A BAD Bill

Last week I did a post on the future of our sport.  An alert reader added some insightful commentary, and alerted me to the legislative action discussed below.  This bears thinking about, and immediate action just might be very appropriate.

(Thanks, and a tip of the Campagnolo cycling cap to Dave for the heads-up.)

~//~ ~//~

2011-2012 Regular Session - SB 468

Rules of the Road; bicycles; single file on roadways not specially designated for the use of bicycles

First Reader’s Summary:

A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Code Section 40-6-294 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to the riding of bicycles on roadways and bicycle paths, so as to provide for bicycles to be operated in single file on roadways not specially designated for the use of bicycles; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

The Senate Transportation Committee offered the following substitute to SB 468:

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT

To amend Code Section 40-6-294 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to the riding of bicycles on roadways and bicycle paths, so as to provide for bicycles to be operated in a manner not to impede the normal flow of traffic; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:

SECTION 1.

Code Section 40-6-294 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to the riding of bicycles on roadways and bicycle paths, is amended by revising subsection (c) as follows:

"(c)  Persons riding bicycles upon a two lane roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on bicycle paths, bicycle lanes, parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles, or when a special event permit issued by a local governing authority permits riding more than two abreast.  Persons riding bicycles or electric assisted bicycles shall not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic and, on a laned roadway, shall ride within a single lane."

SECTION 2.

All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.

~//~

I lifted the above from the Georgia General Assembly Legislation website.  If you would like to verify it for yourself, follow this link. 

Here’s my take on this:

“shall not ride more than two abreast…”

Ever?  Does this mean that I may not pass a slower bicycle?  Ever?  If I do choose to pass, there will be a time when I’m riding “two abreast.”  Would that put me in violation of the law?  It might be good to note that the code currently specifies that two riders abreast are legal, but not more than two abreast.  Seems to be working.  Why is this a problem?

“Persons riding bicycles or electric assisted bicycles shall not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic…”

Now just a dog-gone minute!  The current code defines me and my bicycle as a vehicle.  That means that I am traffic.  I have no wish to impede the folks behind me.  In fact, I’d like to get them around as quickly as possible.  (It might be pointed out that, when I’m driving my truck, I’m a lot harder to pass, and I drive a lot slower than most motorists.)

“impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic…”

In whose opinion?  Might we ask?  Am I liable for citation, arrest, summons, etc because some underpaid policeman, or sheriff, thinks that I’m slowing down his doughnut run?  Perhaps that cell phone and texting chucklehead in the “bubba truck” calls the cops because he thinks I’m “impeding” his “normal”  (read 15 miles per hour above the posted limit!) movement.  Does that make me liable to legal action?

Further, under existing code, cyclists are required to ride as far to the right of the roadway as is “safe and practicable.”  This is good language.  There are certain times and conditions that require me to “take the lane,” in order to remain safe.  If I do this, am I “impeding the normal and reasonable movement of traffic?”  This bill contains the language, “All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.”  Does that mean that the good and prudent prior code is to be removed?  Are we now to be held liable, if we take prudent actions, just because these actions might impede.  Is a cyclist’s safety now to be subordinate to the convenience of an impatient driver?

“bicycle paths, bicycle lanes, parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles…”

Erhem.  Excuse me?  Where are these “paths,” “lanes,” and “roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles”?  Are we to confine all of the cycling in the state to Peachtree City and the Silver Comet Trail?

Why is this happening?

Could it be a reaction to the passage of the “Three Foot Passing Law”?  If that’s the case, I’m sure no one will ever admit it.

I am a driver as well as a cyclist.  In the course of my normal rounds I travel over the roadways and highways of our great state.  I am not often impeded by cyclists.  Yes it happens.  Occasionally.  Rarely.  But to be honest, I’m far more likely to be impeded by idiot drivers.  Happens every day.  Multiple times.  Folks, cycling is part of the answer to traffic congestion.  If our legislators wish to do something truly forward looking and constructive, they might consider legislation that protects and encourages cycling, rather than ill-conceived restrictions upon it.

Perhaps I’m being a bit of an alarmist.  But please stop to consider, we’ve been told, on many occasions, that a given bit of legislation “won’t hurt you,” that it “doesn’t mean that at all,” and that, “it’s in your best interest.  We’re only trying to help you.”  After hearing these reassurances, the law passes and the lawyers get a hold on it.  What usually happens after that is ugly.  And really, why do we need this bill?  What urgent problem is it solving?  I’m of the opinion that, if it ain’t broke, fixing it will surely make it worse.

What you can do:  First off, find out who your state legislators are.  It’s not hard, and I’m going to make it easier.

Step 1)  Go to http://www.congress.org/

Step 2)  On the upper right hand part of the homepage you will see a navigator with the verbiage “Find your lawmakers, tell them what you think”  Beside this is a block where you can enter your zip code.  Do so.

Step 3)  You will be taken to a page with Federal elected officials.  On this page is a location where you can enter your Zip+4.  If you do not know your full zip code, you can enter your zip and your address.  Do it.  This will result in a new page, with your “Governor and State Legislators.”

Step 4) By clicking each of the named State Legislators, you will be take to a page with contact information for them.  You can email them directly with as little as two more clicks.

Advice on emailing a legislator:

• Keep it brief.  State your concern, and express your opinion.  Then clearly ask for what you want.
• Keep it cordial!  Don’t vent your frustration at the legislator.  It’s not productive.  Besides, you want them to get on board.
• Write a draft first.  Do this on your word processor.  Think about what you want to say.  Edit it.  Spell check it.  Then cut-and-paste it into the email.
• Include return contact information.  You want them to know that you are in their district, and that you vote!