There’s beauty in simplicity: a well-turned phrase or an idea that doesn’t bother with gymnastics, and just gets right to the point.

That’s what we see right now in a proposed state law — “Alina’s Law” — that would allow the use of electronic monitoring to help protect people who have obtained protection from abuse orders (PFAs). The proposal was approved unanimously by the state Senate last week, and now faces a committee meeting in the House.

We hope House members see the same merit in it that we do, and give it swift passage to the desk of Gov. Tom Wolf, who should sign it into law as quickly as he can.

This isn’t a new or novel idea. By 2009, 13 states had enacted legislation allowing monitoring devices to be used on domestic abusers and stalkers who violated orders of protection.

That year, according to The New York Times, about 5,000 people nationwide were being tracked by the programs.

That’s nothing compared to the number of people subjected to stalking over the same one year period: 3.4 million, according to a study by the Justice Department.

In mid-2016 the state House ordered a review of Pennsylvania’s PFA law. But it wasn’t until this year, after Alina Sheykhet, a 20-year-old student at the University of Pittsburgh, was killed Oct. 2, allegedly by her ex-boyfriend Matthew Darby, that legislators in Pennsylvania were stirred to take action.

Sheykhet had obtained a PFA against Darby, a former Cranberry Township resident who is charged with homicide in that case and rape in another, less than three weeks before her killing.

Sheykhet’s killing exposed multiple issues with Pennsylvania’s PFA process — from an almost-total lack of communication among counties, police agencies, prisons and jails to the fact that defendants, not police, must currently verify the defendant’s address and serve them with the court order.

There’s also a troubling lack of consistency when it comes to applying the rules and regulations surrounding PFAs. For example, a federal statute that prohibits defendants with a PFA from possessing firearms isn’t always applied when a judge issues a final protection from abuse order.

Advocates for victims of domestic abuse and violence are correct when they say the most effective long-term solution is early education and prevention. If more people were better-equipped to manage emotions like anger and had good examples of positive relationship behavior to draw from when faced with difficult or emotionally-charged scenarios in their own lives, we would be far better off.

However, until society finds a way to ensure that all children grow up learning the importance of treating others with respect and dignity, and the vital nature of empathy, there will continue be a need for a PFA system.

Giving judges the authority to use GPS technology to track offenders in these kinds of cases seems like a common sense move that could help save lives and reduce the number of violent and harassing incidents victims experience.

And at the end of the day, that’s a result the state’s PFA system needs to focus on achieving. Perhaps a simple solution really is the answer.