Washington State License Plate Replacement Laws

Washington State has put into law that vehicle license plates must be replaced every seven years because: "The reflective coating on the plates only has a 5-year guarantee. This coating helps law enforcement officers easily identify vehicles in poor weather conditions." (see Washington State Department of Licensing website).

My questions is: How does this reflective coating help law enforcement officers identify vehicles in poor weather conditions? Do they have an instrument that reads license plates for them other than their own two eyes? Last I checked, they do not. What I do know is that law enforcement officers use laser technology to measure the speed of vehicles. These devices are aimed at the license plate in order to reflect the laser back to the measuring device and give it a reading of the measured vehicle's speed. I may be going out on a limb here, but I'm going to go ahead and make the assumption that this is the real purpose of the reflective coating that is put on license plates, and therefore, the real reason that the government is requiring that the plates be replaced every seven years.

Make no mistake. The taxpayer will be paying for these required plates every seven years. This is not something that the government covers. They made the law, but the citizen is paying for that decision out of their own pocketbook.

Normally, I'm not one to discuss such a topic, but I recently received a notice that my tabs need renewing, and am now going to be paying for a pair of new plates and tabs because.... I have to. If I don't, I'm not permitted to drive my vehicle on public roads. Additionally, if I want to keep the same license plate number, that is extra.

In economic terms, this is referred to as a "flat tax" because everyone pays the same fee. Given the varying incomes among citizens in society, however, this cost does not amount to the same percentage of every individual's income. Therefore, those that make more money, spend a smaller percentage of it paying for these new plates. Those that make less, will pay a larger percentage of their income towards their new set of plates. In this sense, it is also a regressive tax where the more you make the less you pay - percentage wise. The same principle applies to gasoline costs. I'm sure that some of you remember that when the cost of gasoline hit four dollars per gallon, there were less SUV's on the road. There were probably less GMC suburbans, Chevy Tahoes, Ford Exporers, and Expeditions on the road, but I remember distinctly that there didn't seem to be any decrease in Porche, BMW, or Mercedes SUV's. This is an example of how economic stresses affect the less affluent more than the more affluent.

In the case of license plates.... Do I believe that we should have legible plates? Yes, I do. Do I thnk that the citizenry should pay an additional tax in order for law enforcement to have greater power over the citizenry than it already does? No.

Now, to the point. My argument is that the Washington State Department of Licensing is being disingenuous in their statement that the reflective coating "helps law enforcement officers easily identify vehicles in poor weather conditions." The truth is that the reflective material makes it easier for law enforcement officers to use their laser speed detection technology. My fundamental quarrel with this statement is that it is dishonest. If the WA State DOL wanted to be honest, they would have written something like unto this: "The reflective coating makes it easier for law enforcement to use their laser speed detection technology because it provides them with a flat reflective surface off of which they can bounce a laser signal and quickly ascertain whether or not the vehicle is speeding." As a citizen, this doesn't sound very appealing to me. The wording they decided to go with makes me think of law enforcement as a benevolent force that is only out to protect me and to serve me, but not with a ticket. My rendering of the actual truth causes the reader to understand that their additional expense is going to help law enforcement catch them speeding and therefore spend more money and time in court, on the fine, and on newly raised insurance premiums.

Is it right for the citizens to be taxed beyond what legislation has already deemed necessary for law enforcement? The citizen already pays taxes to cover prison costs, but now it seems that the citizen is paying the state for the prisoners' work. Wait a minute, I thought we were already paying for the prisoners to be taken care of? So, if that is the case, than the state is pocketing the profit from the cost of the new plates. Shame on them and shame on use for letting it happen. We are allowing ourselves to be taxed and double taxed. In addition, we are allowing the state to run prison facilities with our tax dollars where they make a profit on a product that is produced by prisoners that we are paying to sustain. In addition, this product that we are paying for makes it easier for law enforcment to tax us via traffic violations. I'm not a proponent of anarchy and am therefore not suggesting that government is the problem. What I am suggesting is that there is a problem with this kind of governance. I hope that as you have read what I have had to say, you have felt the same. Let the objections be heard and let democracy thrive.