Roadblock to Economic Independence - How Driver's License Suspension Policies in Indiana Impede Self-Sufficiency, Burden State Government & Tax Public Resources, HHRC, 2016

• Jan. 1, 2016 • Locations: United States of America -> Indiana United States of America • Topics: Statistics/Trends, Cost of Prison Systems

Download original document:
Brief thumbnail

Document text

This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.

ROADBLOCK TO
ECONOMIC
INDEPENDENCE:
How Driver’s License Suspension Policies in
Indiana Impede Self-Sufficiency, Burden State
Government & Tax Public Resources
Ryan T. Schwier
Autumn James
Health and Human Rights Clinic
Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

ABOUT THE HEALTH AND HUMAN RIGHTS CLINIC
The Health and Human Rights Clinic (HHRC) engages in domestic human rights
advocacy and litigation addressing the social determinants of health. HHRC interns,
authorized to practice law under Rule 2.1 of the Indiana Supreme Court Rules, perform
a full range of lawyering activities: interviewing, counseling, researching, drafting,
problem solving, negotiation and advocacy at court or administrative hearings. Many
of the HHRC’s case referrals come from Indiana Legal Services, the state-wide Legal
Services Corporation (LSC) grantee charged with the delivery of legal assistance to
low-income residents of Indiana.

IU MCKINNEY MISSION
The Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law resides on Indiana’s urban
research and health sciences campus. As the only law school in our vibrant capital city,
we are committed to accessibility, aﬀordability, diversity, and excellence in public legal
education.

The McKinney School of Law serves its students and society as a center of legal
education and scholarly inquiry. Our students pursue a rigorous course of study
immersed in an environment of public service and community engagement. By
fostering a mature sense of integrity and an awareness of an ever-evolving legal
profession, we empower students to succeed as citizens, professionals, and leaders.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report would not have been possible without the support, commitment, and
valuable feedback from several individuals. In particular, the authors would like to thank
Fran Quigley, Clinical Professor of Law, Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School
of Law; Andrew Bradley, Senior Policy Analyst at the Indiana Institute for Working
Families; Scott DeVries, DeVries Law Oﬃces; Michael Poletika, Research Associate at
Indiana Institute for Working Families; and Jessica Fraser, Program Manager at Indiana
Institute for Working Families. Any and all errors are solely the responsibility of the
authors.

Executive Summary ..............................................................................................6
Key Findings .........................................................................................................6
Recommendations ................................................................................................7
Scope & Content of Report .................................................................................. 7
A Note on Data Currency and Availability............................................................8
1. Driver’s License Suspensions in Indiana .........................................................9
1.1. Driver’s License Suspensions as a Tool for Revenue Generation ..........................9
1.1.1. Revenue From Increased Reinstatement Fees .......................................10
1.1.2. Court-Ordered Fees, Surcharges & Debt Collection ...............................14
1.2. Driver’s License Suspensions for Non-Driving-Related Offenses ........................18
1.2.1. Failure to Show Proof of Insurance..........................................................20
1.2.2. Failure to Appear in Court or Pay Traffic Offenses ..................................22
1.2.3. Failure to Pay Child Support ....................................................................22
1.2.4. Failure to Complete Driver Safety Improvement Course ........................23
1.2.5. Controlled Substance Offenses ............................................................... 24
1.2.6. Other Reasons .......................................................................................... 24
1.2.7. Penalties for Driving While Suspended ...................................................25
1.3. Recent Legislative Amendments and Proposals ..................................................27
1.4. Existing Remedies ..................................................................................................29
1.4.1. Indiana’s “Specialized Driving Privilege” Program ..................................29
1.4.2. Fee Waivers and Installment Plans ..........................................................30

2. The Impact of License Suspensions on the Economy, Government, and
Public Safety .......................................................................................................31
2.1. Impact on Workers and Employers .......................................................................31
2.1.1. Lack of Access to Reliable Alternative Forms of Transportation ...........32
2.1.2. Lack of Access to Jobs: The Challenge of “Spatial Mismatch” .............33
2.1.3. Welfare to Work: The Barrier to Economic Self-Sufficiency ...................35
2.2. Impact on State Government ................................................................................35
2.2.1. Costs to Law Enforcement and the BMV ................................................35
2.2.2. Costs to the Court System .......................................................................36

3. Recommendations..........................................................................................38
4

3.1. Build Public Support for Policy Reform ................................................................38
3.2. End the Use of License Suspensions as Tool for Revenue Collection.................38
3.3. End the Use of License Suspensions for Non-Driving Related Offenses ............38
3.3.1. Generally ................................................................................................... 38
3.3.2. Child Support Arrearages .........................................................................39
3.3.3. Controlled Substance Violations ..............................................................40
3.4. Allow for a Reinstatement Fee “Amnesty” ............................................................ 40
3.5. Implement Practical Payment Plans ......................................................................41
3.6. Implement Equitable Monetary Sanctions ............................................................ 42
3.7. Allow for Non-Pecuniary Penalties in Lieu of Fines or Fees .................................44
3.8. Provide Special Auto Insurance Policies for Low-Income Drivers .......................45
3.9. Improve Access to Indiana’s “Specialized Driving Privilege” Program ...............45
3.10. Enable Greater Public Access to BMV Data .......................................................46

MODEL LEGISLATION ........................................................................................47
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................50

Executive Summary
State laws and procedures related to driver’s license suspensions disproportionately impact
low-income Hoosiers. The use of suspensions for reasons unrelated to driving safety,
combined with the dramatic increase in license reinstatement fees make it diﬃcult, if not
impossible, for many to legally get back behind the wheel. Due to the lack of reliable alternative
means of transportation and the growing suburbanization of jobs, these suspensions create
significant barriers for those seeking to maintain employment and, ultimately, support
themselves and their families financially.

Beside the cost to individuals, driver’s license suspensions significantly impact employers,
government resources, and public safety. Police oﬃcers spend countless hours citing,
arresting, and processing suspended drivers, imposing a significant strain on law enforcement
personnel and diminishing eﬀorts at ensuring highway and public safety. The BMV likewise
invests significant time and resources in processing non-highway safety violations, detracting
from what should be the agency’s core mission of ensuring public safety. And in the state trial
court system, traﬃc violations represent the largest number of prosecuted cases; adjudication
of license suspensions for non-driving oﬀenses only adds to congested court dockets.

Key Findings
•

There is an estimated 420,000 Indiana residents whose driver’s licenses have been
suspended; a majority of these are for reasons unrelated to driving.

•

More than 216,000 Hoosiers have suspended driver’s licenses for unpaid traﬃc fines, a
number roughly proportional to the total populations of South Bend and Evansville
combined.

•

There are approximately 8,000 persons in Indiana whose licenses have been
suspended for failure to pay child support.

•

Indiana is one of only 14 states (soon to be 12) with laws that still provide for driver’s
license suspensions for controlled substance violations.

•

In early 2014, the BMV reported a total of $131 million in unpaid driver’s license
reinstatement fees.

•

In 2014 the Indiana Oﬃce of Fiscal and Management Analysis projected an additional
$17,700,000 in annual revenue from increased license reinstatement fees starting FY
2015. Actual revenue generated came to only $9,788,770—nearly $8 million short.

Recommendations
As a matter of public policy, state motor vehicle laws should be limited to (1) establishing
standards for driving competency, (2) ensuring public safety by removing dangerous drivers
from the road, and (3) penalizing those found guilty of reckless or negligent driving. To that end,
Indiana should, to the greatest extent possible, discontinue the use of license suspensions
as a revenue-generating measure and tool for punishing behavior unrelated to driver
safety. Indiana drivers should still be held accountable for violating traﬃc laws. However,
certain measures may help lessen the economic burden on the state’s most financially
vulnerable residents while increasing their mobility and access to jobs. Specific
recommendations include the following:

Reduce or Eliminate License Reinstatement Fees: A reduction or elimination of
driver’s license reinstatement fees could provide significant assistance to those unable
to aﬀord them and who pay their base traﬃc citations. Current policies result in millions
of uncollected debt. By encouraging drivers to pay their parking tickets and other traﬃc
infractions, the state may recoup a significant portion of these losses and get drivers
back behind the wheel legally.

Implement Practical and Equitable Payment Plans: Courts should implement
practical payment plans for traﬃc infractions. State policymakers should also consider
establishing sliding-scale, or income-based, payment plans for fines and fees related to
traﬃc oﬀenses. Research indicates that such systems, which consider the severity of
the oﬀense and the oﬀender’s ability to pay, have strong potential to increase collection
rates.

Allow for Non-Pecuniary Penalties in Lieu of Fines or Fees: State policymakers
should vest discretionary authority in the courts to oﬀer community service hours, in lieu
of fines or fees, to reduce the economic burden on those who must drive to work and to
access essential services such as health care and child care.

Scope & Content of Report
This report examines the current policies, practices, and costs related to driver’s license
suspensions in the State of Indiana.

Part one outlines the use of license suspensions as a revenue-generating measure and tool for
punishing behavior unrelated to driver safety. This component of the report also addresses
recent legislative measures and their important, albeit limited, remedial features.

Part two, in turn, discusses the impact driver’s license suspensions have on communities, the
economy, government administration, and public safety. Here, the report focuses on license
7

suspensions as a barrier to employment, an outcome that contradicts the general state policy
of helping welfare recipients achieve economic self-suﬃciency.1 This section also examines the
administrative and fiscal costs to law enforcement, courts, and the BMV. Such burdens, the
report concludes, ultimately detract from highway and public safety priorities.

Finally, part three makes various recommendations for reforming current policy and practice in
Indiana. In support of these proposed solutions, this section examples of recent reform eﬀorts
in other states as potential models on which to build. While commending the Indiana General
Assembly for its recent eﬀorts at eliminating certain mandatory license suspensions for nontraﬃc related oﬀenses, this report goes a step further in calling for Indiana to follow the lead of
other jurisdictions in implementing much-needed change.

A Note on Data Currency and Availability
All eﬀorts have been made in the preparation of this report to secure up-to-date statistics. In
the absence of current data, this study draws on information found in previously published
studies to paint as full a picture as possible. The HHRC continues to seek more detailed
driver’s license suspension data and will update this report as that data becomes available.

The HHRC takes the position that public access to State data allows for in-depth analysis of
the eﬀects of government policy, opening the door to potential reform where it may be needed.
Accordingly, the HHRC fully supports those provisions under the 2016 BMV omnibus bill
relating to public access to agency records. Under the proposed legislation, “[a]ll records of the
bureau,” with certain exceptions, “. . . must be open to public inspection . . . in accordance
with [Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act].” 2 Moreover, the measure expressly allows for the
“compilation of specific information requested for . . . research or statistical reporting
purposes.”3

Adoption and codification of these provisions into the State’s motor vehicles law would
significantly advance the public policy of government transparency and help ensure the
production of public records, “an integral part of the routine duties of public oﬃcials and
employees, whose duty it is to provide the information.” 4

For a comprehensive analysis of income adequacy and economic security for Indiana families, see Diana M.
Pearce, Ind. Inst. for Working Families, The Self-Suﬃciency Standard for Indiana 2016 [hereinafter IIWF Report],
available at http://www.incap.org/iiwf/self-suﬃciency/2016-Self-suﬃciency-report.pdf.
2

H.R. 1087, 119th Gen. Assemb., 2d Reg. Sess. § 179 (Ind. 2016).

Id.

Ind. Code § 5-14-3-1.

1. Driver’s License Suspensions in Indiana
The Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles is the government entity primarily responsible for
suspending the privileges of those drivers who have violated or otherwise failed to comply with
State motor vehicle laws. 5 The BMV may, upon any reasonable ground, suspend or revoke (1)
the current driver's license of any person, or (2) the certificate of registration and license plate
for any motor vehicle.6 A “reasonable ground” may include, among other things, situations
implicating (1) an individual’s acquisition, use, or renewal of a driver’s license through fraud or
misrepresentation; (2) the need to prevent the misuse of a driver's license, license plate, or
other BMV credential; and (3) the need to ensure public safety.7 In addition to the BMV, Indiana
law provides courts with the authority to suspend
an individual’s driving privileges when he or she is
found to have committed certain traﬃc violations.8

420,000

Estimated number of Indiana
motorists with suspended driver’s
licenses

Today, there is an estimated 420,000 Indiana
residents whose driver’s licenses have been
suspended.9 The grounds for these suspensions,
and the policies that exacerbate the problem, are
discussed in further detail below.

1.1. Driver’s License Suspensions as a Tool for Revenue
Generation
With growing budget restrictions in recent years, states have increasingly relied on fines, fees,
and surcharges to generate additional streams of revenue. Driver’s license suspensions have
played a central role in this process, often with unseen—albeit adverse—consequences.

In December of 2015, the Council of Economic Advisors—an agency within the Executive
Oﬃce of the President charged with oﬀering objective advice in the formulation of economic
policy—issued a brief examining the growing use of monetary sanctions for minor infractions
(including traﬃc violations) as a source of state revenue. In its analysis, the CEA pointed to the
disproportionate eﬀect of court fines and fees on the poor and the collateral repercussions that
often result from such policies: “Individuals unable to pay criminal justice debt may be further
5

For a general overview, see Points, Suspension and Insurance Requirements, in Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles,
Driver’s Manual 30-39 (2015), available at http://www.in.gov/bmv/files/Drivers_Manual_Chapter_3.pdf.
6

Ind. Code § 9-30-4-1.

140 IAC 1-9-1.

Ind. Code §§ 9-30-16, 9-24-11-10, 9-24-18-0.5 and 9-25-6-0.5.

Bennett Haeberle, Change in Law Could Restore Suspended Drivers’ Privileges, WISHTV.com (June 6, 2014),
http://wishtv.com/2014/06/06/change-in-law-could-restore-suspended-drivers-privileges.

punished by having their drivers’ licenses suspended, even for oﬀenses unrelated to
driving. . . . Loss of a driver’s license can make it diﬃcult to maintain employment, increasing
the obstacles to paying oﬀ debt.” 10

“

Loss of a driver’s license can make it diﬃcult to maintain
employment, increasing the obstacles to paying oﬀ debt.
-Council of Economic Advisors (2015)

1.1.1. Revenue From Increased Reinstatement Fees
Driver’s license reinstatement can be a complicated process because BMV requirements are
strict and often expensive.11 Even if a motorist can
pay oﬀ all infraction fines and secure the requisite
insurance coverage, the license reinstatement fees
alone are often prohibitively expensive and may
prevent the restoration of driving privileges
indefinitely for many individuals.

$131 Million
Approximate amount of unpaid

driver’s license reinstatement fees
In early 2014, the BMV reported a total of $131
reported in 2014
12
million in unpaid license reinstatement fees.
Rather than analyze the underlying reasons for this
uncollected debt, the legislative solution was
simply to increase the fines in the hopes of recovering desperately-needed revenue.13

Council of Economic Advisors, Fines, Fees, and Bail: Payments in the Criminal Justice System that
Disproportionately Impact the Poor 4 [hereinafter CEA Brief], available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/
files/page/files/1215_cea_fine_fee_bail_issue_brief.pdf.
11

For a general overview of the reinstatement process, see Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Reinstating Your Driving
Privileges, http://www.in.gov/bmv/2845.htm.
12

Ind. Oﬃce of Fiscal & Management Analysis, Fiscal Impact Statement Related to H.B. 1059, at 2 (2014)
[hereinafter Fiscal Impact Statement], available at http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2014/bills/house/
1059#document-84e77989.
13

The OFMA noted that, “if these increased fees reduce the number of reinstatement requests, actual revenue could
be less than the estimated amount.” Id. at 1 (2014).

On March 13, 2014, Governor Mike Pence signed into law House Bill 1059. Eﬀective January 1,
2015, the legislation made various changes to the motor vehicles law, including expanded
requirements for proof of future financial responsibility and increased fees for the reinstatement
of suspended driver’s licenses. 14

Prior to January 1, 2015, reinstatement fees ranged from $150 for first-time suspensions, $225
for second-time suspensions, and $300 for third and subsequent suspensions. For violations
occurring after January 1, 2015, these fees increased dramatically: $250 for a first-time
suspension, $500 for a second second-time suspension, and $1,000 for third-time and
subsequent suspensions.15 That comes to a 67%, 122%, and 233% increase in reinstatement
fees for each suspension respectively!

Table1. Reinstatement Fees

Prior to Jan. 1, 2015

After Jan. 1, 2015

% Increase

First Suspension

$150

$250

66.67%

Second Suspension

$225

$500

122.22%

Third or Subsequent
Suspension

$300

$1000

233.33%

BMV Revenue Generated From Reinstatement Fees, 2010-14
$7,100,000

$5,325,000

$3,550,000

$1,775,000

$0
FY 2010

FY 2011

FY 2012

FY 2013

FY 2014

The enhanced reinstatement fees were expected to generate considerable revenue for the
State. Using the average number of reinstatement requests made of the BMV between 2011

H.R. 1059, 118th Gen. Assemb., 2d Reg. Sess. (Ind. 2014) (enacted).

Ind. Code § 9-29-10-1.

and 2013, the Oﬃce of Fiscal and Management Analysis (OFMA) estimated an increase in
revenue of $11.7 million per year for the Motor Vehicle Highway Account (MVHA), the state’s
general fund for highway maintenance and repair.

Table 2. Estimated MVHA Revenue

Average Number of

Estimated MVHA Revenue

Reinstatement Requests (FY
2011-2013)
First Suspension

17,891

$1.8 million

Second Suspension

9,264

$2.5 million

Third or Subsequent
Suspension

10,593

$7.4 million

TOTAL

37,748

$11.7 million

The estimated revenue shown in the table above reflects only a portion of the total expected
revenue under the new law. In addition to the MVHA revenue base, a substantial amount of
reinstatement fees are deposited in the Financial Responsibility Compliance Verification Fund
(FRCVF), “established to defray expenses incurred by the [BMV] in verifying compliance with
financial responsibility requirements.”16 The table below illustrates the distribution of revenue
under the new law.

Table 3. Distribution of Revenue

Financial Responsibility
Compliance Verification Fund

Motor Vehicle Highway Account

Amount

% of Fee

Amount

% of Fee

First Suspension

$120

48%

$130

52%

Second
Suspension

$195

39%

$305

61%

Third or
Subsequent
Suspension

$270

27%

$730

73%

Based on these distribution percentages, and using OFMA projections, the total expected
revenue base from the enhanced fee structure hovers near $17.7 million dollars, more than
double the amount of fees generated in 2014 (see chart and table below).

Ind. Code § 9-25-9-7. See also Ind. Code § 9-29-10-1(c).

Revenue Generated from Reinstatement Fees, 2010-14 & 2015 Projections
$18,000,000

$13,500,000

$9,000,000

$4,500,000

$0
FY 2010

FY 2011

FY 2012

FY 2013

FY 2014

FY 2015 (est.)

Table 4. Estimated Revenue from Enhanced Fees

Estimated MVHA Revenue

Estimated FRCVF Revenue

First Suspension

$1.8 million

$1.7 million

Second Suspension

$2.5 million

$1.6 million

Third or Subsequent
Suspension

$7.4 million

$2.7 million

Subtotal

$11.7 million

$6 million

TOTAL

$17.7 million

Ironically, however, the system may be depriving itself of the very revenue it seeks to generate.
A growing body of evidence suggests that states encounter low rates of collection as they
increasingly rely on fines and fees without taking into account the ability to pay.17 The OFMA, in
its fiscal impact analysis of H.B. 1059, appears to have at least recognized this possibility,
noting “if these increased fees reduce the number of reinstatement requests, actual revenue
could be less than the estimated amount.”18 This caveat proved correct. As reported for FY
2015, actual revenue generated came to only $9,788,770. Although a modest increase over the
previous year, the amount fell far short of OFMA projections—nearly $8 million short.19

CEA Brief, supra, at 5.

Fiscal Impact Statement, supra, at 1.

Oﬀ. of Fiscal & Mgmt. Analysis, Indiana Handbook of Taxes, Revenues, Appropriations FY 2015, at 218.

Projected vs. Actual Revenue Generated FY 2015
$18,000,000

$13,500,000

$9,000,000

$17.7 million

$4,500,000

$9.8 million

$0
Projected

Actual

1.1.2. Court-Ordered Fees, Surcharges & Debt Collection
Public interest groups, judicial study committees, and other organizations routinely aﬃrm that
courts should not be treated as revenue sources. In 1986, the Conference of State Court
Administrators published a study in which it adopted nationally-recommended standards
related to court costs and fees.20 Among these standards included the following:

A. Fees and miscellaneous charges should be set by the legislature of each state with
recommendations provided by the appropriate judicial body.

B. Fees and miscellaneous charges should not preclude access to the courts.

C. Fees and miscellaneous charges should not be an alternate form of taxation.

D. Surcharges should not be established.21

Conf. of State Ct. Administrators, Standards Relating to Court Costs: Fees, Miscellaneous Charges and
Surcharges and A National Survey of Practice (1986) [hereinafter CSCA Standards], available at
http://cdm16501.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/financial/id/81.
21

Id. at 2, 3, 4, 7.

The CSCA reiterated these principles twenty-five years later in its policy study, Courts Are Not
Revenue Centers.22 In the intervening years, however, Indiana courts—faced with growing
budget cuts, especially at the local level—have struggled to embrace these standards.

In addition to their base infraction fine, oﬀenders are likely to pay court costs and any number
of add-on fees. To begin with, the court tacks on an initial “infraction or ordinance violation
costs” fee of $70. 23 In addition, there are several other fees that may apply, all of which quickly
compound an oﬀender’s debt into large, often unmanageable, sums. These fees, which vary in
application depending on the type of oﬀense, cover a range of court services. The table below
sets out a non-exhaustive list of court costs and additional fees that oﬀenders who have
committed infractions are likely to have added to their base fines.

Table 5. Court Costs and Additional Fees

Fee Type

Amount

Statutory Provision

Document storage fee

$5.00

Ind. Code § 33-37-4-2(b)(8)

Automated record keeping fee

$19.00

Ind. Code § 33-37-4-2(b)(9)

Late payment fee

$25.00

Ind. Code § 33-37-4-2(b)(10)

Public defense administration fee

$5.00

Ind. Code § 33-37-4-2(b)(11)

Judicial insurance adjustment fee

$1.00

Ind. Code § 33-37-4-2(b)(12)

Court administration fee

$5.00

Ind. Code § 33-37-4-2(b)(14)

In lieu of the initial $70 fee, a court may collect a “deferral program fee” following an
“agreement between a prosecuting attorney or an attorney for a municipal corporation and the
person charged with a violation.”24 This fee consists of a one-time payment of $52 and an
additional $10 “for each month the person remains in the deferral program.”25

Beyond these ancillary fees, oﬀenders are often burdened with collection surcharges. In 2005,
the Marion and Hamilton County Court systems hired private debt collection agencies in an
eﬀort to recover an estimated $17 million in unpaid traﬃc fines.26 To oﬀset collection costs, the
courts tacked on an additional 25% surcharge. Oﬃcials defended the courts’ “get tough

Conf. of State Ct. Administrators, Courts Are Not Revenue Centers (2011), available at http://cosca.ncsc.org/~/
media/Microsites/Files/COSCA/Policy%20Papers/CourtsAreNotRevenueCenters-Final.ashx.
23

Ind. Code § 33-37-4-2(a).

Ind. Code § 33-37-4-2(e).

Id.

Will Higgins, Drivers Are Next: Court Hires Collectors to Pursue $17 Million in Traﬃc Fines, Indpls Star, Nov. 19,
2005, A1.

approach” on the existing “financial crunch,” a result of the state’s “nearly $130 million budget
deficit.”27 Four years later, the City of Indianapolis took similar steps “in an eﬀort to improve the
way [it] collects revenue from parking citations” by initiating a new community traﬃc court. To
administer court operations, Indianapolis hired a private, for-profit contractor that manages the
city’s parking ticket software and collections system. Again, through the assessment of
surcharges, the company received a portion of revenues to finance its services.28

Monetary sanctions such as these have a disproportionate impact on low-income oﬀenders.29
The inability to pay initial traﬃc fines, combined with the added expense of surcharges,
resulted in adverse credit reports for many poor Hoosiers, pushing them even further into the
cycle of debt. Damaged credit scores, in turn, often reduce a job applicant’s employment
prospects, as employers often examine an applicant’s credit history in their background
checks.30 Adverse credit reports are also likely to diminish a person’s chances of securing a
home mortgage or other loan, which can have wider consequences for the housing market and
economy. In addition, insurance providers often look at a person’s credit rating to establish
premiums.31 Higher rates, in turn, may encourage low-income car owners to risk driving
without insurance.

Aggressive collection tactics designed to generate additional revenue have also resulted in the
obstruction of access to courts. With the initiation of its parking citation court in 2009,
Indianapolis made clear its intention of imposing additional fines on those seeking to contest
their tickets: “If citations are not paid prior to their scheduled hearing,” a press release from the
mayor’s oﬃce announced, “the City may request a fine of up to $2,500 per citation.” 32 The
Marion County Traﬃc Court imposed similar penalties at the time, assessing those who
challenged a ticket, and lost, up to an additional $500 in fines.33

Id.

Francesca Jarosz, The Meter is Running on Parking Tickets, Indpls Star (Dec. 2, 2009), http://www.indystar.com/
article/20091202/LOCAL18/912020359; Marcia Oddi, Ind. Courts - A New Indianapolis Parking Citations Court Will
Open Tomorrow, Dec. 1st, Ind. Law Blog (Nov. 30, 2009), http://indianalawblog.com/archives/2009/11/
ind_courts_a_ne.html.
29

CEA Brief, supra, at 3.

See Alicia Bannon, Mitali Nagrecha & Rebekah Diller, Brennan Ctr. for Justice, Criminal Justice Debt: A Barrier to
Reentry 27 (2010), available at https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/criminal-justice-debt-barrier-reentry.
31

Margy Waller, High Cost or High Opportunity Cost? Transportation and Economic Family Success, 35 CCF Brief
(Dec. 2005), available at http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2005/12/poverty-waller/pb35.pdf.
32

Paul K. Ogden, City Threatens People Who Challenge Their Parking Tickets With $2,500 Fines For Going to Court;
Policy Mirrors That Used in Traﬃc Court, Ogden on Politics (Dec. 5, 2009), http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/
2009/12/city-threatens-people-who-challenge.html.
33

Id.

While designed to discourage baseless challenges and congested court dockets, the system
incidentally threatened to punish drivers with legitimate claims. And for those unable to pay
their fines up front, or simply unwilling to risk the additional fines in the event of an adverse
judgement, the courthouse doors remained eﬀectively shut. The CSCA has expressly rejected
the “notion that a fee schedule which is intentionally burdensome may be desirable because of
a deterrent value in preventing the filing of frivolous suits.”34 Whether a lawsuit is frivolous “is a
matter which can only be determined by a court after a lawsuit is filed, at which time costs and
sanctions may be imposed if the lawsuit is dismissed as frivolous.”35

Claims that the city’s traﬃc court system operated unfairly resulted in a class action lawsuit,
charges of judicial misconduct, and legislation designed to remove court discretion in imposing
traﬃc fines.36 Under the new law, a court may not require a driver found to have committed a
moving violation constituting a Class C infraction to pay more than certain specified amounts.37
The following table displays the current fee structure for court-imposed fines.

Table 6. Fee Structure for Court-Imposed Fines

MAX FINE

CIRCUMSTANCES

$35.50 + court
costs

Driver admits, or pleads no contest, to the moving violation before the
appearance date specified in the summons and complaint.

$35.50 + court
costs

Driver admits, or pleads no contest, to the moving violation on the
appearance date specified in the summons and complaint.

$35.50 + court
costs

Driver unsuccessfully contests the moving violation in court, and had not
committed a moving violation within the last 5 years.

$250.50 + court
costs

Driver unsuccessfully contests the moving violation in court, and had
committed 1 moving violation within the last 5 years.

$500 + court
costs

Driver unsuccessfully contests the moving violation in court, and had
committed 2 or more moving violations within the last 5 years.

While changes to the law removed—for better or for worse—judicial discretion in imposing
additional fines, courts (in Marion County at least) still have a financial incentive to collect them.
Funds acquired from infraction judgements in the county are transferred to a dedicated fund, a
34

CSCA Standards, supra, at 4.

Id.

Michael W. Hoskins, Federal Case Challenges Policies of Marion County Traﬃc Court, Ind. Lawyer (Jan. 6, 2010),
http://www.theindianalawyer.com/fining-access-issues-drive-lawsuit-federal-case-challenges-policies-of-marioncounty-traﬃc-court/PARAMS/article/22231; Ind. Courts, Press Release, Judicial Qualifications Commission Files
Misconduct Charges Against Marion Superior Court Judge (Jan. 16, 2010), http://www.in.gov/judiciary/press/
2010/0716.html; S.E.A. 399, 116th Gen. Assemb., 1st Reg. Sess. (Ind. 2011) (codified at Ind. Code § 34-28-5-4).
37

Ind. Code § 34-28-5-4(f).

portion of which pays the salaries of court commissioners.38 Moreover, while statutory caps on
fines may aim to ensure an equitable system of monetary sanctions, these payment ceilings
often remain excessive for many impoverished oﬀenders. 39 And, as the Council of Economic
Advisors observes, these caps tend to “perpetuate the regressive nature of the fine and fee
system by reducing the relative punishment for wealthy defendants.” 40 Debt collection
proceedings initiated by courts, a practice which still apparently continues in some jurisdictions
at the county level,41 only exacerbates this vertical inequity.

1.2. Driver’s License Suspensions for Non-Driving-Related
Offenses
In 1929, Indiana adopted the Uniform Motor-Vehicle Operators’ and Chauﬀeurs’ License Act,
the State’s first law requiring the licensing of persons operating motor vehicles. The measure
was intended to (1) establish certain standards for driving competency, (2) ensure public safety
by removing dangerous drivers from the road, and (3) to punish those found guilty of reckless
or negligent driving.42

In recent decades, however, Indiana, like other states, has begun suspending driver’s licenses
for reasons other than ensuring public safety. In addition to suspending motorists for typical
moving violations—such as for OWIs or habitually reckless driving—the BMV also suspends
licenses for reasons unrelated to safe driving.43

The shift in policy can be traced to reforms at the federal level. In 1990, Congress enacted
legislation compelling states, under threat of losing a portion of federal highway funds, to
suspend the driver’s licenses of persons convicted of drug oﬀenses.44 Six years later,
Congress passed a measure requiring states to suspend the licenses of those delinquent in

Ind. Code § 34-28-5-5(e)(1).

CEA Brief, supra, at 4.

Id.

See Marcia Oddi, “A Fine Mess: Drivers Dunned for Tickets From Years Ago,” Ind. Law Blog (July 14, 2013)
(summarizing report published in the Bloomington Herald-Times on Monroe County’s recent debt collection eﬀorts),
http://indianalawblog.com/archives/2013/07/ind_govt_a_fine.html. The extent to which this practice occurs in other
jurisdictions throughout the State is unknown.
42

1929 Ind. Acts 499.

Meredith Castile, Driver’s License 119 (2015); Best Practices Guide, supra, at 2.

Drug Oﬀender’s Driving Privileges Suspension Act of 1990 (codified at 23 U.S.C.A. § 159). See also Aaron J.

Marcus, Are The Roads a Safer Place Because Drug Oﬀenders Aren’t on Them?: An Analysis of Punishing Drug
Oﬀenders With License Suspensions, 13 Kan. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 557 (2004); and Maureen Hayden, Do Driving
Penalties Fit the Crime?, Ind. Economic Digest (Sept. 23, 2013), http://www.indianaeconomicdigest.org/main.asp?
SectionID=31&subsectionID=135&articleID=71384.

paying child support. 45 Since then, states have responded by authorizing license suspensions
for a variety of other non-driving-related oﬀenses, including unpaid traﬃc tickets, bouncing
checks, truancy, and fuel theft convictions.46

“The license has become a behavioral modification tool,” one scholar observes, “and taking it
away is the ultimate punishment. Since the 1980s, the ID has completed its transition from a
driving-related document to a document of extensive, even invasive, social control.”47

“

Since the 1980s, the ID has completed its transition from a
driving-related document to a document of extensive, even
invasive, social control.
-Meredith Castile, Driver’s License 119 (2015)
According to a 2013 report by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators,
drivers suspended for reasons unrelated to driving safety represented 29% of all suspended
motorists nationwide in 2002; four years later, that number grew to 39%.48

While non-driving related suspensions may give states the teeth to enforce child support or
punish crimes, the collateral eﬀects can be devastating for persons of low income. There is no
question that criminal or socially-aberrant behavior requires appropriate sanctions to deter
recidivism; however, broadly restricting driver’s licenses for oﬀenses unrelated to a person’s

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-193, § 369, 110 Stat.
2105 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 666(a)(16)).
46

For a 50-state survey, see American Ass’n of Motor Vehicle Administrators & Nat’l Highway Traﬃc Safety
Administration, Reasons for Drivers License Suspension, Recidivism and Crash Involvement Among Suspended/
Revoked Drivers 7-8 (2009) [hereinafter AAMVA Report], available at http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=897746.
47

Castile, Driver’s License, supra, at 119.

American Ass’n of Motor Vehicle Administrators, Best Practices Guide to Reducing Suspended Drivers 2 (2013)
[hereinafter Best Practices Guide], available at http://www.aamva.org/Suspended-and-Revoked-Drivers-WorkingGroup.

ability to drive safely may often be more harmful than beneficial, not only to the individual but
to the state as well.49

In addition, the commonly-held belief that the threat of a driver’s license suspension provides
eﬀective motivation for individuals to comply with court-ordered or legislative mandates lacks
empirical support. To the contrary, evidence indicates that when people lose their license for
reasons unrelated to driving safety, they fail to take those suspensions seriously.50 According to
a 2003 report from the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, an estimated 75% of
of motorists with suspended or revoked driver’s licenses simply continue driving.51

1.2.1. Failure to Show Proof of Insurance
Indiana law requires the BMV to impose driving privilege suspensions and financial penalties,
including reinstatement fees, on persons found to have operated a vehicle without proof of
holding the state minimum requirement for auto insurance. Suspensions can range from 90
days to one year.52 In 2003, the most recent year for which data are available, 67,831 Hoosiers
had their driver’s licenses suspended for failure to maintain insurance.53

Low-income drivers are particularly vulnerable to
these penalties. Although car insurance rates have
risen only steadily in recent years, for those
struggling to make ends meet the expense ranks
well below necessities such as food and housing. 54
Nationwide, the average auto insurance
expenditure rose from $798 in 2011 to $815 in
2012 (the most recent year for which data are

67,000
Approximate number of Indiana
motorists with licenses suspended for
failure to show proof of insurance

A GAO study found that, while driver's license suspensions have lead “some noncustodial parents” to pay their
past-due support obligations, the sanction has been ineﬀective in motivating other noncustodial parents, especially
those who “may not be concerned about losing their driver’s licenses.” U.S. Gov't Accountability Oﬀ., GAO-02-239,
Child Support Enforcement: Most States Collect Drivers’ SSNs and Use Them to Enforce Child Support 23 (2002),
available at http://www.gao.gov/assets/240/233361.pdf.
50

Best Practices Guide, supra, at 5.

Nat’l Cooperative Highway Research Prog., A Guide for Addressing Collisions Involving Unlicensed Drivers with
Suspended or Revoked Licenses (2003), available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/
nchrp_rpt_500v2.pdf.
52

Ind. Code § 9-25-6-3.

Margy Waller, Jennifer Doleac & Ilsa Flanagan, Brookings Inst., Driver’s License Suspension Policies 46 (2005),
available at http://www.aecf.org/resources/drivers-license-suspension-policies.
54

Teresa Wiltz, States Look to Reduce Ranks of Uninsured Drivers, Pew Charitable Trusts: Stateline (Feb. 20, 2015),
http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2015/2/20/states-look-to-reduce-ranks-ofuninsured-drivers.

available). In Indiana, that figure rose from $621 to $637 during the same period.55

There are a number of factors that aﬀect car insurance rates, including tort liability laws, auto
repair costs, and liability coverage requirements. Other factors are purely socioeconomic in
nature. For example, some low-income car owners pay more for insurance when providers rely
on credit ratings to establish premiums.56 The insurance industry justifies this practice in
asserting that drivers with poor credit scores are more likely to file claims than those with
higher credit scores. Insurance companies also base premiums on where drivers live. The
industry uses this pricing mechanism—a form of “redlining” known as “territorial rating”—
based on claim experience in a particular geographic area. A recent study by the Consumer
Federation of America found that the average insurance quote for a good driver seeking
minimum coverage exceeded $1,000 in 25.5% of the nation’s lowest-income ZIP codes. In
6.2% of low-income ZIP codes, the average figures exceeded $2,000, while only 2.6% of
drivers in moderate-income ZIP codes and 0.3% of drivers in higher-income ZIP codes
encountered such estimates.57

While some low-income areas in Indiana fall below the national average,58 other factors—such
as driving history, education, occupation, or lapses in coverage—can aﬀect the cost of auto
insurance, making it unaﬀordable for many poor drivers in the State. In addition to paying the
applicable reinstatement fees, those seeking to restore their suspended licenses must, by the
date on which the suspension terminates, provide proof of future financial responsibility for a
period of 3 years (for a first or second oﬀense) or 5 years (for third or subsequent oﬀenses).59
Payment of insurance premiums this far in advance is simply impractical for most low-income
drivers in Indiana.

Average Expenditures for Auto Insurance by State, 2008-2012, Insurance Information Inst., http://www.iii.org/
table-archive/21247 (last visited Jan. 3, 2016).
56

Margy Waller, High Cost or High Opportunity Cost? Transportation and Economic Family Success, 35 CCF Brief

(Dec. 2005), available at http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2005/12/poverty-waller/pb35.pdf;
see also Stephen Brobeck et al., Consumer Federation of America, The Use of Credit Scores by Auto Insurers:
Adverse Impacts on Low- and Moderate-Income Drivers (2013), available at http://consumerfed.org/wp-content/
uploads/2010/08/useofcreditscoresbyautoinsurers_dec2013_cfa.pdf.
57

Stephen Brobeck et al., Consumer Federation of America, The High Price of Mandatory Auto Insurance for Lower
Income Households: Premium Price Data for 50 Urban Regions 8 (2014) [hereinafter “CFA Report”], available at
http://consumerfed.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/140929_highpriceofmandatoryautoinsurance_cfa.pdf. See also
Alice Holbrook, In Some States, Low-Income Drivers Get Help With Car Insurance, NerdWallet (Apr. 21, 2015),
https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/insurance/states-low-income-drivers-car-insurance.
58

CFA Report, supra, at 10 (reporting average annual insurance premiums for low-income areas in Indianapolis at
$500 or below).
59

Ind. Code § 9-25-8-6.

1.2.2. Failure to Appear in Court or Pay Traﬃc Oﬀenses
Failing to appear before a court of law in response to a traﬃc citation, or failing to pay for a
ticket after an entry of judgment, may lead to the suspension of driving privileges. These types
of suspensions are indefinite and will only end when the court notifies the BMV that you
appeared in court or paid the citation in full.60

Additionally, if a court finds a motorist to have accrued three unpaid judgments related to a
parking violation, and the motorist fails to pay those fines within 30 days after notice, the court
will send a referral to the BMV, resulting in the suspension of the motorist’s registration. The
BMV will reinstate the motorist’s registration only if (1) the court furnishes adequate proof that
all judgments have been paid, and (2) the motorist
pays reinstatement fees of an unspecified
amount. 61

216,041

Number of Indiana motorists with
licenses suspended for failure to pay or
appear in court

Based on recent figures provided by the BMV,
there are currently 216,041 Indiana motorists with
suspended licenses for failure to pay or appear in
court, a number roughly proportional to the total
populations of South Bend and Evansville
combined.62

1.2.3. Failure to Pay Child Support
The creation of Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, signed into law in 1975, ushered in the
modern federal oversight of child support enforcement in the United States. While vesting
primary responsibility in the federal Oﬃce of Child Support Enforcement, the law delegates the
operational aspects of the program to the states. Subsequent to this initiative, Congress
enacted the Family Support Act of 1988, which imposed several requirements on states for
obtaining and enforcing child support agreements.63 To avoid burdening state court systems,
the Act encouraged the use of administrative procedures. As a result, license suspension
programs became a popular tool for many states. The Personal Responsibility and Work

Ind. Code § 9-30-3-8.

Ind. Code §§ 9-30-11-3, 9-30-11-6.

U.S. Census Bureau, State and County QuickFacts: South Bend, Ind. and Evansville, Ind., http://
quickfacts.census.gov (last updated Dec. 2, 2015).
63

Family Support Act of 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-485, 102 Stat. 2346 (1989) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 667).

Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 requires states to suspend or restrict driver’s licenses of
non-custodial parents delinquent on their child support payments.64

In Indiana, a court (or local agency responsible for enforcing child support payments) that finds
a parent delinquent in paying child support may order the BMV to suspend that parent’s driving
privileges. This suspension remains in eﬀect until the parent has paid his or her obligation in
full, or establishes a payment plan with the child support bureau, and the BMV receives an
order from the court (or agency) reinstating the parent’s driving privileges. 65

According to the American Association of
Motor Vehicle Administrators, there were over
8,000 driver’s license suspensions in Indiana
in 2010 for failure to pay child support.66 In
2015 alone, the child support division of the
Allen County Prosecutor’s Oﬃce reported
opening nearly 150 new suspension cases
every month.67

8,099

Number of driver’s license suspensions in
Indiana in 2010 for failure to pay child
support, as reported by the AAMVA.

1.2.4. Failure to Complete Driver Safety Improvement Course
The BMV may require a person to attend and satisfactorily complete a defensive driving school
program if, during any 12-month period, that person has (1) been convicted of at least two
traﬃc misdemeanors, (2) had at least two traﬃc judgments entered against the person, or (3)
been convicted of at least one traﬃc misdemeanor and has had at least one traﬃc judgment
entered against the person. In addition, a court may independently order a person to attend a
defensive driving school program.68 The BMV may suspend the driving privileges of any person
who fails to either attend or satisfactorily complete a driver safety program.69

Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-193, 110 Stat. 2105

(codified at 42 U.S.C. § 666(a)(16)).
65

Ind. Code §§ 9-30-13-7, 31-25-4-32. Before a driver’s license is reinstated, most states will also check the
National Driver Registry to ensure the noncustodial parent does not have a suspended or revoked license in another
jurisdiction. Carmen Solomon-Fears, Cong. Research Serv., RL41762, Child Support Enforcement and Driver’s
License Suspension Policies 9 (2011), available at http://greenbook.waysandmeans.house.gov/sites/
greenbook.waysandmeans.house.gov/files/2012/documents/R41762_gb.pdf.
66
67

Best Practices Guide, supra, at 62.
Rebecca Green, Prosecutor Oﬀers Driver’s License Amnesty Day, J. Gazette (June 8, 2015), http://

www.journalgazette.net/news/local/courts/Prosecutor-oﬀers-driver-s-license-amnesty-day-7092390.
68

Ind. Code §§ 9-30-3-12; 9-30-3-16.

Ind. Code § 9-30-3-12(c).

1.2.5. Controlled Substance Oﬀenses
In 1990, Congress passed legislation requiring states, under penalty of losing a portion of
federal highway funds, to suspend the driver’s licenses of persons convicted of drug
oﬀenses. 70 That same year, Indiana took steps to comply with this measure. 71 Under the
present law, if a person is convicted of a drug-related oﬀense “and the court finds that a motor
vehicle was used in the commission of the oﬀense,” the court may order the suspension of that
person's driving privileges by the BMV for a period of “not more than two (2) years.”72

1.2.6. Other Reasons
Other reasons for driver’s license suspensions include making payment to the BMV with
dishonored funds; truancy, suspension, and expulsion for students under 18 years of age;
graﬃti; juvenile delinquency; and fuel theft convictions. The table presented on the following
page provides a comprehensive list of non-moving violations for which a driver’s license may
be suspended, cross-referenced with their respective statutory provisions and periods of
suspension.

Table 7. Driver’s License Suspensions for Non-Moving Violations

Non-Moving Violation

Statutory Provision

Period of Suspension

Failure to show proof of
insurance

Ind. Code § 9-25-6-3

Between 90 days and 1 year

Failure to appear in court or
pay traffic offenses

Ind. Code §§ 9-30-3-8,
34-28-5-6

Indefinite (when DF appears in
court and case has been
disposed, or date on which
court receives payment)

Failure to pay 3 accrued
parking violations within 30
days of notice

Ind. Code §§ 9-30-11-3, 6

Indefinite (when court furnishes
proof of payments for all
judgments, and the motorist
pays reinstatement fees of an
unspecified amount

Payment to BMV with
dishonored check

Ind. Code § 9-30-12-1

Indefinite (when original
amount, along with service,
collection, and reinstatement
fees of unspecified amounts,
are paid in full)

23 U.S.C.A. § 159.

1990 Ind. Acts 1555, § 13 (codified as amended at Ind. Code § 35-48-4-15).

Ind. Code § 35-48-4-15.

Non-Moving Violation

Statutory Provision

Period of Suspension

Failure to pay child support

Ind. Code §§ 9-30-13-7,
31-25-4-32

Indefinite (when child support
arrearage is paid in full, or
when payment plan is
established)

Failure to attend or
satisfactorily complete driver
safety improvement course

Ind. Code §§ 9-30-3-12,
9-30-3-16

30 days

Truancy; suspension, or
expulsion from school

Ind. Code §§ 9-24-2-1,
9-24-2-4

120 days, or upon turning 18
years of age

Graffiti

Ind. Code § 35-43-1-2

Up to 1 year

Juvenile delinquency (including Ind. Code §§ 31-37-1,
running away; habitual
31-37-2, 31-37-19-4
disobedience of parents;
curfew, alcohol, or fireworks
violations; and any other act
that would be a criminal
offense if committed by an
adult)

Between 90 days and 1 year

Attempted purchase of alcohol Ind. Code § 7.1-5-7-5.1
by minor

Up to 1 year

Controlled substance violations Ind. Code §§ 9-24-2-2
(minors), 35-48-4-15 (adults)

Up to 2 years

Fuel theft convictions

30 days

Ind. Code § 9-30-13-8

1.2.7. Penalties for Driving While Suspended
A motorist caught driving with a suspended license (including for reasons listed above)
commits a Class A infraction. If that person’s suspension or revocation was the result of a
criminal conviction, the penalty becomes a Class A misdemeanor. 73

In addition, the BMV assesses a point value for driving-while-suspended violations, which may
lead to extended periods of suspension (see chart below) and even jail time. In a 2014
interview with the Washington Post, the executive director of Indiana’s Public Defender Council

Ind. Code §§ 9-24-19-1, 9-24-19-3.

reported that “200 people whose most serious oﬀense is repeated driving without a license”
are incarcerated in State prisons.74

Table 8. Penalties for Driving While Suspended

Statutory Provision

Violation Description

Point Value

Ind. Code § 9-24-18-5

Driving while license is
suspended or revoked

8 + MS

Ind. Code §§ 9-25-4-1,
9-25-8-5

Suspension of license and
registration for violation of
financial responsibility
requirements

2 + MS

Ind. Code § 9-30-4-8

Operating a vehicle with
suspended registration;
violation of conditions of
restricted license

“MS” means mandatory suspension for a period of up to 1 year or as provided by statute or
court order.
Table 9. Point Values for Driving-While-Suspended Violations

Total Points (Within 24-Month Period)

Corresponding Penalty

12 month probation

1 month suspension and 11 months probation

2 months suspension and 10 months probation

3 months suspension and 9 months probation

4 months suspension and 8 months probation

5 months suspension and 7 months probation

6 months suspension and 6 months probation

7 months suspension and 5 months probation

8 months suspension and 4 months probation

9 months suspension and 3 months probation

Tina Griego, States Are Taking Away Your Driver’s License in the Name of ‘Social Engineering,’ Wash. Post (Oct.

22, 2014), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/10/22/4935. In this context, see Frink v. State,
568 N.E.2d 535 (Ind. 1991) (holding that a driver could not be convicted of driving with a suspended license where
the automatic period of suspension had expired, even though his license had not been reinstated by payment of the
reinstatement fee).

Total Points (Within 24-Month Period)

Corresponding Penalty

10 months suspension and 2 months probation

11 months suspension and 1 months probation

42+

12 months suspension

1.3. Recent Legislative Amendments and Proposals
On March 27, 2014, Governor Pence signed into law House Bill 1279. The legislation, which
took eﬀect on January 1, 2015, created a “specialized driving privilege” program and
eliminated certain mandatory license suspensions for non-traﬃc oﬀenses.75 In addition to
helping some of Indiana’s “more than 420,000” suspended motorists get back behind the
wheel, the measure sought to alleviate the state’s congested court dockets.76 The following
chart summarizes the various changes under the law.

Table 10. Changes Under H.B. 1279 (2014)
Non-Moving Violation

Description of Changes

Statute(s) Affected

Attempted purchase of alcohol by
minor

Amendment to remove a mandatory
driver’s license suspension for minors
convicted of attempting to purchase an
alcoholic beverage

Attempted purchase of alcohol by
minor using another’s driver’s
license

Repealed provisions of the law which had Ind. Code § 9-24-18-8
allowed the BMV to suspend the driver’s
license of a minor found to have used the
driver’s license of another in an attempt
to purchase alcohol

Possession, consumption, or
transportation of alcohol by minor

Amendment to remove driver’s license
suspension for minors convicted of
possessing, consuming, or transporting
an alcoholic beverage.

Counterfeiting of title or
registration

Repealed provisions of the law which had Ind. Code §§ 9-17-2-16
allowed the BMV to suspend the driver’s and 9-18-2-42
license of a person who counterfeits a
certificate of title or registration for a
motor vehicle.

Minor found patronizing a tavern

Amendment to remove mandatory
driver’s license suspension for minors
convicted of patronizing a tavern.

H.R. 1279, 118th Gen. Assemb., 2d Reg. Sess. (Ind. 2014) (enacted).

Haeberle, Change in Law Could Restore Suspended Drivers’ Privileges, supra.

Ind. Code § 7.1-5-7-1.

Ind. Code §§ 7.1-5-7-7
and 9-24-18-12

Ind. Code § 7.1-5-7-10

Non-Moving Violation

Description of Changes

Statute(s) Affected

Truancy; suspension, or expulsion
from school

Amendment to allow a minor whose
driver’s license has been suspended for
school suspensions, expulsion, or
truancy to apply for “specialized driving
privileges” under Ind. Code § 9-30-16.

Ind. Code § 9-24-2-4

Restricted driver’s license

Repealed provisions of the law which
provided for the issuance of a restricted
driver’s license because of hardship.

Ind. Code § 9-24-15

Driver’s license suspensions
pursuant to court order

Added a new code section providing that
“[i]f a court orders the suspension of a
person’s driving privileges, the bureau
shall suspend the person’s driving
privileges in accordance with the court
order, even if the court's order conflicts
with a previous bureau action.”

Ind. Code § 9-25-6-0.5

Violating terms of probation

Repealed provisions of the law which had Ind. Code § 9-30-10-12
required the BMV to suspend a person’s
driver’s license for violating the terms of
his or her probation.

Failure to pay child support

Amendment to allow a parent delinquent
in paying child support to apply for
“specialized driving privileges” under Ind.
Code § 9-30-16.

Ind. Code § 9-30-13-7

Fuel theft

Amendment to allow a person whose
driver’s license has been suspended for
fuel theft to apply for “specialized driving
privileges” under Ind. Code § 9-30-16.

Ind. Code § 9-30-13-8

Juvenile delinquency

Amendment to allow a minor whose
Ind. Code §
driver’s license has been suspended for a 31-37-19-17.3
delinquent act to apply for “specialized
driving privileges” under Ind. Code §
9-30-16.

Delinquency in paying probation
or pre-trial services fees

Amendment prohibiting courts from
barring reinstatement of a driver’s license
for persons delinquent in paying
probation fees or pre-trial services fees.

Controlled substance violations

Amendment allowing (rather than
Ind. Code § 35-48-4-15
mandating) courts to suspend the driver’s
license of a person convicted of certain
drug offenses involving the use of a
motor vehicle.

Ind. Code §§ 31-40-2-1.7
and 35-33-8-3.3

While giving judges greater discretion than before in granting driving privileges, the law does
not end completely the use of license suspensions as a tool to punish individuals for nondriving-related reasons. More importantly, so long as the State continues to rely on license
28

suspensions as a source of revenue—a policy made especially prominent with the recent
increase in reinstatement fees—there seems to be little opportunity for meaningful reform.

On January 5, 2016, state legislators introduced House Bill 1087.77 The BMV omnibus bill,
which aﬀects numerous provisions throughout the Indiana Code, preserves the status quo for
both for driver’s license suspensions and reinstatement fees.78

1.4. Existing Remedies
1.4.1. Indiana’s “Specialized Driving Privilege” Program
Perhaps the most extensive change resulting from House Bill 1279 involved the creation of a
“specialized driving privilege” program. Under this provision, a court that orders a suspension
of driving privileges for persons convicted of a criminal oﬀense involving a motor vehicle may
stay the suspension for a term of no less than 180 days.79 In addition, a person whose driving
privileges have been suspended by an administrative action of the BMV may petition a court
for a specialized driving privilege.80 A court may restrict a person’s driving privileges (1) to
certain hours of the day or specific locations in relation to the person’s residence, or (2) by
requiring the use of certified ignition interlock devices.81

The specialized driving privilege is not available to persons who (1) have never been an Indiana
resident, (2) refused to submit to a chemical test either while operating a motor vehicle or in
accidents involving serious injury or death, (3) have been sentenced for causing death as a
result of operating a motor vehicle, or (4) have more than one conviction for violating certain
conditions imposed by the issuance of a previous specialized driving privilege.82 In addition, a
person granted specialized driving privileges may not, for the duration of the stayed
suspension, operate any vehicle that requires a commercial driver’s license.83

While the program, which oﬀers flexible arrangements by way of judicial discretion, is certainly
a step in the right direction, its success ultimately depends on the number of participating
eligible drivers. The absence of current data, however, prevents analysis of the program’s
77

H.R. 1087, 119th Gen. Assemb., 2d Reg. Sess. (Ind. 2016).

See, e.g., id. §§ 403 (graﬃti; delinquent acts); 406 (truancy, suspension, or expulsion); 522 (mandatory, rather than
discretionary, suspension for failure to provide proof of financial responsibility more than once during a 3-year
period); 523 (reinstatement fees); and 574 (failure to attend driver safety program).
79

Ind. Code § 9-30-16-3.

Ind. Code § 9-30-16-4.

Ind. Code § 9-30-16-3.

Ind. Code § 9-30-16-1.

Ind. Code § 9-30-16-3.

eﬀectiveness to date. The extent of public knowledge of the program is likewise
indeterminable, although there is little to suggest its promotion by either the courts or the
BMV.84

1.4.2. Fee Waivers and Installment Plans
In paying court costs and additional fees, an oﬀender, if “determined by the court . . . to be
indigent,” may be exempt from late payment fees.85 A court may also suspend this fee if it
"finds that the defendant has demonstrated good cause for failure to make a timely payment of
court costs, a fine, or a civil penalty.”86 Code provisions further authorize courts to suspend
half of court costs and fees for those who complete driver safety programs.87

Indiana law permits a court, upon its own motion or upon a petition filed by an individual, to
waive a driver’s license reinstatement fee. The court must determine that (1) the individual (a) is
indigent, and (b) has presented proof of future financial responsibility; and (2) that the waiver is
appropriate in light of the individual’s character and the nature and circumstances surrounding
the license suspension.88 Alternatively, an individual, who oﬀers proof of financial responsibility
for at least three years following reinstatement, may apply to the trial court for the privilege of
paying the judgment in fixed installments. The court, in its discretion, may grant the order.89

Despite these provisions, they remain eﬀectively out of reach for many low-income oﬀenders.
First, there is little evidence to suggest that the courts or the BMV publicize either option.90 And

A search of state and local government websites revealed next to nothing related to the program (the majority of
search results led to the websites of private attorneys). The BMV, in its inconspicuously-posted driver’s manual
(unavailable directly from the agency’s homepage) provides only cursory information on requirements under the
program. Points, Suspension and Insurance Requirements, in Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Driver’s Manual 34, 38
(2015), available at http://www.in.gov/bmv/files/Drivers_Manual_Chapter_3.pdf. There is no information related to the
program available on the agency’s “Suspension and Reinstatement” webpage. See Suspension and Reinstatement,
Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, http://www.in.gov/bmv/2330.htm (last visited Jan. 20, 2016).
85

Ind. Code § 33-37-5-22(a)(3).

Ind. Code § 33-37-5-22(d).

Ind. Code § 9-30-3-12(d).

Ind. Code §§ 9-29-10-2, 9-29-10-3.

Ind. Code § 9-25-6-6.

For its part, the BMV simply notes that “[a]ll insurance reinstatement fees must be paid in full.” Reinstating Your
Driving Privileges, Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, http://www.in.gov/bmv/2845.htm (last visited Jan. 20, 2016). The
agency’s website requires those with “a court ordered, indefinite suspension” to “contact the court that has
suspended [the driver] to determine who [sic] to satisfy their requirements.” Id.

in Marion County, payment plans are simply unavailable.91 Second, for those with knowledge of
these remedies but unable to aﬀord an attorney or secure pro bono legal counsel, the
complexities of navigating the court system present significant hurdles. Indiana Legal Services,
the Indianapolis Bar Association, and other organizations provide useful “self-help” guides,92
but lacking proficiency in procedural rules, pro se litigants may find themselves overwhelmed.

2. The Impact of License Suspensions on the
Economy, Government, and Public Safety
Besides the cost to the individual, driver’s license suspensions have a significant impact on the
community and local economy, government resources, and public safety. This section
considers these eﬀects greater detail.

2.1. Impact on Workers and Employers
Car ownership for low-wage workers not only provides significant benefits for individuals and
families, but also plays a critical role in a strong economy. Numerous studies have shown a
positive correlation between car ownership, job security, and higher earnings. 93 As one study
reported, “[c]ars ensure that more people can fully contribute to the local economy because
vehicle ownership increases employment opportunities, hours worked, and wages earned.”94

For employers, current State policies are counterproductive: there is a cost to hiring and retraining a new person each time an employee loses his or her job from lack of transportation.
This becomes an unnecessary expense for the state as well: payment of unemployment
insurance to a former employee who would otherwise have remained on the job.

On its website, the Marion County Superior Court Traﬃc Division provides no information on alternative payment
options; rather, it clearly states (in bright red text) that “[f]ull payment [is] required.” City of Indpls, Marion County
Superior Court Traﬃc Division, Traﬃc Ticket Payment Options, http://www.indy.gov/eGov/Courts/Superior/CourtInfo/
Pages/Traﬃc-Tickets-Payment-Options-and-Responses.aspx (last visited Nov. 28, 2015); City of Indpls, Marion
County Clerk, Traﬃc Ticket Payment Center: FAQ (noting that the “Traﬃc Court does not oﬀer payment plans”),
https://www.biz.indygov.org/pdfs/TraﬃcTicketFAQs.pdf (last visited Nov. 28, 2015).
92

My Driver’s License is Suspended . . . What Can I Do?, Ind. Legal Services, http://www.indianalegalservices.org/
node/157/my-drivers-license-suspendedwhat-can-i-do (last updated Oct. 2015); Reinstatement Fee Waiver: Things
You Need to Do, Indpls Bar Ass’n, http://www.indybar.org/_files/reinstatement%20fee%20waivers.pdf.
93

See, e.g., Steven Raphael & Lorien Rice, Car Ownership, Employment, and Earnings, 52 J. Urb. Econ. 109 (2002);
Tami Gurley & Donald Bruce, The Eﬀects of Car Access on Employment Outcomes for Welfare Recipients, 58 J. Urb.
Econ. 250 (2005).
94

Access to Driving, The Mobility Agenda, http://www.mobilityagenda.org/home/page/Access-to-Driving.aspx (last
visited Nov. 9, 2015); see also Griego, States Are Taking Away Your Driver’s License, supra; and Gustitus, Simmons &
Waller, supra.

2.1.1. Lack of Access to Reliable Alternative Forms of Transportation
Driver’s license suspensions and enhanced reinstatement fees diminish job opportunities for
many people, especially where there is insuﬃcient or unreliable alternative forms of
transportation. Central Indiana in particular provides an extremely low level of mobility for those
without regular access to a car. Between 2000 and 2007, The Mobility Agenda, a nonprofit
policy research group focused on community economic growth, conducted surveys across ten
U.S. cities, including Indianapolis, collecting data on car ownership, license holding, and
employment.95 The results of the survey, illustrated in the charts below, indicate a strong
correlation between these data. In Indianapolis, while approximately 81% of employed
respondents have a car, only 57% of unemployed respondents have one.96

Employed Respondents
(Indpls, 2000-07)

Unemployed Respondents (Indpls,
2000-07)

11%
30%

9%
8%

42%

72%

16%
14%

No license, no car
License, no car

Car, no license
License and car

No license, no car
License, no car

Car, no license
License and car

In major metropolitan areas such as Chicago, New York, or Washington, D.C., a person with a
suspended license could reasonably rely on public transportation for commuting to work. For
many Hoosiers, however, mass transit rarely aﬀords such an opportunity. A 2010 report from
the Central Indiana Transit Task Force observes that “the current public transportation system

Margy Waller, The Mobility Agenda, Making Connections: Indianapolis (2015), available at http://
www.mobilityagenda.org/MakingConnectionsIndianapolis.pdf?attredirects=0.
96

Id.

is inadequate for the community’s transportation needs. For those without regular access to a
car, access to jobs, medical care, and leisure are incomplete, ineﬃcient and inconvenient.”97

IndyGo, the city’s bus system, runs infrequently, often requiring passengers to wait 30 minutes
or longer between pickups.98 According to a 2009 study conducted by IndyGo and the
Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Organization, a majority of passengers use multiple buses
to complete a one-way trip; only 38% have a “one-seat” ride while nearly half use two.99
Transfers mean the possibility of multiple 30-minute waits for a trip to work and back. A more
recent study conducted by IndyGo indicated that its buses were late in arriving at their
destination nearly a quarter of the time. 100

2.1.2. Lack of Access to Jobs: The Challenge of “Spatial Mismatch”
Changes in the commercial and residential landscape in the last century dramatically altered
the transportation needs of American workers. By the 1950s, suburbanization had separated
many workers from employment opportunities by distance and travel time.101 Changing
economic conditions during the late 1990s and early 2000s resulted in increased
decentralization of employment throughout the United States. A 2009 study of the spatial
location of private-sector jobs in 98 of the country’s largest metropolitan areas by employment
revealed that an average of only 21% of employees work within three miles of downtown while
more than double that share, 45%, work more than 10 miles away from the city center.102 This
resulted from an increasing shift in jobs in nearly every major industry away from the city center
in recent years.103 Between 1998 and 2006, the City of Indianapolis, for example (which
exceeded the national average in employment decentralization), the share of jobs within three
miles of the urban core dropped by 3% (from 24% to 21%); the share of jobs between three

Central Ind. Transit Task Force, Summary Report on Transportation Alternatives in Central Indiana 3 (2010)
[ h e r e i n a f t e r C I T T F R e p o r t ] , a v a i l a b l e a t h t t p : / / w w w. i n d y c o n n e c t . o rg / U s e r F i l e s / d o c s /
CentralIndianaTransitTaskForceReport.pdf. See also IIWF Report, supra, at 45 (indicating that “[n]o counties in
Indiana had rates of public transportation use among work commuters that meet” the threshold percentage of the
working population to be considered adequate).
98

Id.

Indpls Metro. Planning Org. & IndyGo, On-Board Passenger Travel Survey 38 (2009), available at http://
www.indympo.org/Data/SurveyData/Documents/On-Board_Survey_Final_Report_4.8.10.pdf.
100

IndyGo, Indpls Pub. Transportation Corp., Title VI Program 12 (2014), available at http://www.indygo.net/wpcontent/uploads/2015/01/IndyGo_Title_VI_Program_2014-01-10_Clean_Version_reduced.pdf.
101

Gustitus, Simmons & Waller, supra, at 4.

102

Elizabeth Kneebone, Job Sprawl Revisited: The Changing Geography of Metropolitan Employment 1 (2009),
available at http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2009/04/06-job-sprawl-kneebone.
103

Id.

and ten miles fell by 2.9% (48.3% to 45.4%); and the share of jobs beyond ten miles grew by
5.9% (27.8% to 33.6%).104

Shift in Geographic Distribution of Jobs (1998-2006).
6.0%
4.5%
3.0%
1.5%
0.0%
-1.5%
-3.0%

Within 3 Miles of City Center
Indianapolis

3-10 Miles of City Center

Beyond 10 Miles of City Center

National

This “spatial mismatch” has had a disproportionate eﬀect on low-income populations
concentrated in inner cities and rural areas with little access to jobs.105 Again, in central
Indiana, mass transit provides few options for workers commuting from urban centers to the
surrounding suburbs, where a growing number of jobs are available. 106 In fact, IndyGo is limited
to the borders of Marion County, providing no connectivity for commuters traveling to and from
jobs and other activities that lie beyond the County.107

104

Id. at 18. The national average stood at -2.7%, -0.1%, and +2.8% respectively. Id. at 17-19.

105

Waller, High Cost, supra, at 5; Castile, Driver’s License, supra, at 120.

106

See Lindsey Erdody, Retailers, Restaurants Struggle to Find Staﬀ in North ‘Burbs, Indpls Business J. (Nov. 7,

2015) (pointing to “Hamilton County’s extremely low unemployment rate, lack of public transportation and general
economic growth” as factors contributing to the low number of job applicants despite the growing need for their
services. Notably, the president of Carmel’s Chamber of Commerce stated that “We’re presuming that anyone who
wants to work for us must drive a car to get there.”), http://www.ibj.com/articles/55686-retail-restaurants-struggleto-find-staﬀ-in-northern-suburbs.
107

CITTF Report, supra, at 8. See also Erdody, Retailers, supra (noting that one employer “recently hired an
employee who takes a bus to 96th and Meridian streets, then rides a bike three miles north”).

2.1.3. Welfare to Work: The Barrier to Economic Self-Suﬃciency
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 marked a major
shift in national welfare policy.108 The measure—which created the Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) program and vests key decisional authority in the states—replaced the
existing entitlement scheme for low-income families with one that includes work requirements
and time limits on assistance. With the increasing suburbanization of jobs, welfare recipients—
a majority of whom, as indicated above, live in either central cities or rural areas—face
significant barriers in making the transition from welfare to work. 109 Driver’s license
suspensions for non-highway safety reasons, combined with exorbitant reinstatement fees,
exacerbate these barriers. In addition, this directly undermines the state policy of ensuring that
welfare recipients achieve economic self-suﬃciency.110

2.2. Impact on State Government
2.2.1. Costs to Law Enforcement and the BMV
Police oﬃcers spend countless hours citing, arresting, and processing persons found driving
on suspended licenses. This not only imposes a significant strain on law enforcement budgets
and other resources, but also detracts from highway and public safety priorities.111 A 2013
study conducted by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators raises these
very concerns:

108

Pub. L. No. 104-193, 110 Stat. 2105.

109

U.S. Gov’t Accountability Oﬀ., Welfare Reform: Transportation’s Role in Moving From Welfare to Work 1 (1998),
available at http://www.gao.gov/assets/230/225766.pdf. See also Gurley & Bruce, Eﬀects of Car Access, supra at
250.
110

Indiana Manpower and Comprehensive Training (IMPACT), a component of the state’s Welfare-to-Work program,
“seeks to address a broad range of barriers that may inhibit individuals from seeking and maintaining employment.”
Ind. Family & Soc. Serv. Admin., IMPACT (Job Training) (last visited Nov. 23, 2015), http://www.in.gov/fssa/dfr/
2682.htm; see also, Ind. Family & Soc. Serv. Admin., State Plan: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
Block Grant 7 (2014), available at http://www.in.gov/fssa/files/Indiana_TANF_State_Plan_eﬀ_Jan_2014.pdf.
111

AAMVA Report, supra, at 23-24; Best Practices Guide, supra, at 2. There is a common assumption among motor
vehicle agencies, law enforcement, and others that suspended motorists who continue driving pose significant
traﬃc safety risks. For example, a 2014 investigative report by News Channel 13 referred to (without citing) a “recent
study” showing “suspended drivers are almost four times as likely to be involved in a fatal crash.” Cat Anderson,
More Indiana Drivers Are Suspended, Uninsured, WTHR News (Feb. 25, 2014), http://www.wthr.com/story/
11480121/more-indiana-drivers-are-suspended-uninsured. The report is misleading, however, in that it fails to
distinguish between motorists suspended for driving reasons and those suspended for non-driving reasons. In a
recent study, the National Highway Traﬃc Safety Administration reported that, nationally, “[l]ess than 1 percent
(0.09%) of drivers suspended for non-driving reasons . . . are involved in a crash while their driver’s license is
suspended.” AAMVA Report, supra, at iv. Comparatively, “over 3 percent (3.4%) of drivers suspended for driving
reasons . . . are involved in a crash while their driver’s license is suspended.” Id.

The fact that a driver may be suspended for a non-highway safety
related violation makes no diﬀerence in the action taken by the
oﬃcer. When a law enforcement oﬃcer encounters a suspended
driver, their ability to help ensure the safety of drivers on the
roadways and their availability to respond to calls for service are
reduced. The oﬃcer must take appropriate action for the violation
and later appear in court for adjudication of the ticket(s). While
the oﬃcer is in court, there may be little or no enforcement
presence in their patrol area. Oﬃcers are made unavailable for
911 responses, crash investigation, criminal interdiction, and
other enforcement activities, potentially increasing the threat to
public safety.112

The BMV itself faces similar burdens. The agency invests significant time and resources in
processing non-highway safety violations. Administrative tasks, to name a few, include
document analysis and data entry; issuance of suspensions, probationary licenses, and
reinstatements; responses to subpoenas; and preparation of mail verifications—all of which
detracts from (what should be) the BMV’s core mission of ensuring public safety by removing
dangerous drivers from the road.113

2.2.2. Costs to the Court System
Traﬃc violations represent the largest number of charges prosecuted in courts throughout
Indiana. According to the National Center for State Courts, Court Statistics Project, there were
699,983 incoming traﬃc cases reported by Indiana courts in 2013.114 The table on the following
page displays Indiana’s statewide incoming caseload for each of the five major categories of
cases decided from 2012 to 2013.

Cases involving adjudication of license suspensions for non-driving violations only add to
congested court dockets.115 This problem is made worse by the fact that, despite the
sanctions imposed, many people continue driving with suspended licenses. As the Franklin
City Court clerk noted in a 2014 interview, "[o]ver 50 percent of the docket is driving while
suspended. More people are getting arrested. I think more people are taking chances and just
driving trying to get around.”116
112

Best Practices Guide, supra, at 13.

113

Id.

114

Trial Court Caseloads, 2013 Overview: Indiana, Nat’l Ctr. for State Courts, Court Statistics Project, http://

www.ncsc.org.
115

Best Practices Guide, supra, at 13.

116

Anderson, More Indiana Drivers Are Suspended, Uninsured, supra.

IN D IA NA CO U RT S
CA S E L OA D S U M M A RY
A caseload is the sum of all incoming cases reported by the state, and comprise newly filed, reopened, and
reactivated cases. Source: National Center for State Courts, Court Statistics Project.

2012

17.9%

2013

6.4%
3.0%

26.8%

18.0%

27.2%

45.9%

Domestic Relations
Civil

Juvenile
Criminal

6.3%
3.2%

45.2%

Traffic

C A S E L O A D B Y C AT E G O R Y
Category

2012

2013

Domestic Relations

106,358

98,179

Juvenile

50,687

49,368

Traffic

765,765

699,983

Civil

447,351

421,456

Criminal

299,134

278,359

Total

1,669,295

1,547,345

3. Recommendations
As a matter of public policy, state motor vehicle laws should be limited to (1) establishing
standards for driving competency, (2) ensuring public safety by removing dangerous drivers
from the road, and (3) penalizing those found guilty of reckless or negligent driving. To that end,
Indiana should, to the greatest extent possible, discontinue the use of license suspensions as a
revenue-generating measure and tool for punishing behavior unrelated to driver safety.

Indiana drivers should still be held accountable for violating traﬃc laws. However, certain
measures may help lessen the economic burden on the state’s most financially vulnerable
residents while increasing their mobility and access to jobs. The following recommendations
include specific policies or programs instituted in other states to serve as illustrative examples.
For further guidance, the appendix contains several pieces of model legislation.

3.1. Build Public Support for Policy Reform
As a preliminary matter, it is critical to develop public understanding and support for policies
that recognize the importance of access to driving. Absent an eﬀective communication
strategy, the public may prove resistant, claiming that certain policy solutions amount to
government “handouts,” a “get out of jail free card” for lawbreakers, or an improper use of tax
dollars.117

3.2. End the Use of License Suspensions as Tool for Revenue
Collection
Indiana should end the use of license suspensions as a collection tool for citation-related debt,
allowing more people to work and pay their financial obligations. Suspensions should only be
used as a means of keeping unsafe drivers oﬀ the road. Additionally, Indiana courts must
ensure that access to the courts do not depend on income; individuals should not have to pay
up front to get a hearing, pay additional surcharges in settling their debt, or face the possibility
of private debt collection.

3.3. End the Use of License Suspensions for Non-Driving
Related Offenses
3.3.1. Generally
Driver’s license suspensions should penalize drivers for highway safety-related oﬀenses only.
Suspensions for oﬀenses unrelated to driver safety—such as for delinquency in child support
payments or controlled substance violations—impose additional economic hardships on
oﬀender’s and unduly burden the courts, the BMV, and the criminal justice system. To minimize
117

Gustitus, Simmons & Waller, supra, at 14.

these burdens while maintaining driver accountability, Indiana should revise its current laws to
more appropriately reflect standards of ensuring public safety by removing dangerous drivers
from the road.

3.3.2. Child Support Arrearages
Child support suspensions should be used as a last resort when other enforcement tools fail to
result in payment. Although federal law requires states to suspend the driver’s licenses of those
who who fail to pay child support, the states can determine the criteria for such suspensions.
In establishing payment plans, child support agencies in Indiana should consider various
factors, including whether the suspension would impede access to work, impede the best
interests of the child, or cause undue economic hardship.118

Policymakers may also consider oﬀering an exemption, “amnesty,” or extended grace period
for those non-custodial parents who are unable to pay. For a period during 2015, the
Huntington County Prosecuting Attorney’s Oﬃce instituted an “amnesty” program for driver’s
suspended for failing to pay child support. Suspended drivers could reinstate their license if
they made a “lump sum payment equivalent to one full month of current child support, plus the
weekly amount the court has ordered to pay towards their arrearage.” This amount was “in
addition to their regular weekly payments.”119

In the State of Washington, the DMV may not suspend the licenses of a non-custodial parent if,
upon the parent’s timely request for an adjudicatory hearing, an administrative law judge
determines that the suspension unduly burdens the parent who has otherwise demonstrated a
“good faith eﬀort to comply” with the child support order. In making a determination, and in
formulating a payment schedule, the judge considers “the responsible parent's payment
history, ability to pay, and eﬀorts to find and maintain gainful employment.”120

118

If a non-custodial parent with a suspended license “proves to the satisfaction” of the child support agency that

“public transportation is unavailable for travel” (1) to and from that parent’s regular place of employment during
working hours, (2) to and from his or her place of worship, or (3) to engage in court-ordered parenting time, “the Title
IV-D agency may order the [BMV] to issue . . . a restricted driving permit.” Ind. Code § 31-25-4-33(d). However, the
parent only has 20 days from the date of suspension notice to contest the agency’s determination and the “only
basis for contesting an order issued under this section is a mistake of fact.” Ind. Code § 31-25-4-33(b).
119

Prosecuting Attorney’s Oﬃce Oﬀers License Amnesty Program, Huntington County TAB (Nov. 5, 2015), http://
www.huntingtoncountytab.com/community/35918/prosecuting-attorney%E2%80%99s-oﬃce-oﬀers-licenseamnesty-program. The Allen County Prosecutor’s Oﬃce oﬀered a similar program for one day in June of 2015.
Green, supra, Prosecutor Oﬀers Driver’s License Amnesty Day.
120

Wash. Rev. Code § 74.20A.322.

3.3.3. Controlled Substance Violations
As noted above, federal law requires states to suspend or revoke the driver’s licenses of
anyone convicted of a drug oﬀense. However, states can opt out of this requirement without
losing federal highway funds by submitting (1) a certified statement by the Governor opposing
enforcement of the law, and (2) a resolution by the state legislature expressing opposition to
the law.121 To date, 36 states have passed resolutions in opposition to the Act; two others
appear slated to do the same.122

3.4. Allow for a Reinstatement Fee “Amnesty”
Between September 15 and November 16, 2015, Indiana’s “Tax Amnesty” program gave
individuals and businesses an opportunity to pay past-due base taxes free of penalty, interest,
and collection fees. Tax liabilities, for approximately 40 diﬀerent tax types for periods ending
prior to January 1, 2013, were eligible to participate in the program. The Indiana Department of
Revenue identified nearly $545 million in outstanding liabilities as eligible for collection during
the period. Of the outstanding taxes collected, portions were allocated to the Indiana Regional
Cities Development Fund, the Indiana Department of Transportation, and the State general
fund.123

A similar amnesty program should be implemented to reduce or eliminate driver’s license
reinstatement fees for those unable to aﬀord them and who pay their base traﬃc citations.
Current policies result if millions of uncollected debt. As noted above, the BMV in 2014
reported a total of $131 million in unpaid license reinstatement fees. 124 By encouraging drivers
to pay their parking tickets and other traﬃc infractions, the state may recoup a significant
portion of these losses and get drivers back behind the wheel legally. The eﬀectiveness of such
a program depends on the extent of its publicity and a meaningful timeframe for suspended
drivers to apply.

For a six-month period prior to the increase in reinstatement fees on January 1, 2015,
individuals suspended for driving without insurance qualified for a significant reduction in these
fees. A sunset provision under the current motor vehicles law, which expired on January 1,
2015, authorized the BMV to “negotiate, with an individual whose driver's license or driving
121

23 CFR 192.4(c)(2).

122

Maura Ewing, Why Restoring Driving Rights to
progress of bills in Massachusetts and Ohio),
massachusetts-will-restore-driving-rights-inmates;
Suspensions for Drug Oﬀenders, Commonwealth

Former Inmates Matters, Nat’l J. (Jan. 22, 2016) (discussing
http://www.nationaljournal.com/next-america/criminal-justice/
see also Steven W. Tompkins, Ending Driver’s License
(Jan. 11, 2016), http://commonwealthmagazine.org/criminal-

justice/ending-drivers-license-suspension-for-drug-oﬀenders.
123

Tax Amnesty ’15, Ind. Dep’t of Revenue, http://www.in.gov/dor/amnesty (last visited Jan. 20, 2016).

124

Fiscal Impact Statement, supra, at 2.

privileges were suspended before July 1, 2014, a reinstatement fee that is lower than the
reinstatement fee specified in subsection (a).” 125 Policymakers should renew this section of the
law, providing suspended motorists with a similar relief or “amnesty” period, on an annual
basis, to either pay their reinstatement fees at a reduced rate or apply for a waiver.

Other states provide for similar measures. Recently-enacted legislation in Arkansas provides
that between Jan. 1, 2016, and June 30, 2016, a person whose driving privileges are
suspended or revoked, solely as a result of outstanding driver's license reinstatement fees, is
eligible to pay a one-time driver's license reinstatement fee of $100. The person must pay all
costs associated with the suspension and successfully complete a specialty court program. 126

In 2015, California passed a law implementing a one-time amnesty program from October 1,
2015 to March 31, 2017. Under the program, all infractions qualify for amnesty, including
unpaid tickets and related “failure to appear” violations with an initial payment due date on or
before January 1, 2013. Suspensions related to reckless driving or DUIs are not eligible.
Qualified participants pay no civil assessments and their remaining balances are reduced by 50
to 80% depending on income or receipt of public benefits. The program requires payment of a
$55 driver’s license reinstatement fee and permits courts, counties, and collection agencies to
collect an additional $50 amnesty program fee. 127

3.5. Implement Practical Payment Plans
Monetary sanctions “often place a disproportionate burden on poor individuals who have fewer
resources available to manage debt.”128 Moreover, by neglecting to consider an oﬀender’s
ability to pay, state and local governments—despite increasing reliance on fines and fees as
sources of revenue—often face low rates of debt collection. 129

125

Ind. Code 9-29-10-1(c). The fees listed under subsection (a) were those in eﬀect prior to the increase on January
1, 2015.
126

2015 Ark. Acts 1193 (codified at Ark. Code § 27-16-508); Arkansas House: New Laws Impact Taxes, Drivers
Licenses, Abortions, Magnolia Reporter (Dec. 6, 2015), http://www.magnoliareporter.com/news_and_business/
opinion/article_dde6ca0e-9b12-11e5-9090-b3ba5b19ab1b.html.
127

Traﬃc Tickets / Infractions Amnesty Program, Cal. Courts, http://www.courts.ca.gov/traﬃcamnesty.htm (last
updated Dec. 14, 2015).
128

CEA Brief, supra, at 3.

129

Id. at 5 (pointing to studies in Florida and Maryland); see also Don K. Murphy, Inst. for Ct. Management, Nat’l Ctr.

for State Courts, Why Crime Doesn’t Pay: Examining Felony Collections (analyzing low rates of debt collection in
Florida’s criminal justice system), available at http://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/Education%20and
%20Careers/CEDP%20Papers/2015/Why%20Crime%20Doesnt%20Pay-Examining%20Felony
%20CollectionsMurphy.ashx.

Provisions of the Indiana Code allow for, under specified circumstances and at a court’s
discretion, the payment of certain traﬃc judgments in fixed installments. 130 However, as noted
above, there is little evidence that courts oﬀer, let alone publicize, this option. To mitigate the
financial burden on oﬀenders, and to increase rates of collection, courts should implement
practical payment plans for traﬃc infractions and publish information on these plans—both
online and in print—to increase general public awareness.

West Virginia allows a court to “collect a portion of any costs, fines, fees, forfeitures, restitution
or penalties at the time the amount is imposed by the court so long as the court requires the
balance to be paid in accordance with a payment plan.”131 The plan must specify (1) the total
number of payments to be made, (2) the amounts due for each payment, and (3) the dates on
which payments are due.132 “The written agreement represents the minimum payments and the
last date those payments may be made. The obligor . . . may accelerate the payment schedule
at any time by paying any additional portion of any costs, fines, fees, forfeitures, restitution or
penalties.”133 If the obligor fails to pay within 180 days from the date of judgment, the Division
of Motor Vehicles, upon notice from the court, will suspend the individual’s driver's license
“until all costs, fines, fees, forfeitures, restitution or penalties are paid in full.”134 If, however, the
suspension results from the inability to pay, the obligor may, “if he or she is employed on a fullor part-time basis, petition to the circuit court for an order authorizing him or her to operate a
motor vehicle solely for employment purposes.”135

3.6. Implement Equitable Monetary Sanctions
State policymakers should also consider establishing sliding-scale, or income-based, payment
plans for fines and fees related to traﬃc oﬀenses. These “day fine” programs, as they are often
referred to, consider the severity of the oﬀense and the oﬀender’s ability to pay (rather than a
fixed dollar amount, the fine is typically based on a percentage of the oﬀender’s daily income,
hence the name).136 Research indicates that such systems have the potential to “increase
collection rates, as all defendants should be capable of paying proportional fines, [and] to
increase total fine revenue collected.”137

130

Ind. Code §§ 9-25-6-6, 9-29-10-2, 9-29-10-3.

131

W. Va. Code § 50-3-2a(b).

132

Id.

133

Id.

134

W. Va. Code § 50-3-2a(c)(1).

135

Id.

136

Tina Rosenberg, Instead of Jail, Court Fines Cut to Fit the Wallet, N.Y.Times (Oct. 9, 2015), http://
opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/scaling-fines-to-what-oﬀenders-can-pay.
137

CEA Brief, supra, at 5.

Long used by courts in Europe and Latin America, day fines are not a completely foreign
concept in the United States. To begin with, the system is based on the principle of vertical
equity, the basic standard used to assess the fair distribution of tax burdens in the country.138
In addition, several U.S. jurisdictions have experimented with day fines. 139 For example,
criminal provisions under the Alabama Code include “day fines or means-based fines” in the
continuum of punishments.140 And Oklahoma requires courts to consider day fines when
imposing sentences under the state’s Elderly and Incapacitated Victim’s Protection Program.141
By statute, day fines are “not to exceed fifty percent (50%) of the [oﬀender’s] net wages
earned” and “shall be paid to the local community sentencing system as reparation to the
community.” 142

Several other states experimented with day fine pilot programs during the early 1990s, albeit
with mixed results.143 The primary challenges at the time, according to the Council of
Economic Advisors, “included high start-up costs, personnel training, and complications with
easily accessing income data in the courts.”144 However, by “[r]ecognizing these challenges
and capitalizing on modern technology, new forms of progressive fine systems may be more
successful in today’s digital era.”145 The limited use of day fines in the past also resulted, in
part, from an inhospitable political climate. Today, by contrast, growing bipartisan support for
criminal justice reform has largely supplanted the “lock ‘em up” mentality of the 1980s and
1990s.146

138

Joseph J. Cordes, Vertical Equity, Tax Policy Center, http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/encyclopedia/
Vertical-equity.cfm (last visited Jan. 20, 2016); see also David Orentlicher, Stop Using Traﬃc Violations as Revenue
Source, Indpls Star (May 14, 2015) (“[I]ncome taxes are assessed on a percentage basis rather than at a fixed
amount per person, and income tax rates often increase at higher incomes.), http://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/
2015/05/14/orentlicher-stop-using-traﬃc-violations-revenue-source/27312063.
139

Edwin W. Zedlewski, Nat’l Inst. of Justice, Alternatives to Custodial Supervision: The Day Fine 4-6 (2010)
(discussing programs and statutory provisions in Alabama; Alaska; Oklahoma; Richmond County, N.Y.; Milwaukee,
Wisc.; Maricopa County, Ariz.; Polk County, Iowa; Bridgeport, Conn; and several counties in Oregon), available at
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdﬃles1/nij/grants/230401.pdf.
140

Code of Ala. § 12-25-32.

141

22 Okla. Stat. § 991a(A)(y).

142

Id.

143

Susan Turner & Joan Petersilia, Rand Corp., Day Fines in Four U.S. Jurisdictions iii (1996) (discussing temporary
programs funded by the U.S. Dep’t of Justice during the early 1990s), available at https://csgjusticecenter.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/07/1996-RAND-day-fines-4-BJA-pilot-sites.pdf.
144

CEA Issues Brief, supra, at 6.

145

Id.

146

Rosenberg, Instead of Jail, supra.

Despite the lack of broad reception in the United States, day fines oﬀer several benefits: (1)
they are punitive in nature for both the rich and the poor, thus serving as an eﬀective deterrent
for all potential oﬀenders; (2) they reduce administrative burdens on courts, law enforcement,
and state agencies; (3) they impose fewer costs to the criminal justice system by diverting
oﬀenders from expensive forms of custody, probation, or parole; and (4) because of their
income proportionality, day fines are collected at higher rates than with traditional flat fines. 147

3.7. Allow for Non-Pecuniary Penalties in Lieu of Fines or Fees
State policymakers should vest discretionary authority in the courts to oﬀer community service
hours, in lieu of fines or fees, to reduce the economic burden on oﬀenders who must drive to
work or access healthcare and other essential services. This alternative to license suspensions
allows the individual to legally drive, and significantly reduces the burden on law enforcement,
courts, and the BMV. Moreover, it presents an opportunity for the oﬀender to network and
engage in the local community, which benefits directly from his or her services.

In 2014, Michigan lawmakers enacted legislation allowing state residents to pay for “Driver
Responsibility Fees” by performing community service. The legislation permitted drivers, within
45 days of application, to “engage in 10 hours of community service as an alternative to paying
that fee or any unpaid portion of that fee.”148 The program oﬃcially ended on December 31,
2015; however, successive legislation ultimately phases out all Driver Responsibility Fees by
2019. 149

Under Seattle’s Relicensing Program, low-income drivers with suspended driving privileges
resulting from unpaid fines or failure to respond to a ticket or appear for a hearing may have
their charges dismissed either by establishing a payment plan or performing community
service. The program is oﬀered on a one-time basis and participants must not have been
involved in an accident or charged with a DUI. The program is administered by a Relicensing
Coordinator who, at an initial intake hearing, screens defendants for eligibility, enrolls
participants, and explains to them the details of the program. 150

147

Zedlewski, The Day Fine, supra, at 6-7; Rosenberg, Instead of Jail, supra.

148

2014 Mich. Pub. Act No. 283. See also Gov. Rick Snyder Signs Bill Allowing Residents to Volunteer as Payment
for Driver Responsibility Fees, State of Michigan (Sept. 23, 2014), http://www.michigan.gov/som/
0,4669,7-192-53480_56421-338013--,00.html.
149

2014 Mich. Pub. Act No. 250.

150

Relicensing, Seattle Municipal Court, http://www.seattle.gov/courts/relicensing/relicensing.htm (last visited Jan.
4, 2016).

3.8. Provide Special Auto Insurance Policies for Low-Income
Drivers
In addition to facing steep fines and fees, many low-income drivers have a diﬃcult time paying
for car insurance. A few states oﬀer assistance programs that make auto insurance more
aﬀordable for low-income drivers. These programs are separate from the “residual” or “shared”
market programs in each state that guarantee basic coverage for “high risk” drivers (i.e., those
with a poor driving record or who live in areas where the risk of theft or vandalism is
substantial).151

The State of California oﬀers an insurance program for low-income drivers, covering “those
making less than $60,625 per year for a family of four – who are at least 19 and own a car
worth less than $25,000.” 152 The program is self-funding and drivers pay between $213 and
$472 depending on what part of the state they live in, but the liability limits are lower than
California state minimums.

New Jersey’s Special Automobile Insurance Policy is an initiative to help make limited auto
insurance coverage available to drivers who are eligible for Federal Medicaid with
hospitalization. The policy, which costs $365 a year, covers accident-related emergency
medical services, including treatment of serious brain and spinal cord injuries up to $250,000
and provides a $10,000 death benefit. The policy does not include liability coverage (for bodily
injury or property damage) or collision and comprehensive coverage (for damages to the
insured’s car).153

3.9. Improve Access to Indiana’s “Specialized Driving
Privilege” Program
The success of Indiana’s “specialized driving privilege” program depends on the number of
participating eligible drivers. Participation ultimately depends on the extent of the program’s
public knowledge. Yet a basic online search reveals little in the way of promotion or guidance.
To mitigate this informational gap, traﬃc courts and the BMV should publish and disseminate
basic materials, both online and in print, in an eﬀort to improve meaningful access to the
program.

151

Holbrook, supra; Residual Markets, Insurance Information Inst. (Mar. 2015), http://www.iii.org/issue-update/
residual-markets.
152

Cal. Insurance Code § 11629.7. See also California's Low Cost Auto Insurance Program, Cal. Dep’t of Insurance,
http://www.insurance.ca.gov/01-consumers/105-type/95-guides/01-auto/lca (last visited Jan. 24, 2016); and
Holbrook, Help With Car Insurance, supra.
153

Special Automobile Insurance Policy (SAIP), State of New Jersey Dep’t of Banking & Insurance, http://
www.state.nj.us/dobi/division_consumers/insurance/saip.htm (last visited Jan. 24, 2016).

3.10. Enable Greater Public Access to BMV Data
In 2010, the State of Indiana launched the Indiana Transparency Portal. The ITP—which
provides a range of information on budgets and expenditures, state contracts, agency
performance measures and other data—is designed to give taxpayers an inside look at state
government spending and operations. The ITP has been recognized, and rightfully so, as one
of the country’s best state government websites for its high standards of transparency.154 The
development and release of Indiana’s Management and Performance Hub in 2014 builds on
this openness principle by increasing accessibility to key financial data.155

Despite these accomplishments, however, there are significant disparities in the types of State
data publicly available.156 This informational lacuna includes records from the BMV, namely
statistics on driver’s license suspensions, reinstatements, revenue generated from fines and
fees, and related data. The lack of transparency inhibits thorough analysis of the eﬀects of
government policy and, ultimately, the potential for reform where it may be needed.

Fortunately, the 2016 BMV omnibus bill contains provisions for a new chapter in Indiana’s
motor vehicles law relating to public access to agency records. Under the proposed legislation,
“[a]ll records of the bureau,” with certain exceptions, “. . . must be open to public
inspection . . . in accordance with [Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act].”157 Records
include data on driver’s license “suspensions, revocations, or reinstatements.”158 Moreover, the
measure expressly allows for the “compilation of specific information requested for . . .
research or statistical reporting purposes.”159

154

Evaluation of Indiana State Website, BallotPedia (last visited Nov. 20, 2015), http://ballotpedia.org/
Evaluation_of_Indiana_state_website.
155

Jessica Hughes, Indiana Management and Performance Hub Takes Transparency to the Next Level, GovTech
(Sept. 11, 2014), http://www.govtech.com/data/Indiana-Management-and-Performance-Hub-Takes-Transparencyto-the-Next-Level.html.
156

For a recent analysis of the State’s overall poor performance in accommodating public access to information, see
Ctr. for Public Integrity, Indiana Gets D- Grade in 2015 State Integrity Investigation, http://www.publicintegrity.org/
2015/11/09/18387/indiana-gets-d-grade-2015-state-integrity-investigation (last updated Nov. 12, 2015).
157

H.R. 1087, 119th Gen. Assemb., 2d Reg. Sess. § 179 (Ind. 2016).

158

Id.

159

Id.

160

Ind. Code § 5-14-3-1.

Source

A court may collect a portion of any costs, fines, fees, forfeitures, restitution or penalties at the time the amount is imposed by the
court so long as the court requires the balance to be paid in accordance with a payment plan.

W. Va. Code § 50-3-2a(b)-(c)(1)

MODEL LEGISLATION

Summary

Payment Plans

Text of
Legislation

(a) A magistrate court may accept credit cards in payment of all costs, fines, fees, forfeitures, restitution or penalties in accordance
with rules promulgated by the Supreme Court of Appeals. Any charges made by the credit company shall be paid by the person
responsible for paying the cost, fine, forfeiture or penalty.

(b) Unless otherwise required by law, a magistrate court may collect a portion of any costs, fines, fees, forfeitures, restitution or
penalties at the time the amount is imposed by the court so long as the court requires the balance to be paid in accordance with a
payment plan which specifies: (1) The number of payments to be made; (2) the dates on which the payments are due; and (3) the
amounts due for each payment. The written agreement represents the minimum payments and the last date those payments may be
made. The obligor or the obligor's agent may accelerate the payment schedule at any time by paying any additional portion of any
costs, fines, fees, forfeitures, restitution or penalties.

(c) (1) If any costs, fines, fees, forfeitures, restitution or penalties imposed by the magistrate court in a criminal case are not paid
within one hundred eighty days from the date of judgment and the expiration of any stay of execution, the magistrate court clerk or,
upon judgment rendered on appeal, the circuit clerk shall notify the Commissioner of the Division of Motor Vehicles of the failure to
pay: Provided, That in a criminal case in which a nonresident of this state is convicted of a motor vehicle violation defined in section
three-a, article three, chapter seventeen-b of this code, the appropriate clerk shall notify the Division of Motor Vehicles of the failure to
pay within eighty days from the date of judgment and expiration of any stay of execution. Upon notice, the Division of Motor Vehicles
shall suspend any privilege the person defaulting on payment may have to operate a motor vehicle in this state, including any driver’s
license issued to the person by the Division of Motor Vehicles, until all costs, fines, fees, forfeitures, restitution or penalties are paid in
full. The suspension shall be imposed in accordance with the provisions of section six, article three, chapter seventeen-b of this code:
Provided, That any person who has had his or her license to operate a motor vehicle in this state suspended pursuant to this
subsection and his or her failure to pay is based upon inability to pay, may, if he or she is employed on a full- or part-time basis,
petition to the circuit court for an order authorizing him or her to operate a motor vehicle solely for employment purposes. Upon a
showing satisfactory to the court of inability to pay, employment and compliance with other applicable motor vehicle laws, the court
shall issue an order granting relief.

Summary

Source

Between Jan. 1, 2016, and June 30, 2016, a person whose driving privileges are suspended or revoked solely as a result of
outstanding driver's license reinstatement fees is eligible to pay a one-time driver's license reinstatement fee of $100 if the
person has paid all costs, fines and fees associated with his driver's license suspension and has successfully completed a
specialty court program.

Ark. Code § 27-16-508

Reinstatement Fee Reductions

Text of
Legislation

(a) (1) The Office of Driver Services shall collect a reinstatement fee of one hundred dollars ($100), to be multiplied by the
number of administrative orders to suspend, revoke, or cancel a driver's license . . . .
(2) (A) If a person's driving privileges are suspended or revoked solely as a result of outstanding driver's license
reinstatement fees imposed under the laws of this state, the office shall collect only one (1) reinstatement fee of one hundred
dollars ($100) to cover all administrative orders to suspend, revoke, or cancel a driver's license for a person ordered to pay a
reinstatement fee . . . that were in existence on or before January 1, 2016, if a district court or circuit court verifies to the office
that the person has:
(i) Paid all other court costs, fines, and fees associated with the criminal offense that led to his or her driver's license
suspension; and
(ii) Successfully completed one (1) of the following:
(a) A court-ordered diversion program;
(b) A drug court program;
(c) A diversion program for veterans;
(d) A preadjudication probation; or
(e) Any other court-ordered program designed to rehabilitate the person.
(B) Subdivision (a)(2)(A) of this section does not apply to:
(i) A reinstatement fee ordered under:
(a) Section 5-65-119;
(b) Section 5-65-304; or
(c) Section 5-65-310; or
(ii) A fee ordered to reinstate commercial driving privileges.
(3) A district court or circuit court that operates one (1) of the court programs listed under subdivision (a)(2)(A)(ii) of this
section shall notify the Department of Finance and Administration when a person eligible to have his or her reinstatement fees
reduced under this subsection completes the court program.
(b) The revenues derived from this fee shall be deposited into the State Treasury as special revenues to the credit of the
Department of Arkansas State Police Fund.
(c) The fee under this section is supplemental to and in addition to any fee imposed under § 5-65-119, § 5-65-304, § 5-65-310,
or §27-16-808.

Source

Alaska Stat. § 12.55.036 (Repealed)

Day Fines

Summary

Certain misdemeanors can be punished with day fines. The statute sets forth a day fine plan that the State Supreme Court should adopt when
assessing the fine, which includes instructions on how to compute the range of units for each class of crime, how to convert the defendant’s
income, and how to collect the money judgment.

Text of
(a) Upon conviction of a misdemeanor, a defendant may be sentenced to pay a day fine as authorized by this section. If a day fine is imposed
Legislation under this section, the defendant may not be sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment, or be placed on probation.
(b) The State Supreme Court shall adopt a day fine plan that includes:
(1) an assessment of the gravity of all misdemeanor offenses, which assessment must include the existence of prior offenses, and the
assignment of presumptive penalties to them in day fine units within the following ranges:
(A) for class A and unclassified misdemeanors, not to exceed 365-day fine units;
(B) for class B misdemeanors, not to exceed 90-day fine units;
(2) a schedule of the presumptive day fine penalties;
(3) procedures for a court to increase or decrease the presumptive day fine penalties if the court finds the existence of an
aggravating factor or a mitigating factor;
(4) a table for the conversion of a defendant’s actual, potential, or estimated gross income, less one-third for a defendant above the federal
poverty guideline as determined by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and less one-half for a defendant below the federal poverty
guideline into net daily income amounts; the table must include adjustments for the number of dependents actually supported by the defendant;
(5) procedures for a court to gather information about the defendant's occupation, actual, estimated, and potential income, number of
dependents, and other facts necessary or relevant to sentencing a person to a day fine; a court may order the production of the financial or other
records of a person it determines to be relevant to a determination under this section; the procedures must include a requirement that the facts
shall be received
(A) under oath by the defendant; or
(B) in a writing or recording that bears notice that false statements made in it are punishable by law; and
(6) other information the court determines to be necessary for implementing the day fine plan.
(c) The amount of a day fine shall be the product of the net daily income of the defendant, adjusted for the number of dependents actually
supported by the defendant, times the day fine penalty. When imposing a sentence of a day fine, the court shall
(1) state on the record the
(A) presumptive day fine penalty for the offense, and whether the court is adjusting the presumptive day fine penalty for the
existence of aggravating or mitigating factors;
(B) net daily income of the income of the defendant, adjusted for the number of dependents actually supported by the
defendant; and
(C) amount of the day fine;
(2) make written findings of the facts considered in
(A) finding the existence of aggravating or mitigating factors and in assigning a value to those factors; and
(B) determining the defendant's gross and daily net incomes.
(d) When imposing a sentence of a day fine, the court may permit the payment of the day fine in specified installments or within a certain period of
time, provided the entire day fine is paid within 180 days of imposition.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abell Foundation, A License to a Better Life, 16 Abell Rep. No. 5 (Nov.-Dec. 2003), available at
http://www.abell.org/sites/default/files/publications/arn1103.pdf.

Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center, Motor Vehicles Aﬀordability and Fairness Task Force:
Final Report (2006), available at http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/pdf/About/AFTF_final_02.pdf.

American Ass’n of Motor Vehicle Administrators, Best Practices Guide to Reducing Suspended
Drivers (2013), available at http://www.aamva.org/Suspended-and-Revoked-Drivers-WorkingGroup.

American Ass’n of Motor Vehicle Administrators & Nat’l Highway Traﬃc Safety Administration,
Reasons for Drivers License Suspension, Recidivism and Crash Involvement Among
Suspended/Revoked Drivers (2009), available at http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=897746.

American Ass’n of State Highway & Transportation Oﬃcials, Commuting in America 2013: The
National Report on Commuting Patterns and Trends (2013), available at http://
traveltrends.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx.

American Const. Society for Law & Pol’y, Driver’s License Suspensions Perpetuate the
Challenges of Criminal Justice Debt, ACSblog (Apr. 30, 2015), http://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/
driver%E2%80%99s-license-suspensions-perpetuate-the-challenges-of-criminal-justice-debt.

Anderson, Cat, More Indiana Drivers Are Suspended, Uninsured, WTHR News (Feb. 25, 2014),
http://www.wthr.com/story/11480121/more-indiana-drivers-are-suspended-uninsured.

Arkansas House: New Laws Impact Taxes, Drivers Licenses, Abortions, Magnolia Reporter
(Dec. 6, 2015), http://www.magnoliareporter.com/news_and_business/opinion/
article_dde6ca0e-9b12-11e5-9090-b3ba5b19ab1b.html.

Bannon, Alicia, Mitali Nagrecha & Rebekah Diller, Brennan Ctr. for Justice, Criminal Justice
Debt: A Barrier to Reentry (2010), available at https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/
criminal-justice-debt-barrier-reentry.

Blumenberg, Evelyn & Margy Waller, Brookings Instit., The Long Journey to Work: A Federal
Transportation Policy for Working Families (2002), available at http://www.brookings.edu/~/
media/research/files/reports/2003/7/transportation-waller/20030801_waller.pdf.

Brar, Sukhvir S., Cal. Dep’t of Motor Vehicles, Estimation of Fatal Crashes for Suspended/
Revoked and Unlicensed Drivers in California (2012), available at http://www.dol.wa.gov/about/
docs/UnlicensedDriverStudy.pdf.

Brobeck, Stephen, et al., Consumer Federation of America, The High Price of Mandatory Auto
Insurance for Lower Income Households: Premium Price Data for 50 Urban Regions (2014),
available at http://consumerfed.org/wp-content/uploads/
2010/08/140929_highpriceofmandatoryautoinsurance_cfa.pdf.

Brobeck, Stephen, et al., Consumer Federation of America, The Use of Credit Scores by Auto
Insurers: Adverse Impacts on Low- and Moderate-Income Drivers (2013), available at http://
consumerfed.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/
useofcreditscoresbyautoinsurers_dec2013_cfa.pdf.

Cal. Courts, Traﬃc Tickets / Infractions Amnesty Program, http://www.courts.ca.gov/
traﬃcamnesty.htm (last updated Dec. 14, 2015).

Cal. Dep’t of Insurance, California's Low Cost Auto Insurance Program, http://
www.insurance.ca.gov/01-consumers/105-type/95-guides/01-auto/lca (last visited Jan. 24,
2016).

Cal. Dep’t of Motor Vehicles, Estimation of Fatal Crashes for Suspended/Revoked and
Unlicensed Drivers in California (2012), available at http://www.dol.wa.gov/about/docs/
UnlicensedDriverStudy.pdf.

Castile, Meredith, Driver’s License (2015).

Central Ind. Transit Task Force, Summary Report on Transportation Alternatives in Central
Indiana (2010), available at http://www.indyconnect.org/UserFiles/docs/
CentralIndianaTransitTaskForceReport.pdf.

City of Indpls, Marion County Clerk, Traﬃc Ticket Payment Center: FAQ, https://
www.biz.indygov.org/pdfs/TraﬃcTicketFAQs.pdf (last visited Nov. 28, 2015).

City of Indpls, Marion County Superior Court Traﬃc Division, Traﬃc Ticket Payment Options,
http://www.indy.gov/eGov/Courts/Superior/CourtInfo/Pages/Traﬃc-Tickets-Payment-Optionsand-Responses.aspx (last visited Nov. 28, 2015).

Conf. of State Ct. Administrators, Courts Are Not Revenue Centers (2011), available at http://
cosca.ncsc.org/~/media/Microsites/Files/COSCA/Policy%20Papers/
CourtsAreNotRevenueCenters-Final.ashx.

Conf. of State Ct. Administrators, Standards Relating to Court Costs: Fees, Miscellaneous
Charges and Surcharges and A National Survey of Practice (1986), available at
http://cdm16501.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/financial/id/81.

Cordes, Joseph J., Vertical Equity, Tax Policy Center, http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/
encyclopedia/Vertical-equity.cfm (last visited Jan. 20, 2016).

Corkrey, Barbara, Restoring Drivers’ Licenses Removes a Common Legal Barrier to
Employment, 37 Clearinghouse Rev. 523 (2004).

Council of Economic Advisors, Fines, Fees, and Bail: Payments in the Criminal Justice System
that Disproportionately Impact the Poor, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/
files/page/files/1215_cea_fine_fee_bail_issue_brief.pdf.

Ctr. for Public Integrity, Indiana Gets D- Grade in 2015 State Integrity Investigation, http://
www.publicintegrity.org/2015/11/09/18387/indiana-gets-d-grade-2015-state-integrityinvestigation (last updated Nov. 12, 2015).

Dewan, Shaila, Driver’s License Suspensions Create Cycle of Debt, N.Y. Times (Apr. 14, 2015),
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/15/us/with-drivers-license-suspensions-a-cycle-ofdebt.html?_r=0.

Erdody, Lindsey, Retailers, Restaurants Struggle to Find Staﬀ in North ‘Burbs, Indpls Business
J. (Nov. 7, 2015), http://www.ibj.com/articles/55686-retail-restaurants-struggle-to-find-staﬀ-innorthern-suburbs.

Evaluation of Indiana State Website, BallotPedia, http://ballotpedia.org/
Evaluation_of_Indiana_state_website (last visited Nov. 20, 2015).

Ewing, Maura, Why Restoring Driving Rights to Former Inmates Matters, Nat’l J. (Jan. 22,
2016), http://www.nationaljournal.com/next-america/criminal-justice/massachusetts-willrestore-driving-rights-inmates.

Fondacaro, Mark & Dennis Stolle, Revoking Motor Vehicle and Professional Licenses for
Purposes of Child Support Enforcement: Constitutional Challenges and Policy Implications, 5
Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 355 (1996).

Fishman, Nancy & Laurel Dumont, New Jersey Inst. for Social Justice, Getting Back on the
Road: A Manual for Addressing Driver’s License Suspension in New Jersey (2d ed. 2008),
available at http://www.njisj.org/assets/documents/GettingBackontheRoad2008.pdf.

Gov. Rick Snyder Signs Bill Allowing Residents to Volunteer as Payment for Driver
Responsibility Fees, State of Michigan (Sept. 23, 2014), http://www.michigan.gov/som/
0,4669,7-192-53480_56421-338013--,00.html.

Green, Rebecca, Prosecutor Oﬀers Driver’s License Amnesty Day, J. Gazette (June 8, 2015),
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/local/courts/Prosecutor-oﬀers-driver-s-license-amnestyday-7092390.

Griego, Tiena, States Are Taking Away Your Driver’s License in the Name of ‘Social
Engineering,’ Wash. Post (Oct. 22, 2014) (discussing Indiana’s eﬀorts), http://
www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/10/22/4935.

Gurley, Tami & Donald Bruce, The Eﬀects of Car Access on Employment Outcomes for Welfare
Recipient, 58 J. Urb. Econ. 250 (2005).

Gustitus, Sandra, Melody Simmons & Margy Waller, Access to Driving and License Suspension
Policies for the Twenty-First Century Economy (2008), available at http://www.kidscount.org/
news/fes/sep2008/driverslicense.pdf.

Haeberle, Bennett, Change in Law Could Restore Suspended Drivers’ Privileges, WISHTV.com
(June 6, 2014), http://wishtv.com/2014/06/06/change-in-law-could-restore-suspended-driversprivileges.

Hayden, Maureen, Do Driving Penalties Fit the Crime?, Ind. Econ. Digest (Sept. 23, 2013),
http://www.indianaeconomicdigest.org/main.asp?
SectionID=31&subsectionID=135&articleID=71384.

Hayden, Maureen, Indiana Laws That Carry Automatic Loss of Driver's License Under Review,
Ind. Econ. Digest (Sept. 19, 2013), http://www.indianaeconomicdigest.org/main.asp?
SectionID=31&subsectionID=135&articleID=71321.

Higgins, Will, Drivers Are Next: Court Hires Collectors to Pursue $17 Million in Traﬃc Fines,
Indpls Star, Nov. 19, 2005, A1.

Holbrook, Alice, In Some States, Low-Income Drivers Get Help With Car Insurance, NerdWallet
(Apr. 21, 2015), https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/insurance/states-low-income-drivers-carinsurance.

Hoskins, Michael W., Federal Case Challenges Policies of Marion County Traﬃc Court, Ind.
Lawyer (Jan. 6, 2010), http://www.theindianalawyer.com/fining-access-issues-drive-lawsuitfederal-case-challenges-policies-of-marion-county-traﬃc-court/PARAMS/article/22231.

Hughes, Jessica, Indiana Management and Performance Hub Takes Transparency to the Next
Level, GovTech (Sept. 11, 2014), http://www.govtech.com/data/Indiana-Management-andPerformance-Hub-Takes-Transparency-to-the-Next-Level.html.

Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Points, Suspension and Insurance Requirements, in Driver’s
Manual (2015), available at http://www.in.gov/bmv/files/Drivers_Manual_Chapter_3.pdf.

Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Reinstating Your Driving Privileges, http://www.in.gov/bmv/
2845.htm (last visited Jan. 20, 2016).

Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Suspension and Reinstatement, http://www.in.gov/bmv/
2330.htm (last visited Jan. 20, 2016).

Ind. Courts, Press Release, Judicial Qualifications Commission Files Misconduct Charges
Against Marion Superior Court Judge (Jan. 16, 2010), http://www.in.gov/judiciary/press/
2010/0716.html.

Ind. Dep’t of Revenue, Tax Amnesty ’15, http://www.in.gov/dor/amnesty (last visited Jan. 20,
2016).

Ind. Family & Soc. Serv. Admin., IMPACT (Job Training), http://www.in.gov/fssa/dfr/2682.htm
(last visited Nov. 23, 2015).

Ind. Family & Soc. Serv. Admin., State Plan: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
Block Grant (2014), available at http://www.in.gov/fssa/files/
Indiana_TANF_State_Plan_eﬀ_Jan_2014.pdf.

Ind. Oﬃce of Fiscal & Management Analysis, Fiscal Impact Statement Related to H.B. 1059
(2014), available at http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2014/bills/house/1059#document-84e77989.

Indpls Metro. Planning Org., Central Indiana Travel Survey (2011), available at http://
www.indympo.org/Data/SurveyData/Documents/
Central_Indiana_Travel_Survey_2008-2009.pdf.

Indpls Metro. Planning Org. & IndyGo, On-Board Passenger Travel Survey (2009), available at
http://www.indympo.org/Data/SurveyData/Documents/OnBoard_Survey_Final_Report_4.8.10.pdf.

IndyGo, Indpls Pub. Transportation Corp. Title VI Program (2014), available at http://
www.indygo.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/
IndyGo_Title_VI_Program_2014-01-10_Clean_Version_reduced.pdf.

Insurance Information Inst., Average Expenditures for Auto Insurance by State, 2008-2012,
http://www.iii.org/table-archive/21247 (last visited Jan. 3, 2016).

Insurance Information Inst., Residual Markets (Mar. 2015), http://www.iii.org/issue-update/
residual-markets.

Jarosz, Francesca, The Meter is Running on Parking Tickets, Indpls Star (Dec. 2, 2009), http://
www.indystar.com/article/20091202/LOCAL18/912020359.

Kneebone, Elizabeth, Brookings Inst., Job Sprawl Revisited: The Changing Geography of
Metropolitan Employment (2009), available at http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/
2009/04/06-job-sprawl-kneebone.

Marcus, Aaron J., Are The Roads a Safer Place Because Drug Oﬀenders Aren’t on Them?: An
Analysis of Punishing Drug Oﬀenders With License Suspensions, 13 Kan. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 557
(2004).

McKenzie, Brian, U.S. Census American Community Survey, Who Drives to Work? Commuting
by Automobile in the United States: 2013 (2015), available at https://www.census.gov/hhes/
commuting/files/2014/acs-32.pdf.

Murphy, Don K., Inst. for Ct. Management, Nat’l Ctr. for State Courts, Why Crime Doesn’t Pay:
Examining Felony Collections, available at http://www.ncsc.org/~/media/Files/PDF/Education
%20and%20Careers/CEDP%20Papers/2015/Why%20Crime%20Doesnt%20Pay-Examining
%20Felony%20CollectionsMurphy.ashx.

Nat’l Ctr. for State Courts, Court Statistics Project, http://www.ncsc.org.

Nat’l Cooperative Highway Research Prog., A Guide for Addressing Collisions Involving
Unlicensed Drivers with Suspended or Revoked Licenses (2003), available at http://
onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_500v2.pdf.

New Jersey Dep’t of Banking & Insurance, Special Automobile Insurance Policy (SAIP), http://
www.state.nj.us/dobi/division_consumers/insurance/saip.htm (last visited Jan. 24, 2016).

New Jersey Inst. for Social Justice, Roadblock on the Way to Work: Driver’s License
Suspension in New Jersey (2001), available at http://www.njisj.org/assets/documents/
roadblock_report.pdf.

Oddi, Marcia, “A Fine Mess: Drivers Dunned for Tickets From Years Ago,” Ind. Law Blog (July
14, 2013) (summarizing report published in the Bloomington Herald-Times on Monroe County’s
recent debt collection eﬀorts), http://indianalawblog.com/archives/2013/07/
ind_govt_a_fine.html.

Oddi, Marcia, Ind. Courts - A New Indianapolis Parking Citations Court Will Open Tomorrow,
Dec. 1st, Ind. Law Blog (Nov. 30, 2009), http://indianalawblog.com/archives/2009/11/
ind_courts_a_ne.html.

Oﬀ. of the Ind. Pub. Access Counselor, Handbook on Indiana’s Public Access Laws (2011),
available at http://www.in.gov/pac/files/pac_handbook.pdf.

Ogden, Paul K., City Threatens People Who Challenge Their Parking Tickets With $2,500 Fines
For Going to Court; Policy Mirrors That Used in Traﬃc Court, Ogden on Politics (Dec. 5, 2009),
http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2009/12/city-threatens-people-who-challenge.html.

Orentlicher, David, Stop Using Traﬃc Violations as Revenue Source, Indpls Star (May 14, 2015),
http://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/2015/05/14/orentlicher-stop-using-traﬃc-violationsrevenue-source/27312063.

Pawasarat, John & Frank Stetzer, Employment & Training Inst., Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee,
Removing Transportation Barriers to Employment: Assessing Driver’s License and Vehicle
Ownership Patterns of Low-Income Populations: Initial Findings (1998), available at https://
www4.uwm.edu/eti/reprints/DOTbarriers.pdf.

Pearce, Diana M., Ind. Inst. for Working Families, The Self-Suﬃciency Standard for Indiana
2016, available at http://www.incap.org/iiwf/self-suﬃciency/2016-Self-suﬃciency-report.pdf.

Pifer, David & James A. Gramling, Driving Out of Poverty: A Lawyer’s Role in Driver-License
Restoration, 43 Clearinghouse Rev. 14 (2009), http://baylegal.org/wp-content/uploads/TheLegal-Barriers-to-Employment-Project-a-New-Model.pdf.

Pishko, Jessica, Locked Up for Being Poor: How Private Debt Collectors Contribute to a Cycle
of Jail, Unemployment, and Poverty, Atlantic (Feb. 25, 2015), http://www.theatlantic.com/
national/archive/2015/02/locked-up-for-being-poor/386069.

Pool, Jeremy, New Driver’s License Reinstatement Program in Indiana, DMV.com (July 25,
2014), https://www.dmv.com/New-Driver's-License-Reinstatement-Program-inIndiana-520932.

Quinton, Sophie, After Ferguson, States Struggle To Crack Down On Court Debt, Pew Stateline
(Aug. 26, 2015), http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/
2015/08/26/after-ferguson-states-struggle-to-crack-down-on-court-debt.

Raphael, Steven & Lorien Rice, Car Ownership, Employment, and Earnings, 52 J. Urb. Econ.
109 (2002).

Reynolds, Carl & Jeﬀ Hall, Courts Are Not Revenue Centers, Conf. of State Ct. Administrators
(2011), available at http://cosca.ncsc.org/~/media/Microsites/Files/COSCA/Policy%20Papers/
CourtsAreNotRevenueCenters-Final.ashx.

Riggs, Mike, How Driver's License Suspensions Make Poverty Worse, CityLab (Feb. 27, 2014),
http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/02/how-drivers-license-suspensions-make-povertyworse/8510.

Romney, Lee, Driver’s License Suspensions Push Poor Deeper Into Poverty, Report Says, L.A.
Times (Apr. 8, 2015), http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-licensesuspensions-20150408-story.html.

Rosenberg, Tina, Instead of Jail, Court Fines Cut to Fit the Wallet, N.Y.Times (Oct. 9, 2015),
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/scaling-fines-to-what-oﬀenders-can-pay.

Savage, Melissa & James B. Reed, Economic Hardships of Losing a Driver's License, 16
LegisBrief, No. 48 (Nov/Dec 2008), available at http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/
economic-hardships-of-losing-a-drivers-license.aspx.

Seattle Municipal Court, Relicensing, http://www.seattle.gov/courts/relicensing/relicensing.htm
(last visited Jan. 4, 2016).

Shapiro, Joseph, Can't Pay Your Fines? Your License Could Be Taken, NPR (Dec. 29, 2014),
http://www.npr.org/2014/12/29/372691960/cant-pay-your-fines-your-license-could-be-taken.

Shapiro, Joseph, How Driver's License Suspensions Unfairly Target The Poor, NPR (Jan. 5,
2014), http://www.npr.org/2015/01/05/372691918/how-drivers-license-suspensions-unfairlytarget-the-poor.

Solomon-Fears, Carmen, Cong. Research Serv., RL41762, Child Support Enforcement and
Driver’s License Suspension Policies (2011), available at http://
greenbook.waysandmeans.house.gov/sites/greenbook.waysandmeans.house.gov/files/2012/
documents/R41762_gb.pdf.

Tompkins, Steven W., Ending Driver’s License Suspensions for Drug Oﬀenders, Commonwealth
(Jan. 11, 2016), http://commonwealthmagazine.org/criminal-justice/ending-drivers-licensesuspension-for-drug-oﬀenders.

Turner, Susan & Joan Petersilia, Rand Corp., Day Fines in Four U.S. Jurisdictions (1996),
available at https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/1996-RAND-day-fines-4BJA-pilot-sites.pdf.

U.S. Census Bureau, State and County QuickFacts: South Bend, Ind. and Evansville, Ind.,
http://quickfacts.census.gov (last updated Dec. 2, 2015).

U.S. Gov't Accountability Oﬀ., GAO-02-239, Child Support Enforcement: Most States Collect
Drivers’ SSNs and Use Them to Enforce Child Support (2002), available at http://www.gao.gov/
assets/240/233361.pdf.

U.S. Gov’t Accountability Oﬀ., GAO/RCED-98-161, Welfare Reform: Transportation’s Role in
Moving From Welfare to Work (1998), available at http://www.gao.gov/assets/230/225766.pdf.

Waller, Margy, High Cost or High Opportunity Cost? Transportation and Economic Family
Success, 35 CCF Brief (Dec. 2005), available at http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/
files/papers/2005/12/poverty-waller/pb35.pdf.

Waldron, Tom, Abell Foundation, Actuarial Discrimination, 18 Abell Rep. No. 1 (Jan.-Feb. 2005),
available at http://www.abell.org/sites/default/files/publications/arn105.pdf.

Waller, Margy, Jennifer Doleac & Ilsa Flanagan, Driver’s License Suspension Policies (2005),
available at http://www.aecf.org/resources/drivers-license-suspension-policies.

Western Ctr. on Law & Poverty, Not Just a Ferguson Problem: How Traﬃc Courts Drive
Inequality in California (2015), available at http://www.lccr.com/not-just-ferguson-problem-howtraﬃc-courts-drive-inequality-in-california

Williams, Gary, “The Wrong Side of the Tracks”: Territorial Rating and the Setting of Automobile
Liability Insurance Rates in California, 19 Hastings Cost. L.Q. 845 (1992).

Wiltz, Teresa, States Look to Reduce Ranks of Uninsured Drivers, Pew Charitable Trusts:
Stateline (Feb. 20, 2015), http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/
2015/2/20/states-look-to-reduce-ranks-of-uninsured-drivers.

Yunk Nichole, The Significance of a Driver’s License in the Modern Urban Economy, M.A.
Thesis, Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (2007), summary available at http://
www.mobilityagenda.org/wiyunkpaper.pdf.

Zedlewski, Edwin W., Nat’l Inst. of Justice, Alternatives to Custodial Supervision: The Day Fine
(2010), available at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdﬃles1/nij/grants/230401.pdf.