Panhandling debate goes round and round

Sometimes, the newspaper covers a problem and then provides a solution in the same edition. It's like magic.

On Tuesday, a story on page 3A detailed the city's latest attempt to deal with “aggressive panhandling,” especially begging at busy intersections. It makes people uncomfortable, and it's not safe, officials say.

Then, on page 5A, we see a story on the city receiving a grant to construct its very first roundabout. Wait just a minute ...

You really can't panhandle at roundabouts, unless you're especially quick and agile. Unlike a regular old intersection, the cars don't stop, at least not for long. There's barely even time to read a tale of woe scribbled on cardboard.

So, basically, if we want to end panhandling, we need more roundabouts. You're welcome.

Seriously, though, on this panhandling thing, are we certain that this is a major problem?

If you've ever visited an urban area with a truly big panhandling problem - San Francisco, for instance - you know that Cedar Rapids doesn't really have much of a panhandling problem. We have some perennial outdoorapreneurs who man some busy intersections seeking spare loot. They make us uncomfortable for many reasons, valid and less so.

I simply question whether our definition of a problem in need of government action should encompass all manner of unease, annoyance and discomfort. We've got speed cameras and red light cameras, in part, to free up police for other vital stuff. Assessing the temperament of panhandlers doesn't seem vital.

I certainly don't want anyone to be touched, blocked, intimidated or frightened. I thought law enforcement already frowned on threats and intimidation. There are all sorts of good ordinances, codes and laws on the books that aren't always enforced, due to a lack of time, resources, etc. We should be very skeptical of adding more to make ourselves feel better.

If it is the will of the people, the council should at least be very careful. Courts elsewhere have tossed out panhandling bans on First Amendment grounds. In Utah, a federal court axed a state ban that it deemed too broad. An Arizona appeals court threw out a Phoenix ordinance that banned panhandling at night. (The First Amendment Center tracks the panhandling issue here.)In those cases and others, courts found that some laws, in attempting to stop begging, also stepped on other forms of outdoor/roadside free expression.

Heck, if giving money to politicians is now constitutionally protected speech, maybe begging for bucks will be next.

If the council keeps its ordinance narrow, it might stand. But I say we keep moving. Think roundabouts.