Gov Vetoed HB 353! Update: Statement from Huntsman
By Saintless. Filed in Utah, politics |
Thanks to @gwarchol for alerting me via Twitter that Gov. Huntsman vetoed HB 353 (Truth in Advertising Act Amendments aka Video Games Bill) today! At the very end of this News Advisory on the Gov’s site, it’s mentioned.
Thanks to everyone who called, wrote and otherwise let the Governor know their opinions on this one! And thanks to all of the people who commented on my original post about the Bill. It’s been a great conversation! And most of all, thanks to Gov. Huntsman for vetoing this one! I think maybe a thank-you card is in order!
Update: This is what Gov. Huntsman had to say in a letter to Speaker Clark and President Waddoups about why he vetoed the video games bill:
Dear Speaker Clark and President Waddoups:
After careful consideration and study, I have decided to veto HB 353, TRUTH IN ADVERTISING ACT AMENDMENTS, and have transmitted it to the Lieutenant Governor for filing.
While protecting children from inappropriate materials is a laudable goal, the language of this bill is so broad that it likely will be struck down by the courts as an unconstitutional violation of the Dormant Commerce Clause and/or the First Amendment.
The industries most affected by this new requirement indicated that rather than risk being held liable under this bill, they would likely choose to no longer issue age appropriate labels on goods and services. Therefore, the unintended consequence of the bill would be that parents and children would have no labels to guide them in determining the age appropriateness of the goods or service, thereby increasing children’s potential exposure to something they or their parents would have otherwise determined was inappropriate under the voluntary labeling system now being recognized and embraced by a significant majority of vendors.
Sincerely,
Jon M. Huntsman, Jr.
Governor
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 4:07 pm |
Woo hoo! Common sense prevails. I’m glad that fluff piece of a bill was shot down. I agree with the governor, it would cause more harm than good…almost the complete opposite to what it was intended to do.
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 4:40 pm |
Yes! Great job Governor Huntsman!
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 5:08 pm |
I´m really glad of this. The bill was broken, and that´s what the governor saw. I´m glad he didn´t pushed it to a next level.
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 5:24 pm |
As I mentioned on GP:
While I think it’s a good thing the governor was thinking of the people of Utah and the potential costs they would incure, I happen to disagree with a statement he made:
“The industries most affected by this new requirement indicated that rather than risk being held liable under this bill, they would likely choose to no longer issue age appropriate labels on goods and services.
Therefore, the unintended consequence of the bill would be that parents and children would have no labels to guide them in determining the age appropriateness of the goods or service, thereby increasing children’s potential exposure to something they or their parents would have otherwise determined was inappropriate under the voluntary labeling system now being recognized and embraced by a significant majority of vendors.”
The argument fails in the sense that the ratings themselves wouldn’t be removed from the products. The result would be that retailers would stop using the ratings in policies. I very seriously doubt that the ESRB and MPAA would stop rating products because of this bill.
Parents, therefore, wouldn’t be without the informational resource. They would merely not have the voluntary support of retailers. Not exactly a disaster considering that the policies are easily gotten around anyway. But it’s nice to know they voluntarily chose to set such policies.
Andrew
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 6:05 pm |
Yeah! Sometimes politics are nauseating, so I’m always impressed that you can stay so on top of things!
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 6:16 pm |
Victory for common sense and for purses in Utah
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 7:23 pm |
Gov. Huntsman made a smart move for Utah.
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 7:27 pm |
There’s still the possibility that the veto will be overridden.
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 7:38 pm |
I don’t think this one had the support to generate a veto override vote. I think it slipped through as a token “okay, just shut up” to Morley and Dayton.
A token bill to make them feel they’ve at least legislated their morality a tiny bit this session for when they return to Gayle’s Den for another 10 1/2 months of underground rest before the next session.
Ironically, such legislators would make great characters in a game. Someone should get on that.
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 9:46 pm |
Hey Misty – thanks for the update!
I really did not expect this. I’m extremely pleased with the decision, and I wasn’t at all expecting it. I’m glad others didn’t give up hope, even when I had.
Jack Thompson himself indicated in the Deseret News (non-provable that it was him – it was in the online comments column) that he felt that even association with the ESRB and their stated commitment would be adequate grounds to sue. Quite simply, he anticipated this being an open-season call on retailers to bully them out of business or into strict compliance. While I doubt it would have had the impact he had hoped, it is definitely a dangerous precedent and a nasty little wedge that could have had (and might still have) a serious impact over the long term. It wasn’t going to end with Utah.
My personal conspiracy theory is that it was the first attack in a two-pronged strategy: First, you threaten and bully the stores that are trying to do the right thing, so that they stop. Then you complain to Congress that the industry isn’t doing enough to do the right thing.
I sell unrated “indie” games online (small, independent games usually developed “in the garage” with small budgets and no publishers), and the ESRB does not work at all for us. (Many indie developers have entire development budgets significantly less than the fee required to submit a game for rating). Occasionally, there is a suggestion to adopt some kind of voluntary rating system for online titles, and because of this and other attempts to turn a tool intended for parents into some kind of weapon to be used against game developers, I have come out against the idea. What I try to do is to note when I feel a game is “family friendly” or where I advise more careful parental scrutiny before letting younger children play. I want to help players – and, for younger players, their parents – make good decisions for the media that they try.
I do not feel obligated to give politicians ammunition with which to try and score cheap “family values” points.
This was, quite simply, a bad, poorly-conceived bill. I applaud our governor’s decision to veto the bill. And Misty’s effort to bring attention to it before it was too late.
Wednesday, March 25th 2009 at 10:47 pm |
If I was in Utah, I would vote for this governor at every election.
Smart move. Also this highlights the point that i think most of us gamers have been saying repeatedly, the content ratings on Videogames and Movies are there to HELP parents make their decision without playing the game or watching the movie before they buy it for their families.
And at the same time, adults have every right to see, hear, watch and even play what ever they want as long as it is by the rules of the ESRB and also the MMPA.
Sadly many politicians and some insane people from the Eagle Forum don’t understand this.
The Eagle Forum has been used to telling people what to do, but they are not used to being told by other people what to do.
And I think their heads are about to explode in 3…2…1…
Thursday, March 26th 2009 at 12:12 am |
Jay,
Speaking of which, I need to look at what games you have out. There was one a few years ago I wanted my boys to try out, but never got around to. I bet they’d be really interested in them, now. Preston (9) is really into Neverwinter Nights, and I bet he’d be very interested in some of the ones you have out. Email me directly, if you have that info still.
As far as you conspiracy theory, I’d guess you’re on the right track. Thompson isn’t really living in what the rest of us call reality, and given that he bases that on religion, Gayle Ruzika and others are all on board, giving anyone else associated with religious values a bad name.
Hope to talk to you soon. It’s been a long time!
– M
Thursday, March 26th 2009 at 12:16 am |
TBoneTony,
Gov. Huntsman has consistently been someone I could vote for, even if our political affiliations are polar opposites. If his public face has been any indication, he’s actually one of the good guys. Some are saying he’ll run for President in 2012, and if so, he’s got a good start. If I would ever vote for a Republican for President, it would be him. I do hope he won’t run against Obama, though. He’ll have a much better chance in general, and a better chance at my vote, if he waits for Obama to have 2 terms. I just wish the GOP would look to him as a leader, because he’s got what it takes, if you take religious bigotry out of the equation.
And don’t even get me started on the douchebaggery that is the Eagle Forum. Ugh!
Thursday, March 26th 2009 at 6:32 am |
Everyone with a brain is against poor Jack. Wonder which ad hominin attacks Jack is going to hurl at Huntsman.
Thursday, March 26th 2009 at 7:54 am |
Thank you Gov. Huntsman. You have made gamers everywhere very happy with this decision. So, from all of us gamers to you, Thanks, dude!
Thursday, March 26th 2009 at 10:17 am |
Heh – well, Wacky Jack has already said he’d try to get Shurtleff impeached. For, you know, doing his job and warning Representatives that while he’d do his best to defend the LAST anti-videogame bill they proposed, it would probably end up a costly failure on Constitutional grounds. Why, how dare he bring inconveniences like the Constitution of the United States into a discussion about important things, like how to make lawyers more money!
Thursday, March 26th 2009 at 2:03 pm |
Jack’s been posting on Deseret News.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705293125,00.html
I also posted, but that’s irrelevant.
Tuesday, April 28th 2009 at 1:32 am |
Being a strict parent is tough, but the rewards are worth it.