Does the Ansel Adams Act really support amateur and individual photographers like us?

Recently – to be precise on Jan 2nd – Rep Steve Stockman (R-Tex) introduced an “Ansel Adams Act” that could have significant implications for the rights of photographers to take pictures in public places. The act seeks to remove many restrictions from taking photographs in national parks, public places and law enforcement officers, among the many list of items it emphasizes in it.

Even if you are a newborn, maternity and family photographer based and do most of my sessions in the studio, this still matters to you. Why? First and foremost, because each one of us has a role to play in the freedom of speech. And that expression of speech has been more restricted in recent years than previously.

But as many things, the action might result in a different outcome than the intent. As I read through the bill, and various comments, I see and agree with some of the major issues folks have commented on already.

I think the act is well intentioned but opens a whole lot of questions than it answers. Please comment and share your perspective.

1. The act was introduced on Jan 2nd, a day before Rep Stockman’s last day in office. GREAT! Now, it has to be re-introduced again. So this Congress finally gets around to doing something but does it so late, it has to be re-done.
2. The act is pretty open about whose rights it is planning to restore or save. You can read the act below, but suffice to say, the part that concerns me and several people is the last two parts of this statement, “In General.–It is contrary to the public policy of the United States to prohibit or restrict photography in public spaces, whether for private, news media, or commercial use.” Ok – so big pocket news media and big-budget movie makers can use the national parks, not pay a dime, and then tax payers like you and me have to foot the bill. But this one is a slippery slope. How do you suggest we distinguish and charge between a commercial crew and individual business owners like you and I?
3. Concerns for responsible use of park land. As a commentator on The Online Photography states, he “previously lived near Sedona, Arizona and came across some commercial full-scale photo shoots for new SUVs. They were a big production and intrusion” and then makes the right case that he (and so would I), “hate to see a flurry of similar actions in Yosemite, Yellowstone, Canyonlands, etc.” How do we ensure responsible use?
4. I am a big proponent of our armed forces and law enforcement personnel, who puts themselves in harm’s way everyday to protect us. But there are bad actors everywhere, a few bad apples. Section 3.b. of the act states, “Nothing in this Act shall restrict Federal agencies from taking lawful steps to ascertain whether or not photography may consist of reconnaissance for the purpose of endangerment of public safety or national security or for other unlawful activity.” Another slippery slope. How do you distinguish between a bad actor taking away your camera because s/he was mad at you or someone acting in good faith? Tough, right?

So, what do you think? Do you believe this is another goody to the big corporations to make their movies in our national parks without having to pay a dime, or is this really well intentioned and needs to be supported?