Steven Tyler does what he wants. And sometimes that means releasing another Aerosmith album. Or being a reality TV show judge. Or proposing a bill to the Hawaii State Senate. He’s Steven Tyler, so why not?
Tyler proposed a bill—officially named Hawaii Senate Bill 465 and nicknamed the Steven Tyler Act—which would protect celebrities from paparazzi. Tyler wants his privacy and is trying to make sure all those lights and cameras won’t disturb him. The Hawaii Senate has passed the Steven Tyler Act. This is good news for Tyler, who owns a house in Maui.
“The paradise of Hawaii is a magnet for celebrities who just want a peaceful vacation. As a person in the public eye, I know the paparazzi are there and we have to accept that. But when they intrude into our private space, disregard our safety and the safety of others, that crosses a serious line that shouldn’t be ignored,” Tyler said in a statement last month.
Twenty-three of Hawaii’s 25 senators were on Tyler’s side with the bill, which is now headed to the House of Representatives. But one senator, Sen. Sam Slom, isn’t as supportive of Tyler’s latest campaign.
“We have been the butt of many editorials and jokes across the country for this proposed legislation. My final remarks to Steven Tyler as he sang so eloquently are, ‘Dream on, dream on,’” Slom said. Slom believes that Hawaii’s current laws are adequate enough to deal with Tyler’s privacy concerns.
Some other celebrities have jumped on the Steven Tyler Act-bandwagon. Britney Spears, Mick Fleetwood and the Osbournes have endorsed it, but several national media organizations claim that the act infringes on the freedom of the press. Another problem of the act is that the language is not specific enough. The Senate Judiciary Committee has adopted the more specific terminology used in an already-existing anti-paparazzi statute in California.
“It’s better, but it doesn’t change its fatal flaws,” said media lawyer Jeff Portnoy. “Our only chance to get some sanity into this is in the House.”