September 5, 2007 -
The political battle over video games heated up today in California as both sides made strategic moves.
State Sen. Leland Yee, via press release, applauded Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's promised appeal of last month's federal court ruling that California's 2005 video game law was unconstitutional. Said Yee:
I am very pleased to see the Governor's commitment to this issue. This is a common-sense law that empowers parents by giving them the ultimate authority over whether or not their children can play in a world of violence and murder.
For his part, Gov. Schwarzenegger added:
We have a responsibility to our kids and our communities to protect against the effects of games that depict ultra-violent actions. These games are for adults, and the law I signed ensures that parents have the chance to determine which video games are appropriate for their children.
Yee wasn't finished:
The deliberations in this case took over a year, which shows that the ever-growing body of evidence that violent video games are harmful to children is getting harder and harder to ignore. The medical data clearly indicates that these ultra-violent video games have harmful effects on kids, and thus we have a state interest to protect them.
The $31 billion video game industry has fought any attempt at regulation every step of the way. They fought efforts to publicize their rating system because they thought it would impact sales, and now they're again putting their profit margins over the rights of parents and the well-being of children.
Meanwhile, an ESA press release announced that the video game industry would seek to recover $324,840 it spent in legal fees battling California's law. Said ESA boss Mike Gallagher:
California citizens should be outraged at their elected leaders. Hard-earned tax dollars were spent on defending this law that California's state leaders knew was unconstitutional. Before Senator Leland Yee [the bill's sponsor] proposed this bill, federal and district
courts across the country ruled that the path California was taking would run afoul of the First Amendment.
From early on, the industry warned Governor Schwarzenegger and Senator Yee that this bill was unconstitutional and would be thrown out by the courts and that California taxpayers would pay the cost.
We lead in providing caregivers the most comprehensive and effective information and tools to control the content used by their children. And, we invite California legislators, community leaders, family advocates, and the Governor to work with us - as policymakers in Utah, Oklahoma, and Rhode Island already do-in raising awareness and usage of the resources provided.
GP: We should point out for clarity's sake that the timing of Gov. Schwarzenegger's appeal and the ESA's claim for legal expenses are unrelated to one another.
Comments
Its...its one of those things. I get so upset, but its so hard to counter it.
Its like dealing with the insurgents in Iraq. The people practically brain wash their fellow citizens into blowing themselves up. Its nearly impossible to counter that. :(
He can't get re-elected, but he can get elected to some other role, either in California or in the Federal Government.
He could also be showcasing his "strong convictions" and "moral backbone" while interviewing for some morality police position on a juicy role with some think tank.
Just to add, I really hope some one has the sense to sue Governor Schwarzenegger for all the viloent fims he made and contributing to the "obvious" problem.
Ah well, it's not their money, so I don't suppose they care of they throw it away.
On this quote alone, Senator Yee should be ousted from the senate. This is a blatant lie.
How come that a senator that blatantly lies keeps his place, while a senator who does something in the bathroom of a bar with some other guy is considered less trustworthy, even though it has nothing to do with politics and is in essence a private matter ?
You know what I don't get? Yee is not up for re-election. He can't, state rules. So why is he wasting his time on a clearly do-nothing fluff bill that has only been put forth in other jurisdictions by people wanting to prove they're "strong on morality" in order to get re-elected?
Why not figure out how to do it right? What's the point in wasting effort on a doomed bill that's only going to tarnish any legacy he wants to leave?
@chadachada
So wait…the video game industry says tax-payers should be outraged at the spending of tax dollars for this…but also wants 320k of California taxdollars? lol…
The industry has every right to demand it be compensated for the legal fees wasted getting an unconstitutional law shut down. What they're saying is that Californians should be outraged not at the fact that legal fees are being paid out, but that a bill that needed to be defeated ever got signed in the first place.
Sort of a "don't blame me, blame the idiot who put this bill on the table. I'm just collecting compensation for him having wasted my time. maybe you should talk to him about that too..."
"It’s too bad the ESA and video game companies can’t sue the politicians themselves for perusing these laws."
Similar to being a corporation, government is sued as an entity, not as a collection of politicians trying to pad their public resumes...
Um, no. The government seizing more power for itself is not putting power into the hands of parents. If anything its taking it out of their hands. People really seem to ignore history. Nothing good ever comes of a government that seeks more and more power.
"The deliberations in this case took over a year, which shows that the ever-growing body of evidence that violent video games are harmful to children is getting harder and harder to ignore. The medical data clearly indicates that these ultra-violent video games have harmful effects on kids, and thus we have a state interest to protect them."
Um, no. More and more evidence is coming out to the contrary. And more and more evidence is coming out which points out the flaws in the studies that Yee refers to.
"From early on, the industry warned Governor Schwarzenegger and Senator Yee that this bill was unconstitutional and would be thrown out by the courts and that California taxpayers would pay the cost. "
The industry speaketh the truth.
They clearly don't give a damn about the people, cause there wasting the peoples money on this BS bill, they should be ashamed.
Yee is looking uphill, not for state re-election, but likely looking to move into Congress. Either that, or just is so childish he can't stand to be proven wrong.
I wish that Arnold and Yee would give this up already. The judge gave a pretty stren ruling on the matter. What would a new judge say? Nothing different.
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
OK Game Devs
Random Tower
Both also talk about the harmful effects that violent games have on kids.
What harmful effects?!
The most negative thing any credible study has ever indicated is that violent games might increase aggression in kids. And, as every person with an IQ above that of a lima bean knows: aggression does not equal violence. How is a marginal, short-term increase in aggression (similar to what attendees of a high school football game experience, no doubt) harmful to children?
Argh!
Andrew Eisen
However, his statement may have meant he would not appeal as a member of the State Assembly and not the Senate. In that case he was misleading.
Technically, he didn't lie since Arnie did the appealing.
I don't think anyone can say that any better. What do parents get from a law that helps them make decisions about what their children view?
Even if the law created a committee to review each game in a public forum, and was completely transparent and reviewable by the public, so what? What tool does that give to parents? Let's say more games are labeled as violent / not suitable for children and a fine is given to retailers who get caught selling the material to children... how does that assist parents who buy the games for their children anyway, or do not keep track of what their children get into at friends' houses?
Assuming that such a committee would be transparent (which it would not be) as Yee asserts the ESRB should be with it's review process, and assuming the ratings are genuine, what difference can it make? If a minor kills someone, and is found in ownership of an 'adult' game, the game will get blamed anyway -- not the parents, not the fire arms industry (if a gun is used), not the education system, not the police, NOT EVEN THE KID WHO DID THE CRIME!
So honestly, can anyone -- Jack T, Yee, anyone -- tell me what good such a law would do?
Wait a sec... so Yee means to say that i DID NOT see a commercial for the ERSB rating system the just the other night on TV; that the game retailers DO NOT block the sale of games to minors 58% of the time and instead never block game sales to minors; That Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo DO NOT have parental controls in the consoles; and that the game industry HAS NOT been working together with government officals to help advertise and educate poeple on the ESRB rating system... well damn, i guess i need to get my eyes, ears, and WHOLE PERCEPTION OF REALITY checked.
honestly, that statement of his gets to me every damn time...
@chadachada
The $320k is how much the game industry spent defending themselves from this unconstitutional law (high priced lawers over the years). It's in their right to seek compensation for money they should have never needed to spend in the first place... They are not seeking to profit from this, they are only seeking to break even.
What's worst for taxpayers is that how much of their money was WASTED is actually going to be about double that amount as the gov't probably spent the same amount of money themselves trying to win the court battle... so that's about half-a-million dollars down the drain for a law that should have never been passed in the first placed since it was clearly unconstitutional.
it kind of annoys me how poeple say "spent" instead of "wasted"... spending money assume that you actually GAINED something from the money that was used. However, if you use money but end up with nothing, than it's just plain wasted... Politicans aren't SPENDING taxpayer money on these laws, they are WASTING it.
@dutch_gamer
well, i'm not sure if it counts, but technically Yee didn't appeal the law, the govenor did... however, i think Yee was just blowing hot air, as he was probably under the self-delusion that his law was going to be passed; he probably would have appealed anyway if no one else did.
Well, I would have watched it at a younger age if it had been out ;)
Seriously though, you post a good example of what I'm getting at, do you think Arnold Schwarzenegger would try to introduce a law to protect people from the Violent Imagery in movies? Of course not, and it's not hard to guess why. Do you think Yee will demand that the MPAA be transparent? Of course not, and it's not hard to guess why either.
Fought regulation? Uh, let's see:
There's a rating system in place.
Most major game publishers have their games rated.
Most major retailers have policies in place regarding the sale of certain rated games.
Hmm... seems regulated to me.
Oh! Wait! I see! He means regulated to dictate HIS OWN personal, religious, and/or political beliefs upon other individuals and Parents. Ah, that's clearer.
I guess American Pie Unrated and Saw III Unrated are ok to be sold to minors without the government dictating whether they should be deemed appropriate for children or not. Or are there laws on the CA lawbooks that regulate the sale of rated R, NC-17, or even Unrated movies in CA's brick and mortar retail stores?
Oh yeah, I forgot, interactive media is more dangerous. Hmmm... Like the interactivity of spectators at a sporting event who've begun fist fights and even riots? Or the Parents at a kid's sporting event who attack players or other Parents? Wait... they aren't taking part in the sport itself. Hmmm... What about the viewers of a news report about an injustice (such as the Rodney King beating) who become so angry and/or frustrated that they run out and riot, attacking other people? Wait... they weren't interacting with the original situation. Hmmmm..... Oh... Oh... I know! The interactivity of someone being taught bigotry and hate for whole groups of Humans based on religious beliefs! Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket! I mean, some of those folks, even kids, go out and abuse other people mentally, verbally, or even physically or sexually. Oh... wait... that's religion and it's specially protected. Can't touch it. Besides, "God" says it's ok to hate "them kind of people".
Yeah, interactive media is unique. It's the only thing that can or should be regulated because... well... it's interactive, so there! :P
:/
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
OK Game Devs
Random Tower
I feel the same way.
When i get home tonight i'm going to write a letter to them stating my distaste for wasting my tax payer money.
Does anyone know where, or can provide, a list of studies done on the Violent VG effects? It would be appreciated. Thanks.
Don't forget that his likeness has appeared in violent video games.
I'll guess it's ok if he's making money off them.
Yes, but at which point does wasting taxpayers' money stop being about governing and starts being fraud? If you knowingly pass laws that are unconstitutional for political gain, aren't you just using California State taxpayers as a re-election campaign piggy bank?
It would be awesome if some reporter asked the Governator where is he gonna get the money from, and then follow up when California State takes the $320K from the education budget, or the food stamps program budget, or the after-school program budget, or highway construction budget.
The money is gonna come from SOMEWHERE. And since it's an unbudgeted expense, it's gotta be coming out of some other budget line item.
There is also the possibility he's tryign to create a bigger mess for the next administration to clean up/take the fall for
None of this behavior should be a surprise...but I hope the video game industry gets their money, because chucklehead politicians need to pay.
Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the politicians are looking for video game industry kickbacks.
....WHY would some retarded idiot say that and then expect people to not see what the hell just happened? I honestly wonder why he became governor of California when he knows nothing about politics.
My memory is rusty, but I remember hearing that the family he married into (the Shrivers) have been a pretty politically active family for a long time, which may have been a motivational factor.
I'm honestly not inclined to think ill of him on that score. He was already rich and famous, so there can't have been much in the way of motivation to run for a rigorous, high-stress position which would undoubtedly force him into the spotlight and to make decisions that would make him unpopular with certain demographics, unless he had a genuine interest in the position.
Or his wife wanted him to do it. Who knows?