Home > Legislative Tracker > Raising the voter numbers for passage of initiatives & fiscal impact

Citizen Initiatives Constitutional Amendments:
Raising the voter numbers for passage of initiatives & fiscal impact

Our Position: oppose
Bill Number: SJR 1436/HB7037
Sponsor: Senator Atwater/ Rep. Simmons
Legislative Session: 2006

5/14/06:

These bills died: 5/5/05: SB720/SB1244/HB773: Anti-Petition Gathering bills; SB26: Supreme Court Subject Filter Citizen Initiatives:  SB1918/HB7165: Purifying (NOT) the Constitution: SB1436/HB7037 Fiscal Impact: (Citizen Initiatives and petition gathering survived). We can celebrate this victory as well. While we were fighting on a daily basis, it all came down to the internal fighting between leadership, and against the legislators themselves sponsoring so many constitutional amendments; many of the legislators sounded off on how hypocritical this was. Our hard line lobbying efforts and our Save the Voters Voice coalition work around the state was wonderful. Kudo’s to ACORN, FPIRG, Clean Water Action, Sierra, AFL-CIO, Florida LCV, Florida Consumer Action Network,  League of Women Voters of Florida, Common Cause, Panhandle Citizens Coalition and others. We did an excellent job working together, taking turns, sharing responsibilities and being there for each other.

Status

5/5/06: Did not pass.

4/29/06: 5/1/06 SB1436 is on third reading SENATE and House bill is on House third reading for Monday too.

4/22/06: SB1436 is on the Ways and Means Agenda for Monday, 4/24/06: House version is on the House Floor calendar, second reading. 

4/18/06: Tuesday, HB7037 is on House Justice Council agenda.

3/31/06 House version passes another committee

4/1/06: The Save the Voters Voice group is contemplating amendments to this bill. Stay tuned to see if we are successful. The Senate is the place to focus our energy.

3/6/06: HB7037, filed by House Judiciary Committee and Rep Simmons, and SJR1436 by Senator Atwater would create an exceedingly high threshold for voter approval of initiatives which raise the state budget. This would dramatically limit the ability of citizens to pursue initiatives of large scale significance. In addition, if the amendment does increase spending, it is unclear what "body" decides if a proposed amendment or revision imposes a significant financial impact on state government. And, who decides what constitutes a significant financial impact? These questions continue to go unanswered.

The other hook with is Joint Resolution is that the Amendment must pass by 66% of the voters voting, or 2/3 of voters voting.

Action Needed

Background

SJR 1436: Joint Resolution Tax or Fee Limitations: constitutional amendment to require approval by two-thirds of those electors voting in election in order for amendment or revision to Constitution which authorizes imposition of "new State tax or fee," which increases "existing State tax or fee," or which would result in "significant spending" by state government to take effect; deletes obsolete provisions. Amends s. 7, Art. XI.

The House Companion is:

by House Judiciary, and Representative Simmons

Summary of HB 7037

Joint Resolution Tax or Fee Limitations; constitutional amendment re state tax or fee limitations, to specify application to imposition of new state taxes or fees, increases in existing state taxes or fees, & imposition of significant financial impact on state government. Amends s. 7, Art. XI. SEE HOW THE MEMBERS VOTED: HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE VOTES