NATION

PASSWORD

[FREE DRAFT] Drug Trafficking Economics Act

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
New Maadim
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 47
Founded: Aug 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

[FREE DRAFT] Drug Trafficking Economics Act

Postby New Maadim » Thu Aug 26, 2010 9:54 pm

Strength: Mild

CONCURRING with past policy that "the right of nations to legalise, illegalise, restrict or tax recreational drugs as they see fit, within the bounds of any past or future WA resolutions concerning such substances", and adopting the definition of recreational drugs as "chemical substances that affect the central nervous system, causing changes in behavior and/or potential addiction, and defining all drugs as being recreational, unless they are widely recognised within individual nations as legitimate medical substances and used in a manner deemed appropriate by medical experts, or they are used for a recognised sacramental purpose;"

RECOGNIZING the continuing economic and military damage done near national borders due to recreational drug smuggling, where a disparity in drug wholesale prices provides economic motive for violence and the criminal domination of whole communities,

PERCEIVING a lack of international planning in regulating the price of recreational drugs, though drug smuggling is an international problem,

1. Empowers the International Drug Education Agency (IDEA) to solicit data and compile yearly a set of best estimates of recreational drug prices worldwide,
2. Empowers IDEA to compile yearly, for each class of recreational drug, a list of nations with drug wholesale prices more than one standard deviation above and below the WA average, which shall be defined here as "potential drug consumers" and "potential drug suppliers", respectively. Nations will be defined here as "severe cases" where prices are more than two standard deviations above or below the WA average.
3. Empowers IDEA to request and compile statistics yearly for each class of drug regarding the total expenditure for prohibition of drug supply versus the prohibition of drug demand in the aforementioned two categories of nations. Drug supply prohibition shall include but may not be limited to crop eradication, aerial crop surveillance, enforcement operations targeting supply of lights, fertilizer, and electricity, and expenses pertaining to the arrest, prosecution, imprisonment and/or other punishments of drug manufacturers. Drug demand prohibition shall include but may not be limited to the cost of buyer "stings", suppression of street-level and personal mail order sales, expenses created by placing or permitting fake drug sellers, mandated drug testing. mandated or free drug treatment programs, and imprisonment or other punishments inflicted on recreational drug consumers and retailers who directly interact with individual consumers.
4. Strongly urges potential drug consumers to adjust spending priorities to fund suppression of drug demand in excess of funding for suppression of drug supply. Further urges severe cases to fund suppression of drug demand to at least twice the level of suppression of drug supply.
5. Strongly urges potential drug suppliers to adjust spending priorities to fund suppression of drug supply in excess of funding for suppression of drug demand. Further urges severe cases to fund suppression of drug supply to at least twice the level of suppression of drug demand.
6. Respecting the right of any nation to prohibit or permit recreational drugs as a matter of sovereignty, reserves the right of the WA to take additional action to mandate adjustment in national spending priorities. This shall only occur in severe cases, where these spending recommendations have not been implemented voluntarily within three years, subject to the sense of the delegates that a severe smuggling problem in fact exists and that no satisfactory progress toward resolution is being made. In keeping with precedent, the WA shall have no authority to increase or decrease overall drug spending or to affect the legality of any substance, but shall solely demand change in the ratio between two categories of enforcement spending.

------------

This draft, and the idea behind it, are submitted freely by New Ma'adim to the public domain and is free for discussion, use, copying, and modification at will by any WA member for any purpose. Attribution may be required by the rules, but is waived by New Ma'adim to the maximum extent permissible by the rules.
Last edited by New Maadim on Thu Aug 26, 2010 10:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Enn
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1228
Founded: Jan 26, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Enn » Thu Aug 26, 2010 9:57 pm

OOC: Much and all as I like my contribution to the WA recognised, citing it by name is illegal. It's considered a 'House of Cards' offence.

Also, Category/Strength?
I know what gay science is.
Reploid Productions wrote:The World Assembly as a whole terrifies me!
Pythagosaurus wrote:You are seriously deluded about the technical competence of the average human.

User avatar
New Maadim
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 47
Founded: Aug 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby New Maadim » Thu Aug 26, 2010 10:08 pm

OOC: In keeping with that recommendation, I've removed three references to other legislation. My intent was not to make a "house of cards" requiring a full reading of the other legislation, but only to clarify that I did not seek to amend it (with the exception of giving IDEA additional responsibilities).

Thanks for the quick response!

User avatar
New Atlanticia
Secretary
 
Posts: 27
Founded: Aug 25, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby New Atlanticia » Thu Aug 26, 2010 10:13 pm

(ooc: Correct, if you add the category and get rid of those opening lines. The House of Cards effect isn't a prohibiter, it is to protect. If the proposal was to go through to a vote, and the listed act were successfully repealed, than your own act would be by nature defeated. So make those few minor changes, and reintroduce the draft to us. I would be more than happy to consider supporting the idea.)

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18566
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Grays Harbor » Thu Aug 26, 2010 10:23 pm

This appears to be little more than setting up a committee for the sake of setting up a committee.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
New Maadim
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 47
Founded: Aug 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby New Maadim » Thu Aug 26, 2010 11:24 pm

The committee already existed from the International Drug Education Act (mention of which had recently been removed). It seemed unrealistic, and unwise, to permit it to enact a sanction against a nation on its own, because the capability of such an action makes a committee a body with political power, which then becomes the object of political scheming. Only by separating its recommendations from any subsequent action is the possibility maintained that it may operate in an apolitical way and seek to maximize only its professional reputation. Nonetheless your point is well taken, and any recommendations you can offer for safely strengthening the draft would be most welcome.
Last edited by New Maadim on Thu Aug 26, 2010 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:54 am

But the problem is that if IDEA was repealed then the draft would have no basis to operate and would ultimately become useless. That's the house of cards issue.

User avatar
Grays Harbor
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18566
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Grays Harbor » Fri Aug 27, 2010 5:41 am

New Maadim wrote:The committee already existed from the International Drug Education Act (mention of which had recently been removed). It seemed unrealistic, and unwise, to permit it to enact a sanction against a nation on its own, because the capability of such an action makes a committee a body with political power, which then becomes the object of political scheming. Only by separating its recommendations from any subsequent action is the possibility maintained that it may operate in an apolitical way and seek to maximize only its professional reputation. Nonetheless your point is well taken, and any recommendations you can offer for safely strengthening the draft would be most welcome.


Gluing all copies extant of this proposal to pieces of plywood prior to burning them would strengthen it. At least it would stiffen the paper it is printed on.

As for the draft porposal itself, this is completely unnecessary. As we stated previously, it is a committee for the sake of having a committee. Wonderful for the bureaucrats, not so much for the rest of us.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Flibbleites
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 6569
Founded: Jan 02, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Flibbleites » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:38 am

Charlotte Ryberg wrote:But the problem is that if IDEA was repealed then the draft would have no basis to operate and would ultimately become useless. That's the house of cards issue.

BZZT! Wrong.

The Rules wrote:House of Cards

A Proposal must be able to stand on its own even if all referenced Resolutions were struck from existance; however, you may assign duties to an existing committee. Should the Resolution that creates the committe be Repealed, the committee will continue to exist, but in a reduced capacity.

User avatar
Charlotte Ryberg
The Muse of the Westcountry
 
Posts: 15007
Founded: Mar 14, 2007
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charlotte Ryberg » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:49 am

Flibbleites wrote:
Charlotte Ryberg wrote:But the problem is that if IDEA was repealed then the draft would have no basis to operate and would ultimately become useless. That's the house of cards issue.

BZZT! Wrong.

The Rules wrote:House of Cards

A Proposal must be able to stand on its own even if all referenced Resolutions were struck from existance; however, you may assign duties to an existing committee. Should the Resolution that creates the committe be Repealed, the committee will continue to exist, but in a reduced capacity.

Hmm, it did seem that the recent trend is that a resolution creates a branch to extend the duties of an existing committee... :p


Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads