Florida Amendments, Pros and Cons
Amendment 1
Parental notification of termination of a minor’s pregnancy.
Pro: Parents will have more controls over their children (ie leave parenting to the parents), and it may reduce the number of teenage pregnancies, due to the difficulty in getting an abortion on demand.
Con: The potential for a female to not get a medically necessary abortion could exisit if the parents refuse to allow the abortion or the legislature does not enact require exceptions to the law.
Other thoughts: It seems that people who engage in hands on parenting probably don’t need this amendment added to our constitution. And from an aspect of constitutional amendments this should have been written more broadly to reflect/restrict the rights of minors in the state of Florida. It is pretty interesting that we are electing to enact a law that restricts a very specific segment of our population, teenage females. While I can’t argue the fact that parents, in their very nature should have the right and have the responsibility of the actions of their children (male and female); I think that unless this is a national policy, these girls will just dissappear for a weekend up to Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, or where ever they need to go to get it done.
Amendment 2
Review of Constitutional Amendments
Pro: Every election year we are faced with different amendment proposal, some that are legitimate and others that are not. The PRO advocates believe that changing the dates will make it more difficult for Special Interest Groups from financing amendment changes to our constitution, such as the pig amendment sponsored by PETA. Florida voters will get about 9 months rather than 3 months to review and campaign for a specific ballot initiative.
Con: The Con side basically says that the large percentage of amendments proposed aren’t by citizen initiative anyway, but rather are brought forward by the legislature for us to vote on. This amendment will make it more difficult for real grassroots changes to our constitution, because of the lead time required to go through the process.
Other thoughts: Again, we have a historic opportunity here to make a change to our constitution, and we squander it with small thinking amendments. We are one of a few states that even allows changes to our constitution by ballot amemdment. Pro advocates claim that we will become more like California if we don’t enact this, however, we get these wacky amendments because the legislature doesn’t do its job! We pay good money to have these guys go to Tallahassee and enact legislation important to Floridians. The real fix would be to allow the citizens to place LAW on the ballot separate from constitutional amendments. Allowing both may seem confusing at first, but would prevent non-constitutional laws from having the effect of law.
Amendment 3
THE MEDICAL LIABILITY CLAIMANT’S COMPENSATION AMENDMENT
Pro: Laywer hating insurance companies won’t have to deal with as many lawsuits, frivolous or otherwise due to the cost of litigation. Based on that, this should make it easier for doctors to maintain their medical malpractice insurance and stay in practice.
Con: If you read the FAQ at this Florida law firm http://www.forthepeople.com/legal/ about how much it costs to take a case to trial, you soon find out that:
Even though the costs involved with a case can run anywhere from $20,000 to $175,000 and up, it costs you nothing, unless there is a recovery.
As the costs of litigation continue to rise, it will be very questionable whether or not lawyers will take cases that they normally would, but financial find it impossible to support, due to costs.
Other thoughts: Personally, I’m for tort reform, but I also believe that people have a right to make as much money as people are willing to pay them. When hospitals can charge $10 for an aspirin, musicians can make Millions from selling records and doing concerts, and sport stars can make even more from their athletic pursuits, it seems hypocritical to restrict the financial possibilities of the legal profession. Tort reform is complex, and takes a more thought out plan than this to make it work. I believe that the verbage excluding reasonable fees is vague. Too often we hear the those supporting the screw the lawyer crowd saying “McDonald’s Coffee Case” as if it was like saying “Remember the Alamo”. But unfortunately for every one of those cases is countless other cases of that have meritt, and don’t rake in Millions of dollars. Will this be good for Florida? Whose to say? Are you willing to take the risk that if you need a lawyer, you may not be able to get one, that’s the real question! The bottom line is that this law prevents many people from having representation without having cash in their pocket to begin with. In cases of an injury, chances are you’ve already spent that money on your healthcare.
Amendment 4
AUTHORIZES MIAMI-DADE AND BROWARD COUNTY VOTERS TO APPROVE SLOT MACHINES IN PARAMUTUEL FACILITIES
Pro: Florida get Slot Machine style gambling in already established gaming facilities with profits to SUPPLEMENT Florida schools.
Cons: People against this claim increases in crime and drunk driving. Additionally they want to keep this a Family Friendly State.
Other thoughts: It is ironic that people are adamantly against this amendment. It doesn’t establish new gaming areas. It doesn’t create Las Vegas Style Casinos (Table Gaming), and we are currently watching MILLIONS of Florida dollar go off shore, unregulated, and untaxed on Casino daycruise ships. Wake up Florida, we aren’t half pregnant, we have gambling already, we just aren’t cashing in.
Amendment 5
FLORIDA MINIMUM WAGE AMENDMENT
Pro: As fuel prices and other prices have risen over the past few years the minimum wage worker has still seen their wage left behind. This will help give employees enough money to make it some working mothers and elderly the ability to start at a better salary.
Con: This will drive up costs in every place of employment, and will in fact cost Floridians jobs and benefits.
Other Thoughts: Hey, Let’s do the math. Assuming that their is only 300,000 people who are making minimum wage, then we are talking about an increase of $12 Million dollars in cash added to the liquid Florida Economy. That’s roughly $2,000 per person a year, based on a 40 hour work week. But since many of the people who make minimum wage don’t work full-time, such as minors, who by law can’t, the employer out of pocket expense goes down. Since many of these employees aren’t full time, they most likely aren’t getting any medical benefits anyways. But let’s take the McDonalds example.
They employ 20 workers on average that make below $6.15 at various rates. Assuming that the average employee works between 24-30 hours a week, that’s $30 per person raise. Multiply that by 20 people, and you have $600 a week, in raises. The local McDonald’s is a $2Millon a year business locally where I’m at, and other locations do even better. In California, where the minimum wage is higher, they still have a Dollar Menu, so I’m not sure if we should worry.
Now the flip side of the coin here is actually really simple, once again Florida legislature, do your job. It wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for them. This particular amendment should in fact be a law. Changing our constition to have a minimum wage may not be the proper place for such an initiative.
After doing the math, it seems that employers crying about paying an extra $1 an hour or less, is like whores arguing about virginity.
Amendment 6
REPEAL OF HIGH SPEED RAIL AMENDMENT
Pro: Save Florida $20 to $25 Billion by repealing a transporation system.
Con: Florida Voters approved it overwhelmingly in 2000. The Florida government has chose to drag its feet, and should have had infrastructure well on its way. The train would enhance tourism, business between Florida cities, and reduce congestion on Florida roadways.
Other Thoughts: The government didn’t want it and this is just their way of saying “are you sure?” But by dragging their feet, they are costing the State Millions of dollars in development costs. We may not like it, but we bought it, we should have just done it. Imagine if the government just stalled any law, any constitutional amendment that they didn’t agree with?
Amendment 7
PATIENTS’ RIGHT TO KNOW ABOUT ADVERSE MEDICAL INCIDENTS
AND
Amendment 8
PUBLIC PROTECTION FROM REPEATED MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
These two Amendment go together, so here we go:
Pro: Florida citizens will be allowed to know about adverse information relating to medical malpractice. Additionally amendment 8 prohibits medical doctors who have been found to have committed three or more incidents of medical malpractice from being licensed to practice medicine in Florida.
Con: The Florida Medical Association says that this will unfairly malign good doctors, discourage new doctors from starting practice in Florida, and possibly have some Florida doctors move out of state.
Other thoughts: When you look at the big 3 (3, 7 and 8) I say send ’em all packing. Until we can get it right, with these organizations working together, we will never have a system that helps everyone all around. I would recommend voting NO on all three of these, and hope that we can get some non-partisan groups to work on amendments that will really make a difference.