I’m not sure how successful this thread will be, but I really need to vent and see how all of you Dopers feel about this.
Recently, the Ohio legislators passed a bill allowing Pro-Life license plates. $20 of the proceeds will go only to groups that in no way support abortion. Which is fine with me, let them do whatever they want with the money. What I do have a problem with is stifling the other side of the debate.
I’m all for free speech, and I have no problem that they have their own license plates. In fact, I applaud them for using the resources available to them. But what the hell? The Pro-Life crowd can have one but not Pro-Choice? They won’t even discuss it.
I’m really getting sick of this “culture of life” phenomenon. The Pro-Life movement should not equate to overturning the 1st Amendment. I realize you all are passionate about it, but guess what . . . so are we. Since our lawmakers don’t agree with it we now have to just keep our mouths shut?? No thanks, I like living in a free country. What happened to freedom of speech? Apparently only the speech that those in power agree with.
While I whole-heartedly agree with this, why are they hindering free speech? It’s nothing more than a license plate, why shouldn’t the other side be allowed to have one too? It just shows them for who they really are and reflects badly on those in their party.
More of our taxpayer money down the drain so that anti-abortion rights legislators can preen for their admirers.
But if you can’t bring in jobs and provide services, this is one form of distraction.
Misapprehension #1: “W” gives any thought or interest to the Second Amendment other than for the votes that it will bring him. Personally, I wouldn’t trust the guy with a Wrist Rocket.
Misapprehension #2: Gun ownership and liberalism are diametrical opposites.
Misapprehension #3: The refusal to issue a license plate design is some kind of restriction on the principle of free speech or the First Amendment. Ass-hatted and biased, yes, but not really a restriction.
IMHO, the Ohio DoT would be a lot better off to stay out of the arena of hot-button issues. That Ohio legislators have nothing better to do than address issues like this argues for a shortened legislative season and a corresponding reduction in pay.
I live in Ohio, and I’m pretty sure that any group that gets enough participants is allowed to have special license plates commissioned. There’s all kinds of special-interest group plates. I could even get one with my university’s logo on it, if I wanted.
I’m not sure why they rejected the pro-choice group’s application. Maybe they needed something other than a petition?
Hey, yeah, I never thought about being pissed off about lack of equal license plate representation before, but now that you mention it… how come there are Conservation plates in NH with pictures of cute cuddly Alces alces on them, but no anti-conservation plates? Maybe I don’t like moose, the big ugly bastards, and want to kill them all. I don’t eat game, but I hear they’re tasty, and a dead moose isn’t going to kill your grandma by wandering out in front of her car. A moose-antler license plate holder might be nice, too. Fucking environmentalists get their say on their vehicles, but what of the passionate animal haters? Goddamn moose, I bet they’re just thrilled about this sort of shit. Maybe I should start a petition…
Ain’t no votes in free speech. Sounds counterintuitive, but experience bears it out. And until a whole lot of people wake the fuck up, ain’t gonna be no votes in free speech for a while to come.
Why do people have to advertise their political beliefs on a license plate at all? License plates are not a form of political speech, they’re a way of registering and tracking vehicles. Buy a fucking bumper sticker and donate the twenty bucks yourself. We wouldn’t have this debate if everyone just had the standard issue license plate that said Ohio and listed your license number. But no, people (well, some people, the ones with the state-approved political ideals) have to express their “individuality.” Because any anti-choice person can buy a bumper sticker, but it takes a special kind of anti-choice person to buy a special plate. And the whole point of a license plate is to serve as some kind of statement, not just to, y’know, track vehicles.
I think this applies to conservation plates as well. Donate the money yourself and buy a sticker. No need to plug up the government with this nonsense so you can “express yourself.”
I totally agree. Stupid precedence to set and guaranteed to end up in the courts. Ohio can’t fund its school yet our legislators have the time to worry about such ridiculous things as license plate designs.
I’d like to point out that in this, as with so many other absurd public policy decisions, Florida was first. I was (and remain) horribly incensed at this plate, not least because we already have 110 special-interest plates in this state. Add all the other kinds of plates we have (like the local governments, the various law enforcement agencies, the Legislature’s plates, commercial plates, etc.) and you will see that we have approximately 170 kinds of license plate.
In Ohio’s case, I think it was a really bad idea for the legislative body to deny the amendment, but I also think that they will suffer no real consequences, because frankly, the people who are opposed to the pro-life plate aren’t really considered important by the legislature. As long as they can rally the pro-life vote, which they usually can, there’ll be no negatives in it for them.
From the Ohio code, § 4503.78 “Implementation date for new special plates; reestablishment of terminated program:”
(A) Except as may otherwise be specifically provided by law, after the effective date of this section, the registrar of motor vehicles shall not be required to implement any legislation that creates a license plate and provides for its issuance until the registrar receives written statements from not less than one thousand persons, indicating that they intend to apply for and obtain such license plates for their motor vehicles. The registrar may require such statements to be made on a form the registrar provides.
Bolding mine.
Ok, so the State of Ohio wants 1,000 written statements from 1,000 different people saying they plan on buying the plate – and they (may) want it on a certain form.
Here, however, it sounds like NARAL just passed around a petition and got 1,000 signatures – and it doesn’t even say whether or not all 1,000 of those people even live in Ohio, so we don’t even know if everyone who signed the petition is even eligible to buy a plate. When I see the words “1,000 statements” in the Code, I think of 1,000 separate forms being filled out by 1,000 different people. Petitions are great, but it doesn’t sound like that’s what the state wanted in this situation. If this is the case, then no wonder the Speaker refused to recognize the group’s amendment. Duh!
If NARAL didn’t do what the Code requires, they have no reason to complain. And if they actually didn’t do what the Code says, I doubt they’d go out of their way to say “ok, so 200 of those people don’t even live in Ohio and we didn’t actually use the right form and we kindasorta didn’t do what we were told to do to get this thing going.”
That wouldn’t make a very good story and get people riled up. Easier to just hope that nobody bothers to find out what the state actually requires and slant the article as much as possible, hoping that people will get pissed and start screaming at Ohio legislators.
I’m not saying NARAL didn’t do what they were supposed to do – I’m just saying that if you compare the article to the Code, it sure doesn’t look like they met the requirements – the article given in the OP is pretty vague and should have more information if we’re to know what really happened.
If they did do what the Code says, then I think they should have a plate. If they didn’t, they need to hush up and quit trying to stifle those groups who got off their asses and did it right the first time. You shouldn’t get to quiet others just because you can’t be bothered to deal with the red tape you’re all pissed because you didn’t get your way because of it.
Here’s what I want to know/see (anyone feel free to answer if they can find cites to answer these questions):
The petition. How was it worded? The article says it “that called for the Ohio General Assembly to create a “pro-choice” license plate.” Are we to take this to mean that 1,000 people signed a statement saying “hey Assembly … make a pro- choice plate” or did it say “we intend to buy one?”
Does the state of Ohio even accept petitions for stuff like this, or do they actually require 1,000 separate statements?
How many of the 1,000 on the petition are eligible to buy a plate (legal residents of Ohio, old enough to drive, etc.)?
Did the registrar, in this situation, require the statements to be on the registrar’s form described in the Code? If so, did NARAL comply, or just turn in one statement signed with 1,000 signatures?
Did, or does, the state make any attempt to verify the existence of the 1,000 people required? DMV records, etc.? If they did, what were their findings?
Here in Tennessee there has been talk about a Pro-Life plate, with no Pro-Choice plates. You only need 500 signatures here. Our Governor has already said that he won’t sign any legislation that doesn’t include both plates, and that if there are any lawsuits brought because of this, he’ll stop the entire specialty plate program.
Of course, we’ve got like 70 different plates. Except for Western Kentucky University. The school I went to. Where almost 30% of the school is from Nashville. We’ve got a freakin Florida State plate, but no WKU.
But anyway, I think if they want one, they should have the other.
You definitely bring up some valid points. I will do more research to see what I can find. But I would find it hard to believe the ACLU would be suing the state without following the guidleline, but I could be wrong.