SB 2017-133: Regulations for Sex Work in Atlasia Act (Passed) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 10:22:04 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  SB 2017-133: Regulations for Sex Work in Atlasia Act (Passed) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: SB 2017-133: Regulations for Sex Work in Atlasia Act (Passed)  (Read 1462 times)
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,653


« on: October 02, 2017, 09:35:59 AM »

Oh good! I'm glad to see this bill come to the floor. I know this is one of those controversial moral issues with strong opinions on both sides, so there will probably be debate and I welcome that. I want to start by saying, though, that I don't see this as an issue between supporting or opposing sex work. Instead, I see it as an issue between getting something out in the open where we can monitor, regulate, and keep track of it so we know that everyone is being treated well, or trying to ban something that governments have tried to ban unsuccessfully for pretty much all of human history and having the unintended consequence of keeping it all in the shadows, making life worse for the people who still end up doing it.

The main problem with the ban on sex work is that when something is banned, that means it isn't regulated. Facilities are more likely to be dirty, workers are more likely to be victimized or taken advantage of by their employers or clients, and when those things happen, they are afraid to go to the police because the work they are doing is against the law. This is something that I firmly believe needs to be legalized and regulated by the government. Sex work isn't going away. Those kinds of desires are in our biology, whether its wanting human contact or whatever. I'm not going to judge sex workers or the people that pay money to see them. The thing that bothers me about prostitution is when people are taken advantage of and feel like they have nowhere to turn. I think Atlasia needs a policy that treats everyone involved as the human beings that they are, while ensuring strong regulations in the name of public safety and individual protections.

In full disclosure, I shamelessly used 2 bills that were written about 4 years or so that I thought were really done. Some parts of the bill are pretty much straight up taken from those and other parts I modified, removed, or added things in order to make it my own. I hope that the people who wrote and worked on those bills won't be offended by that. Smiley
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,653


« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2017, 05:16:36 PM »

My qualms about this bill are practical rather than moral. Under this law, a licensed sex worked will have to overcome quite a few bureaucratic hurdles; they will have to reapply for a license every 90 days, undergo frequent documented STI tests and be required to be pedantic bookkeepers as all of their transactions will be taxed.

I'm not sure if the bureaucratization of sex work will have its desired effects; the sheer amount of testing, documenting and the taxes which will be levied could deter many sex workers from seeking legal recognition of their jobs.

I see what you're saying. Would you prefer less frequent tests or some other kind of set up?
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,653


« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2017, 07:31:55 PM »

I'm fine with including a funding mechanism. Any suggestions on what it should be?

As far as the testing frequency, what interval would people prefer?
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,653


« Reply #3 on: October 07, 2017, 10:22:42 AM »

Do any other senators have opinions on the interval? I'm inclined to say friendly, but I'd like to hear what people think.
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,653


« Reply #4 on: October 09, 2017, 08:05:49 AM »

Okay I'll call the amendment friendly then.

I would totally support more/better human trafficking laws. In fact, I worked on a bill like that when I was in the South chamber of delegates. I wouldn't object to including those provisions in this bill, but it might make it pretty overly long. Maybe it would be better to have another bill for it.
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,653


« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2017, 11:19:39 AM »

Does anyone else want to propose any amendment or have comments?
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,653


« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2017, 09:20:42 PM »

I motion for a final vote.
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,653


« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2017, 11:43:16 PM »

Aye
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,653


« Reply #8 on: October 25, 2017, 05:55:51 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.


What? Does this mean the Southern Region can operate whore houses for revenue?

It means that the region could choose to operate brothel(s). They would be subject to the regulations in the act and the workers would be allowed to collectively bargain. It doesn't force the regions to do that. I mean, even if it wasn't in the act, I don't see anything stopping the region from deciding to do it on its own. The act just sets up regulations for the case in which it happens.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 12 queries.