Bridgegate vs. Red Light Cams – Which is the Bigger Scandal? [POLL]

It never ceases to amaze.

Why should you not be surprised by the recent revelation by a fired Redflex salesman that officials in multiple states, including New Jersey, were bribed into approving the much talked about red light camera program.

The program that has been debated as to whether or not it’s all about safety.
More of a shakedown than anything.

Now put that up against the recent scandal involving members of the Christie administration approving a “traffic study” amounting to days of gridlock at the Ft. Lee entrance to the George Washington Bridge.

Do you feel there are more citizens of the state affected by the red light camera program than were affected by the bridge lane closings?

I think option “A” gets the prize there.

In other words, the red light camera program is still in effect, and is still ripping off taxpayers; while the bridge mess had taken place over the course of a few days.

According to this:

In a lawsuit filed in Arizona, a terminated Redflex executive claims in order to secure contracts for its red light camera program, the company bribed local officials in more than a dozen states including New Jersey.

Assemblyman Declan O’Scxanlon (R-Red Bank), a critic of the red light camera program. “It shouldn’t surprise us. The companies are not about safety or improving traffic, they are about the almighty dollar and they will stop at nothing to get it. We can’t trust anything they say as they work to game the political system to ensure their lucrative public contracts are safe.”

Fired Redflex salesman Aaron Rosenberg claimed he was forced to cover long-standing practices of “providing government officials with lavish gifts and bribes.” His lawsuit states that during his tenure Redflex “bestowed gifts and bribes on municipal officials in dozens of municipalities.

O’Scanlon said there is a federal probe already underway and he is calling on those involved to examine any claims involving New Jersey.

Now here’s the common thread in both stories – they both involve the Assemblyman who’s in charge of leading the investigation into Governor Christie’s administration’s involvement in the bridge mess.

Thanks to a prolific commenter at nj1015.com, we find out that one of the recipients of Redflex’s largess is allegedly one Assemblyman John Wisniewski.

According to this story where the possibility of "speed cameras" might one day be introduced:

Ron Ely, editor of StopBigBrotherMd.com, has been monitoring the growth of enforcement traffic cameras in Maryland, and he has a warning for New Jersey drivers:

If you hate red-light cameras, get ready, because speed cameras are next.

Politicians will become addicted to the new source of revenue and figure “that if a little of something is good, a lot of it is even better,” Ely says.

Some investigating shows he could be right. Redflex Traffic Systems, a worldwide operator of enforcement cameras, has been tossing around money in New Jersey.

Redflex gave $6,000 to Democrats from 2007 to 2010, according to New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Records — $2,500 of that went to Assemblyman Transportation Committee Chairman John Wisniewski (D-Middlesex).

So here we have a second person alleging that some members of the legislature accepted monies from Redflex.

Most disconcerting is the allegation that the Assemblyman Transportation Chairman – he who is heading the investigation into improprieties at the bridge – was himself the recipient of monies from Redflex.

Sort of like the pot calling the kettle black – no?

In light of this, do you feel that Assemblyman Wisniewski at least recuse himself from investigating the bridge mess – and that an investigation into who accepted what from Redflex should be commissioned?

And if it’s found that he did accept monies from Redflex in order to push through the red light camera program – should he not be prosecuted?

Overall, which is the bigger scandal? Comment below - and thank you Shirley!