By Steve Byas

Chuck Mai, vice-president of AAA Oklahoma, supports passage of a bill making it against the law to use a cell phone while driving. This is a typical "feel good" law.

Feel Good Laws are laws that make folks "feel good" that they are on the books, regardless of whether the law does any good. It works something like this: If you pass a law against something, even if it were to have no effect, you are "sending a message" that you don't like this or that action.

In fact, Mai said as much. "Right now, the Legislature is sending a clear message to motorists that texting while driving is okay."

You see, Mai wants to send them a different message, which is that texting while driving is not okay. Oh, what a relief, we have sent motorists a message, if we pass this proposal by Senator Ron Sharp of Shawnee.

Sharp's bill, SB 67, proposes to fine a motorist up to one thousand dollars PLUS a year in jail. Now, that is a message, no doubt about that.

Mai said, "We need to encourage motorists to limit all distractions." I will have to admit making the consequences a year in jail is some pretty stiff encouragement. I would almost say that calling the putting of someone behind bars "encouragement" is almost like something out of George Orwell.

Now, I am not opposed to fines for distracted driving, although I think a thousand dollars is a bit stiff, and a year in jail simply for taking a phone call falls into that area found in the 8th amendment, which prohibits "excessive fines." But, hey, it does send a message, and it does "encourage" compliance.

We already have laws on the books against distracted driving, but Sharp contends that is not good enough. I have to wonder why is it not good enough? If a police officer spots someone texting, or even just chatting on a cell phone while driving, I suppose that person is "distracted" (as someone would be by putting make-up on going down the road). If this is such a serious problem, then why is it that police are not already pulling people over for distracted driving?

Nope, not good enough, says Sharp. We have to have a law specifically banning talking on the phone, and we have to jail folks for it -- for a year. We have to encourage safe driving.

What we have here is a "feel good law." Although police already have a law, on the books, to pull over motorists and ticket them for distracted driving, we need an additional law.

This is how it works. If we have a law, we are sending the message that we care about something. If we don't have a law, we don't care. So, the laws pile up on the books. Because we "care." Whether these multitudes of laws are effective is beside the point.

Are we really willing to put someone in jail for talking on a cell phone while driving? For a year? I guess after about eight months behind bars, some guy is going to get the message, and he is going to be "encouraged" not to do that again. Of course, by that time he has lost his job, maybe his car and his home. Probably even his cell phone.

I have a better idea. If a traffic cop observes someone driving erratically, weaving, or the like, and he is distracted by a cell phone, or is putting on make-up (these days you never know), then pull him over, write him up a $100 ticket, and send him on his way.

He's gotten the "message," and he is "encouraged" to be an attentive driver in the future.

We don't need another "feel good law," just use the law we already have on the books.

Steve Byas is editor of the Oklahoma Constitution newspaper. He may be contacted at: byassteve@yahoo.com