Mousebumples
TNPer
One of the easiest ways to evaluate a GA proposal is go to line-by-line. Reading a proposal from start-to-finish can be somewhat overwhelming, and - depending on the skill of the author - it's possible that they have enough fluffy "feel-good" phrases and clauses within the proposal to overshadow some of the perhaps less palatable portions.
After you finish this portion of your evaluation, you'll probably want to evaluate the proposal as a whole, once again. Questions to ask at this point include:
- Does the proposal work as a cohesive document? Are there any clauses or phrases that don't seem to fit with the category or the overall theme of the proposal?
- Are there any additional points that could or should be added?
- Is the language clear and accessible to all?
- Are the clauses organized in a logical order? Is there a better arrangement that would improve the readability of the text?
The World Assembly,
RECOGNIZING that legitimate and good-faith differences of opinion exist concerning the legality and morality of abortion, but that abortion is nonetheless a matter of concern and the reduction of abortion rates is desirable to all parties,
OBSERVING that abortion rates may be reduced by the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, improvements in relevant medical care, and increased access to information,
DEEPLY CONCERNED that member states may unintentionally increase abortion rates due to limitations on information and services that would decrease pregnancy complications and remove incentives for abortion,
BELIEVING that many resources that would reduce abortion rates are also inherently desirable such as better family planning, help for those who wish to adopt children, safer childbirth and pregnancy, prevention of rape and incest, and reduction of the emotional, economic, and physical cost on pregnant women and mothers,
DESIRING the removal of economic reasons for abortion and economic barriers to childbirth,
HEREBY:
1. DEFINES "abortion reduction services" as including all of the following: (1) abstinence education, (2) adoption services, (3) contraceptives, (4) family planning services, (5) pre-natal, obstetric, and post-natal medical care, counseling, and services, (6) comprehensive sex education, and (7) education, awareness, prevention, and counseling programs to prevent rape and incest;
2. AFFIRMS the right of individuals to access information regarding abortion reduction services;
3. STRONGLY URGES member states to research, invest in, and provide universal access to abortion reduction services;
4. FURTHER ENCOURAGES member states to provide financial aid to pregnant individuals and parents to reduce or remove economic reasons for abortion and economic barriers to childbirth;
5. EXPANDS the mission of the World Health Authority and its offices in WA member states to include:
a. providing universal access to abortion reduction services in accordance with national and local laws,
b. actively researching the subjects of the epidemiology of abortion and abortion reduction services and making public the results of such research in a non-political manner,
c. facilitating the sharing of technology among member states concerning abortion reduction services;
6. DECLARES that nothing in this resolution shall affect the power of member states to declare abortion legal or illegal or to pass legislation extending or restricting access to abortion.
RECOGNIZING that legitimate and good-faith differences of opinion exist concerning the legality and morality of abortion, but that abortion is nonetheless a matter of concern and the reduction of abortion rates is desirable to all parties,
OBSERVING that abortion rates may be reduced by the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, improvements in relevant medical care, and increased access to information,
DEEPLY CONCERNED that member states may unintentionally increase abortion rates due to limitations on information and services that would decrease pregnancy complications and remove incentives for abortion,
BELIEVING that many resources that would reduce abortion rates are also inherently desirable such as better family planning, help for those who wish to adopt children, safer childbirth and pregnancy, prevention of rape and incest, and reduction of the emotional, economic, and physical cost on pregnant women and mothers,
DESIRING the removal of economic reasons for abortion and economic barriers to childbirth,
HEREBY:
1. DEFINES "abortion reduction services" as including all of the following: (1) abstinence education, (2) adoption services, (3) contraceptives, (4) family planning services, (5) pre-natal, obstetric, and post-natal medical care, counseling, and services, (6) comprehensive sex education, and (7) education, awareness, prevention, and counseling programs to prevent rape and incest;
2. AFFIRMS the right of individuals to access information regarding abortion reduction services;
3. STRONGLY URGES member states to research, invest in, and provide universal access to abortion reduction services;
4. FURTHER ENCOURAGES member states to provide financial aid to pregnant individuals and parents to reduce or remove economic reasons for abortion and economic barriers to childbirth;
5. EXPANDS the mission of the World Health Authority and its offices in WA member states to include:
a. providing universal access to abortion reduction services in accordance with national and local laws,
b. actively researching the subjects of the epidemiology of abortion and abortion reduction services and making public the results of such research in a non-political manner,
c. facilitating the sharing of technology among member states concerning abortion reduction services;
6. DECLARES that nothing in this resolution shall affect the power of member states to declare abortion legal or illegal or to pass legislation extending or restricting access to abortion.
This stuff is all preamble and doesn't really "count" when it comes to what the proposal does. That's not to say that this section isn't a good place to put a lot of fluffy, feel-good nonsense. For those that don't have the high-level evaluation skills that you all do, that can be enough to win you a few votes. Of course, within this text, there are a few issues - in my mind - which I've highlighted with Red Text.
The first section in red seems to be aiming at the "wrong audience." In my mind, abortion rates would be better reduced by helping those who wish to place their child up for adoption. Yes, that would - indirectly - assist those who wish to adopt, but this clause would be better suited by being more clearly worded.
The second bit in red text is laudable, but I'm uncertain how well it can be accomplished as a portion of a GA resolution. It would be nice to be all hand-wavey magic *POOF!* ... rape and incest is no more. Again, this clause doesn't do anything, per se ... Right now, it's just setting off my radar to stay tuned for what follows, to see how well it fulfills these stated goals.
And, look! Here we have hand-wavey magic *POOF!* ... rape and incest is magically prevented. If I were actually interested in repealing this resolution, I'd probably do some research to see how effective the items listed under Clause 7 are at preventing rape and incest. In my (unresearched) opinion, I'd think that education and awareness - for potential victims - can go a long way towards preventing some rapes. However, incest in particular can be difficult to prevent as familial abuse of this nature can be quite difficult to prevent, no matter what education the individual in question receives.
2 only provides the right to INFORMATION about the stuff that was defined up in Clause 1. Access to the services themselves is by no means required, which ... troubles me. Understandably, some of the items mentioned under Clause 1 are contentious (notably: contraception), but I would prefer that access to pre and post-natal care would be assured worldwide, rather than merely "strongly urged." Same goes for adoption services and family planning services.
This is a potential argument for repeal.
Some nations - particularly those that don't think that the purpose of the WA is to pass money from the well-off nations to those that are less well-off financially, will dispute this statement. It's definitely a contentious one, and - if this were a proposal (not a resolution) - I may have some suggestions to make it more palatable to more nations.
However, for the purposes of evaluating a potential repeal, this isn't anything I would really do much about. Any argument I'd want to make would likely be too convoluted to be overly convincing and would only win me so many votes. Also, by arguing that we should not try to remove the economic barriers to childbirth (that may result in an abortion), I'd likely lose votes. Definitely not a net-gain here.
Now, I have to wonder if this somehow contradicts the STRONGLY URGES portion of the resolution text. Is the WHA able to offer abortion reduction services if the nation in question elects not to do so? I don't think so - per the "in accordance with national and local laws" portion - but this is something that could and should have been clarified better prior to submission.
This is a personal quibble of mine with this resolution - and, actually, the other abortion resolution too. This would have been the perfect location for a real Blocking Clause. One that blocked all further legislation on the subject and let WA member nations decide everything else for themselves. However, thanks so very much to this clause that blocks NOTHING in the way of further legislation, we have On Abortion. Which was meant to be a blocker - supposedly - but also blocks NOTHING. *sigh* Which means that even with both of these resolutions in place, we still need to go through the abortion-proposal shitstorm every few months like clockwork.
And now, onto the questions I mentioned above:
- Does the proposal work as a cohesive document? Are there any clauses or phrases that don't seem to fit with the category or the overall theme of the proposal?
It mostly fits. I'm not sure how great the WHA-expansion really works, but it's limited enough that it's not the end of the world. Of course, those clauses almost seem more Educational in nature - versus Social Justice - but they are definitely a minor aspect of the resolution. - Are there any additional points that could or should be added?
A real blocking clause? Actually ensuring that WA member nations comply with the more common-sense and non-controversial abortion reduction services? - Is the language clear and accessible to all?
I think a few things could have been clarified better prior to submission, but overall, it's fine. - Are the clauses organized in a logical order? Is there a better arrangement that would improve the readability of the text?
I think the order is fine.
ASSIGNMENT:
Now, it's your turn to evaluate a GA proposal!
Pick a proposal or resolution to evaluate, and go through the text line-by-line. It would be best if you didn't pick one that's already been evaluating line-by-line elsewhere - i.e. on the NS forum thread - but I'll admit that practice isn't as commonplace as it once was during the proposal drafting phase.
Suggested locations to find a resolution or proposal to evaluate: Passed GA Resolutions, Passed Historical Resolutions, GA Proposal Submission List, NS Forums: GA.
Please answer the following questions after completing the above task -
- Does the proposal work as a cohesive document? Are there any clauses or phrases that don't seem to fit with the category or the overall theme of the proposal?
- Are there any additional points that could or should be added?
- Is the language clear and accessible to all?
- Are the clauses organized in a logical order? Is there a better arrangement that would improve the readability of the text?
And, if you're evaluating a still-in-effect resolution, if this task finds you some flaws, you might be able to create a worthy repeal out of your analysis text. But we'll cover that more in a later lesson ...
