MIKE VINSON, Post Columnist
Posted: Sunday, September 5, 2010 7:43 am

Up front, I’ll admit that I had a totally different subject planned for this week’s column.

However, after accidentally stumbling upon something of a rather unique theme and content, I feel compelled to table the aforementioned plan and enlighten you with a story of how a sense of fashion, indeed, plays a significant role in the world of politics.

A young, female acquaintance, attending college, approached me about helping her with her college English course: tutoring, editing, etc.

As she showed me the outline for her fall semester (2010) assignments, I picked up her required textbook for this English class, “Patterns For College Writing: a Rhetorical Reader and Guide,” and started casually thumbing through it.

What?! No-no, can’t be, I thought.

So, I closed my eyes, regrouped my thoughts, opened my eyes, and, sure enough, there it was, in plain English: “‘Droopy Drawers’ bill.”

Essentially, this particular portion of the chapter talked about some of the specifics surrounding the “Droopy Drawers” bill, and at the end of the chapter, there was/is an exercise that required/requires students to answer certain questions pertaining to the “Droopy Drawers” bill.

After a snicker turned into a chuckle, the chuckle into laughter, I commenced researching the authenticity of the Droopy Drawers bill.

As best research can tell, here’s a fairly accurate account:

Algie T. Howell (Democrat-Norfolk), a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, had received numerous complaints about the “in-your-face fad” of young people wearing their pants down around their knees, exposing their underwear.

“Underwear is called underwear for a reason — because it is normally worn under your clothes,” Howell, an African American, stated to fellow Virginia legislators during a heated floor debate, very early 2005.

Fellow Virginia Delegate Lionnell Spruill, also an African American and a Democrat, countered Howell by arguing that the bill would unfairly target young blacks to the extent that parents would be forced to “take off work to accompany their children to court just for making a fashion statement.”

(Not attempting to play the overused and abused “race card,” but I am of the firm opinion that the current fad of wearing pants down around one’s knees, exposing underwear in the process, transcends anything to do with ethnicity: Blacks kids do it; white kids do it; Hispanic kids do it; Asian kids do it; Middle Eastern kids do it.)


After much debate, the Virginia State House did pass this “Droopy Drawers” bill by a margin of “60-34” in early February 2005, and the bill/law allowed for a $50 fine to be levied against anyone displaying “his or her underpants in a ‘lewd or indecent manner.’”

Expectedly, the American Civil Liberties Union got involved, stating that “the bill would not withstand Constitutional scrutiny.”

After considerable ridicule from all across the globe, a Virginia Senate Court of Justice committee “unanimously killed” the “Droopy Drawers” bill only a couple days after it was passed.

Of course, the “Droopy Drawers” incident still is discussed in many circles: While some feel it is a First Amendment right to wear pants so low that a vast area of underwear is revealed, others find it offensive and feel there should be legal restraints prohibiting it.

When I think of a politician taking the legislative floor to argue a certain bill/legal measure, I think charcoal-gray suit, white or pastel shirt, nice tie, shoes shined.

Indeed, there is something to be said for Algie T. Howell and his connection to the “Droopy Drawers” bill.

For certain, it forced me to investigate further. Had it been the “Charcoal Gray Suit” bill, I doubt I would’ve gone to the trouble.

(Sources: Patterns For College Writing: A Rhetorical Reader and Guide, pages 242-247; authors: Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. A number of related internet sites.)

Mike Vinson can be contacted at mike_vinson56@yahoo.com.