Unjust Macbride rule persists

Given a clear choice between ending or perpetuating an injustice, you would think the Iowa Legislature would not hesitate to do the right thing.

You would, of course, be wrong.

The Legislature, for about the 25th straight year, had an opportunity this session to repeal a law that arbitrarily discriminates against a certain class of citizens based on the size of their outboard motors.

The House on Tuesday, by a 58 to 37 vote, passed a bill that would have allowed operation of boats with motors exceeding 10 horsepower at any time on Lake Macbride.

Then on Thursday, in a move effectively killing the bill for this session, Sen. Dick Dearden, D-Des Moines, said he would not allow the measure to be considered by the Senate Natural Resources Committee, of which he is chairman.

Dearden said he killed the bill not because he opposes it but in deference to a colleague, Sen. Joe Bolkcom, D-Iowa City, whose constituents wish not to share the lake during the prime summer recreational months with the 90 percent of Iowa boaters whose motors exceed the 10 horsepower limit.

Dearden, who worked to repeal a similar limit on Big Creek Lake in 1996, said the same logic supports the removal of the Macbride limit.

At least Dearden doesn't insult Iowans' intelligence by putting forth arguments that, if they were dogs, wouldn't even come out from under the porch, let alone hunt.

Neither did Bolkcom or Sen. Bob Dvorsky, D-Coralville, who during the latest legislative consideration simply expressed their confidence that the measure was doomed.

Only Rep. Mary Mascher, D-Iowa City, attempted to defend the status quo for her constituents, asserting that Macbride is a “special” lake deserving to be reserved during the prime summer outdoor recreation months for the quiet, gentle folks who prefer paddling and sailing to motorized locomotion.

The fact of the matter is Lake Macbride is not the Boundary Waters. It is a state-owned impoundment that would be of less than average quality had the state not recently invested $2.4 million in shoreline and watershed improvements – money derived in large measure from fees paid by Iowa anglers excluded from the lake.

Proponents of the status quo also argue that opening the lake to the “big motor” hoi polloi would damage the lake's fragile shoreline. In a textbook example of illogical criminal profiling, they contend the “big boat” people are more likely than small-motor operators to violate the year-round no-wake restriction in effect at Lake Macbride.

Even Rep. Nate Willems, D-Solon, who in representing his constituents voted against changing the horsepower rule, agrees that the status quo makes little sense and that the Legislature, if starting from scratch to address the Lake Macbride access issue, would do so differently.

Dearden said his decision not to consider the bill was not a matter of party discipline, but there is little doubt that party affiliation played a role in the House votes. The measure passed the House Natural Resource Committee by an 11-9 vote, with Democrats casting all nine nays. On the House floor, Democrats cast 35 of the 37 "no" votes.

Given that the Lake Macbride caucus is solid Democrat, it seems likely that House Democrats were, like Dearden, supporting their colleagues right or wrong, rather than weighing the issue. Either that, or the Democrats are trying to establish their brand as the party of small motors and privileged access to a “special” public resource.