the debate goes on

On the local news this evening they announced that the State Senate has approved a bill requiring that all public schools teach cursive again. Now it has to be approved by the House.  I'm fine with this because I think cursive is a quick and efficient, and, if well done, very attractive way to write with pencil or pen on paper if you should happen to need to write on paper (which I still do quite a lot). When I was in 7th and 8th grade our teacher had us not only practicing cursive but doing it with a pen dipped in a bottle of ink.  Lucky for us the desks we were sitting at were so old that they still had the little holes cut in them to hold the ink bottle.  In the report the comment was made that one of the concerns about children not learning cursive is that they wouldn't be able to legally sign their names on documents like checks and deeds.  Is that true? I have never heard that a printed 'signature' isn't legally binding.  Way back in history an X was a legal signature if it was witnessed. Goodness knows, the signature I scrawl on the signature pads when I charge groceries seldom looks much like my cursive signature but no one has ever questioned it.  Perhaps we could just teach children to sign their names???