124
1 STATE OF FLORIDA
CONSTITUTION REVISION COMMISSION
2
3
4
5
COMMISSION MEETING
6
7
8 VOLUME 2 OF 2
9
10 DATE: March 17, 1998
11 TIME: Commenced at 1:00 p.m.
Concluded at 6:35 p.m.
12
PLACE: The Senate Chamber
13 The Capitol
Tallahassee, Florida
14
REPORTED BY: JULIE L. DOHERTY, RPR
15 MONA L. WHIDDON
Court Reporters
16 Division of Administrative Hearings
The DeSoto Building
17 1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
125
1 APPEARANCES
2 W. DEXTER DOUGLASS, CHAIRMAN
3 CARLOS ALFONSO
CLARENCE E. ANTHONY
4 ANTONIO L. ARGIZ
JUDGE THOMAS H. BARKDULL, JR.
5 MARTHA WALTERS BARNETT
PAT BARTON
6 ROBERT M. BROCHIN
THE HONORABLE ROBERT A. BUTTERWORTH
7 KEN CONNOR
CHRIS CORR
8 SENATOR ANDER CRENSHAW (ABSENT A.M. SESSION ONLY)
VALERIE EVANS
9 MARILYN EVANS-JONES
BARBARA WILLIAMS FORD-COATES
10 ELLEN CATSMAN FREIDIN
PAUL HAWKES
11 WILLIAM CLAY HENDERSON
THE HONORABLE TONI JENNINGS
12 THE HONORABLE GERALD KOGAN
DICK LANGLEY
13 JOHN F. LOWNDES
STANLEY MARSHALL
14 JACINTA MATHIS
JON LESTER MILLS
15 FRANK MORSANI
ROBERT LOWRY NABORS
16 CARLOS PLANAS
JUDITH BYRNE RILEY
17 KATHERINE FERNANDEZ RUNDLE
SENATOR JIM SCOTT
18 H. T. SMITH
ALAN C. SUNDBERG
19 JAMES HAROLD THOMPSON
PAUL WEST
20 JUDGE GERALD T. WETHERINGTON
STEPHEN NEAL ZACK
21
IRA H. LEESFIELD
22 LYRA BLIZZARD LOGAN
23
24
25
126
1 PROCEEDINGS
2 (Quorum taken and recorded electronically.)
3 SECRETARY BLANTON: Quorum call, quorum call. All
4 commissioners, indicate your presence. All commissioners,
5 indicate your presence.
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Okay. We have got to get going
7 here.
8 SECRETARY BLANTON: Quorum call, quorum call. All
9 commissioners, indicate your presence. A quorum present,
10 Mr. Chairman.
11 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. If we'll come to
12 order, please. All right. I was hoping Commissioner
13 Connor would be here because he was going to handle the
14 next proposal. Commissioner Riley.
15 COMMISSIONER RILEY: If I may have a moment of
16 personal privilege, Mr. Chairman.
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Certainly.
18 COMMISSIONER RILEY: I would like to take just a
19 second and this opportunity to introduce my husband, Odin
20 Toness, sitting in the front row there, who was finally
21 able to come with me.
22 (Applause.)
23 COMMISSIONER RILEY: Thank you.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Would you tell us whether he was
25 for men and women alike?
127
1 COMMISSIONER RILEY: He is for whatever I am for,
2 Mr. Chairman.
3 (Laughter.)
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: He is a wise man. We all admire
5 his intelligence and good judgment.
6 Commissioner Connor, the next proposal is Committee
7 Substitute for Proposal 16 by the Committee on Ethics,
8 myself, and you were co-introducer. And rather than me
9 leave the chair, I was going to ask you to present it.
10 But we'll read it first and proceed from there. This is
11 Proposal No. 16, please read.
12 READING CLERK: Committee Substitute for Proposal
13 No. 16, Article VI, Section 7, Florida Constitution, and
14 Article XII, Section 23, Florida Constitution; providing
15 for public financing of campaigns for elective statewide
16 office and for spending limits.
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: And there is an Amendment No. 1
18 on the table by the Style and Drafting Committee,
19 Commissioner Mills. Commissioner Lowndes will handle
20 that.
21 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: Just to clarify, did you call
22 for five hands, sir?
23 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: No, I didn't. Five hands. We
24 got it.
25 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: Thank you.
128
1 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Thank you.
2 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: The only change Style and
3 Drafting has come up with is a change in the last sentence
4 of the proposal, and it's simply a matter of
5 clarification. The last sentence deals with protecting
6 those people who use public funds, to the same extent they
7 are currently protected under the existing law. And the
8 last sentence, as was originally drafted, said that they
9 were protecting people who agreed to spending limits. And
10 the Style and Drafting Committee felt it was more correct
11 to say we were protecting the people who used public
12 funds.
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. All in favor of the
14 amendment, say aye; opposed?
15 (Verbal vote taken.)
16 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: The amendment is adopted. We are
17 now then on Proposal No. 16, as amended by Style and
18 Drafting's suggestion. And, Commissioner Connor, you are
19 recognized to present this proposal.
20 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
21 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: We read it. We started to read
22 it. Read the amendment first that we just adopted.
23 READING CLERK: By Committee on Style and Drafting,
24 on Page 1, Line 24, strike "has agreed to spending limits"
25 and insert "uses public funds."
129
1 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Okay. That has been adopted.
2 Now, Commissioner Connor.
3 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
4 Ladies and gentlemen, I was very, very disturbed to read
5 an article in the newspaper a week or so ago about the
6 tort reform debate in which a leader of my party made the
7 statement to this effect: We promised business that if
8 they voted for our folks this go-around, then we would
9 pass this tort reform legislation.
10 Now, ladies and gentlemen, even Vernon Jordan
11 understands that one shouldn't get a quid pro quo. And
12 yet the statement that was made in the newspaper about the
13 tort reform issue very simply was that if you vote for
14 this, we promise you we will give you that. Now that is a
15 classic quid pro quo.
16 In other words, if a special interest group will
17 support one group of candidates for a particular party,
18 then in exchange for that support, having made that
19 investment, they get a return on that investment by
20 stripping somebody else's rights from them. Now we all
21 know, those of us who have been exposed to government,
22 know that this kind of thing goes on all of the time.
23 Although it's usually not acknowledged with that kind of
24 forthrightness. But the effect is the same.
25 The effect is to strip the public of confidence in
130
1 the process. And because ordinary people believe that if
2 they aren't heavy hitters in the financial arena, that
3 they don't have a voice. That if they aren't prepared to
4 pony up with a check, that they are effectively
5 disenfranchised. The only thing that I regret about this
6 proposal is that it doesn't go far enough to apply to the
7 Legislature. It just limits it to statewide offices. So
8 in that respect, it is a very modest proposal.
9 But, frankly, Mr. Chairman and I want to be political
10 realists, and we know that at this point we don't have the
11 votes to expand the protection of the public in this
12 regard. I just want to encourage you in the strongest
13 terms to give the people a chance to say by their vote on
14 this constitutional provision that given the choice, we
15 prefer to use public finances to promote the public
16 interest in preference to special interest money to
17 promote special interests.
18 Because, ladies and gentlemen, as the tort reform
19 debate illustrates, in return for that investment in a
20 political campaign, what's typically being traded off is
21 other people's rights or other people's money. Because
22 those who invest in political campaigns are doing so as a
23 cost of doing business, expecting that if they ride the
24 right horse to office, they are going to get a return on
25 that political investment. And typically it's going to
131
1 come from the public treasury, whether it's in the form of
2 tax relief or special interest legislation or whatnot.
3 I urge you to support this important proposal to
4 restore public confidence in the electoral process. Thank
5 you.
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Mills is next and
7 then Commissioner Wetherington.
8 COMMISSIONER MILLS: Mr. Chairman, in support,
9 democracy is not only for the rich. In Florida, if you
10 are running for statewide office, you had either better be
11 rich or know a lot of rich people. We have had very, very
12 positive experiences with General Milligan, who used
13 public financing, the Governor, who used public financing.
14 This simply is an honesty provision.
15 I agree with Commissioner Connor. If we would make a
16 good investment of public funds, it would be to remove the
17 influence of so many special interest groups from the
18 electoral process. This is a good start. Actually, I
19 think Commissioner Thompson, when he was Speaker, started
20 this out for statewide offices.
21 It is a good idea from a bipartisan point of view.
22 It keeps democracy available in a statewide sense -- and
23 this state is as big as many countries -- to people who
24 have the capacity to run for office, but maybe not the
25 checkbook.
132
1 This is an important, consistent electoral proposal
2 with the rest of our electoral proposals, all of which are
3 about open access to the process. Access to the process
4 isn't enough if you don't have the finances, and this
5 makes it publicly available. I encourage your support.
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: There is an amendment on the
7 table by Commissioner Langley. I'll recognize you and you
8 can move the amendment and I'll ask them to read the
9 amendment and you move it. Would you read the amendment,
10 please?
11 READING CLERK: By Commissioner Langley, on Page 1,
12 Line 21, delete "sufficient."
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. As I understand it,
14 you are just striking the word "sufficient."
15 COMMISSIONER LANGLEY: Yes, because of its -- and,
16 Members, because of its ambiguity. I don't know what
17 sufficient means and I don't want the Supreme Court to
18 have to decide what sufficient means. If we just put the
19 funding in there, then the funding will have to fit the
20 laws on spending limits and everything else. I meant to
21 talk to Commissioner Connor about it before I did it. Do
22 you have any objection to that?
23 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: I don't. The only concern I
24 have, candidly, is that if we delete "sufficient" and
25 somebody comes back and reads these proceedings and they
133
1 say, Well, they deleted language that intended for it to
2 be sufficient, so it must have meant insufficient.
3 COMMISSIONER LANGLEY: That's not the intent.
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I introduced it and I think it
5 probably makes it constitutionally better language because
6 it says they shall do it. I don't think the word
7 "sufficient" necessarily adds anything as long as it's
8 understood it's not taking anything away to take it out.
9 Now, Commissioner Wetherington.
10 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: I'll just mention on
11 that, sufficient is obviously implied. If it's implied,
12 why not leave it there?
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I don't think it really makes
14 much difference to me personally, but I'm not going to
15 enter the debate at this point. All in favor of the
16 amendment, say aye; opposed?
17 (Verbal vote taken.)
18 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: The amendment carries. Now, as
19 amended, we are on the Proposal No. 16. Any further
20 debate on No. 16? Commissioner Thompson, you spoke before
21 I think. Commissioner Wetherington.
22 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: Question. Commissioner
23 Connor, could you just explain to us how it works?
24 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: Yes, sir. Under the current
25 system, in order to qualify for public campaign financing,
134
1 a candidate has to demonstrate that they have a certain
2 amount of traction and a certain amount of critical mass
3 in the marketplace, in the political marketplace. Once
4 they cross that threshold and demonstrate that they have
5 that traction, then they may get matching funds from the
6 state for contributions made by individuals to that
7 campaign up to $250.
8 And then that -- those contributions, ultimately,
9 have a certain limit. In other words, you can't get
10 beyond a certain amount. So, it's not unlimited
11 financing. And under this proposal, that methodology, as
12 I understand it, will continue to be carried forward,
13 unless there were some kind of change in the future. But
14 it points out that general law implementing this paragraph
15 shall be at least as protective of effective competition
16 by a candidate who has agreed to spending limits as the
17 general law in effect January 1, 1998.
18 So the present law and the present system would wind
19 up being the floor, if you will, for public financing.
20 The Legislature, by general law, could make more -- could
21 provide different provisions in the future, but not less
22 than the provisions that they currently have. Does
23 that --
24 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: Yes. Why do we need it?
25 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: We need it because the public
135
1 has lost confidence in the electoral process.
2 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: How will this help
3 restore the public confidence is what I'm trying to get
4 at.
5 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: Because, in my estimation, what
6 this does is it helps level the playing field. It does
7 exactly what Commissioner Mills indicated. One, it
8 doesn't mean that you have to be a rich person or have a
9 lot of rich friends to run for public office.
10 And the general public, the people who aren't rich,
11 which is most of the folks here in the state of Florida,
12 feel, and I think properly so, that their voice has been
13 diluted by virtue of their inability to contribute
14 financially to the same extent as those who have special
15 interest money to support political candidates. And so
16 they have become cynical, withdrawn and apathetic,
17 believing in many respects that their vote doesn't make a
18 difference, because really it is a vote plus money is what
19 it takes to make it in today's political arena.
20 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: Thank you.
21 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Is there any further debate?
22 Commissioner Langley as an opponent.
23 COMMISSIONER LANGLEY: This sounds like a great idea
24 and it is another curative measure that's going to make
25 everything fair and just and honest. The problem is
136
1 people are involved.
2 And the problem that I see with it is that there are
3 people that don't really like any politicians. Even when
4 you ran for governor, believe it or not, Kenny, there were
5 people that did not like you, and they don't want to
6 contribute to your campaign. And there are people out
7 there that run for office that have some ideas that are so
8 controversial and so much in opposition to what a person's
9 principles may be, now you are going to tax those people
10 and give it to politicians.
11 Many of them are just out there as gadflies, just
12 running. And yet we are going to make people who have no
13 interest in politics, who can't afford to pay the taxes
14 they pay, this money, folks, is real money. It's not
15 Monopoly money and it's not Scotty's money, it's real
16 money that is being taxed to give to politicians, much of
17 which is wasted in campaigns, if you have ever run one.
18 And it's just not right to make people participate in
19 somebody's campaign that is running on issues that are
20 absolutely contrary to their beliefs.
21 It's worked for 100 years. It's not perfect. Do you
22 think this cures this problem? Do you think the amendment
23 sounds good? So the big law firm of Mr. Lowndes with 85
24 law partners says, hey, guys, send Kenny Connor $100
25 apiece and they will match it. We just doubled our
137
1 contributions. Or the labor union does the same thing, or
2 the real estate office with 400 employees. Hey, guys,
3 that guy is all for real estate, send him $200 apiece and
4 the government will match it and give him $200 more.
5 It doesn't cure anything. It is a step in the wrong
6 direction. It is working, it isn't perfect, but it is the
7 best in the world. Why are we going to mess with it?
8 COMMISSIONER MORSANI: Commissioners, I rise in
9 opposition to this proposal for some of the same reasons
10 that I gave before, of course, but I have to differ with
11 our good friend Mr. Connor and -- Commissioner Connor.
12 You know, 30 years ago in the legislative body of
13 this state, it was comprised of 60 percent, or excess, of
14 lawyers. A decade ago, lawyers made up 44 percent of the
15 legislative body in the state of Florida. Currently it's
16 27 percent. That doesn't say that lawyers shouldn't be in
17 the Legislature. I'm only showing you that that's how
18 it's changed in the last 25 years.
19 And so today we are not electing people to the Senate
20 and the House of Representatives in our Legislature
21 because of, quote, any monies that are out there, they are
22 running in their local communities. Now the same thing is
23 in a statewide basis.
24 I -- you know, it's amazing, we have said in this
25 body a number of times, if anyone was to say how everyone
138
1 was going to vote in here, none of us know how anyone is
2 going to vote on these issues. That's our strength, and
3 not our weakness.
4 But I just think this is wrong. I believe that we
5 should not have public financing. I'm opposed to, on the
6 federal tax bill where you can just have, you know, one
7 dollar, checked off. I've never checked off that one
8 dollar and I don't plan on checking it off. And I don't
9 think we need to have public financing in our state. It's
10 wrong, it's not -- it's, as Commissioner Langley said,
11 it's worked for several hundred years, I would hope we
12 wouldn't change this system. I would urge you to vote
13 against this proposal.
14 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Smith.
15 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise
16 to support this proposal. Please remember that this
17 government was established by the aristocracy of this
18 country. The Declaration of Independence was written by
19 the wealthy, wealthy white men who said they pledge their
20 lives and their fortunes.
21 One of the reasons, Commissioner Langley, that this
22 nation is so great is because it refuses to remain static.
23 It is alive, it's vibrant, not only constitutionally but
24 legislatively. Who would have thought just a few years
25 ago issues like flextime, issues like working women having
139
1 time off to care for their children? People said, We
2 don't need to deal with this issue, we have been doing it
3 this way for 200 years. We have to be flexible.
4 Your ability to serve your state, to serve your
5 county, to serve your city should not be dependent upon
6 the balance in your checkbook. We need to level the
7 playing field. I really respect those of you who say, I
8 don't want my money to go for a particular candidate, but
9 all of our tax dollars go to people or institutions or
10 organizations we don't like, in terms of subsidies, in
11 terms of who gets the tax breaks, in terms of a whole lot
12 of issues.
13 So this is not some new system that we are setting up
14 where our tax dollars are going to possibly candidates we
15 don't like. What we are doing is we are saying after 200
16 years of necessarily, by the way we have established
17 things, kind of limited the access to public service. Not
18 to public service, I take that back, to public office --
19 because everybody can serve. Limiting or marginalizing
20 the ability of people who are working-class people to
21 participate in politics, to participate in public office,
22 and thereby serve in public service.
23 The time for that should end. Is this a panacea?
24 Almost nothing that we are doing here is a panacea. What
25 we are trying to do in this relay race of justice is to do
140
1 our share to move our state one step further toward making
2 equal opportunity for all available, whether it is in the
3 area of education, whether it's in the area of
4 environment, or whether it is in the area of public office
5 holding.
6 And so while I share the concerns of the
7 commissioners who have risen to say they don't want their
8 money going to a particular candidate, I'm proud to
9 support this because I really think that working people
10 from my community and working people from your community
11 will have a better chance to step forward and serve and
12 not just allow service to public office holding to be for
13 the aristocracy. Thank you.
14 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Corr.
15 COMMISSIONER CORR: Thank you. Just a quick question
16 for Commissioner Connor. Commission Connor, could this be
17 done without this amendment to the Constitution?
18 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: It can be done.
19 COMMISSIONER CORR: Okay. And it is an existing law,
20 already, right?
21 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: There is an existing law on
22 public financing, which is -- the vitality of which is in
23 jeopardy.
24 COMMISSIONER CORR: To clarify now and to speak in
25 opposition. Two reasons to vote against this. The first
141
1 one is that it is already law. It can already be done,
2 it's already been done in previous campaigns in the
3 Legislature. Bob Milligan keeps being used as an example
4 of that. So that is the first reason to vote against it.
5 The second reason is that this is the wrong kind of
6 reform, if you can even call it reform. I think
7 Commissioner Langley said it best. What this does, it
8 doesn't limit the contributions or the interests of those
9 special interests and lobbyists, et cetera. All it does
10 is just add taxpayers' money to the mix. All it does is
11 add more money, it doesn't limit spending like the title
12 claims that it does.
13 So this would be one more in a series of, quote,
14 reform proposals about campaign financing that are brought
15 forth to the public. Year by year we hear about reform on
16 a federal level, on a state level, but it's always the
17 same. I agree as much as anybody on this commission, but
18 one of the greatest concerns we have in this process is
19 the way elections and campaigns are controlled by the
20 interests of those that hover around these lobbies out
21 here; whatever you want to call them, special interests or
22 whatnot. That's one of the greatest concerns we have.
23 I'm always baffled by how the public doesn't seem to
24 understand that and doesn't seem to rally around issues
25 like that. But for some reason, no change ever gets made.
142
1 So this starts to sound right, but it really does
2 nothing in the final analysis other than just add
3 taxpayers' money to the mix. I think it just is going to
4 add to the problem, make it even worse in the final
5 analysis.
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Any further debate?
7 Commissioner Connor, if you would like me to, I would take
8 the floor on this since I introduced it.
9 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: That would be fine. I'd be
10 proud for you to close, Mr. Chairman.
11 (Commissioner Thompson assumes the Chair.)
12 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Commissioner Douglass to
13 close.
14 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have
15 heard the debate, I have heard it over and over. Those
16 that want money to run government oppose public financing,
17 they oppose any reform in campaign contributions. Those
18 who are committed to the vested interests running our
19 country, running our state take that position. That's not
20 to say that they are not sincere or that they have
21 deep-seated convictions that are not rooted in the greed
22 that is apparent in some of the people that invest in our
23 political process.
24 But it is to say that if we want to do something to
25 allow the people to vote on it, this is the only vehicle.
143
1 This is the only vehicle. They cannot vote on what's
2 before the Legislature. They cannot vote in that body
3 where so many interests have verged with financial
4 investments. But they have to do it with the people.
5 And I see nothing wrong with submitting this to the
6 people for including it in their Constitution as a
7 requirement that this be done in these elections. I agree
8 with Commissioner Connor, it would be better if we could
9 apply it to all elections. It would certainly go a long
10 way to clean the public's view of what's happening. The
11 big threat to our form of government today is the concept
12 of our citizens that our political leaders are not free
13 agents and are not agents of the people. I know that most
14 of them are, but the concept is they are not.
15 Therefore, I think it only appropriate that we afford
16 the opportunity to people to vote on this. And there was
17 another person who was elected with public financing that
18 everybody forgets and that's Commissioner Brogan, along
19 with Commissioner Milligan. And Commissioner Milligan, of
20 course, never would have won without it.
21 And all you do is you say, I'm going to comply with
22 the spending limits. And the other fellow says, okay, go
23 ahead. And the other guy says, I'm not going to comply.
24 The person that does comply is afforded public financing
25 beyond the amount set, which is $500,000 at the current
144
1 time in the governor's race.
2 So I think that if we really want to be a commission
3 that's remembered as thinking about the people, as
4 Commissioner Smith so adequately put it, then we should
5 vote yes on this and allow it to go to the ballot next
6 November. Thank you very much.
7 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: The gentleman having closed,
8 the question recurs on the adoption of Proposal No. 16.
9 The Secretary will unlock the machine and the members will
10 proceed to vote. All members voting.
11 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
12 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: The Secretary will lock the
13 machine and count the vote.
14 READING CLERK: Twenty-four yeas, 12 nays,
15 Mr. Chairman.
16 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: So the measure goes to Style
17 and Drafting for future reference. Take up and read
18 Proposal No. 79.
19 READING CLERK: Committee Substitute for Proposal
20 No. 79, Article VI, Section 1, Florida Constitution;
21 providing that requirements for placing the name of a
22 candidate with no party affiliation or minor party
23 candidate on an election ballot must not be greater than
24 the requirements for major party candidates.
25 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Okay. Commissioner Riley, is
145
1 this your proposal? All right. There is a Style and
2 Drafting amendment. Would you read the Style and Drafting
3 amendment, please?
4 READING CLERK: By the Committee on Style and
5 Drafting, on Page 1, Lines 20-25, strike the underlined
6 and insert: "however, the requirements for a candidate
7 with no party affiliation, or for a candidate of a minor
8 party, for placement of the candidate's name on the ballot
9 shall be no greater than the requirements for a candidate
10 of the party having the largest number of registered
11 voters."
12 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Okay. Show me five hands
13 right quick so we can get to the Style and Drafting
14 amendment. Thank you. Commissioner Lowndes to explain
15 the Style and Drafting amendment.
16 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: The Style and Drafting
17 amendment simply changed several prepositions. They
18 changed some "of" to "for" and some "from" to "of." And
19 they changed the word "shall" -- changed the word "must"
20 to "shall," feeling that shall was the better language in
21 the Constitution. It does not change the meaning or
22 there's nothing substantive with respect to it. They're
23 purely grammatical changes.
24 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Debate or questions on the
25 amendment? Debate or questions on the amendment? Hearing
146
1 none, all those in favor of the amendment say aye; those
2 opposed, say no.
3 (Verbal vote taken.)
4 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Show the amendment adopted.
5 Now we are on the proposal as amended. Is there debate on
6 the proposal as amended? Commissioner Riley, you are
7 recognized to close.
8 COMMISSIONER RILEY: I can open and close very
9 quickly. This has been unanimously voted on. I would
10 sincerely hope that there's not much that I can say that
11 can increase that number. So therefore I will remind you
12 that Florida has the most restrictive ballot access laws
13 in the nation, and this is our one opportunity to fix it.
14 And sincerely hope that we all continue to support the
15 idea of doing so. Thank you.
16 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: The lady having closed, the
17 question recurs on adoption of Proposal No. 79. The
18 Secretary will open the machine and the members will
19 proceed to vote. All members voting.
20 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
21 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: All members voted. The
22 Secretary will lock the machine and announce the vote.
23 READING CLERK: Thirty-three yeas, zero nays, Mr.
24 Chairman.
25 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: And so the proposal goes to
147
1 Style and Drafting. Take up and read Proposal 128 by
2 Commissioner Ford-Coates.
3 READING CLERK: Proposal No. 128, Article VI, Section
4 5 of the Florida Constitution; providing for primary
5 elections.
6 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Commissioner Ford-Coates, you
7 are recognized to explain. Is there an amendment on Style
8 and Drafting? Need five hands. Seeing five hands, we are
9 on this measure.
10 Is there an amendment on the desk?
11 READING CLERK: Amendment on the desk, Mr. Chairman.
12 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Read the amendment.
13 READING CLERK: By the Committee on Style and
14 Drafting, on Page 1, Line 8, strike everything after the
15 proposing clause and insert: Section 1. Section 5 of
16 Article VI of the Florida Constitution as revised by
17 amending that section to insert lengthy amendment.
18 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Who is going to explain that?
19 Commissioner Ford-Coates, you are recognized.
20 COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES: Commissioners, this
21 amendment merely states more clearly what we intended to
22 do by this primary reform package. The new wording says,
23 If all candidates for an office have the same party
24 affiliation and the winner will have no opposition in the
25 general election, all qualified electors, regardless of
148
1 party affiliation, may vote in the primary elections for
2 that office. I think it's fairly self-explanatory.
3 (Chairman Douglass resumes the Chair.)
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: On the amendment, Commissioner
5 Langley.
6 COMMISSIONER LANGLEY: If you want to go ahead and
7 adopt the amendment, I'll speak on the bill. Either one.
8 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I think we are on the amendment
9 at the moment; aren't we? Any discussion on the amendment
10 or debate? If not, all in favor of the amendment say aye;
11 opposed?
12 (Verbal vote taken.)
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: It carries. Now we are on the
14 proposal. The proponent of the proposal was Commissioner
15 Ford-Coates and you may proceed.
16 COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES: Thank you, Commissioner.
17 I first of all want to thank Commissioner Mills for
18 working with me on this initial proposal. I appreciated
19 his help.
20 Commissioners, Proposal 128 returns to the people the
21 simple right to vote for their elected officials. Our
22 Constitution states, quite clearly, that there shall be a
23 general election to select our public officials. The
24 reality is that many times the public official is selected
25 in the primary because no one else has filed from another
149
1 party or as an independent. That means that only a
2 fraction of the public selects the public official.
3 In Pinellas County in 1996 more than 57 percent of
4 the electorate could not vote for their school board, tax
5 collector or clerk of circuit court. That's over half the
6 voters who had no opportunity to vote on these important
7 officials. Every public official should be acting in the
8 best interests of all their constituents and should be
9 elected by all their constituents. This proposal will
10 return the vote to all the electors.
11 I would point out that you have on your desk several
12 articles and editorials that have appeared around the
13 state on this issue. And one in particular, a Sarasota
14 Herald Tribune, was written last Saturday. And that
15 newspaper asked people to call my office and let me know
16 how they felt about this proposal. I want you to know in
17 that 24-hour period after this came out, of course we
18 weren't taking phone calls until Monday, we received over
19 150 calls, faxes and letters delivered in support of this
20 proposal in that very short period of time.
21 This is something that appeals to the average man or
22 woman on the street. They want to be able to vote for
23 their public officials. It is time to return the
24 franchise to those people.
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Lowndes.
150
1 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: Yes, I would like to speak in
2 favor of this proposal. You know, we just passed
3 unanimously a ballot access proposal. This is really
4 ballot access, it really is affording more people the
5 right to vote. And my sense is we passed the last one
6 unanimously, we should pass this one unanimously. Because
7 we are really giving more people the right to vote by
8 doing this. Thank you.
9 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Langley and then
10 Commissioner Barkdull.
11 COMMISSIONER LANGLEY: I rise in opposition. I don't
12 particularly like party politics, and you know, it's kind
13 of ugly sometimes, but it works. And it is a mechanism
14 that is set up from the very committee level to promote
15 anti-interest people and to promote a philosophy. And
16 between the parties, there are philosophical differences,
17 including the Libertarians or any other parties that may
18 come up.
19 But it's easy to see the problems with this proposal.
20 You have a county -- well, you know, when I first ran in
21 Lake County, the Republican registration was 28 percent.
22 And I still won, somehow. They didn't know me that well
23 then. You know, it's still possible to do that. The
24 registration now in Lake County is 63 percent Republican.
25 When I first ran -- I'll tell you-all a secret not
151
1 many people know. When I came back from Korea in 19, that
2 was this century, in 1957 --
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: The war was over.
4 COMMISSIONER LANGLEY: I know that, I was in
5 occupation. You-all made such a mess over there that we
6 had to clean it up.
7 But anyway, I came back and I had turned 21, and my
8 dad took me up to the county registrar's office, a lady
9 named Catherine Baker, she had been there for about 30
10 years. And I said I want to register Republican because I
11 had known General Eisenhower and I thought he was great.
12 Son, there ain't no use registering Republican in Lake
13 County, you would never get to vote. And so I registered
14 Democrat. Not for long, not for long.
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Is it true confessions time?
16 COMMISSIONER LANGLEY: Yes, but it makes a point. It
17 is like the little puppies, at 10 days my eyes were opened
18 and then I went back to register Republican. Be that as
19 it may, Republicans didn't win many elections in those
20 days, but the philosophy of the Republican party developed
21 and caught the pleasure and the attraction of the middle
22 class people and we built a party in this state. And we
23 are still building a party in this state.
24 And now you want to destroy the party system. Give
25 ole' Slick Willie credit, he captured the middle, you
152
1 know, no strong Democrat and no strong Republican vote in
2 this country in 1996. He appealed to them. And that's
3 all well and good. What I'm saying is don't destroy the
4 party system. And in doing this, you are destroying the
5 party system.
6 Scenario: I'm running for Republican nomination,
7 have a record as a conservative, Democrats put up a
8 liberal Republican whom I could beat hands down in any
9 other election, but in the primary, all of the Democrats
10 in the county run out and vote for the liberal Republican.
11 Now what is the party philosophy? It's destroyed.
12 And that can happen the other way in Democratic
13 counties where the Republicans would put up a
14 conservative, very conservative Democrat and run out in
15 the Democratic primary, where there's very little turnout,
16 and vote in the conservative Democrat and destroy the
17 liberal bent of the Democratic party in that county.
18 You know, it's working like it is, again, and I
19 implore you that this is not a good idea. If you want to
20 vote in my primary, Ms. Ford-Coates, we'll let you
21 register and you can come vote. Thank you.
22 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Barton is next,
23 followed by Barnett and then Connor.
24 COMMISSIONER BARTON: Commissioner Langley has really
25 stated everything that I was going to state except that I
153
1 would remind you that the primaries are a process by which
2 the party selects their candidates. And it taints the
3 process when the people of other parties vote in those
4 primaries. I might add, too, I had the same experience in
5 1965 in Collier County when I went down to register. I
6 was a little tougher than you, I registered Republican
7 anyway.
8 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Barnett is next,
9 followed by Commissioner Connor.
10 COMMISSIONER BARNETT: I would like to speak in
11 support of this proposal. The issue to me -- and I have
12 voted against it consistently. I voted against this
13 proposal consistently, but I have been worrying and
14 thinking about it and I want to tell you why I now believe
15 that we should support it.
16 And it hasn't got, to me, anything to do with
17 Democrats or Republicans. I was born a Democrat, I'll
18 probably die a Democrat, but I vote often for Republicans
19 and I raised a Republican. My son is a Republican.
20 (Laughter.)
21 COMMISSIONER BARNETT: But to me, it is not about
22 party politics. Since I've been registered to vote, I
23 have only missed voting in one or two elections,
24 regardless of what it was. To me, the right to vote, the
25 privilege to vote in this country is one of the great
154
1 privileges we have in a free society. And I honor it and
2 I do my best to participate in the process.
3 And I have become convinced that Commissioner
4 Ford-Coates is right, that many, many times we are faced
5 with a situation, usually in local political issues, very
6 local races where many people cannot exercise that right
7 to vote. Too few people in this country today exercise
8 the privilege to vote for their elected officials. And if
9 this proposal in any way encourages more people to go to
10 the polls, it wouldn't matter to me which party, whether
11 it's Republican, Democrat, Green, Libertarian or whatever.
12 If it encourages people to go out and speak and
13 participate in the political process, then I think
14 whatever faults I thought it had are far outweighed by the
15 benefits of exercising our rights to elect our governing
16 officials.
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner Connor.
18 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: Ladies and gentlemen, this
19 proposal not only enhances voter turnout and participation
20 of people in elections, it enhances the party system.
21 Why? Because you are not required to choose between what
22 political party you are going to be a member of and
23 whether or not, on the other hand, you are going to be
24 able to vote in the election.
25 And that is the choice, the Hobson's choice, that we
155
1 give many voters today. We say, If you join this
2 particular political party, then you won't be able to play
3 a meaningful role in your community in the elections that
4 take place. That ought not to be.
5 Now what this proposal does is it allows people to
6 join the party that most, most nearly equates with their
7 own philosophy of principle, and enables them to
8 participate all the way through, even through the
9 election, where the primary election is in effect the
10 general election. It doesn't force them to join a party
11 as a matter of convenience, it enables them to join a
12 party based on conscience because they won't forfeit their
13 right to vote in the process.
14 I suggest to you, Mr. Langley, that if this provision
15 had been in effect for a longer period of time, Florida
16 would have moved toward Republican dominance long ago,
17 because the effect would have not been a chilling effect
18 preventing people from registering Republican because they
19 gave up their right to vote.
20 So if you support the party system and you believe
21 people ought to be aligned and affiliated with parties
22 that most narrowly mirror their consciences and
23 convictions, I urge you to support this proposal.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Any further debate? If not, are
25 you ready to vote? Oh, excuse me. Commissioner
156
1 Ford-coates, you get to close.
2 COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES: Thank you, my last chance
3 on the issue. Commissioners, let me give you some figures
4 to illustrate how this proposal will correct the problem
5 that we face in these so-called primaries.
6 If you have a voter pool of 100,000 adults, potential
7 voters, half are registered to vote, you have got 50,000
8 registered voters. If, as in Pinellas County, 57 percent
9 are not members of the majority party, we have 21,500
10 people who can vote in the primary. If there's a
11 50 percent turnout, 10,500 voters, then to win that
12 primary election all you need is 5,251 votes, that's
13 50 percent plus one. 5,251 votes in a population of
14 100,000 people could elect the public officials to serve
15 that area.
16 Is that the kind of mandate we want in Florida? I
17 submit to you it is not. We need to do everything we can
18 to increase voter participation.
19 In closing, with apologies to a good Republican,
20 Abraham Lincoln, let me take editorial license with his
21 good advice about how often you can fool the people and
22 say to you that today in the state of Florida we have
23 public officials elected by only some of the voters all of
24 the time. And we have public officials in Florida elected
25 by all of the voters only some of the time. It is time
157
1 that all our officials are elected by all of the voters
2 all of the time. Please vote for this good proposal.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. We'll unlock the
4 machine and vote.
5 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Has everybody voted? Everybody
7 has now voted. There are 37 votes cast. Lock the machine
8 and announce the vote.
9 READING CLERK: Twenty-five yeas, 12 nays,
10 Mr. Chairman.
11 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: That last little bit did it
12 there, Commissioner Ford-Coates. Those statistics won it
13 over. That is going to Style and Drafting for grouping.
14 We now move to Proposal 149 by Commissioner Scott.
15 Would you read it?
16 READING CLERK: Proposal 149, Article IV, Section 5,
17 Florida Constitution; providing for the candidate for the
18 office of governor to run without a lieutenant governor
19 candidate.
20 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Okay. This one passed 28 to 2.
21 If there's not five hands, it'll be sent to Style and
22 Drafting. Not seeing five hands, it's sent to Style and
23 Drafting.
24 (Off-the-record comment.)
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: If we don't get five hands
158
1 there's no amendment. It doesn't have one unless -- oh,
2 Style and Drafting has an amendment? We still need five
3 hands, I think.
4 (Off-the-record comment.)
5 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Okay. Style and Drafting all
6 raised their hands. Commissioner Scott, you were doing
7 good. Read the amendment, please.
8 READING CLERK: By the Committee on Style and
9 Drafting on Page 1, Lines 21-23, strike the underlined
10 language and insert: "In primary elections, candidates
11 for the office of governor may choose to run without a
12 lieutenant governor candidate."
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: On the amendment. It is just a
14 style amendment is all, it doesn't change --
15 COMMISSIONER MILLS: Yes, Mr. Chairman. It does not
16 change the meaning at all.
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Scott is a
18 proponent. Do you have any --
19 COMMISSIONER SCOTT: I was not able to get to the
20 meeting last night, but Style and Drafting appears to me,
21 instead of saying "all candidates may" it just says
22 "candidates may." And the difference would be that they
23 all wouldn't have to choose to do it. So it just
24 clarifies that some may do it.
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Okay. So you support the
159
1 amendment. All in favor of the amendment, say aye.
2 Opposed?
3 (Verbal vote taken.)
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: As amended, any debate? If not,
5 if you're ready to vote, we'll vote. This is the one that
6 does away with the need for the governor to choose his
7 lieutenant governor's candidate in the primaries. He has
8 to still do it in the general election. Commissioner
9 Barkdull, you rise to a question?
10 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Yes, sir. Would Chairman
11 Mills or whoever from Style and Drafting is handling this
12 amendment. As I understand this amendment or the proposal
13 as it is now amended, we have several candidates running
14 in a primary for the office of governor, some of them can
15 select a lieutenant governor and I guess it'll be up to
16 the Legislature as whether they appear in tandem on the
17 ballot, and others that don't, which I'm trying to find
18 out whether that will change the way the ballot language
19 will be.
20 COMMISSIONER MILLS: This exactly tracks the intent
21 of the original language, which means you just have a
22 choice. You can run with or without.
23 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: That's the point I wanted to
24 be sure that everybody understood, that this is changing
25 it where some people may make a selection and others may
160
1 not. Now my question is, would they be in tandem, those
2 that had selected a lieutenant governor, would both names
3 appear or just the top man?
4 (Off-the-record comment.)
5 COMMISSIONER MILLS: Yes, that's exactly right, man
6 or woman. That since it, this only authorizes them to run
7 without it, it would be my interpretation that it would
8 remain, they would run in tandem on the ballot, if they so
9 chose.
10 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Then we would have possibly
11 one pair of candidates, a pair of females running in
12 tandem and a male running separately.
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Only in the primary though.
14 COMMISSIONER MILLS: In the primary, correct.
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: You still have to have in tandem
16 in the general election. You shouldn't have said that,
17 that may appeal to a lot of people, Commissioner Barkdull.
18 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: It makes it an interesting
19 proposition. I just wanted to be sure everybody is as
20 interested --
21 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I think so. We had a lot of
22 debate on this and it was adopted, 29 to 2. If you are
23 ready to vote we'll proceed to vote on the amendment,
24 proposal. Unlock the machine and let's vote.
25 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
161
1 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Lock the machine and announce the
2 vote.
3 READING CLERK: Thirty-one yeas, 2 nays,
4 Mr. Chairman.
5 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. We'll proceed to the
6 next proposal, which is by Commissioner Marshall, Proposal
7 No. 158. Would you read the proposal, please?
8 READING CLERK: Proposal No. 158, Article IX, Section
9 4, Florida Constitution; providing for nonpartisan school
10 board elections.
11 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Are there any amendments?
12 READING CLERK: None on the desk.
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: None on the desk. Now do we have
14 five hands to revisit this? It only got 21, but we still
15 have to have five hands to vote on it again. We have five
16 hands. It only got 21 votes, but we still have to bring
17 it up.
18 Commissioner Marshall is the proposer and you are
19 recognized, Commissioner Marshall.
20 COMMISSIONER MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
21 Commissioners. I do believe in partisan politics, I
22 believe political parties and public policy are
23 strengthened by active participation in partisanship in
24 elections. I think that helps to strengthen public
25 policy, sharpens the debate, the contrast between
162
1 different political philosophies. But I think there are a
2 few occasions when public offices, officers' civic duty is
3 burdened by partisanship, and I think this is one of
4 those.
5 I think school board members can function more
6 effectively, carry out their duties more faithfully if
7 they are elected in nonpartisan elections. I ask you for
8 a moment to think about the issues, the most prominent,
9 the most widely debated and discussed issues that school
10 board members are likely to take up. They would include,
11 for example, the establishment of school attendance zones.
12 There's a major article in this morning's Tallahassee
13 Democrat about the controversy that's in this community
14 over the assignment of students to particular zones within
15 the district.
16 Another issue would be teacher compensation, an issue
17 that school board members are burdened with that ought not
18 to be a matter of political consideration. Another would
19 be discipline of students, expelling students for
20 misbehavior. Another common issue would be the selection
21 of school sites when new school buildings are to be
22 constructed.
23 The pernicious effects of making politicians into
24 those who set school board policy, who determine policy
25 for the school board, in other words, school board
163
1 members, I think, imposes on them a burden we ought not to
2 ask them to carry.
3 If an elected school board member, elected in a
4 partisan campaign, has to answer to the electors on such
5 issues as those I've just mentioned; the disciplining of
6 students, zoning, the selection of school board sites, I
7 think that imposes on those school board members a burden
8 that they ought not have to carry, and in many cases do
9 not want to carry.
10 A few minutes ago, Commissioner Langley -- is he
11 still in the room?
12 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: He's here.
13 COMMISSIONER MARSHALL: A few minutes ago
14 Commissioner Langley made the following statement and I
15 thought so much of it that I wrote it down. He said, I
16 don't like party politics. And I would like to see the
17 hands of those who believe that. He then went into a
18 discussion of the means by which Commissioner Langley was
19 elected after he took off the uniform and decided to run
20 for public office.
21 I liked the description he gave several weeks ago
22 when he was attributing a quotation to a legislator from
23 the Panhandle named Billy Joe Rishe [phonetic], when he
24 said that Mr. Rishe described his success in politics by
25 saying, half the stuff my political opponents say about me
164
1 isn't true, later he said -- Commissioner Langley, can we
2 ask you to explain that, please?
3 COMMISSIONER LANGLEY: What he said was, Them folks
4 back home telling lies about me, and half of them ain't
5 even true.
6 COMMISSIONER MARSHALL: So I thought it might be
7 useful to explain Commissioner Langley's partisan views on
8 public service.
9 In any case, whether true or not, I believe we impose
10 a needless burden on school board officers who are elected
11 on partisan platforms. And I therefore urge you to vote
12 in favor of Proposal 158.
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Any further discussion on
14 Proposal 158? Any opponents or proponents on Proposal
15 158, nonpartisan election of school boards? If not, we'll
16 proceed to vote. Unlock the machine and we'll vote. If
17 you are not in the chamber, you better get here.
18 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
19 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Well, everybody was here. They
20 are not here. They are now here. Lock the machine and
21 announce the vote.
22 READING CLERK: Twenty-three yeas, 13 nays,
23 Mr. Chairman.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: By your vote you have sent 158 to
25 Style and Drafting for inclusion on the ballot.
165
1 Incidentally, that changed right at the end there in case
2 you-all weren't looking.
3 The next proposal is Committee Substitute for
4 Proposals 172 and 162 by the Committee on Legislative
5 Affairs, Article III, and Commissioners Thompson and
6 Evans-Jones. Would you read the amendment, please?
7 READING CLERK: Committee Substitute for Proposal
8 Nos. 172 and 162, a proposal to repeal Article III,
9 Section 16, Florida Constitution, relating to legislative
10 apportionment and create Article II, Section 10, Florida
11 Constitution; providing for a commission to establish
12 legislative and congressional districts; providing for the
13 appointment of members to the commission; requiring that
14 the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court fill certain
15 vacancies on the commission; requiring meetings and
16 records of the commission to be open to the public;
17 providing certain exceptions; requiring that the
18 commission file its final report with the Secretary of
19 State within a specified period; requiring that the
20 Supreme Court determine the validity of the plans;
21 providing for the Supreme Court to establish the districts
22 under specified circumstances; providing for the
23 assignment of senatorial terms that are shortened as a
24 result of apportionment; deleting requirements that the
25 Legislature apportion the state into legislative
166
1 districts.
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. This is Commissioner
3 Evans-Jones on the proposal.
4 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
5 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Can we have your
6 attention please?
7 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: I'm just briefly going to
8 go through the steps. I think most of you have been here
9 and --
10 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Excuse me, I didn't ask for the
11 five hands. Okay, you have the five hands. Now, excuse
12 me for interrupting.
13 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: That's fine. I just
14 briefly want to walk you through the proposal. How many
15 commissioners? There are nine. The commissioners are
16 appointed. The President of the Senate and the Speaker of
17 the House, and the minority leader of the House and the
18 minority leader of the Senate will each appoint two
19 people. Those eight people will then elect their
20 chairman. If they can't decide on a chairman, then the
21 Supreme Court justice, Chief Justice, would make the
22 appointment.
23 Are there any restrictions on who could be on the
24 commission? Yes, there are restrictions. Commissioners
25 should not be an elected public official, party officer,
167
1 lobbyist, legislative employee, congressional employee, or
2 relative of the Florida Legislature or member of the U.S.
3 House of Representatives. Additionally, they would take
4 an oath not to run or lobby for two years. And that is a
5 healthy thing, Commissioners.
6 Would the commission have standards to go by? And
7 this is very, very important. The commission would be
8 required to use sensible and fair redistricting standards
9 in drawing the maps. Those standards are, and I want you
10 to really listen to this very closely, shall have equal
11 population, shall be composed of contiguous territory and
12 districts shall not be drawn to dilute minority voting
13 strengths. And that is extremely important.
14 Could you challenge this? Yes. Would single-member
15 districts be required? There would be 120 members of the
16 House and 40 of the Senate. Would these meetings be open
17 to the public? Yes, they would. And this is very
18 important because they have never been noticed before, any
19 of the meetings. They are always held very privately.
20 And I think it's important that the public would be able
21 to have an input and would know what's going on.
22 I think another very healthy thing would be the
23 public hearings that would be required so that people will
24 be able to give their input as far as to this
25 reapportionment commission.
168
1 I think that there have been a lot of people here who
2 have been pressured by one thing or another to vote for or
3 to vote against this. And I think that you have to
4 understand that we are not here as Republicans and we are
5 not here as Democrats. We are here as citizens of the
6 Constitution Revision Commission with an obligation to the
7 citizens of Florida and not to our party. And I think you
8 should remember that.
9 What we are simply trying to do is to have equity in
10 the process. You cannot expect a member of the
11 Legislature not to be tremendously concerned with their
12 own seat. That's just a fact of life, whether it be when
13 the Democrats are in control or whether -- when the
14 Republicans are in control. It is unrealistic to think
15 that they will not use their power.
16 If you have fairness and equity, I sincerely believe
17 that the best candidates will win and I think that's very,
18 very important for the citizens of Florida. We have
19 gotten a lot of editorial support throughout the state for
20 this process. I think the people are really very confused
21 about the political process. They really don't trust the
22 politics and the politicians. I think this will be a
23 wonderful step forward to let them understand that we can
24 rise above petty partisan politics and that we can do what
25 is indeed the right thing to do.
169
1 I urge you very strongly to try to put your partisan
2 feelings behind you, to try to remember that you are here
3 to serve the people of Florida and not necessarily your
4 particular party. And I just urge you, plead with you,
5 please, please vote yes.
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner Scott,
7 you rise as an opponent?
8 COMMISSIONER SCOTT: Commissioners, there are a lot
9 of reasons -- I was commenting to somebody today that one
10 of the big differences between this commission and the
11 Legislature is that we only argue these things once. So
12 now we have been there two or three times, but I hope you
13 will give me your attention for a minute.
14 Diversity. You know, who is going to know what's
15 best for Miami or Pensacola or Jacksonville or Tampa? The
16 diverse groups that we send here, their geographic and
17 historical and cultural communities of interest, who best
18 knows that other than someone who is elected to office?
19 Equal representation, let's talk about equal
20 representation for a minute. This bill would allow four
21 people to pick all of the memberships and they will be
22 evenly divided and you can bet that they are going to be
23 evenly divided party-wise and you can bet that they are
24 not going to be able to easily select a chairman.
25 I just think that that -- letting four leaders, and
170
1 having been one of them, to pick people, even if you try
2 to get a diversity, I mean, you could get a diversity by
3 race, but who knows if the person that may be black or may
4 be Hispanic is going to know anything about the inner
5 areas of Jacksonville or the Tampa Bay area or Miami.
6 Accountability. The Legislature is accountable. We
7 had an experience, it's been discussed by Commissioner
8 Crenshaw and others, with a 20/20 Senate. And we had
9 difficulty with reapportionment and I know Commissioner
10 Zack was there for that. But that's passed now. So that
11 was one bad experience. I don't think you should take
12 this away from the Legislature.
13 One of the things that I have to say to you that's
14 different is this, minority districts. Now I want to tell
15 you that I don't know if I could qualify as an expert, I
16 certainly should qualify as an expert client on behalf of
17 the Florida Legislature and the minority members with the
18 lawsuits that we've been through.
19 When we started, and the lawyers in here will
20 understand, we had the Shaw case and the Miller case and
21 the Bush case and others. They have thrown out all the
22 minority districts in this country. And the first one
23 that they upheld -- why did they throw them out, first of
24 all? Because they were able to show that race was, that
25 other considerations were subordinate to race. That race
171
1 was the predominant factor. Okay.
2 We went to the federal court in Tampa. Now that I've
3 dropped all my papers but I can remember it anyway what
4 they said because I was there. What they said was -- this
5 is the big factor with us is that the Legislature has
6 approved this, deferring to the Legislature. They
7 deferred to the Legislature in these other cases.
8 Now in our argument in the U.S. Supreme Court, in our
9 argument in the U.S. Supreme Court, what we said was we
10 did not make race the predominant factor. We said that
11 unlike -- we said that this case does not involve the
12 critical factor identified in the Shaw and the Bush case.
13 In both those decisions the court made clear that the key
14 defect was that race had been the factor that could not be
15 compromised.
16 Now you may think, and I know the intentions are
17 good, that where it's been written into this bill that
18 there will be minority districts and except for that
19 requirement, along with a couple of others, then we are
20 going to have, follow geographic boundaries and so forth.
21 This is a total -- if you trust me on anything -- a total
22 setup for a Fourteenth Amendment challenge. If this is
23 the law of Florida, and there is a plan enacted under
24 this, it will clearly be thrown out. And there will be no
25 deference to the Legislature.
172
1 What we were able to do is say, Look, we have got
2 this community of interest, and we -- while race is a
3 factor, it was not the predominant factor.
4 Now the courts have deferred to the Legislature. All
5 of the things we do up here, we could raise taxes, we
6 could do, double the sales taxes and eliminate all the
7 tax, all exemptions for services, we could effect -- you
8 know the saying, all of us that have been here know that
9 life, liberty and property is in jeopardy when the
10 Legislature is in session.
11 We can do all of those things, but now this one thing
12 that's probably the heart of all of it we are going to
13 take that away from the people who are elected and give it
14 to an apportionment board. I would urge you and I'm very
15 sympathetic to, I know that Commissioner Evans-Jones has
16 strong beliefs on this and has for some time, but this is
17 a serious matter, it will adversely affect the minority
18 districts.
19 We now, I went through this before with you, we have
20 five members of the Senate, let them sit at the table.
21 Let them sit at the table, even though there are only five
22 out of 40 or 17 out of whatever in the House, out of 120.
23 Let them have a chance to say what's best for Jacksonville
24 and for Tampa and for Miami.
25 So, you know, this is an idea that, like some others,
173
1 that sounds good on its face but it is the heart of
2 democracy and I would urge you to defeat this proposal.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Sundberg. Six
4 minutes used by the opponents, five by the proponents. Go
5 ahead, Commissioner Sundberg.
6 COMMISSIONER SUNDBERG: In favor of the proposal. It
7 has been written that no person is so blind as one who
8 will not see. How is it that we are incapable of seeing
9 what apparently everybody in the state of Florida sees
10 quite clearly? In all the public hearings there was
11 absolute support for this proposal. I heard, I can recall
12 no dissenting voice. Everybody thought it was a good
13 idea. The editorial support has been uniformly in favor
14 of this. The Sun Sentinel says, Of the six things which
15 are essential for this commission to address, that one of
16 that six is this proposal.
17 The Palm Beach Post says, Redistricting is too
18 important to be left to active politicians, not
19 politicians, active politicians. A Legislature full of
20 people trying to nail down their jobs or move up to better
21 ones is of no earthly use to the taxpayers. How is it
22 that we cannot put this on the ballot to let the people
23 out there vote in favor of it?
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Wetherington. In
25 favor?
174
1 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: Yes. I have great
2 respect for the Legislature and for legislative process.
3 One of the hallmarks, however, of proper legislation and
4 one of the things that is important in all government is
5 the problem of conflict of interest that we all deal with
6 and have to deal with on a daily basis. It seems to me
7 that there is a very strong and significant conflict of
8 interest that's built into the legislative decision
9 concerning the apportionment.
10 And that this conflict of interest, although you
11 can't totally eliminate all aspects of conflict of
12 interest you can always make a case, but basically the
13 substance of this conflict of interest can be eliminated
14 by having an independent group who don't have the conflict
15 of interest make these decisions which will give, to a
16 great extent, confidence on the part of the public.
17 Because one thing that's great about a jury, you can
18 fault the jury system in a lot of ways, but one thing
19 that's great about the jury system is the feeling that it
20 is impartial. And that whether they are right or whether
21 they are wrong you have got an impartial, you have got a
22 decision without conflict of interest. That's one of the
23 things that we are very careful about eliminating when we
24 pick a jury.
25 And I think that that's the major factor here. It is
175
1 not that the Legislature is not very capable and not very
2 competent, they are extremely capable and very competent.
3 But this is an area where the appearance and perhaps the
4 reality of conflict of interest is so substantial that I
5 think that it overshadows the good work that the
6 Legislature intends to do. And we can correct that by
7 having this well-thought-out proposal adopted. Thank you
8 very much.
9 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Thank you. Commissioner Mathis,
10 are you an opponent?
11 COMMISSIONER MATHIS: Opponent.
12 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Beg your pardon?
13 COMMISSIONER MATHIS: Opponent.
14 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: You are recognized.
15 COMMISSIONER MATHIS: I don't want to go back to
16 backroom deals. And lofty language offers no security for
17 me.
18 The legislative process in doing apportionment
19 probably isn't pretty, it isn't well thought out, probably
20 gets a little ugly, but I can elect and have a voice by
21 putting elected officials who have a voice in that
22 process. I am not that comforted by lofty language and
23 lofty goals. My grandaddy told me somebody promised him
24 40 acres and a mule. That doesn't mean he got it. Let
25 those people who are elected represent their constituents
176
1 in this reapportionment process.
2 Conflict of interest, are we going to take that a
3 step further? Are we going to say the Legislature has
4 such a conflict of interest that they can't make their own
5 rules of procedure? There is an inherent conflict in that
6 also but we have delegated to the Legislature certain
7 powers and responsibilities. We have certain safeguards
8 and safety nets if they fail to meet those
9 responsibilities. But that does not mean that nine people
10 are going to be able to do it better than those who have
11 been elected to serve the constituency of all of Florida.
12 I am not going to say that there aren't problems, and
13 there are some in this room that know the problems much
14 better than I. But neither are there, are we going to
15 eliminate all of those problems with nine people. And to
16 tell you the truth, I feel safer with the ugly process,
17 not so pretty, maybe not so well done, but I feel safer
18 with the diverse body of legislators that Commissioner
19 Scott referred to making those decisions because a
20 diversity of Florida is represented at the table. They
21 are sitting there and helping to make those decisions.
22 So I would say that, let's leave this with the
23 Legislature and let the Legislature reform the process, if
24 in fact -- I think that's what we heard at the public
25 hearing that there needs to be some reforms. But I don't
177
1 think that nine people are going to be able to do it any
2 better than the Legislature.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner Zack.
4 COMMISSIONER ZACK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With
5 all due respect, Commissioner, I always prefer a pretty
6 process, one that's open to the light, one that's ethical
7 and one that can be seen by everyone who cares to look at
8 it.
9 The process of reapportionment is done at 1:00, 2:00
10 in the morning on computers, with people who have a vested
11 self-interest in saving their seat. I believe enlightened
12 self-interest is one of the great motivating forces in the
13 world; however, I don't believe it belongs in the
14 reapportionment process.
15 In this vote in the final analysis is a vote of
16 philosophy. It is a vote to determine whether people who
17 have a conflict of interest, inherent conflict of
18 interest, they can't avoid it, should draw those seats or
19 whether it should be an independent commission that has
20 public hearings like we had throughout the state, that
21 gives input from all segments of the state and draws the
22 best districts possible without regard to the fact of who
23 might be the opponent in that district.
24 As I mentioned to you-all before, this process has
25 become so sophisticated that the information given to the
178
1 people drawing those districts will tell you when they
2 voted, how they voted and what they had for breakfast that
3 morning, where their opposition lives.
4 If the group that doesn't like them voted against
5 them last time, do you think that if an opponent, possible
6 opponent is going to run, that that district just might
7 have a little curve to avoid that opponent running in
8 their district? Do you think that a pocket of voters who
9 are opposed to the way a legislator voted might just be
10 drawn out of that district? Of course that is what
11 happens, and will happen unless we have an independent
12 commission.
13 I know that the issue regarding whether or not we
14 have a Fourteenth Amendment challenge is an important
15 issue, and properly raised. But what this says is that
16 that commission may not draw districts in a manner that
17 dilutes the voting strength of any racial or language
18 minority group. That is precisely what the case law says.
19 That is what DeGrandi [phonetic] stood for, that is what
20 Shaw stands for, that is what Miller stands for and that
21 is what the law is. Whether we're there or not that is
22 the law of this country.
23 There will be the same minority districts no matter
24 which proposal we have. It is just a question of who
25 draws the districts.
179
1 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner West,
2 you are an opponent? You have two minutes.
3 COMMISSIONER WEST: Thank you. I'll -- I certainly
4 won't take that much time. I have nothing but the utmost
5 respect and personal regards for Commissioner Evans-Jones,
6 tremendously creative. And in talking with her about this
7 particular thing, we tried to iron out some differences.
8 I'll tell you why I oppose it is because it is not the
9 legislators drawing special districts for themselves, it
10 is really the people.
11 I mean, as Commissioner Mathis mentioned, to me the
12 whole issue is accountability. Who do those nine people
13 have to answer to? They don't have to answer to anybody.
14 Who do those legislators have to answer to? They have got
15 to go up every two years or four years or whatever it is,
16 they have to go up and get re-elected.
17 And I would just strongly urge you to realize that as
18 we go to these public hearings that we have been in, let
19 me tell you one of the major themes that has been woven in
20 and out. And that is the theme of accountability. If you
21 were to go to the Floridian public, voting public and ask
22 them, Do you want to have a say-so or do you want this
23 commission appointed? I'm telling you what, you are going
24 to get a strong backlash.
25 And, again, I just urge you to vote for
180
1 representation where the elected officials are the ones
2 that are accountable that will be drawing the districts.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner Smith,
4 30 seconds. All the time is up on both sides. You have
5 30 seconds.
6 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Mr. Chairman, in 30 seconds let
7 me just say that this has been one of the more troubling
8 decisions for me because Commissioner Scott and others
9 have brought up concerns about minority districts.
10 What I did was I had the staff to give me the debate
11 on tape that transpired at the time that the opponents of
12 this proposal were in the minority, and I listened to the
13 entire debate. And after listening to the entire debate
14 and reading the case law, I was convinced by the
15 then-minority position that this is definitely the right
16 thing to do.
17 I think Commissioner Crenshaw and others made a very,
18 very powerful argument as to why, notwithstanding who was
19 in the majority, that this matter should be handled by an
20 independent panel. And it is not nine commissioners, it
21 is 17 commissioners. And I think this will go a long way
22 toward us giving confidence in the people to our electoral
23 process.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. To close,
25 Commissioner Evans-Jones.
181
1 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
2 Commissioners, I think this is probably one of the most
3 important votes that you are going to cast today. We do
4 have 17 members and the reason that we increased it was to
5 answer some of the problems that people wanted more people
6 who could have diversity. And I think that will give the
7 diversity.
8 And I think the other thing that you have to remember
9 is if they, if the Legislature had done such a good job,
10 why did it have to go to the Supreme Court? They have not
11 done such an excellent job and we need to recognize that.
12 I can tell you, Commissioners, that it takes an enormous
13 amount of the legislators' time during a reapportionment
14 session. And everything, everything else takes a complete
15 backseat.
16 And why? Because they are looking after their own
17 seat, where they are going to run, where they are going to
18 run in the future. And if you think for a single second
19 that it is not going to be a partisan, whether it is the
20 Democrats or whether it is the Republicans who are in
21 charge, it is not going to be fair, it is not going to be
22 equitable.
23 And I challenge you, I really challenge those of you
24 who -- I know you have had your arms twisted, I have had
25 mine twisted. Where did it go? It is still here. I am
182
1 going to live and survive and I am going to do what I
2 really think is the proper thing to do. And I ask you to
3 do that same thing.
4 I know that the public would be so appreciative of a
5 commission who could lift themselves up just a little bit
6 above the partisan level and for people to have the
7 courage to do what they really think is the right and
8 proper thing to do. I have been working on this for many,
9 many years. It is something, its time has come. The
10 Legislature is full of self-interest, and it will always
11 be that way.
12 And you say, well you have 160 members who are going
13 to be involved. My friends, forget that. You have about
14 one or two who are going to make all of the decisions. In
15 this case you have got nine and that's really a whole lot
16 better. Why do I keep saying nine, 17, 17. And I think
17 that you will find that this is indeed the way to go.
18 I don't think that we want to operate on a
19 don't-get-angry, let's-get-even philosophy. I think
20 that's beneath us to do that as Republicans. And I think
21 that we can be better than that. And I challenge you to
22 vote yes on this very, very, very important proposal.
23 Thank you.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Debate is closed.
25 Open the machine and we will proceed to vote.
183
1 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Lock the machine and announce the
3 vote.
4 READING CLERK: Twenty-two yeas, 15 nays,
5 Mr. Chairman.
6 (Applause.)
7 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: And everybody voted. We move on
8 to the next proposal, 155, by Commissioner Scott, passed
9 29 to 1. Read it, please.
10 READING CLERK: Proposal 155, a proposal to revise
11 Article III, Section 16, Florida Constitution; providing
12 for the Legislature to apportion the state into
13 single-member senatorial districts of contiguous territory
14 and single-member representatives' districts of contiguous
15 territory.
16 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Are there five hands? If not, we
17 will go forward. There is not. This will be referred to
18 Style and Drafting for inclusion in the package.
19 Now we go to Proposal No. 59 by Commissioner Zack.
20 Would you read it, please?
21 Wait a minute, excuse me. Commissioner Barkdull, I
22 didn't mean to slight you. Commissioner Barkdull's
23 Proposal No. 123. Do we have five hands on that? It was
24 passed 20 to 9. Read it, please.
25 READING CLERK: Proposal No. 123, a proposal to
184
1 revise Article XI, Florida Constitution; repealing Section
2 6 relating to the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Do we have five hands
4 on that? We have an amendment so we better have five
5 hands from Style and Drafting. We do. Two amendments on
6 the table. The first amendment is by Style and Drafting.
7 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Mr. Chairman, I would suggest
8 you take up the Barnett and Nabors' amendment first
9 because --
10 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Amendment No. 1 will be the one
11 by Barnett and Nabors. Would you read it, please?
12 READING CLERK: By Commissioners Barnett and Nabors,
13 on Page 1, Lines 9-10, strike said lines and insert:
14 "Section 1. Section 6 of Article XI of the Florida
15 Constitution is revised by amending that section to read."
16 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. The amendment will,
17 we will take that up first and then the other amendment,
18 depending on what this one does; is that correct?
19 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: That's correct.
20 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioners Barnett and Nabors,
21 one of you want to present your amendment? This isn't a
22 matter we have already voted on; is it, this amendment?
23 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Not in the form it is in now.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Okay. How do I interpret that
25 answer? We have, but not quite like this?
185
1 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Something like that.
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Without objection we will proceed
3 with the Barnett and Nabors' amendment. You are
4 recognized, Commissioners, one of you.
5 COMMISSIONER BARNETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I'll
6 be glad to explain this amendment. As most of you know, I
7 have argued several times as this has come -- as a
8 proposal to eliminate the Tax Commission has come before
9 this body about my belief that we need to maintain this
10 mechanism in our Constitution so that we will have an
11 opportunity to, in a systematic, routine and thoughtful
12 way to consider revisions to our tax structure and
13 importantly to our budget structure.
14 A number of concerns have been raised by members of
15 the commission about the timing of this proposal, about
16 the timing of the work of the Taxation and Budget Reform
17 Commission, about the voting process, the cumbersome
18 voting process.
19 What you have before you is a proposal that is really
20 the, I think the good work of Commissioner Nabors. I wish
21 I had thought of it because I strongly support it. And
22 what this does is two things. One, it continues to
23 eliminate the cumbersome voting process that is in the
24 current Constitution. It continues to have a two-thirds'
25 vote for any product of the Taxation and Budget Reform
186
1 Commission, but that language that requires a majority
2 vote of each of the groups from the various appointing
3 bodies has been eliminated. And I think there is general
4 agreement that is a very cumbersome and unworkable
5 product.
6 The other thing this does that I think is very
7 important and addresses concerns of Senator Scott, I hope,
8 and others is rather than being a commission that meets
9 every ten years, and the next meeting to begin in two
10 years, what this proposal does is make the Taxation and
11 Budget Reform Commission meet every 20 years. And it
12 schedules it so that it will meet in the ten-year interval
13 when the Constitution Revision Commission is not meeting.
14 So the Constitution Revision Commission would meet,
15 ten years later the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission
16 would meet, and ten years later the commission would meet
17 again. It would roll over on a 20-year process. And
18 under that scenario, the Taxation and Budget Reform
19 Commission would not meet again until the year 2007.
20 So that is the gist of the amendment. It is an
21 effort to address some of the concerns people had, but it
22 is also an effort to continue what I think is a very
23 important and necessary mechanism in our Constitution to
24 address our tax structure and our budget structure. And I
25 ask your support of that amendment.
187
1 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. On the amendment,
2 Commissioner Barkdull.
3 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: I think it is a friendly
4 amendment.
5 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Any further discussion on the
6 amendment? If not, all in favor say aye; opposed?
7 (Verbal vote taken.)
8 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: The amendment is adopted. Now on
9 the proposal as amended, you were the proposer?
10 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: I was the proposer but now
11 with the amendment that Commissioner Barnett has explained
12 I would move the adoption of the proposal as amended.
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: You are not going to move the
14 other amendment? There is another amendment on the table.
15 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: It is not needed,
16 Mr. Chairman.
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Will somebody withdraw it? It is
18 withdrawn by Style and Drafting. Now does everybody
19 understand what the proposal now provides? Commissioner
20 Nabors, maybe you can explain it in a few short words.
21 COMMISSIONER NABORS: Let me -- everybody pay
22 attention. Let me tell you why I think this is very
23 important. All of the structural reasons that
24 Commissioner Barnett talked about are in place. There is
25 still a two-thirds' vote, we have taken away the weighted
188
1 vote for the House and the Speaker.
2 But the most fundamental thing is we have delayed
3 this -- the convening of this body until the year 2007 and
4 it meets every 20 years. So it meets in the decades in
5 between Constitution Revision Commissions. And I think it
6 is fundamentally important.
7 One of the frustrations I have in this process, as
8 all of you know, on my Proposition 6 we didn't deal with
9 tax reform in a fundamental way. This would allow that to
10 be done 10 years from now with a new commission that's
11 dedicated to tax reform. As I said when I closed my
12 debate on Proposition 6, without this, we really don't
13 have a vehicle until 20 years from now to deal with tax
14 reform because of things dealing with issues like the
15 sales tax if you believe the Legislature won't do it with
16 a constitutional amendment, you have the single subject
17 matter that's going to bar voter initiative.
18 All of those who feel guilty, and there are many of
19 you, for voting against my Proposal No. 6, who are not
20 going to be able to sleep at night because of that guilt,
21 you can relieve a lot of your feelings by voting favorably
22 on this amendment.
23 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Anybody else want to
24 discuss sleep? Commissioner Connor.
25 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: I'd like to ask a question of
189
1 Commissioner Barnett.
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Certainly. Commissioner Barnett
3 yields to your question, sir.
4 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: Commissioner Barnett, is the
5 effect of this amendment, does it mean that it would be
6 easier for the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission to
7 put a proposal on the ballot than it currently is?
8 COMMISSIONER BARNETT: Yes.
9 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: Thank you.
10 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Any further?
11 Commissioner Evans.
12 COMMISSIONER EVANS: I have a concern, I don't know
13 if it is a question or just a concern, maybe it is a
14 question for Commissioner Barnett about changing it from
15 90 days to 180 days. My concern is that people who have
16 an interest in educating the public will have only,
17 basically only 90 days' notice that something is going to
18 go on the fall ballot to get their educational materials
19 together, to find the money to place ads and so forth.
20 And this will be in the heat of all of the other
21 elections, too, just the final tail end, 90 days. So I'm
22 wondering about why has it been changed from 180 to 90.
23 COMMISSIONER BARNETT: I think the reason,
24 Commissioner Evans, was to make it consistent with the
25 same type of treatment for the proposals of the
190
1 Constitution Revision Commission.
2 COMMISSIONER EVANS: We did not change that though
3 for this commission. We did not change it.
4 COMMISSIONER BARNETT: That was my understanding as
5 the reason was to keep that consistency there. We would
6 leave it at 180 if you wanted to offer, you know, an
7 amendment to the amendment to keep it at 180. It was
8 designed for consistency in the Constitution.
9 COMMISSIONER EVANS: Okay. Then may I offer that
10 amendment then to -- because we did not change it with the
11 other.
12 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: You can offer it, but you have
13 got to put it in the table in writing. Commissioner
14 Barkdull.
15 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: May I suggest that we, for a
16 short period of time, temporarily pass that because there
17 is another scribner's problem with this that's got to be
18 pointed out.
19 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Does anybody object to
20 temporarily passing and coming back to it after they get
21 the amendment straight correcting the scribner's problems?
22 Okay.
23 Okay. We will go to Proposal No. 59 by Commissioner
24 Zack. Would you read it, please? There is one amendment
25 on the table. Hold it.
191
1 (Off-the-record comment.)
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. I was wrong. It is
3 No. 152 by Commissioner Barkdull.
4 READING CLERK: Proposal No. 152, a proposal to
5 revise Article XI, Section 2, of the Florida Constitution;
6 amending the deadline by which the Constitution Revision
7 Commission must file any proposed revision of the
8 Secretary of State.
9 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. There are no
10 amendments on it. It passed 29 to nothing. If there is
11 no show of five hands, we will proceed to the next one and
12 this one will be sent to Style and Drafting for inclusion
13 on the package. Therefore it is done that way, it is
14 adopted.
15 Now if I can find the next one, 59 is the next one by
16 Commissioner Zack. Would you read 59, please?
17 READING CLERK: Proposal No. 59, a proposal to revise
18 Article X, Section 13, Florida Constitution; relating to
19 suits against the state; providing for arbitration of
20 certain tort claims; providing a limit on the waiver of
21 sovereign immunity for claims submitted to arbitration.
22 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. There is an
23 amendment. But first of all we need five hands, a Style
24 and Drafting amendment. All right, we have five hands.
25 We will proceed. Read the amendment, please, moved by
192
1 Commissioner Mills, or Commissioner Lowndes, excuse me.
2 It should be amendment --
3 READING CLERK: By the Committee on Style and
4 Drafting, on Page 1, Lines 17-24, strike the underlined
5 language and insert: "When a tort suit for which provision
6 has been made by general law claims damages in excess of
7 the amount permitted by the limited waiver of sovereign
8 immunity established by general law, the claimant may
9 elect to submit such claim to arbitration in lieu of a
10 trial by judge or jury, in accordance with procedures
11 established by general law. Sovereign immunity is waived
12 for such arbitration decisions to the extent of five times
13 the limited waiver of sovereign immunity established by
14 general law."
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. We are on the
16 amendment. Commissioner Lowndes, please.
17 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: It is a Style and Drafting
18 amendment, Mr. Chairman. And there are certain phrases
19 and clauses which have been added to what existed
20 initially to clarify the situation. The phrases are, for
21 which -- "a tort suit for which provision has been made by
22 general law." And that addition is to clarify the
23 proposition that this amendment doesn't create any new
24 rights to bring suits against the state.
25 The second addition is on the third line, it is "in
193
1 lieu of trial by judge or jury." And that's to clarify
2 the point that if a claimant selects arbitration, the
3 arbitration is in lieu of the claimant's right to a trial
4 by judge or jury in the matter.
5 And the third change is in the fifth line.
6 Previously the amendment, the proposal dealt with
7 $500,000. Rather than putting $500,000 as a figure in the
8 Constitution, it was felt that saying five times the
9 limited waiver of sovereign immunity, which today would be
10 $500,000, but which would be increased or decreased if the
11 limited waiver was changed.
12 Those are the three changes which were deemed by
13 Style and Drafting to be nonsubstantive. I'll be happy to
14 answer any questions on them.
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner Zack.
16 COMMISSIONER ZACK: I don't understand why this was
17 done. You know, this is different than what we came out
18 with. I thought Style and Drafting is supposed to change
19 the style and drafting, not make a whole new proposal.
20 And this is a completely different proposal.
21 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: In what respect?
22 COMMISSIONER ZACK: In every respect. You had a
23 $500,000 per occurrence, I mean, per incident waiver of
24 sovereign immunity under the old proposal. Here the
25 Legislature could reduce the amount of sovereign immunity
194
1 to 20,000, five times that is back to 100,000 in an
2 arbitration provision. That's not what was intended.
3 And frankly this allows -- it appears to me to allow
4 more games to be played as opposed to less games. And the
5 whole idea was not to have any more games with the claims
6 bill process and to make it a clean, straight-up $500,000
7 for anybody who gets injured in the state of Florida based
8 on an arbitration-type proceeding.
9 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: Your point is that the change
10 is the five times the limited immunity rather than the
11 $500,000?
12 COMMISSIONER ZACK: Right. I think the change goes
13 to the essence of the original proposal as opposed to
14 merely being a change.
15 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: But that is the issue you are
16 raising, that change?
17 COMMISSIONER ZACK: I don't understand how that is a
18 style, that is a point of clarification or point of
19 information. To me --
20 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Since I suggested it, I |
