[PASSED] Pesticide Regulations

[Reploid Productions]

READ ME BEFORE VOTING AND PLEASE UPVOTE


APPROVE HERE

Pesticide Regulations

Category: Environmental
Area of Effect: Agriculture

The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING previous efforts at enviromental protection,

RECOGNIZING that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemical pesticides to keep their crops healthy,

CONCERNED of the effects that pesticides could have on the environment and the inhabitants of member nations, such as contamination of waterways, soil and groundwater, as well as unintended harm to non-target organisms,

UNDERSTANDING that, like all pollution, pesticide run-off does not respect national boundaries,

HEREBY

1. Extends the mandate of the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) to monitor the use of pesticides in member nations, their unintentional environmental effects, as well as disseminate information on how to best avoid environmental contamination,

2. Defines "chemical pesticide" as a chemical designed to prevent or kill pathogens and non-sapient pests, and which is used to protect crops or other organisms,

3. Establishes these regulations on chemical pesticides used and produced in the member nations:

1. All pesticide ingredients must be ones that are permitted for the intended use by the nation where the product is used,
   
2. The ingredients must be listed on the label of the pesticide, which must also contain instructions for safe handling and use,
   
3. No false advertising or unsubstantiated claims are allowed on the label,
   
4. The producer of the pesticide must include its name and contact information on the label,

4. Requires that the users of chemical pesticides must act to prevent pesticide runoff with preventative measures, including but not limited to buffer zones, selective application and avoiding irrigation right after applying pesticides,

5. Also requires that should an accident involving pesticides happen at or near the border of another nation, the member nation must contact the neighbouring nation's relevant officials, and offer assistance with possible clean-up measures,

6. Encourages member nations to research and use more environmentally-friendly pesticides as well as non-chemical forms of pest control, if these are not already in use,

7. Reaffirms that the use of pesticides as chemical weapons does not fall under the domain of this resolution.

Co-Authored by Araraukar

What does all this mean?

Why involve WASP?

We didn't want to add yet another committee, but did want an impartial way of both recording and spreading information on the hazards of pesticide use as well as how to avoid said hazards.

"Crops or other organisms", isn't that unnecessarily complicated wording?

We had "farmed organisms", until someone pointed out that pesticides are also used to protect organisms (that word is used so that it encompasses plants, animals, fungi and micro-organisms) that aren't farmed, such as destroying invasive species to protect native ecosystems.

What's with the micromanagement?

This is basically an attempt to close some loopholes, but also a way to add requirements similar to those of the real life world.

You mean we can't water the plants after applying pesticides?

You shouldn't water the plants right after applying the pesticides, as the water will - especially if it's overhead watering - wash away the pesticide. If you're using irrigation as a way of applying the pesticide, you won't need to water them right after anyway.

Why should we care what happens to some other nation, especially if it's not a WA nation?

Well if it's your fault that their soil, air or water is now polluted with pesticides, you definitely should be held responsible. There's also a loophole we're closing, where a nation might "accidentally" spread something right at the border just to cause trouble.

I can't think of a question other than "why have this clause at all?"

Again we're echoing what's happening in the real life world, where more environmentally friendly pesticides and non-chemical pest control - such as using natural predators of pest species, planting plants nearby that the pest species prefers over the crop plants, using predatory animal replicas to deter the smarter pests, and so on - are on the rise, since the more traditional chemical pesticides cause both environmental and health hazards. The bit about "if these are not already at use" means that if you're using those measures already, you won't have to waste money trying to research them.

Why the military exception?

There is an existing chemical weapons resolution, and many pesticides have, over the course of human history, been used in war as chemical weapons. Trying to legislate on that use would fall foul of the previous resolution, which would make this proposal illegal.

Why is this an international issue?

We couldn't think of a better answer than our environmental sciences specialised friend gave:

OOC: Because pesticides have serious environmental impacts that do not respect national borders or jurisdictions. Nations are not always willing to cede to a neighbor's insistence to stop a particular practice, feeling the political damage done doesn't surpass in value the benefit derived for themselves. Since a bilateral approach has many potential pitfalls in this case, unlike, say, border control issues, the logical body to regulate the issue is the World Assembly.

Doesn't this contradict the "Preventing Animal Abuse" resolution?

The keywords in that resolution are "cruelly or maliciously". A farmer spraying his crops to keep them from being destroyed by a pest animal is not doing so maliciously or to be cruel to the pests, he's doing it so they don't eat his crops. We're not sure if he would be allowed to do the mad scientist laughter while spreading the pesticide, or if that would go against GA #372.

If you have additional questions, we're happy to try and reply them!

Pesticide Regulations

Category: Environmental
Area of Effect: Agriculture

The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING previous efforts at enviromental protection,

RECOGNIZING that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemical pesticides to keep their crops healthy,

CONCERNED of the effects that pesticides may have on the environment and the inhabitants of the member nations, such as contamination of waterways, soil and groundwater, as well as unintended harm to non-target organisms,

UNDERSTANDING that, like all pollution, pesticide run-off does not respect national boundaries,

HEREBY

1. Extends the mandate of the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) to monitor the use of pesticides in member nations, their unintentional environmental effects, as well as disseminate information on how to best avoid environmental contamination,

2. Defines "chemical pesticide" as a chemical designed to prevent or kill pathogens and non-sapient pests, and which is used to protect crops or other intentionally grown organisms,

3. Establishes these regulations on chemical pesticides used and produced in the member nations:

1. All pesticide ingredients can only be ones that are permitted for the intended use by the nation where the product is used,
   
2. The ingredients must be listed on the label of the pesticide, which must also contain instructions for safe handling and use,
   
3. No false advertising or unsubstantiated claims are allowed on the label,
   
4. The producer of the pesticide must include its name and contact information on the label,

4. Requires that the users of chemical pesticides must act to prevent pesticide runoff with preventative measures, including but not limited to buffer zones, selective application and avoidance of adverse weather conditions likely to increase unintentional spreading of the pesticide,

5. Also requires that should an accident involving pesticides happen at or near the border of another nation, the member nation must contact the neighbouring nation's relevant officials, and offer assistance with possible clean-up measures,

6. Encourages member nations to research and use more environmentally-friendly pesticides as well as non-chemical forms of pest control, if these are not already in use,

7. Reaffirms that the use of pesticides as chemical weapons does not fall under the domain of this resolution.

Co-Authored by Araraukar

What does all this mean?

[spoiler=Clause 1]Why involve WASP?

We didn't want to add yet another committee, but did want an impartial way of both recording and spreading information on the hazards of pesticide use as well as how to avoid said hazards.

"Intentionally grown organisms", isn't that unnecessarily complicated wording?

We had "farmed organisms", until someone pointed out that pesticides are also used to protect organisms (that word is used so that it encompasses plants, animals, fungi and micro-organisms) that aren't farmed, such as destroying invasive species to protect native ecosystems.

What's with the micromanagement?

This is basically an attempt to close some loopholes, but also a way to add requirements similar to those of the real life world.

"Adverse weather conditions"? You mean you can't use pesticides if it's windy or rainy?

If it's very windy and you spray a field from an airplane, it's very likely that the pesticide won't land on the field at all. Or that if it's very rainy, whatever you spray or spread will be washed away. In both cases using the pesticide won't help the farmer at all. We hope that a reasonable nation would read this clause reasonably rather than go "But it rains in the spring, now we can't use pesticides, OMG!"

Why should we care what happens to some other nation, especially if it's not a WA nation?

Well if it's your fault that their soil, air or water is now polluted with pesticides, you definitely should be held responsible. There's also a loophole we're closing, where a nation might "accidentally" spread something right at the border just to cause trouble.

I can't think of a question other than "why have this clause at all?"

Again we're echoing what's happening in the real life world, where more environmentally friendly pesticides and non-chemical pest control - such as using natural predators of pest species, planting plants nearby that the pest species prefers over the crop plants, using predatory animal replicas to deter the smarter pests, and so on - are on the rise, since the more traditional chemical pesticides cause both environmental and health hazards. The bit about "if these are not already at use" means that if you're using those measures already, you won't have to waste money trying to research them.

Why the military exception?

There is an existing chemical weapons resolution, and many pesticides have, over the course of human history, been used in war as chemical weapons. Trying to legislate on that use would fall foul of the previous resolution, which would make this proposal illegal.

If you have additional questions, we're happy to try and reply them![/spoiler]

Pesticide Regulations

Category: Environmental
Area of Effect: Agriculture

The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING previous efforts at enviromental protection,

RECOGNIZING that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemical pesticides to keep their crops healthy,

CONCERNED of the effects that pesticides may have on the environment and inhabitants of the member nations, such as contamination of waterways, soil and groundwater, as well as unintended harm to non-target organisms,

UNDERSTANDING that like all pollution, pesticide run-off does not respect national boundaries,

HEREBY

1. Extends the mandate of the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) to monitor the use of pesticides in the member nations, their unintentional environmental effects, as well as disseminate information on how to best avoid environmental contamination,

2. Defines "chemical pesticide" as a chemical designed to prevent or kill pathogens and non-sapient pests, and which is used to protect crops or other intentionally grown organisms,

3. Establishes these regulations on chemical pesticides used and produced in the member nations:

1. All pesticide ingredients can only be ones that are permitted for the intended use by the nation where the product is used,
   
2. The ingredients must be listed on the label of the pesticide, which must also contain instructions for safe handling and use,
   
3. No false advertising or unsubstantiated claims are allowed on the label,
   
4. The producer of the pesticide must include its name and contact information on the label,

4. Requires that when using chemical pesticides at or near the border of another nation, the member nations must take all reasonable precautions to avoid cross-border contamination; and in the case of an accident, contact the neighbouring nation's relevant officials,

5. Encourages member nations to research and use more environmentally-friendly pesticides as well as non-chemical forms of pest control, if such are not already in use,

6. Reaffirms that the use of pesticides as chemical weapons does not fall under the domain of this resolution.

Co-Authored by Araraukar

Pesticide Regulations

Category: Environmental
Area of Effect: Agriculture

The World Assembly,

APPLAUDING previous efforts at enviromental protection,

RECOGNIZING that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemical pesticides to keep their crops healthy,

CONCERNED of the effects that pesticides may have on the environment and inhabitants of member nations, such as contamination of waterways, soil and groundwater, as well as unintended harm to non-target organisms,

HEREBY

1. Extends the mandate of the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) to monitor the use of pesticides in the member nations, their unintentional environmental effects, as well as disseminate information on how to best avoid environmental contamination,

2. Defines "chemical pesticide" as a chemical designed to prevent or kill pathogens and non-sapient pests, and which is used to protect farmed organisms,

3. Establishes these regulations on chemical pesticides used and produced in the member nations:

I. The active and inert ingredients can only be ones that are permitted for protection of crops by the nation where the product is used,

II.The active and inert ingredients must be listed on the label of the pesticide, which must also contain instructions for safe handling and use,

III. No false advertising or unsubstantiated claims are allowed on the label,



4. Encourages member nations to research and use environmentally-friendly pesticides as well as non-chemical forms of pest control,

5. Reaffirms that the use of pesticides as chemical weapons does not fall under the domain of this resolution.

Co-Authored by Araraukar

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

Suggustions are welcome. ( well, I have the suggustions already)

You know, I hated that changelog.

[United Great Britian]

"Citizens of certain member states are GMOs!"

[New Dukaine]

"Citizens of certain member states are GMOs!"

Wow, I didnt think of it that way! Changing definition

[United Great Britian]

"Citizens of certain member states are GMOs!"

Wow, I didnt think of it that way! Changing definition

"What about GMO salmon? Is that not also a health risk?"

[New Dukaine]

Defining a genetically modified organism (GMO), in this resolution, as a plant or animal (excluding citizens of member states) organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques.

underlined: Want me to add?

[United Great Britian]

Defining a genetically modified organism (GMO), in this resolution, as a plant or animal, (excluding human) organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques.

underlined: Want me to add?

"But, some member states are made up of GMO non-humans. How about Defining a genetically modified organism (GMO), in this resolution, as a plant or non-sapient animal,

[New Dukaine]

Defining a genetically modified organism (GMO), in this resolution, as a plant or animal, (excluding human) organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques.

underlined: Want me to add?

"But, some member states are made up of GMO non-humans. How about Defining a genetically modified organism (GMO), in this resolution, as a plant or non-sapient animal,

Edited definition that you quoted

Defining a genetically modified organism (GMO), in this resolution, as a plant or animal (excluding citizens of member states) organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques.

[Araraukar]

OOC post because I'm not feeling well and IC takes more energy: First of all, you've taken the absolutely right action in posting this here on the forum, rather than submitting it as is. Only this way we can help you make it better.

Proposal titles can be 30 marks long and that includes spaces. Yours is 4 marks too long. It's also a good idea to have that in the first post itself, not just the thread title.

Next you'll need Category and Area of Effect. In your case I'm guessing Environmental and Agricultural? You need to put that visible in your first post to keep people from having to guess.

Now let's go over your actual text.

Applauding the General Assembly for going after enviromental problems

This doesn't sound very professional. Most proposals, though it is by no means the only right way of doing things, start with "The World Assembly", so that you'll have something that is doing all the recognizing and mandating and such. Basically the whole proposal can read as a one, very long run-on sentence. So you might change that to:

The World Assembly,

Applauding previous efforts at environmental protection,

Recognizing that farmers around the world rely on pesticides and GMOs to keeps pests off of their crops,

Now here you're forgetting how the NS multiverse works. Not all WA nations are bound to one planet. Some are vast intergalactic empires, some inhabit one tiny island, and while proposals don't need to cater to every single nation's roleplayed reality, they need to take a multi-world approach. Also, it may be that in some nations they don't have the technology for GMOs, or that in others GMO tech is so advanced and has been in use for so long that they no longer have pest problems at all.

Also, most GM plants (the O stands for "organism") are modified to resist diseases and herbicides, as well as be unappealing to pests that would eat them. They aren't generally used "to keep pests off their crops".

A better wording, perhaps:

Recognizing that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemicals to keep their crops healthy,

Appalled on their affect on the enviroment and on the human body such as:

Here you're making the newbie-mistake (don't worry, almost everyone does this!) in thinking that all WA nations are inhabited by humans. Many aren't, and in many more even though they call their inhabitants humans, they aren't the same humans as us players are in the real world. Besides, you're writing an environmental proposal, not a health one. You don't need to get sapient creatures (a base rule for how the intelligent life thing works: a bacterium is alive, a housecat is alive and sentient, a human is alive, sentient and sapient) involved in the mixture at all.

1. Pollution
2. Health risks
3. Unintended harm to other organisms
4. Disease

Okay, why is that list there? Having lists in the preamble (that's the bits that come before the lines that make nations do something) is a sign of bad planning. You'll definitely want to include the "unintended harm to other organisms" and "run-off pollution" and such, but you want to write them into additional sentences. Even if you decide you'll just list them off, don't make an actual list, but say them in a sentence.

Also recognizing that Pesticides and GMOS can completely alter an organism to grow in ways that arent predictable or fully undersood by science,

Okay, people will yell at you for clumping pesticides with GMOs, because the two have little to do with each other. After all, even in real life, most GMO plants have been modified to not die when herbicide is used on the fields, so GMOs can both encourage and reduce the use of pesticides, depending on what the pest control strategy is. Additionally, in NationStates, there are many nations that are so advanced technologically (remember what I said about intergalactic empires?) that they do understand and are able to predict what happens to an organism that gets sprayed pesticides. In fact, for the most part, so do real world scientists; the pests die. Not all pesticides are carcenogenic.

I suggest you drop GMOs off this proposal altogether (it would solve your title length too) and concentrate on pesticides.

Sure that if GMOs and Pesticides continue to be used in this way that the effects will be outrageous

This sounds like you were a 10-year-old writing an essay for school. It's not what should go into the text of what is essentially an international law text. You can just drop it entirely.

Defining a genetically modified organism (GMO) is any organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques.

You don't need this, if you're smart and drop GMOs from the proposal completely.

Hereby declares the following

If you start with "The World Assembly", you can shorten this line to "Hereby".

1. The World Assembly Pesticide and GMO Monitorization Group, also known as the WAPGMG, to help monitor the use of pesticides and GMOs on farms and make sure they arent abusing it

Why are you making a committee that you don't give any good things to do? Also, "monitorization" sounds like a nonsense-word, wouldn't "monitoring" work? Additionally, have you checked the existing resolutions if there isn't already an agricultural committee that you could use? Or, that failing, you could always use the World Assembly Science Program (WASP), and simply extend its duties to cover this too. However, you need to sort out what you consider "abusing".

2. Voluntary Regulations of pesticides and genetically modified seeds sold in member stores

Voluntary-anything shouldn't be in the law text either. Just think if speed limits were voluntary in real life? We'd have about fifty times as many car accidents, because many people think that if it's voluntary, it means they don't have to do it. Also, what regulations? You need to spell out what you're regulating and how.

Also if "member stores" means the ones on NS forums, kill that line entirely, because the other forums aren't really recognized in the IC-reality around here, and mentioning them can count as metagaming violation. Remember, you're writing a law that acts on the member nations.

3. A Limit on the use of GMOs and pesticides, and if they go over this limit, the crops will not be allowed to go on member store shelfs,

What limit? That's like saying, okay, you can buy this many cans of soda, but if you buy any more, you're banned from coming back to the store. Wouldn't you want to know what that limit is?

That said, don't make a numeric limit, because nations are of different sizes - even in real life a number that works for Holland wouldn't work for India!

Hereby declares the Regulations of Pesticides and GMOs in Effect

This one is entirely unnecessary, as a resolution goes into effect when it passes.

Suggustions are welcome.

I suggest that you find a spell-checker online.

[New Dukaine]

35-hour bump.

Any more comments?

[Imperium Anglorum]

Who is going to pay this levy? 'Extra duties for the World Assembly Science Program'

[New Dukaine]

Who is going to pay this levy?

Please be more specific

'extra duties for the World Assembly Science Program'

I couldnt find the page with committees on it

help much?

[United Great Britian]

Who is going to pay this levy?

Please be more specific

'extra duties for the World Assembly Science Program'

I couldnt find the page with committees on it

help much?

There isn;t an official list, but that could be a good thing.

[New Dukaine]

while waiting, Pama wonders how he is going to campaign it, with out TG Stamps*

[Imperium Anglorum]

Who is going to pay this levy? 'extra duties for the World Assembly Science Program'

Please be more specific

Who — that is, the person, entity, or object, i.e. subject, that will pay a levy;
is — connecting verb to;
going — as this will occur after the resolution is passed, if it is passed;
to pay — infinitive form 'pay', i.e. transfer funds or give (someone) money that is due;
this — pronoun standing for the levy spoken of in the following quoted sentence;
levy — a tax, fee, or fine, e.g. duty, i.e. 'a payment levied on the import, export, manufacture, or sale of goods'.

[Imperium Anglorum]

2. Regulations of pesticides and genetically modified seeds sold in member nations stores by regulating the amount of the item going into agricultural sections

3. A limit (decided by the nation) on the use of GMOs and pesticides, and if they go over this limit, the crops will not be allowed to go on member nations store shelfs,

Parsons: All of this is utterly nonsensical.

1. Extra duties for the World Assembly Science Program, which include monitoring the use of pesticides and researching pesticides

Oh, and who is going to pay this levy?

---

while waiting, Pama wonders how he is going to campaign it, with out TG Stamps*

Having already solved that problem, Parsons readies to counter-campaign should the Dukainian delegation take a number of reckless moves.

[New Dukaine]

2. Regulations of pesticides and genetically modified seeds sold in member nations stores by regulating the amount of the item going into agricultural sections

3. A limit (decided by the nation) on the use of GMOs and pesticides, and if they go over this limit, the crops will not be allowed to go on member nations store shelfs,

Parsons: All of this is utterly nonsensical.

1. Extra duties for the World Assembly Science Program, which include monitoring the use of pesticides and researching pesticides

Oh, and who is going to pay this levy?

---

while waiting, Pama wonders how he is going to campaign it, with out TG Stamps*

Having already solved that problem, Parsons readies to counter-campaign should the Dukainian delegation take a number of reckless moves.

I edited those clauses a bit.

The Commitee can pay the levy, or member nations that could be fined...

WAIT! METAGAMING ALERT METAGAMING ALERT METAG-

okay, maybe the comittee

[Tinfect]

Appalled on their affect on the enviroment and on citizens of the WA such as runoff pollution, and unintended harm to other plants and organisms

"The World Assembly does not grant citizenship. In any case, the failures of your nation to contain the usage of pesticides are likely not shared by many Member-States."

Also recognizing that Pesticides can completely kill an organism if overused

"That is rather the idea. Unfortunately, however, the World Assembly has standing legislation on the elimination of lesser species."

2. Regulations of pesticides and genetically modified seeds sold in member nations stores by regulating the amount of the item going into agricultural sections

"Inexact and naive."

3. A limit (decided by the nation) on the use of GMOs and pesticides, and if they go over this limit, the crops will not be allowed to go on member nations store shelfs,

"Ineffective and naive."

[Co-authored by Araraukar]

OOC:
Given the low quality of this draft, I seriously doubt that.

[New Dukaine]

OOC post because I'm not feeling well and IC takes more energy: First of all, you've taken the absolutely right action in posting this here on the forum, rather than submitting it as is. Only this way we can help you make it better.

Proposal titles can be 30 marks long and that includes spaces. Yours is 4 marks too long. It's also a good idea to have that in the first post itself, not just the thread title.

Next you'll need Category and Area of Effect. In your case I'm guessing Environmental and Agricultural? You need to put that visible in your first post to keep people from having to guess.

Now let's go over your actual text.

Applauding the General Assembly for going after enviromental problems

This doesn't sound very professional. Most proposals, though it is by no means the only right way of doing things, start with "The World Assembly", so that you'll have something that is doing all the recognizing and mandating and such. Basically the whole proposal can read as a one, very long run-on sentence. So you might change that to:

The World Assembly,

Applauding previous efforts at environmental protection,

Recognizing that farmers around the world rely on pesticides and GMOs to keeps pests off of their crops,

Now here you're forgetting how the NS multiverse works. Not all WA nations are bound to one planet. Some are vast intergalactic empires, some inhabit one tiny island, and while proposals don't need to cater to every single nation's roleplayed reality, they need to take a multi-world approach. Also, it may be that in some nations they don't have the technology for GMOs, or that in others GMO tech is so advanced and has been in use for so long that they no longer have pest problems at all.

Also, most GM plants (the O stands for "organism") are modified to resist diseases and herbicides, as well as be unappealing to pests that would eat them. They aren't generally used "to keep pests off their crops".

A better wording, perhaps:

Recognizing that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemicals to keep their crops healthy,

Appalled on their affect on the enviroment and on the human body such as:

Here you're making the newbie-mistake (don't worry, almost everyone does this!) in thinking that all WA nations are inhabited by humans. Many aren't, and in many more even though they call their inhabitants humans, they aren't the same humans as us players are in the real world. Besides, you're writing an environmental proposal, not a health one. You don't need to get sapient creatures (a base rule for how the intelligent life thing works: a bacterium is alive, a housecat is alive and sentient, a human is alive, sentient and sapient) involved in the mixture at all.

1. Pollution
2. Health risks
3. Unintended harm to other organisms
4. Disease

Okay, why is that list there? Having lists in the preamble (that's the bits that come before the lines that make nations do something) is a sign of bad planning. You'll definitely want to include the "unintended harm to other organisms" and "run-off pollution" and such, but you want to write them into additional sentences. Even if you decide you'll just list them off, don't make an actual list, but say them in a sentence.

Also recognizing that Pesticides and GMOS can completely alter an organism to grow in ways that arent predictable or fully undersood by science,

Okay, people will yell at you for clumping pesticides with GMOs, because the two have little to do with each other. After all, even in real life, most GMO plants have been modified to not die when herbicide is used on the fields, so GMOs can both encourage and reduce the use of pesticides, depending on what the pest control strategy is. Additionally, in NationStates, there are many nations that are so advanced technologically (remember what I said about intergalactic empires?) that they do understand and are able to predict what happens to an organism that gets sprayed pesticides. In fact, for the most part, so do real world scientists; the pests die. Not all pesticides are carcenogenic.

I suggest you drop GMOs off this proposal altogether (it would solve your title length too) and concentrate on pesticides.

Sure that if GMOs and Pesticides continue to be used in this way that the effects will be outrageous

This sounds like you were a 10-year-old writing an essay for school. It's not what should go into the text of what is essentially an international law text. You can just drop it entirely.

Defining a genetically modified organism (GMO) is any organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques.

You don't need this, if you're smart and drop GMOs from the proposal completely.

Hereby declares the following

If you start with "The World Assembly", you can shorten this line to "Hereby".

1. The World Assembly Pesticide and GMO Monitorization Group, also known as the WAPGMG, to help monitor the use of pesticides and GMOs on farms and make sure they arent abusing it

Why are you making a committee that you don't give any good things to do? Also, "monitorization" sounds like a nonsense-word, wouldn't "monitoring" work? Additionally, have you checked the existing resolutions if there isn't already an agricultural committee that you could use? Or, that failing, you could always use the World Assembly Science Program (WASP), and simply extend its duties to cover this too. However, you need to sort out what you consider "abusing".

2. Voluntary Regulations of pesticides and genetically modified seeds sold in member stores

Voluntary-anything shouldn't be in the law text either. Just think if speed limits were voluntary in real life? We'd have about fifty times as many car accidents, because many people think that if it's voluntary, it means they don't have to do it. Also, what regulations? You need to spell out what you're regulating and how.

Also if "member stores" means the ones on NS forums, kill that line entirely, because the other forums aren't really recognized in the IC-reality around here, and mentioning them can count as metagaming violation. Remember, you're writing a law that acts on the member nations.

3. A Limit on the use of GMOs and pesticides, and if they go over this limit, the crops will not be allowed to go on member store shelfs,

What limit? That's like saying, okay, you can buy this many cans of soda, but if you buy any more, you're banned from coming back to the store. Wouldn't you want to know what that limit is?

That said, don't make a numeric limit, because nations are of different sizes - even in real life a number that works for Holland wouldn't work for India!

Hereby declares the Regulations of Pesticides and GMOs in Effect

This one is entirely unnecessary, as a resolution goes into effect when it passes.

Suggustions are welcome.

I suggest that you find a spell-checker online.

Appalled on their affect on the enviroment and on citizens of the WA such as runoff pollution, and unintended harm to other plants and organisms

"The World Assembly does not grant citizenship. In any case, the failures of your nation to contain the usage of pesticides are likely not shared by many Member-States."

Also recognizing that Pesticides can completely kill an organism if overused

"That is rather the idea. Unfortunately, however, the World Assembly has standing legislation on the elimination of lesser species."

2. Regulations of pesticides and genetically modified seeds sold in member nations stores by regulating the amount of the item going into agricultural sections

"Inexact and naive."

3. A limit (decided by the nation) on the use of GMOs and pesticides, and if they go over this limit, the crops will not be allowed to go on member nations store shelfs,

"Ineffective and naive."

[Co-authored by Araraukar]

OOC:
Given the low quality of this draft, I seriously doubt that.

I will try to redraft those clauses

[Leppikania]

while waiting, Pama wonders how he is going to campaign it, with out TG Stamps*

Like my API script? For loaning whenever it's open?

[New Dukaine]

while waiting, Pama wonders how he is going to campaign it, with out TG Stamps*

Like my API script? For loaning whenever it's open?

Sure. When this proposal is ahem...ready of course

[Imperium Anglorum]

okay, maybe the comittee

So you're telling me that the committee will by the World Assembly. Put it in the proposal. Also, from where will the committee get its money?

---

The World Assembly,

Applauding previous efforts at enviromental protection,

Recognizing that in many member nations, farmers need to rely on chemicals to keep their crops healthy;

Appalled on their affect on the environment and on citizens of member nations such as runoff pollution, and unintended harm to other plants and organisms;

Also recognizing that pesticides can completely kill an organism if overused;
Hell, pesticides can completely kill an organism when not overused... that's the fucking point.

The World Assembly Hereby Establishes:

1. The World Assembly Agricultural Pesticide Committee, which include monitoring the use of pesticides and researching pesticides; Why? Give me justifications to why this committee is necessary.

2. Regulations of pesticides sold in member nations stores by limiting the amount of pesticides going into agricultural sections; Okay. This is badly worded. It's also idiotic. This is so ineffective and so vague that there's actually no efficacy. A government can simply just say: Okay. Our regulations say unlimited use is fine.

3. A limit (decided by the nation) on the use of pesticides on crops and other organisms, and if they go over this limit, the crops or organisms will not be allowed to go on member nations store shelf's.
First, this is badly worded as well. A limit of infinity grammes, litres, etc. Ineffective. Also, 'crops or organisms will not be allowed to go on member nations store shelf's'? This actually doesn't make grammatical sense.

My comments in red.

I am actually fine with this. If you pass it, so long as it is actually worded competently and formatted correctly, it would block any future action on this with regulations that are absolutely useless and entirely ineffectual. Thus, it would prevent any future action.

[Potted Plants United]

OOC post.

Okay, so I took what I think you wanted to say with this proposal, tweaked the language a bit and killed off the editing leftovers, and this is what I was left with:

Pesticide Regulations

Category: Environmental
Area of Effect: Agriculture

The World Assembly,

Applauding previous efforts at enviromental protection;

Recognizing that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemical pesticides to keep their crops healthy;

Concerned of the effects that pesticides may have on the environment and inhabitants of member nations, such as contamination of waterways, soil and groundwater, as well as unintended harm to non-target organisms;

Hereby,

1. Extends the mandate of the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) to monitor the use of pesticides in the member nations, their unintentional environmental effects, as well as disseminate information on how to best avoid environmental contamination.

2. Encourages member nations to research and use more environmentally-friendly pesticides as well as non-chemical forms of pest control.

Now whether that's enough material to warrant this proposal in the first place, is up for debate.

I went with using the WASP rather than creating an entirely new committee, because it already exists so you don't need to justify creating it, and giving it a few extra duties won't be that big a hassle, considering all the other stuff it's already doing.

I nixed all mentions of limits, since they're damn near impossible to set, considering all the variety of the member nations.

If you decide to go with the version of the text I provided, may I please have co-writer credit? (Yes, yes, I know, shameless grab for co-author badge and all that...)

[United Great Britian]

OOC post.

Okay, so I took what I think you wanted to say with this proposal, tweaked the language a bit and killed off the editing leftovers, and this is what I was left with:

Pesticide Regulations

Category: Environmental
Area of Effect: Agriculture

The World Assembly,

Applauding previous efforts at enviromental protection;

Recognizing that in many member nations farmers need to rely on chemical pesticides to keep their crops healthy;

Concerned of the effects that pesticides may have on the environment and inhabitants of member nations, such as contamination of waterways, soil and groundwater, as well as unintended harm to non-target organisms;

Hereby,

1. Extends the mandate of the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) to monitor the use of pesticides in the member nations, their unintentional environmental effects, as well as disseminate information on how to best avoid environmental contamination.

2. Encourages member nations to research and use more environmentally-friendly pesticides as well as non-chemical forms of pest control.

Now whether that's enough material to warrant this proposal in the first place, is up for debate.

I went with using the WASP rather than creating an entirely new committee, because it already exists so you don't need to justify creating it, and giving it a few extra duties won't be that big a hassle, considering all the other stuff it's already doing.

I nixed all mentions of limits, since they're damn near impossible to set, considering all the variety of the member nations.

If you decide to go with the version of the text I provided, may I please have co-writer credit? (Yes, yes, I know, shameless grab for co-author badge and all that...)

OOC: House of Cards violation!

[Wrapper]

OOC: House of Cards violation!

Please explain why you think this is so.

[United Great Britian]

OOC: House of Cards violation!

Please explain why you think this is so.

It is adding duties to WASP, without establishing this.