Florida Voters Asked to Scrap One Way to Amend Constitution
Critics say the panel's membership is politically driven and includes unaccountable bureaucrats, political donors and lobbyists.
October 28, 2022 at 10:44 AM
3 minute read
Florida voters are deciding whether to get rid of a commission that meets every 20 years to recommend changes to the state constitution, the only such panel among the U.S. states that refers amendments directly to a statewide ballot.
Opponents of the Constitution Revision Commission say it has gone beyond its original mandate, lacks accountability and has become a venue for new statewide policy to be proposed to a group of temporary officials who — in contrast to the elected Legislature — are unelected appointees.
The commission isn't the only way to refer state amendments to voters. The Legislature can do so, as can citizens through initiative petitions.
Still, some citizen groups don't want to lose the commission, which Common Cause Florida calls "an important pathway Floridians have to change their state's constitution." The group is urging voters to reject the measure in voting that started in Florida on Oct. 24 and culminates Nov. 8.
The commission was created in the late 1960s and met in 1977-78, 1997-98 and 2017-18. Its critics say it was only intended to propose clean-up language or delete obsolete provisions, though the constitution gives it broad authority to set its own rules, procedures and agenda.
The governor, Senate president, House speaker — who in some years can be all from the same political party — appoint 33 of the panel's members. The Supreme Court chief justice appoints three members, and the attorney general is an automatic appointee.
Critics say the panel's membership is politically driven and includes unaccountable bureaucrats, political donors and lobbyists.
"It's run by people who follow no rules and who are not elected," said Republican Sen. Jeff Brandes, who sponsored the bill to put the measure on the ballot. "What we see is this body who, with one-party control of the Legislature and governor's mansion, can effectively rewrite the constitution and I think that's something both Republicans and Democrats should be concerned about."
In the latest meeting, the commission placed seven proposed constitutional amendments on the 2018 ballot. Voters approved all seven. Some lawmakers complained that the commission had bundled different subjects into single proposed amendments. For example, one measure banned oil drilling in state waters and also barred vaping in places where smoking is banned.
In any case, the commission's recommended ballot issues were overshadowed that year by a citizens' initiative measure to automatically restore voting rights for most felons who have completed their sentences, which also passed. Republican lawmakers later insisted the law be clarified to require that felons pay all fines, restitution and legal fees as part of their sentences to regain their right to vote.
It's not the first time voters have been asked to abolish the commission. In 1980, voters rejected a similar ballot question, with 56.5% voting no and 43.5% voting yes. That's when the governor's office and Legislature were controlled by Democrats. They're now controlled by Republicans.
Back in 1980 such ballot measures required a simple majority of yes votes to pass. However, they now require a higher hurdle, with approval by 60% of voters.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllClimate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250