Students get chance to create new law |

Students get chance to create new law

Mandatory retesting for senior citizen drivers and stiffer penalties for litterbugs are among the ideas McKeesport Area High School students would like to see made laws.

“There’s a $1,000 fine, but nothing is ever done,” Terrence Manning said, referring to littering. “They know they’ll never be caught. Someone needs to start enforcing it.”

Manning, 17, a senior, said he might enter his ideas on the littering issue in a statewide contest designed to make young people aware of how laws are created.

Students can enter their ideas in the “There Ought to be a Law” contest by writing an essay and submitting it to their local representative by Oct. 31. The winner will have his idea introduced in the state House of Representatives and will spend the day working as a page for that body.

“New laws come from the everyday Joe Citizen,” state Rep. Marc Gergly told McKeesport Area High School students.

Gergly, a White Oak Democrat, visited McKeesport Area High School last week as part of a program that had legislators returning to high school for the day to talk to students.

A McKeesport alumni and former school director from that district, Gergly spent the day talking to students and teachers about the state legislature, laws and what state representatives do.

“Senior citizens know how to access state government,” said Gergly, who explained to students that his office can help them do such things as register to vote, get their car registered, and check on their state income tax refund.

Students can also help state lawmakers by making them aware of problems that need to be addressed.

“You guys have great ideas,” Gergly said. “You don’t realize.”

Gergly said two of ideas entered in the student contest in the past have become state law, including one recently passed that increases penalties for drivers who speed while driving commercial vehicles.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.