To get attention, woo supporters or bestow honors, lawmakers like to name their handiwork after someone famous or newsworthy.
That’s why we have the Brady Act, the Lindbergh Law, the Lilly Ledbetter Law and Megan’s Law.
Add to that the Hawaii Legislature’s efforts to create the Steven Tyler Act, designed to preserve the privacy of the 64-year-old Aerosmith lead singer.
Tyler last year, according to The Wall Street Journal, bought a $4.8 million, 3,000-square-foot home sited on the water in a nature preserve area near Wailea, featuring a floor-to-ceiling aquarium and multiple outdoor decks overlooking the Maui coastline.
From the pictures on the real estate blog Zillow, the decks look great, mostly because they open the house to the water, the water to the house and, unfortunately for Tyler, also to the telephoto lens of paparazzi in boats off shore.
To stop that and other prying, Tyler got the Maui Democrat, Sen. J. Kalani English, to author Senate Bill 465. It was actually called the Steven Tyler Act.
Soon Tyler had enlisted the aid of Mick Fleetwood and other Maui-visiting celebs to push the bill, which would allow them to sue if someone took their picture or recorded their voice when they had "a reasonable expectation of keeping private their personal life."
The bill as first written was a laughable trampling of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, which, among other things, allows the media to take pictures of people in public places.
The in an editorial called it "a boneheaded measure" and urged Hawaii to "please trash this trashy bill."
The bill apparently thinks we are fairly vigilant in protecting the whales who visit the waters off Maui to frolic, bred and give birth — so why not extend the same sort of aloha spirit to our visiting celebrities, who might be viewed as whales of a different sort?
"Sometimes the paparazzi go too far to disturb the peace and tranquility afforded celebrities who escape to Hawaii for a quiet life.
"Many celebrities are deterred from buying property or vacationing in Hawaii because the same paparazzi that harass them on the mainland are more likely to follow them to Hawaii," the original copy of the bill actually said.
Sen. Clayton Hee, Judiciary Committee chairman, amended the bill Friday so that public figures would have the right to sue only in cases involving property they own or lease.
Nothing would stop the offending paparazzi from snapping away at public places, such as beaches or at private facilities such as hotels.
But the Senate was not finished with its kowtowing to the rich and famous.
After testifying in public, Tyler was invited into the Senate Democratic caucus room for another briefing, which amounted to picture-taking, autograph-signing and general sucking-up.
Then to put the fawning on public display, the Senate invited Tyler to ascend to the chamber podium and address the assembled Hawaii Senate, which he did.
He said he needed his privacy.
If the bill clears the Senate, which appears likely, the bill goes to the House and another round of fawning.
When the 76 lawmakers bring down the curtain on the 2013 edition of this Legislature with speeches regretting they did not have the time to handle problems of the poor, homeless, overtaxed, under-represented and uneducated, we should remember at least that Steven Tyler, Tommy Lee of Motley Crue, Mick Fleetwood, Margaret Cho, Ozzy Osbourne, Britney Spears, Neil Diamond and folks from Guns N’ Roses and Quiet Riot simply asked for action and got it.
———
Richard Borreca writes on politics on Sundays, Tuesdays and Fridays. Reach him at rborreca@staradvertiser.com.
