Source
Many argue that allowing the suspension of driver’s licenses is necessary for local governments to collect the revenue required to keep our justice system functioning and provide government services. As noted above, suspending an individual’s driver’s license has a direct impact on their ability to retain employment so it is no surprise that many studies show these policies have a negative impact on the revenue generated by local governments. While it is true that many local cities and towns have increasingly become reliant on revenue from fines and fees to survive, many localities report horrendously low collection rates and some even admit that it can cost more to collect the debts than the revenue gained.
In fact, after ending or reforming their local driver’s license suspension policies, some states and localities have seen their revenue improve. California saw collections on newly issued tickets improve by almost 9 percent and saw revenue increase by $82 million. Phoenix found that it would collect more revenue and grow the city’s economy by ending license suspension and allowing individuals to enter payment plans aligned with their income level.
A Distraction from Community Safety
Every hour law enforcement spends collecting debt related to the suspension of driver’s license for non-public safety reasons is an hour that same officer is not focused on real threats to public safety. The Washington State Patrol previously estimated that the agency’s officers spent more than 79,000 hours a year dealing with drivers who have their license suspended for court debt. One recent study found that law enforcement’s focus on revenue collection has a direct negative impact on the rate at which violent crimes are solved. Law enforcement officers should be focused on public safety in their local communities instead of on revenue collection.
This significant investment of government resources to implement these policies extends beyond law enforcement to other agencies. Employees at Colorado’s Motor Vehicle Division spend more than 8,500 hours each year to process these non-driving suspensions. Other states like Missouri, Arkansas, and Oregon have also reported that it takes multiple full-time staff to process these suspensions. These taxpayer resources could be more appropriately spent on activities that improve our communities such as identifying vehicle registration fraud or helping young people who are learning to drive for the first time.
An Opportunity for Positive Change
While the most recent reforms have been in states like Virginia and Montana, an opportunity to end this counterproductive practice now exists on the federal level. The Driving for Opportunity Act of 2020 has been introduced by Sens. Chris Coons and Roger Wicker. The bill has been endorsed by a diverse group of organizations including the ACLU, Americans for Tax Reform, The Libre Initiative, National District Attorneys Association, and more than 70 other groups.
This bill will help states end this wasteful policy and enact smart, data-driven policies related to the use of fines and fees in our justice system. It will also end a federal government mandate requiring states to choose between suspending the driver’s license of those with non-driving related drug offenses, or filing a formal opposition to receive their full federal transportation funding.
Conclusion
The suspension of a driver’s license solely for a failure to pay court debt negatively impacts millions of Americans each year. It is a ineffective policy that harms communities and families without a proven positive impact on public safety or government revenue. Ending this counterproductive practice will have an even greater impact today given the unique complications COVID-19 poses for many families, employers, and our court system. Congress should quickly advance the Driving for Opportunity Act to give states more freedom in selecting the policies that work best for its citizens.
To learn more, please see our recent coalition letter supporting the introduction of the Driving for Opportunity Act here.