Cedar Rapids had a City Council election in November, and, from my vantage point, the city’s use of automated traffic enforcement cameras was not a big issue.

Flood recovery, downtown, budget issues and taxes played major roles. But cameras really didn’t get a close-up. No one’s victory or loss hinged on the camera issue.

I wasn’t a fan of cameras in the beginning, but, like a lot of locals, I’ve come to accept them. Local elected leaders approved them. The courts say they’re legal. They seem to have had some positive impact on traffic safety.

I’m not leading a rousing camera cheer, nor am I mounting a protest. It’s settled. Moving on.

Unless you’re at the Statehouse. Red light cameras are red-hot. Lawmakers are in high-speed pursuit of legislation to ban them. A few even want to amend the Constitution. Gov. Terry Branstad says he would sign a ban.

I predict a ban will pass. After all, it has all the right ingredients.

For one thing, it affects politicians personally. Lawmakers drive many miles, so they stand a good chance of actually getting a ticket, or have received one already. The governor got a $200 speed-camera ticket from Arizona. You don’t need a scofflaws’ lobby in the rotunda when they’re already sitting inside the General Assembly.

For another thing, this issue allows Statehouse types to pose as noble defenders of civil liberties at no political cost whatsoever. Tackling real, meaty civil liberties issues — such as examining criminal penalties for some drug crimes or stubborn forms of discrimination — is way too politically touchy. Shutting down nosy speed cameras, on the contrary, makes for great campaign brochure copy.

“Rep. Hornblower stood strong against the surveillance culture. He delivered his impassioned defense of vehicular liberty in the House chamber, which is now, incidentally, wired for live video. …”

And state leaders can’t pass up a chance to meddle in the affairs of local government.

From the Statehouse perspective, there’s really no reason not to substitute state judgment for the judgment of city councils, mayors and police chiefs around Iowa. Never mind that Cedar Rapids had a local debate over the issue. If it didn’t take place under the golden dome of supreme wisdom, it doesn’t count. Lawmakers could do something sensible, like create a set of uniform rules for all camera communities to play by in the future. But what fun would that be?

I’m not going to cry a river if cameras go away. But this is a brand of lawmaking I can’t support — codifying personal grievance, grandstanding on a molehill and shoving aside local decisions without a compelling reason. All ingredients that leave a bad aftertaste.