(Editorial - Graphic Illustration - MetroCreativeConnection)

Perhaps without meaning to, Ohio Rep. Johnathan Newman, R-Troy, demonstrated perfectly the problem with a portion of Ohio House Bill 583, “regarding the provision of online library database resources by public schools, public libraries, and state agencies.” The bill would amend state code to target “inappropriate” content that has made its way onto InfOhio and the Ohio Web Library — vendors used as online information databases in most public schools and libraries.

HB 583 would establish “safety policy and technology protection measure requirements” for the companies. Sounds OK, right?

The devil is, as always, in the details.

According to a report by the Ohio Capital Journal, co-sponsors Newman and Rep. Kevin Ritter, R-Marietta, suggest companies would face a three-strike rule, wherein they would be notified of reported offenses coming from advertisements that may come with the online resources and give the chance to “cure” the resources by removing the material.

“No doubt, our schools and libraries select educational resources thoughtfully, aiming to provide reliable, age-appropriate content amid tight budgets and heavy demands on their time,” Ritter said in a recent hearing of the House Finance Committee, according to the Capital Journal.

But Newman tipped his hand, claiming a parent from his district said her son asked “Mom, why is this boy pretending to be a girl, wearing girls’ clothes?”

“Because he knows Mom and Dad don’t approve of that, he knows this is wrong,” Newman said, according to the Capital Journal.

Surely Newman understands it is possible for one parent not to approve of something without that meaning it is universally “wrong.”

In fact, defining what is “wrong” is a deeply individual thing, not policeable by the state. Who, then, defines what is “wrong,” “inappropriate” or “obscene” for the purposes of state code?

“I would be shocked if anyone had problems on this committee if we explicitly denied (removing) illegal drugs, tobacco, pornography, all that stuff,” said state Rep. Bride Rose Sweeney, D-Westlake. “But when it comes to obscene, and what the definition of obscene is, we’ve had many debates on the floor of the House.”

State Rep. Jamie Callender, R-Concord, was right to take criticism of the HB 583 a step further, saying that “overreach” even in purportedly well-meaning legislation, can be “problematic,” according to the Capital Journal.

Worse, Ritter acknowledged this bill will not affect all school districts equally, as there are other vendor options.

“Some of our WEALTHIER (emphasis ours) school districts … contract with other vendors,” Ritter said, according to the Capital Journal. “This bill would not touch those relationships.”

Ritter knows his own Washington County districts can only dream of being classified as “wealthier.”

HB 583 is certainly both problematic and an attempt at overreach, as have been previous agenda-driven efforts that were not workable. Lawmakers’ attention is better spent elsewhere.