By Haleigh Ehmsen–

In an election year, traffic cameras have become a hot topic. Governor Terry Branstad deemed the cameras “unfair” after receiving a $200 ticket from an Arizona speed-camera nearly two years ago.

“I have no problem with fining people who break the law. I just think a lot of people have problems with not being able to see their accuser,” Branstad told a crowd in Sioux City when discussing his priorities this year.

If Branstad really doesn’t have a problem with persecuting people who break the law, I do not understand why he called the cameras “unfair”. Not only do the cameras bring in more revenue to cities, they are also reducing accidents. In Cedar Rapids, car crashes dropped by 40 percent at the eight intersections with red-light cameras in their first year alone.

Despite the fact that the Iowa Supreme Court ruled the cameras constitutional in 2008, the House and Senate have recently drafted bills that would ban traffic cameras.  A state representative in Sioux City introduced a constitutional amendment. Other lawmakers are drafting petitions, as more and more cities are thinking of putting the cameras in their towns.

Here’s my take. These cameras are not being installed in public bathrooms. They aren’t invading personal privacy.  They are put near main roads and highways that see a lot of traffic or accidents to keep people safe. When the results are positive I don’t see tqhe reason for the ban.

My mom received a ticket last year on I-380 for $ 75. She said it was annoying, but the ticket also came with a picture of her van driving on the interstate. You can try to dispute it and march down to the police station, but honestly if the cameras are keeping your roads safe, what’s the problem?