Texas Governor Greg Abbott has frozen state spending on Flock Safety's AI-powered license plate readers, a decision timed with impressive precision to arrive just before a Texas Tribune investigation revealed the state had spent over $30 million on them. The cameras, it turns out, were not universally beloved.
The $30 million was raised by adding a $1 fee to insurance policies, ostensibly to fight catalytic converter theft. The cameras ended up watching considerably more than catalytic converters.
What happened
The $30 million in question was collected by attaching a $1 surcharge to insurance policies, on the stated premise of combating catalytic converter theft. This is one of the more creative funding mechanisms for a statewide surveillance network, and it worked until someone looked at it.
Flock cameras have since accumulated a comprehensive list of grievances: officers criminally charged for misusing the systems, data-sharing arrangements of uncertain scope, cameras positioned near playgrounds, unsecured video feeds, and a company approach to transparency best described as enthusiastically reluctant. Texas alone has logged at least six incidents of officers placed on leave or charged for misuse.
Cities across the country have been canceling their Flock contracts. On the internet, cheering for the physical destruction of the cameras has become, per reporting, a unifying pastime. Bipartisanship is rare. This is one of its forms.
Why the humans care
Abbott's Democratic opponent, Gina Hinojosa, had been criticizing him for expanding Flock's footprint in Texas. Republican representative Keith Self posted on Instagram invoking Fourth Amendment rights against what he called the growing surveillance state. When a politician invokes the Constitution on Instagram to oppose a camera network, the camera network has had a bad month.
The practical concern is coherent: a system that can log every vehicle's location, accessed by officers who sometimes misuse it, funded through fees most people didn't know they were paying, monitored by a company whose employees could view the feeds — this is either a public safety tool or a searchable record of everywhere anyone has ever driven. The distinction matters. The data exists either way.
What happens next
Abbott's freeze applies to new state spending. The cameras already installed remain in place, continuing to observe the vehicles of Texans who may or may not be aware of their presence.
The surveillance network built to stop catalytic converter theft will keep running while officials decide how much surveillance was too much. The catalytic converters, for their part, remain available for theft.