As Clear As the Rules of Baseball
by Ken Bresler
Beacon Hill, July 7, 1997
Republished in Plain Language News (on-line publication of National Partnership for Reinventing Government), March 2000
When it comes to lawgivers who changed the world, Alexander Joy Cartwright is overlooked. Cartwright, who helped draft baseball’s rule book in the 1840s, is usually not mentioned in the same sentence as Moses, Hamurabi, Solon and Napoleon.
But he deserves to be.
Cartwright’s work lives on, incorporated into The 1997 Official Rules of Major League Baseball. The rules of baseball are elegant in their eloquence, exquisite in their simplicity, as fluid as a double play. If only the state laws of Massachusetts were as clear as the rules of baseball.
Here’s part of the rule against spitballs, Rule 8.02(a)(1):
“The pitcher shall not bring his pitching hand in contact with his mouth or lips while in the 18-foot circle surrounding the pitching rubber.
“EXCEPTION: Provided it is agreed to by both managers, the umpire prior to the start of the game played in cold weather, may permit the pitcher to blow on his hands.
PENALTY: For violation of this part of the rule the umpires shall immediately call a ball….”
The prohibited act is clear. The exception is clearly marked; so is the penalty.
This provision works even though it disobeys some principles of plain English. One sentence is 30 words, one-and-a-half times as long as the 20-word limit that some linguists recommend. Two phrases are in the passive voice, which is harder to understand than the active voice. And “prior” is legalese for “before.”
But you can still follow it. Now try this provision from the Massachusetts General Laws, chapter 175I, section 6:
“Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, no insurance institution, insurance representative or insurance-support organization may utilize as its disclosure form in connection with insurance transactions a form or statement which authorizes the disclosure of personal or privileged information about an individual to the insurance institution, insurance representative or insurance-support organization unless the form or statement:
“(1) is written in plain language;
“(2) is dated;
“(3) specifies the types of persons authorized to disclose information about the individual;…”
And so it goes for a total of eight subsections. Subsection 7 has two sub-subsections, A and B. Sub-subsection B in turn has two sub-sub-subsections, or whatever they’re called, i and ii.
The entire section is a single sentence, 271 words long – only 13 times the recommended length of a sentence.
Ironically, this section requires some insurance forms to be written in plain English. Where is the requirement that state statutes themselves use plain English?
In the Massachusetts Constitution, Article 4 of the Declaration of Rights states, “The people of this Commonwealth have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves….” How can we govern ourselves when the rule book is gobbledygook?
Massachusetts men fought and died at Gettysburg so that, in Abraham Lincoln’s words, “government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from this earth.”
How did we end up with a government of, by, and for lawyers – lawyers who charge hundreds of dollars an hour to decipher public information?
Ignorance of the law is no excuse, but enforcing ignorance through unreadable laws is inexcusable. Is it a coincidence that a compilation of laws is called a code, as in the Napoleonic Code?
This is what I say: Decode the laws, demystify the statutes, write the ordinances in ordinary language.
If major league baseball can do it, so can Massachusetts.