Editorial

EDITORIAL

Nightmare on Main Street

IT WASN'T OUR VERY WORST NIGHTmare, but it was right up there among the biggies, those scary ones in which you fall forever into a bottomless abyss or feel like you're stuck in molasses when trying to run from certain death. But this one is a nightmare no longer; it’s suddenly a frightening reality. After years of bad dreams about Big Brotherism invading motorcycling, we’ve been rudely awakened to find ourselves staring down the muzzle of a double-barreled bureaucrat. And if he has his way, the sport we all love so much will undergo some of the most sweeping— and possibly some of the most negative—changes in its history.

The boogeyman in this dreamscape is Senator John C. Danforth of Missouri, a man intent on legislating high-performance streetbikes out of existence. If the bill he submitted to the U.S. Senate this past July becomes law, the Department of Transportation will begin imposing performance restrictions on motorcycles sold for street use. The DOT would do this in any one of several ways, including Danforth's recommendation to establish maximum rates of acceleration or minimum power-toweight ratios—or both. Whatever the methodolgy, the result will be the same; the end of the street superbike.

In the unlikely event that you have no idea what I’m talking about, turn to page 10. There, in Roundup, you will find The Compleat Guide to the Danforth Bill. We have reprinted the bill in its entirety, along with the statement Danforth issued when introducing the bill to the Senate. You’ll also find some background information on this matter, as well as the names and addresses of all the members of the senate committees that will examine the bill. Our goal is to encourage all concerned motorcyclists to write the appropriate elected officials and voice their anger at this proposed legislation.

But the operative word here is “concerned.” I’ve discussed Danforth’s bill with countless fellow riders, and I’ve been shocked to find that many of them are quite nonchalant about it all. Not surprisingly, those showing the most indifference were not big-bore sportbike riders, but instead ran the gamut from fulldress touring types to fans of dualpurpose bikes, from confirmed cruisers to staunch followers of mid-size sporting machines. But they all have had one thing in common; the belief that only the biggest, fastest puresport models—the 130-horsepower, 160-mph racer-replicas—will be affected. As a consequence, they feel they have nothing to worry about, since mega-powered sportbikes are not their cup of motorcycling tea.

But they're sadly mistaken. Remember that this matter is in the hands of people to whom motorcycles are as popular as acid rain, politicians who neither ride bikes nor understand why anyone else would. So if you think that their definition of a high-performance motorcycle will be the same as ours, you're wrong. If you believe that they will exempt the likes of 140-mph. 600cc Ninjas and Hurricanes from the high-performance category, think again. If you’re convinced that 80or 90-horsepower touring bikes or cruisers that turn high-12-second quarter-miles will be overlooked, you’re still dreaming.

For proof, you need look no farther than Danforth's statement to the Senate, in which he compares the power and weight of high-performance bikes to that of 98-horsepower, 2800-pound automobiles. If those are his standards of reference for power-to-weight ratios, we can look forward to 400-pound. 14-horsepower sportbikes, 800-pound tourers with less than 30 horsepower on tap, 500-pound cruisers powered by a whopping 18 ponies. In other words. the hottest bikes of a post-Danforthlegislation era might easily get blown in the weeds by a Honda 250 Rebel.

Don’t laugh; it could happen. And you can bet your last cc that it will happen unless the motorcycling public gets off its butt, collectively and individually, and raises hell with the elected officials who hold the future of this bill in their hands. They need to know that their constituency includes enough irate motorcyclists that their re-election just might be hanging in the balance.

There’s more at stake here, however, than just the future of motorcycle performance. By trying to control the kinds of bikes we can or cannot buy, Danforth is tampering with the fundamental freedoms on which this country is built. I won't deny that there are certain problems inherent in the selling of high-powered bikes to the general public; but there are other, more rational, more democratic solutions. And as a tax-paying American who is a fully qualified operator of high-performance motorcycles, I am outraged beyond belief at being told by a public servant that I cannot buy such machines.

Besides, if Danforth succeeds with high-performance bikes, what’s next? High-performance cars? Small aircraft? High-risk recreational activities? Firearms? Think hard on that one, because once the precedent is set. it becomes much easier for government to impose its will on almost any aspect of daily life.

In his statement, Danforth makes numerous references to the way motorcycles are legislated in other countries. I would like to remind the Senator-just as you should remind the legislators to whom you write—that this is not a foreign country. This is America, a country that successfully fought a war for its independence and the right to do things more democratically than they are done in other lands. If the will of the people in this matter is to find a more equitable solution than simply banning the sale of performance bikes, it is incumbent upon the lawmakers to do so.

Government of, by and for the people is still possible in America. But you are “the people.” It’s up to you to make it happen. —Paul Dean