Log in

View Full Version : NYS Sex Performer Registry Bill



Pages : 1 [2]

Earl_the_Pearl
06-06-2009, 01:10 PM
As my friend also pointed out, this is about money and about power. 'Strip clubs' and 'strippers' have lots of money but little or no power ( or are at least perceived as such by legislators and the public).

That is the way it is with tax evaders; they have money but are breaking the law. Yes the law is more powerful then law barkers.

Melonie
06-06-2009, 06:33 PM
so they'll have to wait until after the summer, around August or so, to introduce a companion bill to this in the Senate in order for it to even be close to passing. But, the bill in the Assembly does have a lot of sponsors, so lobbying the Assembly right now is probably our best bet. Then once fall rolls around, if it goes get introduced in the Senate too, we'll have to really start organizing around this one."

Yes ... but ..... with the but being that by August the NY State treasury will have another quarter's worth of additional state tax revenue shortfalls, another quarter's worth of 'bankrupt' state unemployment fund expenditures, and another quarter's worth of overall 'red ink' (i.e. widening state budget deficit) data available with which to motivate the passage of this bill.

pornlaw
06-06-2009, 09:59 PM
A couple of people have mentioned the right to privacy but so far what I can tell no one has mention the First Amendment.

This bill chills free speech. Dancing has already been determined to be a form of expression that is protected under the First Amendment.

By forcing women to have their identities on file with a governmental agency it can force women out of or not to dance in the first place.

We in the porn industry have been fighting a law like this for awhile -- 18 USC 2257.

I imagine if this bill passes someone from the First Amendment Lawyers Assoc. will be filing for an injunction under the premise that it violates the Constitutional rights of dancers.

MSNYC
06-07-2009, 09:47 AM
What really scares me about this piece of legislation is that it uses people's already-strong dislike/fear of sex trafficking to get support for a bill that will probably lead many women to engage in far more exploitative, underground forms of sex work than dancing. I know that a bunch of women at my club are undocumented immigrants who, were this bill to pass, would probably be dancing less and doing other stuff a whole lot more. Our club could no longer employ them, and I don't know where they would end up.

I'm one of the semi-lucky, in that this bill's passage will seriously make me question whether I still want to dance, but as a graduate student I can always find a lower-paying, less interesting job that will still allow me to (barely) pay my bills. But I'm not someone who has a child yet, or someone who is an undocumented immigrant, someone for whom working at clubs is more about survival and less about art/entertainment/passion, or for whom a breach of confidentiality would be disastrous. I consider the fact that I can dance for passion/art/politics a real privilege I have, and thus this bill would actually most negatively impact some of the least privileged dancers - dancers who, unfortunately, probably don't have the time, energy, and resources to participate in this online forum.

That said, I will still be super-pissed if (or, as some of you have pointed out, when) this bill takes effect.

mysteryman
06-07-2009, 09:56 AM
Mel

Most likely yes one club will have to step to the plate and state we will not turn down an independent registered contractor for dancing at the club. This of course will start a large court battle which then allow the club owners of NYS to get an injunction for several years suspending the law while the courts decide. We all know this is business as usual in the adult industry.

Think about it, a touring dancer is a perfect example of who is going to get caught up in this whole mess that NYS is creating. The touring dancer usually is incorporated and is contracted to work at a series of clubs for a period of time. NYS is a stop on the tour, so NYS is going to force her to get a NYS permit prior to the show in that state?

I see this whole permit ordeal being thrown out because if entertainers are already registered as sub-contractors/business owners then its redundancy.

Melonie
06-07-2009, 10:06 AM
I imagine if this bill passes someone from the First Amendment Lawyers Assoc. will be filing for an injunction under the premise that it violates the Constitutional rights of dancers.

Most likely yes one club will have to step to the plate and state we will not turn down an independent registered contractor for dancing at the club. This of course will start a large court battle which then allow the club owners of NYS to get an injunction for several years suspending the law while the courts decide. We all know this is business as usual in the adult industry


Obviously it's premature to do a whole lot of speculation. However, if you again try to draw similarities between this sex performer's 'permit' bill and the anti-smoking laws, anti-pollution laws etc. that were put into effect using the same sort of rationale ... i.e. the law's achievement of a 'greater good' by addressing some (perceived) detriment to society outweighs the rights of individuals ... or opposition to the bill (on whatever grounds) being publicly equated as a vote IN FAVOR OF smoking / pollution / exploitation of women ... would tend to indicate that it will not be 'business as usual' when the bill is passed and the appeals are filed.

This will be even more probable if this bill can be framed as strictly the regulation of intrastate commerce / regulation of alcohol sales within the state, as opposed to the bill containing any specific restrictions to a NY exotic dancer's performances ( which have typically opened the door to first amendment appeals in the past). The bill's authors were very careful to insure that this bill does NOT change any aspect of dancer performances (that are currently legal) ... it merely requires that their personal information become a matter of public record, and it authorizes the NYS Dept of Labor to enforce 'regulations' that are already in existance on a state-wide basis ( 'regulations' which had only been previously enforced by the DOL on a specific club by club basis, based on individual DOL hearing / court case results)

My friend in the state capital admits that there IS always the element of 'prior restraint' as potential grounds for appeal ... i.e. the fact that exotic dancers a.k.a. sex performers must consent to having their personal information become a matter of public record PRIOR to being allowed to legally perform could serve to 'restrain' some women from becoming exotic dancers a.k.a. sex performers due to (perceived) future negative repurcussions stemming from public knowledge of their sex performance history. However, my friend also points out that a.) the use of such (legal) employment history by a future employer to deny a future job opportunity is already illegal in NY (excepting 'public trust' and 'moral terpitude' issues), and b.) that 'employees' in NY state do not enjoy unlimited privacy protections which would allow them to keep the nature of their past employment record a secret from potential future employers.

Thus my friend feels that any up-front appeal based on 'prior restraint' will fail as it dumps the entire burden of proof on the appellant i.e. it's impossible to prove the existance of FUTURE negative repurcussions resulting from this bill until AFTER the bill becomes law and the negative repurcussions can be documented. Such an appeal may be successful at some time in the future, but by that time the sex performer's 'permit' database will have already been established, DOL enforcement of 'statutory employee' payroll and workplace regulations will have already been established etc.


PS - PornLaw - you don't need to tell me about Section 2257. It is the very reason that I no longer operate a (previously reasonably successful) pay website ! Arguably, from a standpoint of 'records', the ramifications of the NY sex performer 'permit' bill would place NY topless alcohol strip club owners in the same legal position as Section 2257 has created for adult webmasters in regard to being the subject of 'unannounced record inspections' ! However, this does raise another controversial issue in regard to future violators of the NY sex performer's 'permit' law possibly being considered as / legally treated as 'sex offenders'.

~

Earl_the_Pearl
06-07-2009, 06:33 PM
This bill chills free speech. Dancing has already been determined to be a form of expression that is protected under the First Amendment.

By forcing women to have their identities on file with a governmental agency it can force women out of or not to dance in the first place.


As for the constitution the last 8 years has shown the constitution is not worth the paper it is printed on.

If someone is ashamed of their expression maybe they should not express it.

Eric Stoner
06-09-2009, 07:06 AM
"Ladies who MUST work off the books?" What? Who must work off the books? It's not a "must" it's a "would rather". I am in law school. Believe me, Im someone who would rather not disclose what I do for a living, that doesn't mean I'm not for a bill passing that would regulate these back woods clubs and make them a safer working environment. If/when I work in vegas I'll have to get a permit. That will go on my record. So? There will be no life after stripping if I god forbid need a permit? Lots of girls already have to do this. They get by. I've seen no detrimental effects to them because of it. They do what they need to do. Why should nys be any different?

Like I said, Im not going to fight something so that ppl can continue to be dishonest and cheat on their taxes. It's a ridiculous notion.

Well yeah ! Sure. I know lots of single mom-dancers who could take a straight office job, cut hair, do make-up and half a dozen other things rather than dance. But then their kids wouldn't eat and dress as well as they do. Or get the special tutoring they need. Or go to a private school. Or afford the doctors and/or meds they need. Read the paper lately about the cost of health insurance and medical care ?
In a more perfect world their exes would fulfill their fatherly obligations and stay current on child support. Shockingly and disgracefully, most do not.

Obviously you've never been to Family Court or seen a matrimonial or custody action up close. It's NOT just the government some of these gals have to worry about. Some have left abusive relationships and don't want to be found. A permit on file indicating where she works ? Others are engaged in custody and/or support battles whose hubbies or ex-hubbies would LOVE to find out that they are stripping. Even in "liberal" NYC, a lot of judges look down their nose at dancing.

You're in Law School and that's great. Many a dancer has danced her way through Law School. The few I know personally would NOT like it to EVER become public knowledge that they danced for a living. All breathed a big sigh of relief when they passed their Character & Fitness background checks and interviews without certain parts of their employment history coming out. More than one asked me what she should do if it came out. My advice was : "Don't lie about it. Don't volunteer anything but whatever you do, don't lie." Fortunately for them it never got that far.

So I wouldn't be too quick to judge what other dancers think is necessary to get by. Especially if they have kids.

Eric Stoner
06-09-2009, 07:09 AM
Wait until you or someone you know has a child, loses your/their job for whatever reason (you know, in life, shit DOES happen sometimes); and your 'baby daddy' or husband decides he doesn't want to be with you anymore (also happens to the best people) and takes you to court...

"HERE, your Honor! HERE's the proof she's an UNFIT mother! Her employment record/W2/permit!"

I have a friend who has never, ever been a stripper. She has, bless her heart, remained my friend despte the fact that it became a liability to her in her ongoing custody battle. The fact that she is even friends with an alleged stripper (I've never hidden what I do, but they have no written proof) has come up several times over the last EIGHT years (her ex is an asshole, suprise suprise). IMAGINE if this was me, and I was under the NY law.

I'll fight to the death for my child, and my right to raise him. I can't believe that anyone would want to put me, and others like me, in that kind of position. Not to mention all the other reasons one might not want any proof of employment. There are many good reasons people would not want any record of their presence at a club. It sucks that other people care to limit our freedom to do so.

Nanny state is right..and I call myself a liberal..but this is just way, way too much.

Not to be patronizing, but this comes straight from the REAL World afaic.

Athenathefabulous
06-15-2009, 01:14 PM
-------

JayATee
06-18-2009, 01:13 AM
Well yeah ! Sure. I know lots of single mom-dancers who could take a straight office job, cut hair, do make-up and half a dozen other things rather than dance. But then their kids wouldn't eat and dress as well as they do. Or get the special tutoring they need. Or go to a private school. Or afford the doctors and/or meds they need. Read the paper lately about the cost of health insurance and medical care ?
In a more perfect world their exes would fulfill their fatherly obligations and stay current on child support. Shockingly and disgracefully, most do not.

Obviously you've never been to Family Court or seen a matrimonial or custody action up close. It's NOT just the government some of these gals have to worry about. Some have left abusive relationships and don't want to be found. A permit on file indicating where she works ? Others are engaged in custody and/or support battles whose hubbies or ex-hubbies would LOVE to find out that they are stripping. Even in "liberal" NYC, a lot of judges look down their nose at dancing.

You're in Law School and that's great. Many a dancer has danced her way through Law School. The few I know personally would NOT like it to EVER become public knowledge that they danced for a living. All breathed a big sigh of relief when they passed their Character & Fitness background checks and interviews without certain parts of their employment history coming out. More than one asked me what she should do if it came out. My advice was : "Don't lie about it. Don't volunteer anything but whatever you do, don't lie." Fortunately for them it never got that far.

So I wouldn't be too quick to judge what other dancers think is necessary to get by. Especially if they have kids.

I'm not judging anyone. I'm saying I don't have a problem with this law being passed, and I'm saying I'm not going to fight against it simply because there are people out there who want to cheat on their taxes.

mysteryman
06-18-2009, 05:41 AM
This goes way beyond tax evasion or trafficing sex workers. Think about it, you register as a dance at club xyz. Some guy who understands the way government works decides he wants to know where you live to send you flower, maybe more. Easy for him to find out. This is but one simple example which will turn dancers a way from NYS quickly if this bill goes into affect.

Eric Stoner
06-18-2009, 09:24 AM
I'm not judging anyone. I'm saying I don't have a problem with this law being passed, and I'm saying I'm not going to fight against it simply because there are people out there who want to cheat on their taxes.

I think you are being breathtakingly naive about dancing in particular and the real world in general. As I and others have pointed out, there is a LOT more to worry about than just tax implications.

Why don't you try to explain what you see as the "pluses" for this proposal ?

What big problem for dancers in NYS will it rectify ?

Just how exactly do you think dancers will benefit from this new requirement ?

Have you thought through the effects it will have on dancer employment and earnings ? Even leaving any and all tax issues aside ?

Athenathefabulous
06-18-2009, 12:43 PM
-------

JayATee
06-18-2009, 12:53 PM
I think you are being breathtakingly naive about dancing in particular and the real world in general. As I and others have pointed out, there is a LOT more to worry about than just tax implications.

Why don't you try to explain what you see as the "pluses" for this proposal ?

What big problem for dancers in NYS will it rectify ?

Just how exactly do you think dancers will benefit from this new requirement ?

Have you thought through the effects it will have on dancer employment and earnings ? Even leaving any and all tax issues aside ?

You know, I really don't find it necessary to defend myself to you anymore than I already have. Go back and read my first posts, they explain my position and why I feel the way I do, if you have a problem with it that's your problem. I'm not going to continue to go back and forth with you because it's obviously pointless. Think whatever you want, I really don't care.

Eric Stoner
06-18-2009, 01:03 PM
You know, I really don't find it necessary to defend myself to you anymore than I already have. Go back and read my first posts, they explain my position and why I feel the way I do, if you have a problem with it that's your problem. I'm not going to continue to go back and forth with you because it's obviously pointless. Think whatever you want, I really don't care.

Are you REALLY in Law School ? Is that how you're going to act when a judge asks you a question you don't like or your opponent makes an argument you didn't think about ?

I've read your posts and those who KNOW something about the skin biz think you are engaging in a LOT of wishful thinking and that you're willing to sacrifice a LOT of autonomy in exchange for .... what exactly ? Worker's Comp. ? Maybe, but don't hold your breath.

I asked you about the "dumpy dives" with "unsafe stages" that you think will be reformed by this proposal. I asked you to name one and you couldn't.

Afaic, this is one of those classic cases of being careful what you wish for.

Golden_Rule
06-18-2009, 02:47 PM
I was under the impression that the registry was still going to protect people's privacy as in not provide addresses to every stalker idiot who requests it.

Difficult, at best. Almost all state records are public domain. Those that are not are easily gotten with a court order.

If someone were suing you and wanted to make an issue out of the fact that you were a "registered sex worker" they'd have little problem accessing the state records of your license to prove it.

Athenathefabulous
06-18-2009, 03:51 PM
------

mysteryman
06-18-2009, 07:12 PM
So basically if you wish to continue to work as a dancer and keep your privacy, move to another state because your not going to get it in NYS.

Eric Stoner
06-19-2009, 07:20 AM
So basically if you wish to continue to work as a dancer and keep your privacy, move to another state because your not going to get it in NYS.

In a perverse way, I think some proponents hope that will in fact happen.

If you want less of something, regulate and tax the hell out of it.

Golden_Rule
06-19-2009, 07:25 PM
In a perverse way, I think some proponents hope that will in fact happen.

If you want less of something, regulate and tax the hell out of it.

Precisely, which has been the point of myself, who originated this thread, Melonie, yourself, straight along.

Its not the paying of taxes that is the issue. Never truly has been.

It is that this law is intended not to do what it claims to do, which is protect people, but to do the precise opposite. Its will limit people's ability to move about freely, making their own choices, because it will punish them for making those choices.

There is a powerful faction in NYS that would love to see strip-clubs [in fact anything to do with sex work] go away. There stated goals might be to protect exploited women [a very noble and righteous cause]. Their true goals is to limit the choices of free thinking women to think and act for themselves by causing certain choices to carry a heavy price tag.

Melonie
06-19-2009, 11:54 PM
There stated goals might be to protect exploited women [a very noble and righteous cause]. Their true goals is to limit the choices of free thinking women to think and act for themselves by causing certain choices to carry a heavy price tag.

^^^ in more ways than one ! The first price tag will be a much higher de-facto effective tax rate both on dancers and on clubowners. However, this price tag stops when a girl decides to quit dancing.

The second price tag will be the 'legacy cost' of having an official gov't record of a girl having been a 'sex performer' show up during any future background check by 'authorized' persons ... from potential future straight job employers to potential future landlords / lenders to potential future family court divorce / custody cases. While the bill draft states a 3 year 'aging period' between the time a dancer chooses to quit dancing ( not renew her permit) and the time the record of her 'sex performer' permit drops out of the state's database, there is no guarantee that being dropped from the database also means the record of her 'sex performer' permit is dropped from public record altogether. Thus it's distinctly possible that the public record of having been a 'sex performer' may follow a girl forever !


Actually, NY dancers have just 'caught a break' ! Thanks to a rather controversial development in the NY state senate ( i.e. a hugely rich republican donor convinced two troubled democrat senators to 'switch sides') this has precipitated a de-facto immobilization of the state senate ( see ). The important result is that the 'sex performer permit bill' , along with a bill to raise NY income tax rates on the rich, along with a bill to legalize gay marraige, and every other bill for that matter, will probably not be voted on until much later in the year !!!!!

It will indeed be ironic if NY dancers wind up being 'saved' from the effects of this sex performer 'permit' bill by the efforts of a republican billionaire !!!!



~

pornlaw
06-21-2009, 09:18 PM
It will indeed be ironic if NY dancers wind up being 'saved' from the effects of this sex performer 'permit' bill by the efforts of a republican billionaire !!!!

Politics makes for strange bedfellows... for the past 5 years I have lobbyed the California Assembly and Senate, the last 2/3 have been mainly fighting against a porn tax introduced by a Democrat. The Republicans and their "no new taxes" pledge helped us kill the bill in Committee. The bill never made it past the hearing stage.