[ABANDONED] Betting House Advertisements Restrictions Act

[Sierra Lyricalia]

--snip--

<etc.>

OOC: The operating hours provision still violates GAR #302. I don't know how you can salvage it.

Anyway, I think neither cars nor no-smoking zones are the right comparison - in effect, you are telling smokers they aren't permitted to smoke except at night. I am not convinced that such a provision actually protects people from the evils of smoking (any more than outlawing heroin has been effective at reducing heroin use/abuse), and I am similarly unconvinced that closing casinos for two thirds of the day will actually stop more than a small fraction of the most functional gambling addicts.
Meanwhile the casinos themselves, and their workers, all earn markedly less than they hitherto have. This provision simply does not protect the consumer in any meaningful way.

[Bears Armed]

OOC: The operating hours provision still violates GAR #302.

OOC: Agreed. [another one-sixth of GenSec]

[Eothasia]

OoC: Very well. If that is the case, then the operating hours provision has been removed from the bill and it has been reorganized. The OP has been updated but I'll post the newest draft here also for ease.

---

Betting House Advertisements Restrictions Act
Category: Regulation | Area of Effect: Consumer Protection | Proposed By: Eothasia

---

---

Recognizing the inherent right of citizens around the world to make their own decisions;

Also Recognizing the right of each World Assembly member state or legislate over the regulations and restrictions applied to betting houses and other centers for gambling;

However Understanding that betting houses pose a serious risk to the general well-being of a population, in particular to those of a younger age, and understanding that the societal impact of their presence is not always properly analyzed and valued;

Believing that proper regulation is required in order to ensure that betting houses conform to societal norms and are not manipulative, harmful or destructive to the population;

The World Assembly Hereby,

Declares that World Assembly member states must implement obligatory restrictions on betting houses present and operating within their jurisdictional boundaries. These restrictions must include, but are not limited to:

1. Setting a limited period of the workday in which betting houses are allowed to promote themselves —in all forms, including physical ads, promotional posters, radio and television commercials, or others—, to be determined by the member state individually insofar as the advertising window does not appear during:

a. Prime time emissions;
b. Interim periods of heavy-audience events, such as sports, political debates, contests, and others;
2. Betting houses must properly inform via informational posters on the entrances of all storefronts of the dangers of betting and gambling addictions;
3. Betting houses must not be situated within a perimeter of three hundred [300] standardized meters of an educational center;

Tasks governments with carrying out a series of reforms in order to ensure the widespread education of the population with regards to the dangers of betting and gambling addictions, which can include but are not limited to:

1. The preparation, production, and publication of anti-gambling advertising explaining the dangers of betting houses;
2. The establishment of government-sponsored programs to help individuals afflicted with gambling addictions overcome them, such as:

a. Support groups;
b. Subsidization of individual therapy sessions;
3. The creation of social centers for underage persons in neighborhoods with high concentration of betting houses and gambling addictions to foment other activities of social benefit;

Establishes the World Assembly Committee for Betting Control —henceforth referred to as the CBC— which shall be tasked with (a) forming advisory committees to assist in the formulation of measures to ensure the objectives set by this resolution are met, and (b) forming observation groups to study the implementation and effects of such measures on the population;

Tasks the World Assembly CBC with compiling annual reports in order to determine whether member states are adhering to this resolution;

Forbids any World Assembly member state from establishing restrictions that directly contradict those set forth by this resolution;

Grants member states a period of eighteen months upon ratification of this bill or upon admission into the World Assembly to bring these measures into place in their respective jurisdictions.

---

---

[Kenmoria]

“You have banned the two best times to be advertising from having advertising in them. Also, a sports gambling house now can’t advertise during major sports games, which seems completely counter-intuitive.”

(OOC: The earlier point about educational centres including home-schooled children, made by BA, still stands.)

[Eothasia]

--snip--

“Yes,” the Eothasi ambassador says as he nods, “that is precisely the point. Ambassadors, we are not here with this bill in hand in order to ratify it while still allowing the proliferation of the negative effects of gambling advertising to continue. Surely, when the first restrictions on advertising for high-content alcohol or tobacco products were introduced, people considered that they were being too restrictive and that such measures should not be taken. If those measures aren’t taken, then we aren’t making any difference in the topic whatsoever. These regulations will not help the betting houses to grow, that much is certain, but we work towards a healthier and safer population, which should be our primary objective.”

OoC

Oops, forgot to submit that one in the latest draft edit. Done.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Could you please stop snipping off the quotes entirely? You could remove the bits you're not making a point on, or make it something like...

*snip about advertizing at specific hours*

...as that way it's more obvious what exactly you're referring to.

[Kenmoria]

--snip--

“Yes,” the Eothasi ambassador says as he nods, “that is precisely the point. Ambassadors, we are not here with this bill in hand in order to ratify it while still allowing the proliferation of the negative effects of gambling advertising to continue. Surely, when the first restrictions on advertising for high-content alcohol or tobacco products were introduced, people considered that they were being too restrictive and that such measures should not be taken. If those measures aren’t taken, then we aren’t making any difference in the topic whatsoever. These regulations will not help the betting houses to grow, that much is certain, but we work towards a healthier and safer population, which should be our primary objective.”

OoC

Oops, forgot to submit that one in the latest draft edit. Done.

“In that case, the Kenmoria WA Mission, being a representative of a Laissez-Faire nation, cannot offer support for this bill.”

(OOC: Excellent idea, but an ultracapitalist nation such as Kenmoria won’t support.)

[Eothasia]

OOC: Could you please stop snipping off the quotes entirely?

OoC: Oh, sure, sorry.

“In that case, the Kenmoria WA Mission, being a representative of a Laissez-Faire nation, cannot offer support for this bill.”

The Eothasi delegation sighed collectively —yet another support gone to the wind— but the Ambassador merely nodded courteously. “Understood, Ambassador. We humbly thank you for your attention.”

[Eothasia]

BUMP for thoughts, suggestions or counterarguments?

[The New Nordic Union]

BUMP for thoughts, suggestions or counterarguments?

'Fundamentally: Whatever is a betting house? A house which bets? A house in which someone makes a bet? A house in which an organised betting business is set up? What about bets between individuals, e.g., family members? What about betting businesses not operating in houses?'

[Eothasia]

'Fundamentally: Whatever is a betting house? A house which bets? A house in which someone makes a bet? A house in which an organised betting business is set up? What about bets between individuals, e.g., family members? What about betting businesses not operating in houses?'

“Though the Eothasi delegation initially believed the introduction of such a definition was necessary to the development and success of the bill, upon this request, we have ultimately decided it would be beneficial to include and specify the businesses this bill would affect.”

[Liberimery]

New draft submitted.

---

Shifting his attention to continue, he says, “With regards to the elements of online gambling: as we have stated, the draft presented in this chamber is merely a rough draft to display the intent of our delegation in present a bill of this stature to the World Assembly. It is still a work in progress and its presentation for delegation approval and, should it achieve it, posterior vote is still not perceived as the next course of action.

“Furthermore, casinos offering other types of services — such as live shows, restaurants, or others — can still offer these services to the populace at any given time of the day, with the exception that their gambling section be closed off until the times specified by individual countries in accordance with the window presented in this bill. No part of this text implies, directly or indirectly, that businesses offering other services would see themselves restricted because of this bill.

“For cruise lines, it is understood — as is norm currently — that any cruise ships that fly flags of member states of the World Assembly have to abide by the laws and regulations implemented by that country, among which we would find regulations for areas meant for gambling and betting. As such, these areas on cruise ships would also be closed off during the times indicated in the bill.

“Lastly, we believe that this bill fits under the second exception as indicated by GAR #068, which states, ‘REQUIRES that no commerce be generally restricted by the WA unless: The enterprise causes an extreme hazard to national populations’.”

Your moral hazard is not an extreme hazard by any stretch of my imagination and you declaring the primary tax revenue of my nation any hazard does not make it so. Provide the evidence that my nation is extreme risk of extinction because people gamble legally.


You’re own Bill is against you as you are not blanket banning the gambling industry but the time of day in which we should.

Additionally, the cruise industry thrives on gambling. In fact, Ships in Nations with bans on gambling still gamble at sea once in international waters. Even the WA can’t enforce its laws out there and we will consider any member nation that tries to board a Liberimery flagged civilian vessel in international waters without her captain’s consent to be committing an act of war.

[Bears Armed]

In fact, Ships in Nations with bans on gambling still gamble at sea once in international waters. Even the WA can’t enforce its laws out there and we will consider any member nation that tries to board a Liberimery flagged civilian vessel in international waters without her captain’s consent to be committing an act of war.

"Under existing WA law, ships in international waters count as being inside the legal jurisdiction of the nations where they are registered. Consequently, if this proposed resolution were to be passed at a time when your nation was a member of the WA, your own government would be legally required to enforce it with respect to Liberimery-flagged ships... and would face potential penalties for non-compliance if it did not do so."

Hwa Sue,
Legal Attaché,
Bears Armed Mission to the World Assembly
(and anthropomorphic male Giant Panda).

[Eothasia]

Your moral hazard is not an extreme hazard by any stretch of my imagination and you declaring the primary tax revenue of my nation any hazard does not make it so. Provide the evidence that my nation is extreme risk of extinction because people gamble legally.

You’re own Bill is against you as you are not blanket banning the gambling industry but the time of day in which we should.

Additionally, the cruise industry thrives on gambling. In fact, Ships in Nations with bans on gambling still gamble at sea once in international waters. Even the WA can’t enforce its laws out there and we will consider any member nation that tries to board a Liberimery flagged civilian vessel in international waters without her captain’s consent to be committing an act of war.

“Indeed, as my colleague from Bears Armed has explained, international waters are not devoid of law. A cruise liner flying the Liberimerian flag must abide by Liberimerian law, which must itself abide by the laws ratified by the World Assembly. With this point clear, we understand that nations that have illegalized gambling activities in their countries cannot have cruise ships registered that do not abide by those gambling prohibitions.

“That said, Ambassador, the fact that the bill —which, as you may have noticed, has been heavily modified in order to comply with previously-ratified bills in the World Assembly, concretely with GAR #302— only restricts the hours is not ‘against me’, as you put it. If anything, it was a tentative first step to reduce gambling activity in general; that would be similar to saying that anything short of illegalizing the use of tobacco is ‘against the legislator’ because they’re admitting it’s not harmful.

“Furthermore, we must strongly recommend that you reclassify gambling addictions from ‘moral hazards’. It is very much like those that are addicted to drugs that bring bodily harm; those that are addicted to gambling and betting are unable to control themselves and end up betting their entire livelihoods —homes, cars, savings meant for their own or their children’s education, etc.— in order to win at the game. This presents a very real hazard to the population, and it is something we believe must be dealt with at an institutional level. That said, Ambassador, given the shift in focus of the bill, we consider that this is no longer a conversation adequate for this chamber at this time.”

[Liberimery]

And I ask why we cannot advertise during prime time, which previously was acceptable time to actually gamble. So it is unsafe to now say “You should gamble” on television between the hours of 7 pm and 11 pm but it’s perfectly acceptable to the ambassador to actually gamble during these time periods in the earlier drafting of this legislation. And again, any we offer the services you request but we hold the individual responsible for the damages they cause others. If a drunk driver kills a family, do you fine the liquor store that sold him the drink or the car manufacturer? Assuming your government even trusts your citizens to even drink alcohol. Again you are legislating your fundamental religious morality to atheists who do not believe in your god. Your definition of “hazard” is not “extreme” hazard as you have said is your standard.

Again, were you to believe casinos were an extreme hazard , then your Proposal would be for the total ban of gambling in the WA. Since you are unwilling to commit to that strength of legislation, you clearly do not believe that gambling is an “extreme hazard” and are waisting your precious supply of oxygen entering the arguing for the consideration of the advertising of gambling as an extreme hazard. You should put the total ban on gambling forward like you want, or sit in your perfect gambling free land and keep your judgements of mine to yourself. It doesn’t matter to me what you do. We both know the total ban won’t pass and I have good money on your response being “more lecturing that someone will die as an immediate and direct cause of personal mismanagement of one’s own money” with my bookie.

[Newark Aristocracy]

The WA ambassador of the Newark Aristocracy reads over the proposal.

He gets up.

"I don't approve of the setforth proposal, should it pass, nations in the WA whom rely on gambling will be hit like they just got nuked. I would actually love to condemn the nation who laid the proposal out in the WA.

So,I vote no,also the advertising part is so stupid,that part itself should be condemed."

[Kenmoria]

The WA ambassador of the Newark Aristocracy reads over the proposal.

He gets up.

"I don't approve of the setforth proposal, should it pass, nations in the WA whom rely on gambling will be hit like they just got nuked. I would actually love to condemn the nation who laid the proposal out in the WA.

So,I vote no,also the advertising part is so stupid,that part itself should be condemed."

(OOC: A condemnation would be quite over-the-top, and I can’t think of a way to make it legal. However, this does represent the unlikelihood of nations support something so detrimental to so many economies. On another note, Eothasia, do you think you could fit the CBC under another committee? There are so many of them already.)

[Eothasia]

And I ask why we cannot advertise during prime time, which previously was acceptable time to actually gamble. So it is unsafe to now say “You should gamble” on television between the hours of 7 pm and 11 pm but it’s perfectly acceptable to the ambassador to actually gamble during these time periods in the earlier drafting of this legislation. And again, any we offer the services you request but we hold the individual responsible for the damages they cause others. If a drunk driver kills a family, do you fine the liquor store that sold him the drink or the car manufacturer? Assuming your government even trusts your citizens to even drink alcohol. Again you are legislating your fundamental religious morality to atheists who do not believe in your god. Your definition of “hazard” is not “extreme” hazard as you have said is your standard.

Again, were you to believe casinos were an extreme hazard , then your Proposal would be for the total ban of gambling in the WA. Since you are unwilling to commit to that strength of legislation, you clearly do not believe that gambling is an “extreme hazard” and are waisting your precious supply of oxygen entering the arguing for the consideration of the advertising of gambling as an extreme hazard. You should put the total ban on gambling forward like you want, or sit in your perfect gambling free land and keep your judgements of mine to yourself. It doesn’t matter to me what you do. We both know the total ban won’t pass and I have good money on your response being “more lecturing that someone will die as an immediate and direct cause of personal mismanagement of one’s own money” with my bookie.

“Why yes, Ambassador,” the Eothasi delegate said, squinting his eyes, “it very much was prohibited under previous renditions of this legislation. However, as I’m sure you’re aware, this bill is under debate in this chamber, and as such, we have to shift in order to reach compromises. The very concept of us being ‘unwilling to commit’ because we do not propose a bill that we are certain — especially given the response in this chamber regarding the limitation of working hours — will not prosper. Instead of imposing our own ideas on the world, we intend to propose a plan to deal with what we believe to be a hazard to world populations, and then deliberate with our colleagues around the globe in order to find a solution that benefits all nations as much as possible, and not only economically, but also socially. Furthermore, if you could explain your ‘religious morality’ accusation, it would certainly be beneficial to the development of this debate, as we are unsure from where you could have derived such a conclusion.

“On the points regarding alcohol and tobacco consumption: no, an illegal act being conducted while drunk does not cause blame to reside with the liquor store, nor does the development of any numerous types of cancer cause blame to reside with cigarette companies. However, you must realize that we are equating, in that sense, the field. An activity considered to be a hazard for those suffering from addictions not being allowed to promote their activity, in the same way that alcohol producers above a certain grade are not allowed to advertise their product, or in the same way that cigarette companies are forced to advertise the dangers of smoking on their product. The parallel you have drawn does not correspond to the situation at hand with the reality of this bill, Ambassador.”

The WA ambassador of the Newark Aristocracy reads over the proposal.

He gets up.

"I don't approve of the setforth proposal, should it pass, nations in the WA whom rely on gambling will be hit like they just got nuked. I would actually love to condemn the nation who laid the proposal out in the WA.

So,I vote no,also the advertising part is so stupid,that part itself should be condemed."

“Ambassador, I request from you the utmost respect for our delegation and the bills set forth in this chamber. Under no circumstances is such a reaction towards our country nor the bill put forth by our delegation acceptable. If you are in disapproval of the bill at a fundamental level, you are more than free to express such a concern within the confines of etiquette exercised in this chamber and exemplified by our colleagues from countless other nations that have participated in this debate.”

On another note, Eothasia, do you think you could fit the CBC under another committee? There are so many of them already.)

OoC: It's something we could study. I'll definitely add it to the agenda and go through a quick run of other committees that have already been created. Thank you for the suggestion!

[Araraukar]

OOC: If the issue with gambling is that it can be addictive to some people and thus cause issues, doesn't that go with anything addictive? Alcohol, drugs, nicotine, pornography, physical exercise, smartphone use, computer games, NationStates... It's hard to think of something that someone would not be able to become addicted to.

[Eothasia]

OOC: If the issue with gambling is that it can be addictive to some people and thus cause issues, doesn't that go with anything addictive? Alcohol, drugs, nicotine, pornography, physical exercise, smartphone use, computer games, NationStates... It's hard to think of something that someone would not be able to become addicted to.

OoC: Alcohol, drugs, and nicotine addictions all lead to very harmful results for the individuals addicted. Pornography itself doesn't have any inherently dangerous outcomes as a result of addiction (that could lead to poverty or death), nor does physical exercise. Smartphone use and computer games don't have any complete studies that show that their addiction is inherently harmful to society. The bill isn't about avoiding addiction to things -- hell, you can get addicted to a person you're in love with, or with a TV show, or like you said, literally anything -- but rather, to things that produce harm. Like gambling your livelihood away.

[Separatist Peoples]

Like gambling your livelihood away.

OOC: Sounds like their problem, not the WAs.

[Eothasia]

Well, clearly the support for this bill is non-existent for the World Assembly. As such, I think we'll be abandoning this instead of pursuing support from delegates. Thanks for your interventions, everyone.

[Youssath]

Well, clearly the support for this bill is non-existent for the World Assembly. As such, I think we'll be abandoning this instead of pursuing support from delegates. Thanks for your interventions, everyone.

"Support for this bill does not equate to a total rejection of the idea of this bill, ambassador. Yes, I'm firmly against this drafted resolution as the points stated above, but I am willing to let you know that a softer stance on this matter should be taken as a whole in consideration of economies who are wholly dependent on gambling. I would suggest not to take up drastic mandates like the ones you have proposed previously, and that rather you should provide recommendations and leave it up to the nation's jurisdictions to deal with this matter appropriately. After all, the matter of gambling does bring about negative externalities to society as a whole - but what this resolution is proposing here is in my own terms, radical."

"I believe that the majority of the delegations here in WA are willing to vote on a softer legislation of this bill. Just not this one, Ambassador."

[Kenmoria]

Well, clearly the support for this bill is non-existent for the World Assembly. As such, I think we'll be abandoning this instead of pursuing support from delegates. Thanks for your interventions, everyone.

(OOC: Thanks for coming here with a draft. Don’t be disheartened with this response, as your legislation-writing and rules-following were both very good. I look forward to possibly seeing you around the GA forums again.)

[Great Nortend]

OOC: It would be very impractical to force advertisers to have to cover up and uncover adverts throughout the day. I also don't see why betting adverts during 'prime time emissions' or interim periods are especially worthy of banning.

Furthermore, the definition of 'betting house' is very sloppy. A business is an undertaking of trade. It cannot be 'where' people place bets. People place bets with businesses or through businesses. I would probably just defined a betting house as a business which accepts and pays off bets on certain events at published odds. I've honestly never heard of the term 'betting house'. Do you mean 'bookmakers' or possibly 'gambling house'?Furthermore, I don't see what the clause beginning with 'often' is meant to achieve. You've already defined betting house is somewhere where bets are made. Does it matter that different events have different bet styles? Nothing seems to be affected by it.

Edit: I didn't see that it was abandoned. Sorry.