Given their ubiquity, one would think Americans no longer can live without the iPhones, iPads, BlackBerrys, smart phones and assorted electronic devices that collectively provide the chirps, whistles, clicks, beeps and other noises that have become the soundtrack of contemporary life. Not so. The gadgets, to be sure, are extremely useful, but they remain a convenience not a necessity in the truest sense of the word. Sensible limits on their use are wise.
Most schools now ban their use in classrooms. Judges routinely outlaw them in their courtrooms. Airlines and medical facilities ban them in many circumstances, too, pointing out that their use can interfere with the operation of equipment vital to the safety and security of their passengers and patients.
Indeed, rather than finding ways to expand the arenas in which the use of electronic devices is acceptable, there appears to be a trend toward limiting their use. That’s evident in the stern looks and sometimes harsh words directed to those who use electronic devices in a restaurant, movie theater or other confined but still public spaces. It’s a movement that should be encouraged in the name of public politeness and propriety.
Not everyone, of course, agrees with that assessment. Some actively oppose it. That’s certainly the case for the new Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. They’ve proposed a rule that will lift the current ban on such devices on the floor of the House. They’ve wrapped up the proposal in language that suggests they don’t want to trounce tradition, but a careful reading of the proposal suggests otherwise.
The rule, proponents say, will permit the use of the devices as long as it doesn’t “impair decorum” and only if they are used for official business. There is, as one would suspect, no definition of “impair” or “decorum” or description of what constitutes “official ” rather than unofficial business. Given those omissions, it seems likely that many members would use their BlackBerrys, phones and other devices however and whenever they choose.
That won’t do. House members don’t need additional distractions. There already are enough. Voters are right to wonder if their elected representative spends more time on personal business and political issues than in serving those who put them in office. Allowing widespread use of electronic devices on the House floor likely will create additional diversions that would take more of the members’ already fractured attention away from the debates and votes that are essential to the operation of government.
The chamber has operated without the distractions of electronic devices for more than two centuries. It should continue to do so. The proposal to allow the gizmos on the House floor should be defeated.