HARRISBURG -- In the past 10 years, many states have begun putting digital cameras atop poles near traffic lights to photograph the license plates of cars that speed through signals that have turned red.

These "red light cameras" are generally seen as a good way to increase traffic safety and save lives of motorists and pedestrians. In use since 2005 in Philadelphia, they could be expanded to Pittsburgh and other cities, according to some state officials.

The state-authorized trial in Philadelphia has been life-saving and profitable, officials say. In its four years, the Philly camera program has netted almost $9 million in fines after operational costs are deducted, and state and city officials now are arguing over where to spend the revenue.

"If there's a chance to expand the program, I would be interested in doing it in Pittsburgh," Rep. Paul Costa, D-Wilkins, said last week.

The cameras take a picture of the rear of the car, showing its license plate. Pictures of the driver or passengers aren't taken. If the cameras detect a violation, the ticket is mailed to the car's owner, who is responsible for paying the fine. Signs announce the presence of cameras to drivers.

Some people fear use of the cameras could be another invasion of privacy, calling it a further advance of Big Brother into our lives. But overall, state House Transportation Committee members think the red light cameras are saving lives in Philadelphia.

Rep. Rick Geist, of Altoona, the transportation panel's top Republican, said, "If everything continues to work out [in Philadelphia], the cameras could be a good tool for Pittsburgh, especially, say, for parts of Route 51."

Rep. Joe Markosek, D-Monroeville, Transportation Committee chairman, said he would consider a request for cameras from Pittsburgh officials "if they have a 'problem child' intersection, but it has to be for traffic safety, not for raising revenue."

In 2006, city Councilman Bill Peduto introduced legislation creating a red light camera program in Pittsburgh, but he couldn't get the votes to pass it. He said he'll try again next year.

The fines generated, he said, would go only to street safety improvements and signals.

"We would've used the people who make the city dangerous, and use their fines, to make the city safer," he said.

Pennsylvania hasn't been in the forefront with red light cameras. In the mid-1990s, only two U.S. cities, New York and San Francisco, had them, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. But now more than 200 American cities use them, in states such as Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio -- including Cleveland and Columbus -- Tennessee and Texas.

The cameras generally get praise for lowering accidents and fatalities, though a few places have seen an increase in rear-end collisions, as drivers brake suddenly when they see a yellow light at a "red light camera intersection" and the cars behind them can't stop in time.

In Washington state, as in Philadelphia, a battle occurred between local and state officials over where to spend the money generated from the fines.

A statewide survey in New York in September showed 77 percent of New York voters supported the use of such cameras to monitor vehicles that run red lights, with 18 percent opposed. After the first six months of the program in Dallas in 2007, numbers of accidents and traffic tickets were significantly down at busy intersections.

Under a Legislature-authorized pilot program that began in 2005, red light cameras have been installed at intersections on heavily trafficked Route 1 (Roosevelt Boulevard) in northeast Philadelphia, starting with three and now at 13.

"It continues to be successful as one of the ways the city is trying to reduce accidents and fatalities," Deputy Mayor Rina Cutler told the state panel.

Drivers seem to be adjusting. This year, an average of 27 tickets are being issued per intersection per day, compared with 120 violations per intersection per day in the first year.

The cameras sit atop high poles in the median, perhaps 20 feet from the traffic lights. The fine for a violation: $100.

"While each intersection is different, reductions in violations have ranged from 10 percent to 81 percent," said Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Deputy Secretary Scott Christie. "Overall, it appears the program is successful and will continue to help with traffic safety enforcement in Philadelphia."

Roosevelt Boulevard is an extremely busy and often hazardous stretch of road, with six lanes in each direction through some residential areas.

"It's sort of like McKnight Road in the North Hills of Pittsburgh, only three times wider. The traffic is crazy," Mr. Costa said.

As of Aug. 20, $8.85 million in net revenue had been collected in Philly and forwarded to a restricted account in the state's Motor License Fund. State and city officials are at odds over whether to use it for problem roads statewide or only those in Philly.

The committee wants to have another year or so of experience with the program in Philadelphia before expanding it. But Mr. Costa said, "It seems to be working in Philadelphia. It's reducing the number of people who run red lights and reducing fatalities and accidents."

He plans to talk to Pittsburgh police and engineering department officials about locations where red light cameras would be best used.

"But I can think of one intersection, near where I grew up, a traffic light at Forbes and Dallas streets in the Squirrel Hill area," he said. "Even when the light on Dallas turns green, you'd better wait a few seconds before you proceed because a lot of people [driving on Forbes] run that light."

Mr. Geist is a little more cautious.

"It looks like a very good program, but we still need more data" from Philadelphia, he said.

Putting up more cameras may stir concerns over invasion of privacy. But Andy Hoover, legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union, said that if these cameras are used as legislators say -- merely to take a photo of a vehicle and its license plate -- the organization wouldn't object.

"We don't oppose these cameras when they are used in these narrow circumstances," Mr. Hoover said. "But if they start using the cameras to monitor innocent activity, we would have greater concerns."

Mr. Geist said privacy was a concern among legislators several years ago when the pilot program was enacted. Some lawmakers didn't want pictures to be taken of the drivers or people inside the car.

"There was concern some people would think it was some kind of conspiracy, a 'black helicopter' sort of thing," he said.

There is still a battle over the fine money, since the state and the city need every shekel they can get to improve cracked roads and rusting bridges. Philly officials, naturally, think the $8.8 million should be restricted to road improvements in their city.

"Any fine revenue was intended to be reinvested in the community where it was generated for safety projects,'' Ms. Cutler maintained.

Mr. Geist disagreed. When the Legislature authorized the pilot program, he said, the money was to be spent on the projects deemed most necessary by the state Transportation Department. The department is now drawing up a list of where the money may be used.

Looking for more from the Post-Gazette? Join PG+, our members-only web site. You'll get exclusive sports content, opinion, financial information, discounts from retailers and restaurants, and more. Our introduction to PG+ gives you all the details.