Replies

WHOAH! Rethink Amendment #3, people!

Are we a government of the people, by the people and for the people or a government of the politicians, by the politicians, for the politicians?

Most conservatives would likely want to Vote NO on Amendment #3, if you did it in pencil, you might want to erase. See here for a very lucid argument.
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061103/OPINION/611030377/1030/OPINION01

Basically: Amendment #3 keeps government in the hands of the people when the legislature refuses to listen to the populace.

Quoting from the link above:
By requiring that any proposed amendment be approved by 60 percent of the voters, rather than a simple majority, it would certainly make changing the constitution much more difficult. But it would do so by further restricting the only avenue Florida citizens have for initiating changes in law or the constitution that the Legislature has failed to address.

Legislature too often fails to protect the public interest. Instead, special interests hold lawmakers in sway, through political contributions and other incentives, and thwart popular causes.

Critics of the initiative process like to cite the famous pig-crate amendment, but important changes have been made through initiative, for example, requiring full public disclosure by state and county elections officials. The Sunshine Laws.

((The legislators would never have voted to have their actions in full view of the public. It took US to do that. Trying to force this with a super-majority would be virtually impossible.))

No other state requires a supermajority for approving an amendment.

I suggest a NO vote - keep the power in OUR hands instead of theirs. Or at least do a little more research on your own and think it over.

County Court Judge, Group 10.

When my daughter was getting a divorce, earlier this year, folks told her to get Judy Atkin. She was even told by one fellow who's former had Atkin and took him to the cleaners...so to speak. And sure enough, my daughter got her and cleaned her ex's clock. What I noticed, during the proceedings, was that Atkins was very, very sharp, especially in the courtroom under fire. Now that's Atkins' abilities in family court. She is tops. How she might be as a judge, I can't say. I do know she was expensive and charged more than the average divorce lawyer. Also, she is a democrat.