The New Hampshire House of Representatives voted 153 to 140 on April 5 to cause New Hampshire to join the 49 other states that require adults as well as kids to use seat belts while in a moving car. The bill now goes to the New Hampshire Senate.
The account of this vote in the Valley News quoted one of the bill's opponents, Rep. Jason Bedrick (Republican of Londonderry) as saying: "We don't need a paternalistic Legislature coming in and telling adults what they can and cannot do."
Oh really?
Would you want that paternalistic Legislature to step in if hospitals decided to stop treating injuries caused by car accidents in which the patient was not wearing a seat belt? Or if your health insurance carrier decided not to cover the necessary health care in such circumstances?
And what about the paternalistic Legislature that has made drunk driving illegal? And murder, for that matter?
It is also worth noting how this opponent of paternalistic legislation voted a few weeks ago on the question of whether to REQUIRE parental notification when a pregnant teenage girl seeks an abortion. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston has declared the current notification statute unconsitutional because it lacked an exception for circumstances in which the patient's health is in danger, a decision affirmed last year by the U.S. Supreme Court. The House voted overwhelmingly to repeal the unconstitutional statute. In that particular roll call, as well as the numerous procedural votes that preceded it, Rep. Bedrick voted in favor of maintaining the notification requirement. Could a legislature possibly be more paternalistic than by interfering in family relationships like that?
0 comments:
Post a Comment