No Children Allowed!
There is (rightfully) a storm of controversy swirling around the misguided attempt by Oregon Rep. Mitch Greenlick’s HB 2228 that would make it illegal to ride a your bicycle while carrying a child under the age of six.
While many others (BikePortland – Totcycle) have done an excellent job of exposing the idiocy of this idea, I would like to propose that the attention surrounding it is good for bicycle advocacy, and provides us with a great opportunity to educate the public. My wife, a professional teacher, is always is looking for a moment when questions or circumstances open the channels for learning wide. This is such a moment.
Mia Birk, in her book Joyride, recounts a story where controversy and opposition served to focus the attention of the Portland community on the benefits of bicycle infrastructure, and bicycling in general. She went to a television debate with a anti-bicycle lane businessman, with some trepidation, but great preparation (this is key), and found that she quite easily won the day. More importantly, she was able to recruit a whole cadre of bicycle advocates to the one-sided fray that would not have been as interested if the anti-bike guy had not stirred them up. The “take home lesson” for her was that the publicity generated by his wrong-headed attitude was great, and served to deepen and clarify the resolve of the bicycling community, while drawing attention to their persuasive arguments from the public at large.
This is another such opportunity and one that is framed perfectly for the people who care about both bicycling and the heath of children. We need to use this chance to talk about the benefits of bicycling and walking for children in comparison with the truly tragic consequences of an inactive lifestyle, such as the epidemic of childhood obesity and adult onset diabetes many children now face.
Everyone wants what is best for their children. Each of us feel strong protective instincts for our own children, and for kids in general. That is what most likely led to this misguided bill. To do our best for children in this country we need to get them active again. In the light of the controversy stirred up by this bill, delivering a clear message of supporting safe bicycling and walking infrastructure, Safe Routes to School, and active transportation education for children, will naturally draw the support of a public who might otherwise be less sympathetic, and is all too frequently apathetic. David Hembrow at his blog, A View from the Cycle Path, does a great job making this case. See his post on it here (and don’t be too thrown by the rather dramatic title).
We need to see Rep. Greenlick’s bill to “protect” children from the dangers of bicycling as an opening to educate our community on the true danger of not having the complete structures in place for them to thrive with bicycling and active transportation as a part of their daily life.
Though it may not be as exhaustive as the BikePortland coverage, Breakfast on Bikes will have at least weekly summaries of all bike-related legislation. HB 2437, for example, proposes to change the “method of calculating transportation grant from State School Fund distributions” – i.e., the way school busing is organized and funded. Hopefully, someone who actually understands the formula will weigh in with some analysis! It’s important we don’t focus on the easy-to-understand bills and neglect the complicated ones.
Great coverage, as always, from Breakfast on Bikes!
Understanding legislation? That would require it being written by someone other then legislators. And what would the lawyers do?
That’s a great perspective, Daniel. Instead of getting really hot and bothered about a misguided proposal for legislation, use it as an opportunity to educate. Thanks for reminding us to be “big picture” people!
Thanks Kelly,
Taking the “big picture” perspective is not always our first inclination, but it sure seems to produce better results!
Pingback: Beyond “Us” and “Them” (Part Two) « Cog-itate
Hello Dan Long time no see.
I am amazed by the entry and the bill… I am rushing to read your entry now, I might misunderstand what you mean in this entry. I can say, it would be terrible that children below six years’s old could not ride any bicycle from now on. I imagine that much controversy would be made in order to stop the bill. Anyway, if I misunderstood the argument about the bill please tell me.
Hi again Shuichi!
You are reading the post correctly. There was indeed a law proposed to make it illegal to ride with a child under six. There has been an outcry by the bicycling community, and the bill will be modified to a study supposedly. Still just a very misguided bill to say the least. Your English is getting better every time I hear from you!