Amnesty, Indigence rules for Driver Responsibility surcharge finally published

New rules for Amnesty, Indigence and Incentive program were issued by the Department of Public Safety in today's Texas Register for the Driver Responsibility Program. I'll have much more on this next week heading toward the upcoming House Public Safety Committee meeting on the subject.

The Amnesty program looks about as good as I could have hoped for and I'm really proud of everybody at DPS (and their bosses on the Public Safety Commission) for listening carefully to public criticism and thoughtfully responding to it. This could potentially help out a lot of desperate folks. The Indigence program is also a big improvement, though there's a good chance the truly indigent still won't be able to afford $250. Basically it's the same reduction offered to those under the more general Amnesty program available to everybody.

There is, however, an easily fixed glitch spotted by the talented and indefatigable Amanda Marzullo at the Texas Fair Defense Project: Because the proposed rules fail to waive surcharges for indigent drivers - as courts will be required to do beginning in September 2011 under Rep. Sylvester Turner's amendment -  there's a risk going forward that drivers might choose to seek relief through the courts instead of DPS' administrative program. That would be an unnecessary hassle for the courts and easily rectified by DPS waiving surcharges for indigents to match the relief that courts will be giving. Going forward, if DPS doesn't waive surcharges for indigent drivers, the Legislature will need to somehow reconcile the parallel programs in the courts and at the agency to avoid overburdening county-court judges.

It's disappointing that the incentive program won't be implemented right away, but when the economy bounces back, at least it will be on the books and perhaps the agency can implement it later. For my part I think estimates of large financial losses due to an incentive program - where drivers could pay a smaller lump sum up front instead of spread a larger amount over three years - are likely overstated. After all, so many are able to make their first payment but don't complete the final two in the out years. And since we're going to do something for drivers who defaulted, it's a shame not to also implement the program that benefits folks who played by the rules. But that's who the revenue comes from so DPS apparently decided they couldn't do so and keep their changes revenue neutral.

Perhaps next Spring, if there's not enough support to abolish the DRP entirely, the Lege should simply require DPS to implement the Incentive program, since it will already be on the books in the Administrative Code and vetted by stakeholders. It'd be a bit like a bowler picking up a spare. Who knows? Sure, I'd rather see the DRP abolished and will certainly continue to promote that option. But this program is in flux and there's still a lot of opportunity over the next 12 months to make it significantly more consumer friendly, at the very least, whether or not it's possible to get rid of it entirely during a major budget crunch.