Category Archives: Florida

2018 November Election Guide: Six Florida Constitutional Amendments to Vote For

There are six worthy constitutional amendments on the ballot.

TL/DR on Amendments
Amendment 1: NO
Amendment 2: NO
Amendment 3: YES
Amendment 4: YES!!!!
Amendment 5: NO
Amendment 6: NO
Amendment 7: NO
(Note: there is no #8)
Amendment 9: YES
Amendment 10: NO
Amendment 11: YES
Amendment 12: YES
Amendment 13: YES


Amendment 4

Let’s start with the most important one: Amendment 4.  If you do nothing else with this year’s crop of amendments, you should vote for this one. Amendment 4 re-enfranchises persons convicted of felonies–excepting persons convicted of murder or rape.  Currently, Florida is a national outlier, with one of the most arbitrary, unfair, difficult, and slow procedures for felon re-enfranchisement.  Many states don’t strip voting rights at all; of those that do, most restore voting rights automatically after some number of years of good behavior. Florida has about 1.5 million people who would get their rights back with this change.  Under the current rule, their only way to get the right to vote back is to petition a committee headed by the Governor, one which operates in an utterly arbitrary manner.  (The process is so bad that it was struck down by a federal court, although the decisions has been stayed pending appeal.  Read the decision in Hand v. Scott if you want to see just how badly this committee behaves.  We used to say that when someone serves a prison term they “have served their debt to society”; why then should we keep them on a payment plan?  Research suggests that rest0ring voting rights–removing a badge of infamy–helps reintegrate prison veterans into normal life.  And, of course, there are stories of exceptional people being held back by childhood mistakes. See, for example, Getting Out.

Both the morality of restoring an important human right to former prisoners and the social science agree: vote FOR Amendment 4.

Amendment 3

Amendment 3 will block the expansion of casino gambling by requiring voter approval for new casinos.  I’ve gotten more misleading mailers about this one than anything else–the gambling people, who have way too much money, oppose it. They’ve been claiming that if we block new gambling our schools and teachers will starve to death, because, of course, there is no money for schools other than a tax on casinos?  Even if I wasn’t for Amendment 3 on the merits, I’d be for it just because who opposes it and how they have run their deceitful campaign.

There is, it should be said, a small downside to Amendment 3, but it has got nothing to do with school funding. Rather, the downside is that by blocking new entrants we entrench the monopoly position of existing casinos, which amounts to a windfall to some undeserving people. But that’s still better than bringing in even more casinos.  Casinos mean a few lousy jobs, and a lot of graft; if you’re lucky it’s the more legal sort that buys politicians.  If you are not lucky it is the less legal sourced that involves the Mafia and its grandchildren.  No thanks. Vote FOR Amendment 3.

Amendment 9

Amendment 9 will ban offshore oil and gas drilling and also ban indoor vaping.  Strange bedfellows, but since I’m for both bans, this is an easy vote.  A third part allows localities to enact even more stringent vaping restrictions.

I don’t really have much to say here.  The oil and gas rules make sense given that Florida depends on its coastline to attract tourists, and a spill thus has disastrous economic consequences even beyond the environmental ones. This is worth constitutionalizing.

Vaping strikes me as a rather weird thing in general, and also a rather weird thing to put into the constitution.  Were this an amendment on its own, I’d probably oppose it on the grounds that we should save the state constitution for important things or things that we can’t get through a gerrymandered legislature, and this is neither.  But on the merits I’m fine with it.

Amendment 11

Amendment 11 is mostly about tidying up stuff.  The most important substantive changed worked by this amendment is that it opens the door to a form of retroactive leniency.  Under current law, if the legislature softens or repeals a criminal law that changes does not, cannot, have retroactive effect.  This amendment would remove the impediment to retroactive leniency, although it would not require it.

Suppose for example that we legalize marijuana.  Under current rules anyone in jail for pot possession gets no benefit from that change.  If the amendment passes, it would be open to the legislature to say that people who violated the possession law before it was repealed would be freed.  It’s just a choice; if the legislature doesn’t want to do that, it doesn’t have to. Indeed, new prosecutions of crimes committed before repeal remains a possibility. Also, even if this amendment passes, there is no danger of retroactive increases in penalties if the legislature toughens a criminal penalty because ex post facto laws of that type are prohibited by the federal Constitution.

Other tidying includes removing unconstitutional language from the state Constitution that prohibits non-citizens from owning real property.

Amendment 12

Amendment 12 toughens a few ethics rules.  To be honest, I don’t think these changes are going to make much of a noticeable difference to local corruption, as a longer ban on people lobbying after they leave office doesn’t address what ails us. But I suppose it cannot hurt, so I’m for it.



Amendment 13

Amendment 13 will ban dog racing in Florida, and allow existing dog tracks that get to have slots only because they have a dog track to continue to host slots even after the dogs are gone.  I confess I feel like I don’t have a dog in this hunt, and that again this seems like something that belongs in legislation rather than the state Constitution, but the thing is going to pass, and there enough stories about dogs being mistreated at tracks to make me think that on the merits it is a good idea.  Note that current tracks can still display and take wagers on out-of-state dog races.

I was interested to learn last week that a majority of the 16 or so dog tracks in the USA are located in Florida. So it is possible that this amendment will have a big effect on the industry.

Links to other November 2018 election guides:

Posted in 2018 Election, Florida | Leave a comment

2018 November Election Guide: Six Florida Constitutional Amendments to Vote Against

There are 12 ballot items relating to the Florida Constitution, due largely to the work of the Constitutional Revision Commission which had its 20-year meeting. They voted out a lot of amendments, then — wrongly, I’d argue — grouped them so that we don’t get to vote on each one individually. That is wrong on principle, and also I think bad in practice as the ballot has become even more opaque than usual.

TL/DR on Amendments
Amendment 1: NO
Amendment 2: NO
Amendment 3: YES
Amendment 4: YES!!!!
Amendment 5: NO
Amendment 6: NO
Amendment 7: NO (Note: there is no #8)
Amendment 9: YES
Amendment 10: NO
Amendment 11: YES
Amendment 12: YES
Amendment 13: YES

In this, the first of two posts on the Constitutional Amendments, I’m going to outline why you should vote NO on six of the twelve, ## 1,2, 5, 6, 7 & 10. My next post in this series will be about why you should vote YES on the other six, ## 3,4, 9, 11, 12 & 13.

It’s important to vote NO on these six proposals because not voting is almost as bad as a yes vote: in order to pass, a proposal must get 60% approval of those who vote on the issue–not 60% of those who vote as a whole. Skip voting on any one of these and you increase the odds of its passage.

Continue reading

Posted in 2018 Election, Florida | Leave a comment

2018 November Election Guide: Judges

Here, belatedly (early voting has already begun!), is Part I of some recommendations on the undercard of your ballot. I will start with the judges. Future parts forthcoming Real Soon Now™ will be coming soon.

In my part of South Florida we have four appellate Judges up for retention, and one run-off election for state Circuit Judge on the 11th Judicial Circuit.

I intend to vote to retain all four District Court of Appeal Judges:

▪Kevin Emas: Yes
▪Ivan F. Fernandez: Yes
▪Norma Shepard Lindsey: Yes
▪Robert Joshua Luck: Yes

All have good ratings from the Florida Bar poll:
Kevin Emas: 92 percent.
Ivan F. Fernandez: 87 percent.
Norma Shepard Lindsey: 85 percent.
Robert Joshua Luck: 90 percent.

As I’ve said before, I approach retention elections with a presumption that Judges should be retained unless they have given us a good reason not to do so; happily, to the best of my knowledge, there’s no such reason in any of these four cases.

In the run-off for Group 14 of the state 11th Judicial Circuit (not to be confused with the federal appeals court of that name!), I endorsed Renee Gordon in August and I’m going to vote for her again, as opposed to Vivianne del Rio, the other candidate who survived the first round. As I wrote in August,

I endorsed Renee Gordon the last time she ran, noting that she is is a “former Public Defender who has been litigating for 20+ years, of which twelve were in private practice. She also has a long resume of working with troubled children in various managerial and legal capacities. This is a great background for a Judge – in the trenches and there for a long time.” She almost won last time, and I’ll vote for her again. That said, both other candidates, Louis Martinez and Vivianne del Rio, sound like people who would make decent judges. Del Rio is an ASA, Martinez is a former AUSA. FWIW, the Herald endorses Gordon too.

Happily, whoever wins we should be fine.

Posted in 2018 Election, Florida | 1 Comment

Gillum Speaks in Coral Gables

I attended an Andrew Gillum event last night, and recorded most of Gillum’s inspirational speech (I didn’t record the extensive thank-yous that prefaced the talk.)

Posted in 2018 Election, Florida | 4 Comments

I Saw This Ad Just Before the Heat Game Started

This ad by VoteVets about Rick Scott is a lot better than anything I’ve seen by the Nelson for Senate campaign:

Of course, Scott has more money, and has been flooding the airwaves with warm and fuzzy stuff.

Posted in 2018 Election, Florida | Leave a comment

Florida Bar Pass Rates July 2018

UM did fine; the news is the crash over at neighboring law schools, notably Nova Southeastern, Stetson, and Barry. What happened? (In reading this list I would not read much into small differences in pass rates; but big differences (over 10%, maybe; certainly over 20%, and likely less) do mean something.)

This year’s bar was tough, with the lowest pass rate on the multistate in 34 years. In that environment, UM’s 83.2% is credible, given that we have a lot more bar-takers than our close competitors, even if it is still lower than I would like.

The shockers on this list are Nova and Stetson and Barry.  Nova had an 86% pass rate in 2009, and almost 81% in 2010; last year was 70.2.  Where are they now? At 42.9%.  What happened?

Stetson, once the #1 or #2 in the State, and  at least  in the high 70s or low 80s less than 10 years ago, was 76.8% last year, and suffered less this year, but it was down to only 67.2%. These are schools that are (were?) known for solid teaching of doctrinal law, for producing reliable local practitioners year after year, if perhaps not for being national or especially academic in their ambitions.  Barry, which not long ago was comfortably in the mid-70% range,  and got 58.9% last year, cratered too, to 45.5%. Indeed both Barry and Nova were below Florida A&M, and FAMU’s 58.5 score wasn’t much to cheer about.

There won’t be much happiness at the University of Florida. They have a fine program, and students with excellent credentials, and yet only 70.9% passed? A blip, I trust.

I’ve long said that Bar pass rates are over-rated as a measure of law school quality. But, as I also said back then,

[T]here certainly comes a point where a substantially lower bar pass rate than other schools in the state is a sign of a problem that a law school should work to fix. Most people come to law school in order to become lawyers. If they can’t pass the bar, at least on second try, in most cases they have wasted large amounts of time and money. If this is happening to a substantial fraction of the class, and it isn’t happening nearly as much in other law schools in the same state, then something is wrong either with the teaching, the work ethic, or with the admission policy. Note that the latter may not be the school’s direct fault: as there are more and more law schools it becomes increasingly likely that some schools simply are unable to attract enough students with enough discipline or talent, which puts pressure on the school to either teach to the bar, or to flunk a greater fraction of the entering students.

I’m not sure where that point is exactly, but surely a 42.9% pass rate is below it, and probably 62% also, unless the school is self-consciously taking risks on admissions in order to further a social goal (which arguably describes FAMU) — and the students understand this going in.

I’m glad we as a school did well; I feel sorry for everyone at every school who tried hard and failed. Anyone can fail the bar once; many of you will pass on second try, if you work hard again.

Posted in Florida, Law School | 2 Comments