Retry: Repeal Clean Water Act

Quote :

The World Assembly

APPLAUDS the noble intent behind the Clean Water Act
CONCURS with the basic principles underlying the Clean Water Act
DISMAYED that the Clean Water Act did not address the organization of international efforts to relieve poor, drought-ridden nations, or even attempt to require other nations to recognize the plight of these nations

RECOGNIZES with dismay the many shortcomings of the resolution:

1) The resolution is disappointingly vague on important points including, but not limited to:
A) It's first clause, which states without further elaboration, "The intentional contamination of any water supply that may conceivably serve civilians is prohibited, for purposes military or otherwise, without exception."
- Further elaboration as to the meaning of 'contamination,' or 'conceivably serve civilians' is absent from the legislation, leaving in doubt what water supplies are affected by the resolution, and what is considered 'contamination' with regards to a water supply.
- The use of nuclear weapons is clearly prohibited by this act, which is completely apart from the intent of the resolution.
B) Its statement that the clause applies 'without exception' seems absurd considering its vague nature.
C) The use of the word 'civilian' in clause 1 seems misplaced, as the rest of the resolution deals with mandates concerning only 'citizens' of member nations, rather than civilians in general.
- The use of the word 'civilian' is further misplaced, as the third line of the resolution reads, "SHOCKED that contamination of water supplies may be used as a military tactic."

2) Its section labeled '3', clause 'iv', which states: "Nations may charge reasonable amounts for water usage, provided such does not impede access."
A) The clause seems to be contradictory, as any price charged for water usage would impede access.
B) By preventing nations from impeding access to water, the resolution greatly reduces the ability of nations to conserve water in times of sustained drought.

3) Its section labeled '3', clause 'v,' which requires nations to provide aid to those lacking clean water.
A) The legislation does not address the fact that many nations do not have the power to ensure that the aid provided is actually used to obtain clean water.

HEREBY renders GA Resolution #105, "Clean Water Act" null and void.

That's what I submitted. I read through the thread, and I'm adding things now.

Quote :

The World Assembly

APPLAUDS the noble intent behind the Clean Water Act
CONCURS with the basic principles underlying the Clean Water Act
DISMAYED that the Clean Water Act did not address the organization of international efforts to relieve poor, drought-ridden nations, or even attempt to require other nations to recognize the plight of these nations
ALARMED that application of this resolution often relies on selective interpretation of the clauses in writing.

RECOGNIZES with dismay the many shortcomings of the resolution:

1) The resolution is disappointingly vague on important points including, but not limited to:
A) It's first clause, which states without further elaboration, "The intentional contamination of any water supply that may conceivably serve civilians is prohibited, for purposes military or otherwise, without exception."
- Further elaboration as to the meaning of 'contamination,' or 'conceivably serve civilians' is absent from the legislation, leaving in doubt what water supplies are affected by the resolution, and what is considered 'contamination' with regards to a water supply.
- The use of nuclear weapons is clearly prohibited by this act, which is completely apart from the intent of the resolution.
B) Its statement that the clause applies 'without exception' seems absurd considering its vague nature.
C) The use of the word 'civilian' in clause 1 seems misplaced, as the rest of the resolution deals with mandates concerning only 'citizens' of member nations, rather than civilians in general.
- The use of the word 'civilian' is further misplaced, as the third line of the resolution reads, "SHOCKED that contamination of water supplies may be used as a military tactic."

2) Its section labeled '3', which states: "All nations must provide at least a minimal amount of potable water to all their citizens."
A) This clause, and all its subclauses make up the section of the resolution intended to ensure drinkable water is available to everyone, however:
- The clause does not apply to non-citizens residing in member nations
- The use of the word 'citizens' in this clause would also force member nations to ensure that expatriates are supplied with water.

3) Its section labeled '3', clause 'iv', which states: "Nations may charge reasonable amounts for water usage, provided such does not impede access."
A) The clause seems to be contradictory, as any price charged for water usage would impede access.
B) By preventing nations from impeding access to water, the resolution greatly reduces the ability of nations to conserve water in times of sustained drought.
C) The clause fails to take into account that some nations may not have the funds to build onto their water infrastructure, and need to charge for its use to maintain its infrastructure.
- Nations in this position may also need to use funds from charging for water to build projects for obtaining water in remote areas.

4) Its section labeled '3', clause 'v,' which requires nations to provide aid to those lacking clean water.
A) The legislation does not address the fact that many nations do not have the power to ensure that the aid provided is actually used to obtain clean water.

HEREBY renders GA Resolution #105, "Clean Water Act" null and void.

Edits in red.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant

Quote :

COGNIZANT of the many great steps in the area of human rights made by the World Assembly.

RECOGNIZES that access to drinking water has not yet been addressed as one of those rights.

ALARMED that in the absence of international legislation, many people are forced to go without acceptable drinking water.

BELIEVES that access to drinking water is a basic human right.

DEFINES for the purposes of this resolution:
"Potable water" as water that is clean enough to be consumed over a long or short term without any negative health effects.
"Water supply" as a body of water from which the public directly derives its drinking water, such as a reservoir.

HEREBY enacts the following:
1) No nation may engage in any action that is directly intended to rob the right of civilians to obtain the minimum amount of potable water necessary for survival.

2) Each nation must ensure that the minimum amount of potable water necessary for survival is obtained by civilians living within its borders.
- Nations may impose a cost for water use, or leave water utilities in private hands as long as this cost does not cause the nation to be in violation of the previous clauses.

3) No nation may falsely claim that the water it provides is potable if it does not meet the definition provided by this resolution.
a) Nations must ensure that their water supplies are clean enough that once whatever purification process is used by that nation is completed, the water is potable.
b) Should water supplies become contaminated, nations must inform the public, and provide information on the best way to safely use their water, such as boiling it before use.

CREATES the World Assembly Drought Relief Commission (WADRC) to organize and provide aid to drought ridden nations, or nations who may find it difficult to comply with this resolution, and instate minimum standards for water potability.

The WADRC shall:
1) Create minimum standards for the potability of water.
2) Assist drought ridden member nations or member nations in the midst of a prolonged drought by coordinating and providing aid to those nations.
3) Aid member nations in locating and tapping into new sources of water.

Looks good to me. The new 3C could probably be taken care of by the General Fund, but meh. It's a valid point.

I like the alterations. Hopefully it'll pass this time around.

A few people also voted against because I didn't present an alternative. So I was considering writing one of those as well. Should I do that, or should I just forward this?

Forward it. If they want an alternative, tell them that you're waiting on the repeal to pass first.

Said that last time

It was primarily on the forum that the one delegate with 400 some endorsements sent me to to influence their constituents. So it's worth like 450 points

Updated repeal effort now has a thread in the NS forums. I'll submit it again once people comment on it, and once it gains visibility.

See the post right after the repeal here for the in progress replacement.

Finished. Comments please?

I'll support just about any repeal on this as long as it makes sense. I'd post an update on the NS forum and see where it goes.

I've already posted the updated repeal on the forums. I got several statements of support, and a protest and argument from the person who wrote the original.

However, some of the giant delegates who voted against the last repeal said that they will not support any repeal unless there is an alternative. That's the one I need comments on

Give me some time. I'll have a draft of a new clean water act up here either tonight or tomorrow. Once it's fleshed out, we can offer it as a possible alternative should the repeal pass.

If you want, you can start with a modification of mine:

Quote :

COGNIZANT of the many great steps in the area of human rights made by the World Assembly.

RECOGNIZES that access to drinking water has not yet been addressed as one of those rights.

ALARMED that in the absence of international legislation, many people are forced to go without acceptable drinking water.

BELIEVES that access to drinking water is a basic human right.

DEFINES for the purposes of this resolution:
"Potable water" as water that is clean enough to be consumed over a long or short term without any negative health effects.
"Water supply" as a body of water from which the public directly derives its drinking water, such as a reservoir.

HEREBY enacts the following:
1) No nation may engage in any action that is directly intended to rob the right of civilians to obtain the minimum amount of potable water necessary for survival.

2) Each nation must ensure that the minimum amount of potable water necessary for survival is obtained by civilians living within its borders.
- Nations may impose a cost for water use, or leave water utilities in private hands as long as this cost does not cause the nation to be in violation of the previous clauses.

3) No nation may falsely claim that the water it provides is potable if it does not meet the definition provided by this resolution.
a) Nations must ensure that their water supplies are clean enough that once whatever purification process is used by that nation is completed, the water is potable.
b) Should water supplies become contaminated, nations must inform the public, and provide information on the best way to safely use their water, such as boiling it before use.

CREATES the World Assembly Drought Relief Commission (WADRC) to organize and provide aid to drought ridden nations, or nations who may find it difficult to comply with this resolution, and instate minimum standards for water potability.

The WADRC shall:
1) Create minimum standards for the potability of water.
2) Assist drought ridden member nations or member nations in the midst of a prolonged drought by coordinating and providing aid to those nations.
3) Aid member nations in locating and tapping into new sources of water.

I didn't get a chance to work on it last night. Seeing as how I'm not feeling well due to a chronic illness I have AND my ankle getting all uppity about the cold weather, I'm taking work off today.

I'll look this draft over and either change it up some or leave it as is with comments. I'm still pretty tired from a night of little sleep.

No rush