THERE is a bill in the Guam Legislature which states the “driver of a vehicle approaching a totally or partially blind pedestrian who is carrying a cane predominantly white or metallic in color (with or without a red tip) or using a guide dog shall take all necessary precautions and any driver who fails to take such precaution shall be liable in damages for injuries caused such pedestrians.”

This is a brilliant bill – provided the word “brilliant” is loaded with sarcasm. Apparently, there is a spate of incidents involving blind people being run over while crossing the street that it was necessary to file this legislation. This bill seeks to protect the “totally or partially blind pedestrians who are carrying canes predominantly white or metallic in color (with or without a red tip).” If you don’t fall in this category, you’re fair game for any driver.

This is one of my favorite bills in the Guam Legislature – provided the word “favorite” is loaded with sarcasm and accompanied with the tongue-out emoticon.

So far, the 31st Guam Legislature has produced 470 bills – at least 213 of these are now public laws – distinguishing itself as the most prolific batch of lawmakers over the past 12 years. But the adjective “prolific” in this sense does not necessarily mean virtuous – especially if we are talking about bills that don’t make any sense. (One particular bill – now a public law – has created an advisory council tasked to submit a report to a policy office that doesn’t exist.)

There are legislative proposals that paralyze our freedom to choose, e.g., a bill that prohibits decaffeinated malt
beverages.

There are proposals that seek to legislate common sense and right conduct. Falling in the same category of the blind pedestrian protection bill are the following: a bill that proposes to increase penalties for drivers “who disregard the safety of school children entering and exiting the school bus;” a bill that prohibits "the use of video screens in a motor vehicle while in motion;” a bill that "prohibits smoking in a motor vehicle when a child is present;” and a bill that requires motorists convicted of reckless driving to take a defensive driving lesson.

Of course, ordinary citizens are not capable of thinking for themselves. So we have lawmakers spelling out excruciating details of how we should run our lives. If they don’t stop introducing “prohibition” bills, half of Guam would soon be all criminals.

The great swell in so many unnecessary bills seems to be attributable to the over-eagerness of politicians, who take “lawmaking” over-seriously in a bid to prove their worth to their constituents. Sometimes, their idea of working is importing legislation from other states, notwithstanding their farcical nature.

“In our country, the words of law are like millions of trip wires, preventing us from doing the sensible thing,” wrote Phillip K. Howard, author of “The Death of Common Sense,” a must-read for every politician. “Politicians are bogged down in this vast legal quicksand, proposing more laws to deal with failures that are caused by the accumulation of too much law. Leadership requires freedom to take responsibility.”

There should be a law against more laws.