Testimony for PA 192 of 2003 (HB 4360)
House Commerce Committee
June 10, 2003
Testimony submitted for HB 4360

Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of HB 4360. My name is Dan Jarvis and I am the research and policy director at Michigan Family Forum.

This piece of legislation is, quite simply, legislation to define how a store must display obscenity that is illegal to sell to minors. If you believe a store owner should have the right to openly display obscenity right next to the candy and chips, you should vote against this measure. If you believe owners should have a higher standard when displaying material which they cannot legally sell to minors, then I would encourage you to vote for this bill.

Several of you already cosponsored and voted for this legislation four years ago when it passed the House unanimously. We thank you for taking that step to protect children at that time and we ask that you vote again to move this legislation forward.

For those of you who were not here four years ago, you should know that this bill passed the House unanimously and then the Senate by a vote of 28-8. Unfortunately, that bill was tie-barred on the floor of the Senate and was not able to be addressed by the House before session ended. Last session, a similar but much more complicated bill was introduced. By returning to this simple, straightforward version of the bill, we hope there will again be nearly unanimous support in regulating how obscenity is displayed.

Many times we hear that parents, not government, need to be the guardians of what children watch on television, at the movies and what books they read. We agree. However, I think everyone would also agree that there are some materials which are harmful to minors and in those cases, government has an obligation to protect the health and safety of children. In general, the state of Michigan has done a good job of balancing its obligation of protecting children, without interfering with the legitimate rights of free speech and press. However, there is a gap in that protection and this bill will fill that gap.

I would like to share one family’s real-life experience. While on a short trip to visit relatives, this family stopped at a gas station to purchase a snack and let their children use the restroom. The gas station was a very large, clean, respectable looking one which had a family restaurant attached to it. As the family finished in the restrooms, they exited the hallway and found numerous adult magazines in front of them. There was no way for a person using the restrooms to avoid seeing these magazines. All of the children were under the age of twelve at the time. No parent should be forced into a situation like that and it is unacceptable that we would allow such young children to be exposed to this type of material.

Since that time, our staff has talked to numerous other individuals who have complained that they also have been blind-sided by similar situations. These are not instances where people have a free choice whether or not they want to be exposed to this type of material. Stores such as the one mentioned advertise gasoline, Coca-Cola and Doritos, not sexually-explicit matter.

The material I described cannot be sold to minors, therefore, it should not be displayed in way a that exposes minors to it. The regulations being proposed by HB 4360 are reasonable and do not present an undue burden to business owners.

We have asked several attorneys to examine the legislation to determine whether or not it is constitutional. Without exception, they say it is. They point out that this does not present an undue burden on businesses and it is well within the authority of the state to regulate the display of material which is harmful to minors.

Even our neighbors south of us have legislation which accomplishes exactly what HB 4360 proposes to do. Both Indiana and Ohio expressly prohibit displaying sexually-explicit material in a place where minors can see it.

We have heard some complaints that stores will need to inventory everything to determine whether or not to display the material in a restricted area. I would argue that they already need to determine whether the material is legal or illegal to sell to minors. This legislation will not change what a store can sell to minors, only how they display that material.

Again, this bill is not about a person’s right to choose to view this material. Nor is it about free speech. There are no new prohibitions to adults and no new categories of material being denied to minors. The regulations are reasonable and easy to comply with. This legislation is about protecting unsuspecting parents and children from being exposed to material that cannot be legally sold to minors because of its harmful and offensive nature.

Again, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.

Dan Jarvis
Research and Policy Director

Dan Jarvis is the Research and Policy Director at Michigan Family Forum.