In February 1989, seven year old Melissa
Moreina and her mother were attacked by a pit bull in Miami-Dade County,
Florida. In the ordinance that followed the attack, all pit bulls in Miami-Dade
county were officially illegal. The ordinance was written by Robert
Ginsberg, the Dade County attorney, for the County Board of Commissioners to
discuss and vote on. The County Board of
Commissioners is made up of 13 elected commissioners representing the 13
districts of the state. While the county attorney is usually the author of
ordinances, it’s the County Board of Commissioners that decide whether or not
the ordinance will be enacted.
All
of Miami-Dade County’s legislation, including this pit bull ordinance, can be
found on the county’s government website. The attack on young Melissa spurred
a huge public outcry against pit bulls and the county commissioners began
working out a solution to what people were calling “the dangerous dog epidemic.”
The ordinance is part of a large number of activity systems; the state of
Florida, the county of Miami-Dade, humane societies both in Miami and around
the state, veterinary offices, animal rescues, police stations, fire departments,
and all the citizens of Florida. The most relevant activity system that the
ordinance is a part of, and the focus of this article, is what I like to call,
the political arena. The political arena is the abstract place where candidates
try to win voters by any means possible in order to get elected or reelected. Everything
that a politician does is part of the political arena, from kissing babies to
making speeches.
Most laws
and ordinances are direct results of the public having an issue with something
going on in the world. In 1989, a little girl was severely injured by a pit
bull, so the public wanted something to be done about it. According to the
ordinance, “this article is intended to utilize the authority and
powers of Metropolitan Dade County in order to secure for the citizens of this County
the protection of their health, safety, and welfare.” However, because the ordinance is part of the
political arena, it is clear that there are other motives at work. Specifically
the desire to get reelected and remain in power.
The official style runs rampant in the
political arena, especially in legislation. In this ordinance, the official
style is used for three main reasons; one, it helps maintain the commissioners positive
appearance in the eyes of the public; two, it allows enough confusion in order
to protect the county from getting sued in the event that a mistakes is made; three,
it is the prescribed norm of behavior for legal documents to be written in the
official style.
While the whole text is rife with the official style,
the three key characteristics of the official style found in this text are passive
voice, shapeless sentences, and verbose phrases. An example of passive voice is
“Humane destruction of the pit bull dog
by order of a court of competent jurisdiction.” This phrase hides
both the subject and the action. The subject is neatly tucked away at the end
of the sentence (the court), while the action is hidden behind the euphemistic
phrase “humane destruction.” They couldn’t just say, “we will kill your pit
bull” because they want to remain in a positive light in order to get reelected.
An example of a shapeless sentence is “Technical deficiencies in the dog's
conformance to the standards described in subsection (b) shall not be construed
to indicate that the subject dog is not a "pit bull dog" under this
article.” This sentence is particularly confusing,
but once translated it becomes apparent how important it could be to the owner
of a boxer. This sentence basically means that even if the dog in question
doesn’t conform to their standard pit bull appearance, it can still be
considered a pit bull. This means that the county could declare your boxer a
pit bull and kill it, but you couldn’t sue them because even if it didn’t look
like a pit bull that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a pit bull. In the long run, this would hurt the
commissioners image and hurt their chances of getting reelected, but in the
short run it might appear that they were just trying to do their best to
protect the citizens of Miami-Dade County.
Another characteristic of the official style used in
this legal document is verbose phrasing. Verbose phrasing can be found in many
legal documents because the legal team wants to try to cover all their bases
and to conform to the standard official style. An example of verbose phrasing
in the pit bull ordinance is, “No
pit bull dogs may be sold, purchased, obtained, brought into Miami-Dade County,
or otherwise acquired by residents of Miami-Dade County anytime after the
passage of ninety (90) days after the effective date of Ordinance Number 89-22.”
And
even though it would be simpler to say “It is illegal to bring or buy a pit
bull in Miami-Dade County starting 90 days after this ordinance” it would not
be considered appropriate in a legal document because it doesn’t cover all of
the possible scenarios.
The official style in this text is designed
to create a positive opinion of the commissioners, to conform to the standard
legal code style, and cover up any possible mistakes that the county might
make. However, the ordinance has a readability level of an 18.5 grade. This
means it has low readability and the average Miami-Dade County citizen is not
likely to understand the ordinance in its entirety. But on the surface, the
ordinance’s purpose is not to be understood. It doesn’t matter if people fully
understand the entire ordinance as long as they understand the gist of it: pit
bulls are illegal, pay a fine, register your dogs, etc. Its not to be argued,
its not to be torn apart and scrutinized, it’s a law. The commissioners put
this out on the table and it doesn’t matter to them that you understand it
fully as long as you mostly understand it and you follow it. Even focusing on
the ulterior motives of the ordinance, getting reelected, it doesn’t matter if
the citizens fully understand it. The citizens will get the basics, pit bulls
are now illegal, and presumably this is what the public wanted and since the commissioners
are doing what the people want, at least in this instance, its stands to reason
that they will get reelected.
Its also entirely possible that I’m
being pessimistic about the commissioners and their motives. It is possible
that the commissioners are convinced that the public is in danger and that it
is their job to protect the people from pit bulls. Its possible that my bias
against this particular ordinance (not only do I love pit bulls, but I believe breed
specific legislation does not reduce the number of dog bites), is affecting my
view of the commissioners and the real reason behind the ordinance. And even if
the commissioners are just doing the public’s will, isn’t that what they are
supposed to do? It isn’t necessarily a bad thing that the commissioners want to
get reelected because they were elected to serve the people and if they are
serving the people in order to get reelected, well then at least they are doing
what they are supposed to.
It is also important to note that even
though it was the County Board of Commissioners who voted on the ordinance, it
was Robert Ginsberg who wrote it. This critique only focused on the
motives of the commissioners, but perhaps I should have focused on the motives
of the author, after all, he is the one who employed the Official Style. It
could be that Robert Ginsberg had a personal vendetta against pit bulls and
wrote the ordinance in order to confuse the commissioners who were voting on
it. The average reading level of most people is 7th grade, but what’s
the average reading level of the County Board of Commissioners? It’s possible
that they didn’t know what they were voting on, only that the people wanted it.
But that is a subject for another critique.
Websites:
By: Pearl C.
No comments:
Post a Comment