If you want to be added, please FReepMail me.
PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS OR OTHER PUBLIC MEASURES
NO. 1
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE X, SECTION 22
Article X
Miscellaneous
Section 22. Parental notice of termination of a minor's pregnancy. The legislature shall not limit or deny the privacy right guaranteed to a minor under the United States Constitution as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court. Notwithstanding a minor's right of privacy provided in Section 23 of Article I, the Legislature is authorized to require by general law for notification to a parent or guardian of a minor before the termination of the minor's pregnancy. The Legislature shall provide exceptions to such requirement for notification and shall create a process for judicial waiver of the notification.
NO. 2
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE IV, SECTION 10
ARTICLE XI, SECTION 5
Constitutional Amendments Proposed by Initative
Proposing amendments to the State Constitution to require the sponsor of a constitutional amendment proposed by citizen initiative to file the initiative petition with the Secretary of State by February 1 of the year of a general election in order to have the measure submitted to the electors for approval or rejection at the following November's general election, and to require the Florida Supreme Court to render an advisory opinion addressing the validity of an initiative petition by April 1 of the year in which the amendment is to be submitted to the electors.
NO. 3
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE I, SECTION 26
The Medical Liability Claimant's Compensation Amendment
Proposes to amend the State Constitution to provide that an injured claimant who enters into a contingency fee agreement with an attorney in a claim for medical liability is entitled to no less than 70% of the first $250,000.00 in all damages received by the claimant, and 90% of damages in excess of $250,000.00, exclusive of reasonable and customary costs and regardless of the number of defendants. This amendment is intended to be self-executing. The direct financial impact this amendment will have on state and local government revenues and expenditures cannot be determined.
NO. 4
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE X, SECTION 19
Authorizes Miami-Dade and Broward County Voters to Approve Slot Machines in Paramutuel Facilities
Authorizes Miami-Dade and Broward Counties to hold referenda on whether to authorize slot machines in existing, licensed parimutuel facilities (thoroughbred and harness racing, greyhound racing, and jai alai) that have conducted live racing or games in that county during each of the last two calendar years before effective date of this amendment. The Legislature may tax slot machine revenues, and any such taxes must supplement public education funding statewide. Requires implementing legislation. This amendment alone has no fiscal impact on government. If slot machines are authorized in Miami-Dade or Broward counties, governmental costs associated with additional gambling will increase by an unknown amount and local sales tax-related revenues will be reduced by $5 million to $8 million annually. If the Legislature also chooses to tax slot machine revenues, state tax revenues from Miami-Dade and Broward counties combined would range from $200 million to $500 million annually.
NO. 5
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE X
Florida Minimum Wage Amendment
This amendment creates a Florida minimum wage covering all employees in the state covered by the federal minimum wage. The state minimum wage will start at $6.15 per hour six months after enactment, and thereafter be indexed to inflation each year. It provides for enforcement, including double damages for unpaid wages, attorney's fees, and fines by the state. It forbids retaliation against employees for exercising this right. The impact of this amendment on costs and revenues of state and local governments is expected to be minimal.
NO. 6
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE X, SECTION 19
Repeal of High Speed Rail Amendment
This amendment repeals an amendment in the Florida Constitution that requires the Legislature, the Cabinet and the Governor to proceed with the development and operation of a high speed ground transportation system by the state and/or by a private entity. The probable financial impact of passage of this amendment is a state cost savings ranging from $20 billion to $25 billion over the next 30 years. This estimate assumes the repeal of associated laws, the use of state bonds to finance construction, and could be reduced by federal or private sector funding.
NO. 7
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE X, SECTION 22
Patients' Right to Know About Adverse Medical Incidents
Current Florida law restricts information available to patients related to investigations of adverse medical incidents, such as medical malpractice. This amendment would give patients the right to review, upon request, records of health care facilities' or providers' adverse medical incidents, including those which could cause injury or death. Provides that patients' identities should not be disclosed. The direct financial impact this amendment will have on state and local government revenues and expenditures cannot be determined, but is expected to be minimal. State agencies will incur some additional costs to comply with public records requirements of the amendment, but these costs will be generally offset by fees charged to the persons requesting the information.
NO. 8
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
ARTICLE X, SECTION 20
Public Protection from Repeated Medical Malpractice
Current law allows medical doctors who have committed repeated malpractice to be licensed to practice medicine in Florida. This amendment 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. The direct financial impact on state and local governments resulting from the proposed initiative would be minimal. There will likely be additional costs to the state of less than $1 million per year, but these costs will be offset by licensure fees.
From what I've heard, all the ammendments are expected to pass.
Bump for later reading.
This might be a good thread for the FL ping list.
No. 1 - YES
No. 2 - Anybody know what the implications of this are?
No. 3 - YES (unless you're a trial lawyer)
No. 4 - Anyone have thoughts on this?
No. 5 - NO
No. 6 - YES
No. 7 - NO (unless you're a trial lawyer)
No. 8 - NO (unless you're a trial lawyer)
Does #2 make it tougher to put Constitutional Amendments on the ballot? Still reeling from the Pregnant Pig Amendment, I was hoping for a 75% super-majority for these blasted things.
Check out this site, http://www.flchamber.com/home/default.asp
FL FRiends: Just learned about the following site...Julie
To help you make an informed decision on your votes...... information on all proposed Florida Amendments can be viewed at:
http://www.votesmartflorida.org/voterguide.asp
BUMP for reference!
BUMP. Thanks.
By: Gator Girl on the Florida Locale board, 10/22/2004 7:25:54 PM EDT
Re: Amendments 3, 7 and 8
My husband works in the ER and was sued by someone who waited a week to go to the ER for a eye injury and subsequently lost his eye.
The guy named the doctors, PA, nurses, and even the on-call clinic because they asked to have the guy sent over in the morning instead of coming in.
Because he waited, he would have lost the eye anyway.
My husband's malpractice carrier decided to settle instead of spending the money it would take to fight, and then most likely paying out to a sympathetic plaintiff who lost an eye.
A "yes" on Amendment 3 will allow more carriers to fight lawsuits and will give some of these plaintiff's lawyers pause before they take some of the more questionable cases.
By the way, I am a lawyer.
With regard to 7 and 8, there is no definition of "malpractice" or "adverse incident" in either Amendment. Neither my husband nor any of the other medical providers involved really committed malpractice, but the result of the suit may lead someone to believe they did.
Don't get me wrong, I think patients should be able to select a qualified physician, but "malpractice" is not always "malpractice". Let the doctors police the doctors, just like lawyers police the lawyers.
BTTT