SENATE BILL: Sex Work Act of 2013 (Law'd)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: TNF

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Okay, what do we got here, Senator. 24 hours etc.

[Napoleon]

Are we going to hire an army of undercover Client 9's to ensure that condoms are being used?

[TNF]

Are we going to hire an army of undercover Client 9's to ensure that condoms are being used?

I figure the requirement for regular STI testing will solve that problem.

[Frodo]

I propose renaming this bill the 'Opebo Act of 2013'.  

At the very least, the one person on this forum who has actual experience as the customer should have some measure of input. 

[TJ in Oregon]

If by some miracle I am still in the senate when this undergoes a final vote, I will vote against it. I don't see any variant of this I could end up supporting.

I see Senator TNF has finally found one kind of work he isn't opposed to people doing

[tmthforu94]

An amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I am very open to potentially backing this bill with a couple changes. Clause 5 is completely unenforceable - I believe clause 3 is sufficient.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: None Given
Status: Vote in 24 hours if none is given.

[TNF]

Friendly

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senators have 24 hours to object to the above amendment.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment has been adopted. What now?

[tmthforu94]

I will support this bill, as I believe tight regulations on prostitution is better than the status quo. I would like to see prostitution only limited to those 18+, though.

[President Tyrion]

I am definitely not comfortable with waiving the requirement to wear condoms. However, it's rather obvious that it would be unenforceable. Let's instead require all sex workers to carry a condom, available upon request.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[TNF]

Amendment is friendly.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I suspect you will be offering that this afternoon in 58th Senate, correct "Governor" Tyrion?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I tend to oppose a measure to force someone to carry condoms with them at all times. If someone wants to bang without it, great, and if that sex worker doesn't have one and the client wants to use one, his client simply doesn't have to have sex with them. Fining them for not carrying a condom, well, seems a bit much, right? It's all about freedom to raw dog it, my friends.

[President Tyrion]

I tend to oppose a measure to force someone to carry condoms with them at all times. If someone wants to bang without it, great, and if that sex worker doesn't have one and the client wants to use one, his client simply doesn't have to have sex with them. Fining them for not carrying a condom, well, seems a bit much, right? It's all about freedom to raw dog it, my friends.

It's akin to requiring people to have fresh food in a school lunch. It's entirely for the citizens' health, and it serves the dual purpose of reducing healthcare costs for the country (since we'll be footing the bill for whatever that unsheathed sausage does).

I suspect you will be offering that this afternoon in 58th Senate, correct "Governor" Tyrion?

Yes

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I tend to oppose a measure to force someone to carry condoms with them at all times. If someone wants to bang without it, great, and if that sex worker doesn't have one and the client wants to use one, his client simply doesn't have to have sex with them. Fining them for not carrying a condom, well, seems a bit much, right? It's all about freedom to raw dog it, my friends.

It's akin to requiring people to have fresh food in a school lunch. It's entirely for the citizens' health, and it serves the dual purpose of reducing healthcare costs for the country (since we'll be footing the bill for whatever that unsheathed sausage does).

I suspect you will be offering that this afternoon in 58th Senate, correct "Governor" Tyrion?

Yes

Well, the poor boy in the school cafeteria has no choice but to eat the food being served, or he will go hungry. He has no choice.

Here, the client of the sex worker can chose not to have sex with the worker if they do not carry a condom. Sex is great, but it is not as essential as eating, understand? I don't want to see poor little Jimmy go hungry, but I don't care if Mike has to find another sex worker to fulfill his primal urges. No, I won't lose any sleep over that.

I will say this little provision isn't a deal breaker, I am just putting my two cents out there.

[President Tyrion]

I tend to oppose a measure to force someone to carry condoms with them at all times. If someone wants to bang without it, great, and if that sex worker doesn't have one and the client wants to use one, his client simply doesn't have to have sex with them. Fining them for not carrying a condom, well, seems a bit much, right? It's all about freedom to raw dog it, my friends.

It's akin to requiring people to have fresh food in a school lunch. It's entirely for the citizens' health, and it serves the dual purpose of reducing healthcare costs for the country (since we'll be footing the bill for whatever that unsheathed sausage does).

I suspect you will be offering that this afternoon in 58th Senate, correct "Governor" Tyrion?

Yes

Well, the poor boy in the school cafeteria has no choice but to eat the food being served, or he will go hungry. He has no choice.

Here, the client of the sex worker can chose not to have sex with the worker if they do not carry a condom. Sex is great, but it is not as essential as eating, understand? I don't want to see poor little Jimmy go hungry, but I don't care if Mike has to find another sex worker to fulfill his primal urges. No, I won't lose any sleep over that.

I will say this little provision isn't a deal breaker, I am just putting my two cents out there.

Well, I feel like the analogy still holds. Little Jimmy could easily eat whatever other unhealthy item he wants, as long as the cafeteria provides it; we can't really stop him, because it would be too difficult to enforce. Similarly, a client could easily choose not to use a condom under this law (the treat to unsheath!), but having that option is one step in the right direction. Of course, I would require condom usage if it was feasible, but the law as currently written wouldn't need it.

Plus, this is an issue of worker safety, really. It's probably more unlikely that a worker would have an STD than a random client, so we're essentially protecting the worker by requiring him/her to be carrying a condom. It's like a hard hat on a construction site. A hard-on hat.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Lesbihonest, if you're a sex worker, you are assuming the risk of catching an STD.

I just feel like it's an unnecessary regulation, but maybe it's just me. If a client wants to raw dog, they will regardless of whether this law is in place, and if they want to wrap it up, they will find someone who has a condom with them.

The point of legalizing things like this is to make it more accessible, and implementing such a requirement only hinders Mike from getting it in. It doesn't make anyone safer because condoms remain an option, not a requirement, and even if you made it a requirement, no one could feasibly enforce the law unless you reorganized the whole industry and forced it indoors, in regulated buildings with security everywhere, which would never fly here.

I don't want to drive perfectly good sex workers from the industry merely for forgetting to carry a condom! I want to keep The People employed, not slam them with fines. Look at it this way: how often do you forget condoms? I always do! It's a mistake. If the client wants a condom, they can say thanks, but no thanks, I will go elsewhere. Simple as that. Think about it. Think about how simply this solution is.

[President Tyrion]

Lesbihonest, if you're a sex worker, you are assuming the risk of catching an STD.

Yes, of course! But we as a government protect citizens from risky ventures all the time. There's a relatively large negative externality to this free market transaction, and we're trying to curb it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That bolded statement doesn't ring true to me. Remember, we provide condoms for free, so the cost of carrying one is minimal. At the same time, for it not to make anyone safer, required condom carry would have to be 100% ineffective, and I don't see that happening.

I would rather penalize sex workers for not being safe than have to deal with the consequences once they aren't. I don't think it's as simple as saying a client can just go somewhere else. To get to a point where you know the sex worker doesn't have a condom, you would have already incurred a cost: agreeing to meet, finding a mutually acceptable location, and being there. It makes the transaction time a lot lengthier when you need to replace your sex worker for lack of a condom.

[President Tyrion]

I officially offer the amendment now.

[tmthforu94]

I object for reasons already discussed in debate.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Friendly
Status: Objection Filed by Senator Tmthforu94, a vote can be started in almost exactly thirteen hours.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Matt, you can start a vote on 58:02 in thirty minutes.