PHOENIZ, Ariz. – Even if you regularly read the stuff I publish here on YNOT, there’s probably a lot you don’t know about me.

For example, do you know whether I’ve ever won an Emmy, Grammy, Oscar or JD Power Award?

Was I drafted in the first or third round of the 1990 NFL draft? Or did I go undrafted and become deeply resentful of the Indianapolis Colts for passing on me in favor of Jeff Fucking George?

Can you be 100% certain, or even convinced beyond reasonable doubt, that I’m not the Pope?

On top of all the other things you don’t know about me, there’s no way you can know for sure whether I’m an Arizona state legislator. For that matter, I doubt the Arizona Legislature itself can be sure I’m not one of them, because they have some very unlikely characters running around that joint who likely do a lot of anonymous posting on the internet.

Given this unresolvable uncertainty, I’m taking the position that as a potential legislator who hasn’t been definitively shown to not exist, I have the right to propose new legislation for Arizona without going through the normal process of collecting signatures to introduce a ballot measure, or raising the issue for a vote on the House floor, or slipping a few Ben Franklins to a staff member of the Speaker of the House to plant a seed in the Speaker’s ear about it, or however things normally work around here.

I think we can all agree that if there’s one issue facing the nation that stands out above all other issues – yes, including immigration, fentanyl addiction, the economy and the looming question of who will win the next season of the runaway hit reality show The Entirely Concealed in a Large Wooden Box Anonymous Dancer – is the easy access to content that is harmful to minors afforded by the internet, cable and satellite television, motion pictures, postage stamps, fax machines, ice sculptures  and other emerging technologies.

Sure, state legislatures around the country have tried to tackle this problem by imposing age-verification mandates for adult websites, but in my view, these efforts are too modest, too timid and too easily circumvented through the use of so-called “VPN” technology. (Admittedly, as a possible state legislator, I have no idea what “VPN” stands for, but I assume it’s something deeply concerning, extremely leftist and fundamentally wrong, like “Victor’s Porn Network” or “Vicious Penguin Nationalists.”)

At any rate, the point is, these age-verification measures suffer from a lot of defects and issues, like under-inclusiveness, over-inclusiveness, in-between-inclusiveness, ringing in the ears and dry mouth. And Americans don’t want or need an under-inclusive dry mouth; we want and need bold solutions.

This is why today I’m announcing the introduction of the “Action to Lessen the Effects of Ribald Talk” Act, AKA the ALERT Act.

As you can plainly see, my legislation satisfies the most important test of constitutionality, in that the acronym spells something easy to say and important sounding. How can anyone oppose something called the “ALERT Act,” after all? Would they have us NOT be alert at time like this, when illegal immigrant gang members are trying to turn our kids transgender through woke history lessons taught by militant Islamic communists?

The basic tenets of the ALERT Act are simple: People under the age of 18 must be shielded from harmful content, whether that harmful content is sexually explicit, merely sexually suggestive, or Chappell Roan.

Like all good bills, the ALERT Act begins with a series of “whereas” statements, followed the obligatory thing the Legislature “be resolved to do.”

Whereas it’s definitely possible I’m an Arizona State Legislator;

Whereas a lot of content on the internet, cable television, all the TikChats and SnapToks and WhatNots is harmful to minors (and possibly harmful to miners as well);

Whereas “locker room talk” is the gateway drug to “pillow talk” and – God forbid – the “sex talk,” barriers must be erected, but never described as “erect” while in the presence of children, to keep Arizona’s minors (and miners) innocent and pure;

Whereas Arizona already has a lot of even dumber laws on the books, so screw it, what’s one more?

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona: We gotta do something about all this “harmful to minors” shit on the interwebs.

Of course, to survive court scrutiny, a bill like the ALERT Act must be specific, narrowly tailored and subject to challenge only in the Northern District of Texas. Which is why I’ve included the following bit of brilliant, legally bulletproof statutory construction in Section 13-6969:

All definitions in the above section are extremely specific and clear and if they were tailored any more narrowly, Kate Moss couldn’t fit inside them, I tell ya. And if you don’t like it, you can take up your complaints with U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk.

In the extremely unlikely event the above text doesn’t hold up in court, I’ve performed a twist on the usual ‘severability clause’ just to make the validity of the ALERT Act even more ironclad:

“If any provision under this Section shall be held or made invalid by a court decision, statute or rule, well, they’re just wrong and this entire law survives intact. Checkmate, motherfuckers!”

Granted, the ALERT Act can’t solve all our problems – the USA network will presumably continue to run Law & Order: Special Victims Unit 24/7 with impunity, for example – but it’s good start. And it will be an even better start once I’ve written the rest of it, which, trust me, is going to be spectacular, filled with twists and turns, a real thrill ride, edge-of your-seat, blockbuster of summer movie fun proposed legislation.

If you live in Arizona, please write your representatives today and urge them to support the ALERT Act. They won’t have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about, but hey – these are Arizona legislators we’re discussing here; since when do they know what anyone is talking about?

Stop sign image by Pixabay from Pexels