|
2007
Legislative Sessionx Know Your Florida Constitutional Amendments
By:Alex Leary
If you're a Florida voter,
prepare for a workout Nov. 4. 2. Gay marriage ban Would define marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife. Florida already has such a law, but backers say putting it in the Constitution protects from legal challenge. 3. Energy/hurricane tax break Improvements on residential property for energy efficiency or windstorm protection wouldn't be subject to property tax assessments. 4. Conservation land tax break Land held in perpetuity for conservation would be exempt from property taxes, and other conservation lands would be taxed on their current use rather than their "highest and best," or potential use. 5. Tax swap Would reduce overall property taxes by about 25 percent by eliminating most property taxes for schools in 2011. To replace the more than $9-billion, lawmakers would have to increase the sales tax, eliminate sales tax exemptions, extend taxes to services such as lawyers or cut other state spending. 6. "Working waterfront" tax break Would provide a property tax break for waterfront businesses such as marinas and boat repair shops that do not intend to convert to a more lucrative use, such as condominiums. 7. Repeal ban on funding for religious organizations Would remove "Blaine Amendment" from the state Constitution, a century-old ban on funding for religious groups. In 2004, an appellate court cited the provision in rejecting then-Gov. Jeb Bush's school voucher program. 8. Community colleges Would allow local option sales taxes to support community colleges if approved by local voters. 9. School funding vouchers Orders that 65 percent of school funding go toward classroom instruction. Changes a provision of the state Constitution to allow private school vouchers.
200asxxx x2007
Legislative Sessionxxc To Dismay of Some in Florida, Legislators Cut Property Taxes
By Abby Goodnough and
Christine Jordan Sexton The plan was championed by Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican who has vowed to make taxes "drop like a rock," and Marco Rubio, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, who has made property-tax relief the main goal of his first year in power. The cost of the package was initially estimated to be $31.6 billion over five years, but a last-minute change pushed by Republicans in the Senate may have blunted the savings by as much as $7 billion. Even so, many local governments that levy property taxes said it would ravage their budgets, potentially forcing layoffs of police officers and firefighters and deep cuts to public schools. Some counties and cities have raised the possibility of a legal challenge. Florida does not have an income tax, and lawmakers did mention imposing one to make up for lost property tax revenue. Republican leaders had hoped to substantially decrease or even eliminate property taxes in exchange for a sharp sales tax increase. But that idea proved too controversial. The tax reduction is a two-part plan. The first piece would require cities and counties to roll back rates this fall and impose a cap on future spending that local government bodies could override only with a supermajority. The second, more contentious piece of the plan is a proposed constitutional amendment for a "supersized" homestead exemption. It would shield from taxes 75 percent of the first $200,000 in assessed property value, and 15 percent of the next $300,000. Should the amendment pass, homeowners could choose instead to keep their current exemption of $25,000 a year and a cap that prevents assessments from rising more than 3 percent a year for a primary residence. Those measures, in place since 1995, have kept property taxes low for longtime homeowners but not for part-time residents whose primary homes are elsewhere, or for business owners or recent home buyers. They are the ones who have clamored for change. The plan would save property taxpayers an average of $174 this year, and, if voters approve the constitutional amendment, $948 in 2008, lawmakers said. "I am so impressed," Mr. Crist said in a news conference after the vote, indicating he would approve the first piece. Because the second piece requires a public referendum, it does not need Mr. Crist’s approval — perhaps providing him political cover if it proves unpopular down the road. The vote on the property tax amendment is scheduled for Jan. 29, the same day as Florida’s presidential primaries. If approved, it would take effect in November, the start of the next budget year for local governments. But counties, cities, teachers unions and Democrats who oppose the plan say they will strive to persuade voters to reject the proposed amendment. It would reduce public school spending by as much as a $7.2 billion. "I think we could really devastate education," said Representative Shelley Vana, a Democrat from Lantana and former teacher. "I think we are going off the deep end." But Mr. Rubio and other architects of the plan said that somehow — they would not provide details — the Legislature would bridge the difference. Mr. Crist has repeatedly said property-tax cuts would not force layoffs, but local government and union officials insist otherwise. "They are huge cuts, the largest we’ve ever seen," said Andy Ford, president of the Florida Education Association, predicting that the cuts would block school districts from hiring new employees, from teachers to bus drivers to cafeteria workers. "It will affect absolutely everybody." The real estate and building industries, which are suffering from the housing slump, lobbied relentlessly for the cuts. The revenue that Florida collects from real estate transactions dipped 25 percent over the last year, causing overall tax revenue to fall for the first time since the 1970s. This year the Legislature approved a series of measures to reduce home insurance rates, which have soared as major hurricanes have struck in recent years. But many homeowners are finding the savings to be much smaller than they had hoped. Abby Goodnough reported from Miami, and Christine Jordan Sexton from Tallahassee.
By Daniel Ostrovsky
The focus of lawmakers on
property tax and property insurance issues, plus the state’s tight
fiscal situation, prevented bar leaders and court officials from
getting much of what they wanted in the areas of judicial funding,
increased pay for public lawyers, no-fault auto insurance, death
penalty representation and apportionment of civil liability.
Allison North Jones, a spokeswoman for an insurance industry-backed
coalition called Floridians for Lower Insurance Cost, said that the
state will be better off when PIP sunsets in October.
Business Granted Right to Ban Signature-Seekers
Crist
Offers Tax-cut Compromise
Jason Garcia and John Kennedy Copyright © 2007, Orlando Sentinel
Lawmakers Bandy Lots of Ideas to Revamp Property Taxes
By Mary Ellen Klas How much? Stay tuned. Legislators began their annual 60-day session last week and declared property taxes a top priority. At least four ideas have emerged; none likely to be the final product. All share the same goals: • Lowering property taxes for all Floridians, who have seen property values spike and taxes escalate in spite of the now depressed real estate market. • Ending or offsetting the inequities in the 15-year-old Save Our Homes tax cap, which has left similar homes in the same neighborhood to be taxed at vastly different rates depending on when the owner took up residence. • Making homeownership more affordable by, among other things, ending the tax barriers that have locked many elderly Floridians into their homes because they can't move to a smaller home with a higher tax bill. RADICAL PROPOSITION The House plan is the most dramatic: it proposes a two-part solution that first rolls back local government spending to near 2001, pre-boom levels. The savings would then finance a $5.8 billion reduction in all property taxes. Governments could override the spending cap with a two-thirds vote of the county or city commission. The second phase would wipe out all property taxes on primary homes by asking voters to approve a constitutional amendment. The lost revenue would be replaced with a 2.5 cent increase in the statewide sales tax. The current rate: 6 cents. House Speaker Marco Rubio called it ``the boldest and most sweeping tax initiative in Florida's history.'' But it's fraught with problems. Many Republican lawmakers last week privately expressed doubts about how local governments would fare with less money. City and county officials warned they would be forced to close libraries and parks, and make Draconian cuts to police and fire departments. ''Florida counties cannot and will not support a hastily-crafted, one-size-fits-all state solution that could severely impact crucial local programs and services to our citizens,'' said Susan Latvala, a Pinellas County commissioner and president of the Florida Association of Counties. The lobbying group even hired an economist, Hank Fishkind, to present their case to the legislature. He said spiraling health and property insurance costs, fuel and higher land prices contributed to the spike in county government expenditures -- not wasteful spending. House leaders, who expected the outcry from counties and cities, contend that voters are unhappy about local government expenditures and are demanding property tax cuts. ''I was a county commissioner for eight years,'' said Rep. Ray Sansom, a Destin Republican who is leading the tax reform push in the House. ``I'd have said the same thing.'' Sansom believes the House plan is a starting point for debate. He and other House leaders are preparing amendments to extend property tax savings to renters and spare poorer, smaller counties from the worst cuts. BELT TIGHTENING If nothing else, the House plan has gotten counties to accept shrinking budgets. Asked what level of spending cuts counties may be able to swallow, Latvala suggested: 9-10 percent. Gov. Charlie Crist's property tax proposal also would force counties to tighten their budget belts. His idea: double the homestead exemption from $25,000 to $50,000 and allow homeowners who move to another home to take the savings from the Save Our Homes Act. The act caps increases in property tax assessments at 3 percent annually for primary homeowners. As a result, homeowners who have lived in the same house for some time more relief than newcomers and or those who have recently moved. Crist also wants legislators to put a constitutional amendment before voters that would institute a 3 percent cap on property tax assessments for commercial and non-Homestead property. These property owners have historically paid more than primary homeowners. But the governor's idea also has its problems. Several small counties, where property values are among Florida's lowest, could see budgets wiped out by the doubling of the homestead exemption. In larger, more urban counties, homeowners complain the doubling will do little to reduce their tax bill. As a result, Crist has begun to back off on his plan, saying he's open to all ideas. House Democrats have informally come forward with plans that seek to offer tax relief by replacing some property taxes with other taxes. One idea, by Rep. Jack Seiler, a Wilton Manors Democrat, would lower property taxes $7.8 billion statewide by eliminating the portion of tax bills that go to school districts but leave local government spending alone. Voters would be asked to approve a constitutional amendment to make up the lost revenue by raising the state sales tax 2 cents on the dollar. Democrats are expected to pitch a modified version of Seiler's plan next week as well as some caps on spending. The problem with this plan: it doesn't touch the inequities created by the Save Our Homes cap. And it leaves schools more dependent on sales tax collections, which could drop in an economic downturn. A MODEST PROPOSAL? Senate Republicans have yet to unveil their proposals but they are expected to be more modest. Last week, Sen. Mike Haridopolous, the Melbourne Republican leading the effort, said his colleagues will lower taxes for everyone by forcing counties to change the way they value property. Rather than tax a home or business based on its highest potential use, counties would be required to tax it at its current use -- regardless of what kind of real estate speculation or development is going on around it, he said. Many counties welcome the idea, but critics warn it could lead to more fraud as property owners attempt to escape taxes by misrepresenting improvements to the property that would warrant an increase. The Senate also plans to propose some kind of a spending cap on local governments, but not as harsh as the House plan. Haridopolous suggested it may be closer to the 2004 or 2005 spending levels. Rubio said Saturday that the House welcomes the new ideas and is open to alternatives. ''It is exactly what we said we expected this to be: an open competition of ideas,'' he said.
Voters Will Decide on Term Limits
By Mary Ellen Klas TALLAHASSEE - The Florida Legislature decided Thursday that eight years is not enough. By a 35-4 vote, the Florida Senate passed a House bill that will put an amendment before voters in 2006 that asks them to expand term limits to 12 years from the current eight, modifying a 1992 constitutional change that won voter approval that year by a 77-23 percent margin. The measure applies only to legislators whose first term begins in 2006, theoretically making ineligible the 160 legislators now serving. But lawmakers, more than half of them in office less than two years, have already come up with potential exceptions -- such as switching districts before their term expires or moving from the House to the Senate. ''Term limits have done significant damage to the Legislature in some respects,'' said Senate President Tom Lee, a Brandon Republican whose term ends in 2006. ``The learning curve is steep and the empowerment of the lobbying corps and the staff is no longer just a threat. We've seen it happen.'' LONG ODDS Lee and House Speaker Allan Bense said that because of the popularity of the term limits amendment 14 years ago, and the reluctance of lawmakers to tinker with it since, their proposal faces long odds before voters. ''If I had to handicap it now, I would say it's going to fail next year,'' Bense said. Voters will argue ``the longer they're here, the more the lobbyists have influence on them.'' Nonetheless, several legislators said it was worth a try because many believe having a 12-year stint will improve the quality of representation in both chambers, especially in the House, where experienced legislators leave after they've reached their term limit and move to the Senate, leaving the House with the least experienced members. ''You don't have enough time to figure out who has got the talent versus who has got the voice,'' said Sen. Jim King, a Jacksonville Republican and one of the Legislature's longest-serving members. He said the inexperience of House members led to repeated conflicts with his chamber. Florida voters passed term limits after a statewide campaign called ''Throw the Rascals Out'' and ''Eight is Enough'' galvanized voter frustration over legislative deadlock and cronyism in Washington, D.C., and Tallahassee. In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out state-imposed term limits for Congress, but the Florida Supreme Court upheld the legislative and Cabinet limits. POSSIBLE OPPOSITION The proposal to expand term limits evoked little opposition in the Senate or in the House, which passed it two weeks ago by a 92-24 vote. But proponents of term limits nationwide warned that it will not be welcomed by voters. ''If this Legislature believes it isn't capable of learning the ropes in eight years, they have the responsibility to tell voters that when they run for reelection,'' said Paul Jacob, executive director of U.S. Term Limits, which is working with Florida organizers to mount a campaign to defeat the amendment. Attempts to expand term limits to 12 years by modifying state constitutions have failed in California, Arkansas and Montana, Jacobs said. In California, legislators raised $11 million and ran television ads throughout the state, while proponents of term limits collected $1 million and conducted a limited direct mail campaign. The measure was defeated 58-42, Jacob said. ''I would not be surprised if they raise big bucks in Florida,'' he said. ``There's a lot of special interests that will want to curry favor with them, but they may be surprised.'' EMPOWERMENT Jacobs thinks legislatures feel empowered by Florida's recent track record of approving most amendments that have been put on the ballot, from protecting pregnant pigs to punishing doctors and trial lawyers, but thinks this one may produce a difference result. ''They may just think voters will just vote yes on anything,'' he said. ``I think they'll be sadly mistaken.'' SEVERAL PROPOSALS The constitutional amendment would be the first voters see on the 2006 ballot, but if the governor and key legislators get their way, it will be followed by a proposal to modify the 2002 class-size measure, and at least two proposals to make it harder for citizens to amend the constitution. ''The voters may not buy it, but it doesn't mean that there aren't valid reasons why we believe it is in the best interest in the future of this state to have expanded term limits, to make it harder to amend the constitution, to address class size,'' Lee said. ``I don't know if all of that stuff or any of that stuff passes, but I'm telling you it's the right thing to do.''
Election Bill Draws
Complaints
By Gary Fine TALLAHASSEE - The Republican-controlled Florida House passed a sweeping elections bill Tuesday, but the legislation immediately drew fire for what it doesn't do. Despite pleas from some voters for a paper trail, the legislation won't require counties with touch-screen machines to add technology that could track votes on paper in case a recount is needed. And despite requests from election supervisors, the bill won't empower local election officials to set up extra sites for early voting or keep people at least 100 feet away from the polling place. ''The Legislature either has amnesia or was blinded to the fact that there were long lines at early voting sites,'' complained Rep. Tim Ryan, a Dania Beach Democrat. But House Republicans defended their decision to keep a tight rein on early voting, pointing out that it wasn't until last year that legislators gave wide approval to a 15-day early voting period before Election Day. Current state law limits early voting to the main and branch offices of supervisors, libraries and city halls. The House bill would keep it that way, as would a similar Senate bill. `EXPANSION' ''This is an expansion of democracy,'' said Rep. J.C. Planas, a Miami Republican. ``I remember the old days where you truly did have long lines.'' Republicans have also defended the decision not to require a paper trail for counties that use touch-screen voting machines, such as Miami-Dade and Broward, pointing out that the state still hasn't certified any printers that could work with the ATM-styl machines. The House approved the elections bill by 83-35, with only Democrats voting against it. Included in the bill are provisions that would require voters without an ID to vote by a provisional ballot, new restrictions for third-party groups that register voters and a change in law that would force groups that file election lawsuits to pay all legal costs if they lose in court. Most of the debate over the bill, however, centered on early voting, which was enormously popular during the 2004 elections. Nearly 19 percent of voters across the state voted early, leading to long lines. Secretary of State Glenda Hood, reacting to complaints from supervisors, asked legislators to let local election officials offer extra sites for early voting. House Republicans also nixed a plan to expand the buffer around the polling place from 50 feet to 100 feet. So far, however,the Senate has not gone along with the House proposals to keep only a 50-foot buffer. ''Fifty feet isn't enough,'' said Sen. Bill Posey, a Rockledge Republican who is sponsoring the Senate election bills. ``We have all heard from voters who were complaining about being harassed.'' Another problem surrounding early voting: If you vote early, the vote is tallied separately, not as part of your normal precinct. Republicans in the Legislature have tucked a measure in another election bill that would require all supervisors in Florida to report precinct-by-precinct results, including early voters, 75 days after an election. Republicans concede they want the information because there is a concern that they will lose the ability to predict the election results if more voters vote at an early voting site. That could hamper their ability to draw new legislative and congressional districts. `SKEWED RESULTS' ''When you look at it for reapportionment purposes, you are getting skewed results,'' said Rep. Don Brown, a DeFuniak Springs Republican. Brown, however, insisted the information would be beneficial to both sides. Malpractice Measures Defined
Lawmakers Passed Two Bills
Narrowing the 'Three Strikes' Amendment to Revoke Doctors' Medical
Licenses and the Release of Hospital Records. The House passed two bills that would put into state law the details of the two voter-approved constitutional amendments on medical malpractice. Both bills now go to the desk of Gov. Jeb Bush. The first bill (SB 940), which passed unanimously with no debate, spells out how the so-called ''three strikes'' measure will work. The measure said doctors with three medical malpractice judgments against them, not counting settlements, must lose their licenses. The bill passed Friday would narrow that requirement, saying doctors would automatically lose their licenses after three strikes unless the finding was based on less than ``clear and convincing evidence.'' In that case, it would remain up to the Board of Medicine whether to yank the license. The bill says the new requirement only applies to incidents that occur after Nov. 2, when voters put the measure in the Constitution. The amendment -- approved by 70 percent of voters -- was put on hold by a judge until after the legislative session ends in May, giving lawmakers the chance to work out details of putting it in place. The House also passed a measure (SB 938) clarifying the constitutional amendment that requires hospitals to release records about adverse medical incidents. That amendment, approved by more than 80 percent of voters, didn't say to whom the records must be released, or spell out exactly which records were covered. Lawmakers also interpreted that one narrowly. The bill says the records only must be released to patients of that particular hospital and that the patient can only get records about medical mistakes related to the same condition or diagnoses they have. ''That was not what was marketed, that was not what the voters believed,'' objected Rep. Susan Bucher, D-West Palm Beach. But Bucher was one of only a few who voted against the measure, which passed 110-3.
2004 Legislative Session AMENDMENT ON CITIZEN INITIATIVES
Amendment
Reforms Proposed On Citizen Initiatives While House and Senate versions differ slightly in their approach, both chambers want to require that future proposals to change the Constitution receive a 60 percent vote to pass, instead of the current simple majority. The Republican-led Legislature also wants to give the state Supreme Court new powers to decide if a proposal is appropriate for the Constitution, and extend the time period that proponents of constitutional changes are given to educate voters. Anything lawmakers approve to change the way the state Constitution is amended would itself have to be a constitutional amendment approved by voters. As lawmakers prepare to tackle the issue this week, opposition to the measures is rising. A group that emerged last week criticized the shift to a 60 percent majority as short-sighted, saying it would put more power in the hands of special interest groups -- exactly what the citizen initiative process was designed to protect against. ''If this thing passes, there will never again be a citizen initiative effort, because [the law] will have such a chilling effect,'' said Rick Shepherd, chairman of the Florida Initiative League, a pro- citizen-initiative group formed by organizers of a successful term-limits drive in Palm Beach County. But the Florida Chamber of Commerce and a coalition of the most powerful business groups in the state counter that tough new limits are the only way to preserve the sanctity of the Constitution -- and they're prepared to promote it with a $4 million media blitz to win voter support. ''If we become a state that is run by the electorate, we will become a significantly dysfunctional state,'' said Fred Leonhardt, an Orlando lawyer and chairman of the Florida Chamber of Commerce. ``If you're unhappy with legislators, replace them. It's easy enough.'' Two Methods Currently, there are two principal ways the state Constitution can be amended: citizens can collect 489,000 signatures statewide and put a proposed amendment on the ballot; or, state legislators can put a proposal before voters with a three-fifths vote in each chamber. Under proposals expected to be considered this week, lawmakers in the House also want to require citizen initiatives to identify a source of the money the state would need to carry out an amendment. And House leaders want signature gatherers to disclose whether they are getting paid. House and Senate leaders are still working out details, such as when to put on the ballot the proposed amendments that would make changing the Constitution more difficult. Senate leaders want it on the Aug. 31 primary ballot, while others say it should be done during the Nov. 2 general election. ''The public may do all of those things, some of those things or none of those things, but we want to give them a choice,'' said Sen. Rod Smith, the Gainesville Democrat leading the effort in the Senate. The assault on the citizen petition process by state and business leaders was provoked by the 2002 election, in which voters banned the use of crates for pregnant pigs and smoking in restaurants, and passed the school class-size amendment. Pregnant pigs have been the poster children for everything that's wrong with the initiative process, but legislators have the greatest disdain for the class-size amendment. That measure, promoted by a Democratic congressman from Miami, Kendrick Meek, and the state teachers union, forces lawmakers to direct vast amounts of money to reducing the student-to-teacher ratios in public schools over the next 10 years. Legislators and Gov. Jeb Bush lobbied against it, considering it an expensive straitjacket that handicaps them because it limits their discretion when they write the state budget. They say it will do more harm than good for education. The budget handicap is not lost on the business lobby and other special interests. Every year, they hire more than 400 lobbyists to persuade legislators to steer state money to their causes, among other things. The class-size amendment requires the state to spend up to $2 billion a year on reducing class sizes, and the high-speed rail amendment requires the construction of a multibillion-dollar bullet train, leaving industry groups with a state budget that has less money available for their priorities. Leonhardt, of the Florida Chamber of Commerce, says many in the business community have had enough. ''The right way to have this system work is to elect a Legislature that does its jobs correctly,'' Leonhardt said. ``These efforts to go around the Legislature are like an end run around the board of directors. It's an affront to the integrity of our democratic system.'' `Minority Rule' But supporters of citizen initiatives say that by restricting the way the state Constitution can be changed, business groups are being short-sighted: If the tide ever turns and the Republican-led, business-friendly Legislature is replaced by a group that is less responsive to business needs, it would be more difficult for businesses to initiate amendments to the Constitution. ''If you don't believe in majority rule, there's only one other thing, and that's minority rule,'' said Paul Jacob, president of Citizens in Charge, a Virginia-based group that supports citizen initiatives and is working with the Florida opponents of the legislative proposals. ``That's what this 60 percent threshold is designed to do.'' Jacob believes that if legislators really wanted to deal with amendments that have already been passed, such as class-size caps and pregnant pigs, they would have put the flawed amendments on the ballot again so that ``voters with more education and more knowledge would choose a different way.'' Instead, legislators appear more concerned about attacking the process rather than fixing it, he said. For a brief time in the past year, legislators considered seeking a new vote on class caps. Bush made repealing it a top priority in his State of the State speech in 2003, and lawmakers considered drafting legislation. But, once Republicans started conducting public opinion polls, they realized voters weren't in favor of repeal and dropped the idea. Rather than redo the vote, legislators this year are gambling that voters will agree it's time to change the rules of the game. ''As offended as I am about amending the Constitution regularly, what offends me more is amending and repealing,'' said Sen. Smith, a former prosecutor. ``I'm willing to erect the dam but not drain the levee.'' The Florida Chamber of Commerce has assembled a coalition of trade associations and business and community groups to promote its campaign, VoteSmartFlorida.org. Leonhardt predicts they will be able to persuade voters to limit the chances of future initiative efforts. ''We need to convince Floridians to stabilize the Constitution and refocus their efforts on the Legislature,'' he said.
Jacob predicted: ``If it's not
going to be stopped in the Legislature, it's going to be stopped on
the ballot.
At the
close of the legislative session there is no resolution over revisions to make
it more difficult for citizens to change the state Constitution.
SB 1776, sponsored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Alex Villalobos, R-Miami, would raise the penalty for violating the states Unauthorized Practice of Law UPL from a first-degree misdemeanor to a third-degree felony, which can be prosecuted by the State Attorney. The bill had passed the Senate Judiciary Committee with minimal discussion and a unanimous vote. If approved, the new law would become effective July 1, 2004. In the House, Rep. Jeff Kottkamp, R-Cape Coral, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, plans to bring the issue there in a proposed committee bill. The Florida Bar is supporting a bill to increase penalties. The difference would mean tougher punishment. A first-degree misdemeanor is punishable by up to one year in jail and up to $1,000 in fines. A third-degree felony is punishable by up to five years in prison and $5,000 in fines. The Bar supports this legislation -- of course not to get business for the lawyers, but "to protect the people who are suffering irreparable harm. We recognize our obligation to protect Floridians from the unlicensed practice of law, and we need the state prosecutors to help us resolve this problem" says Miles A. McGrane III president of the Florida Bar. Two bills were approved by the Legislature, SB 1776 and HB 1915, making Unauthorized Practice of Law a third degree felony. INITIATIVE TO CAP LAWYERS' FEES IN MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
Proposal to Cap Lawyers' Fees
Moves Toward Ballot TALLAHASSEE Fl- Lawyers' fees in medical malpractice cases would be limited under a proposed constitutional change that moved a step closer Tuesday to getting on the November ballot. A doctor-backed group seeking to limit what trial lawyers can take home when they win a malpractice case has enough signatures to get the Supreme Court to review its proposed amendment. Under the proposed amendment, patients would get 70 percent of the first $250,000 awarded in medical malpractice cases and 90 percent of the rest of the award, minus the costs of bringing the lawsuit. The measure is backed by the Florida Medical Association. The organization has battled trial lawyers for several years over malpractice lawsuits, which doctors say are costing them so much money that many of their practices are threatened. Currently, there's a rule providing for a sliding scale in such cases. Lawyers usually get 40 percent of the first $1 million their client is awarded, 30 percent of the second $1 million and 20 percent of anything above that. Gov. Jeb Bush signed a bill last year that limits a doctor's liability for noneconomic damages in most medical malpractice cases to $500,000. A medical facility's liability will be limited to $750,000 in most cases. Multiple victims - such as a victim, a spouse and their children - will be able to receive more money with multiple lawsuits against the doctor and the facility. But no group of victims could win more than $2.5 million. The FMA will need about a half-million petition signatures to place its proposed amendment on the ballot but needed to get about 10 percent of that to have the Supreme Court review the measure. The Supreme Court checks to make sure the proposed amendment is clear to voters and deals only with one subject. The FMA announced Tuesday that it had collected the 50,000 signatures needed to trigger that review. Trial lawyers say a cap on their fees in malpractice cases would make it virtually impossible to try malpractice cases, and they say they are prepared to fight the amendment. The lawyers are pursuing three ballot proposals of their own, seeking to limit what doctors can charge in some cases, to prevent doctors repeatedly found to be negligent from practicing and to open some doctors' records about medical mistakes to the public. Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers executive director Scott Carruthers said all three of its petition gathering efforts had surpassed the number of signatures needed to gain Supreme Court review. The Florida Medical Association House of Delegates voted during the 2003 Annual Meeting to seek a constitutional amendment to limit contingency fees. [They put this message on their website - In order to get this issue on the ballot we will need from each physician 1,000 petitions signed by Florida registered voters sent to your county medical society as soon as possible. Each County Medical Society will need enough time to gather all the petitions to submit them to the Division of Elections for verification.] PROPOSAL TO CHANGE RULE MAKING OF SUPREME COURT The latest proposal comes from Rep. Gustavo Barreiro, R-Miami, the chairman of the House Public Safety and Crime Prevention Committee, proposes to alter the state Constitution to shift the judiciary's rule-making authority from the Florida Supreme Court to the Legislature. Barreiro's proposed constitutional amendment would establish a judicial conference, with members chosen by the Legislature, to recommend rule changes that would be forwarded to the Legislature for approval. The high court would no longer have a say in the process. The Bill to Change Rule Making of the Supreme Court did not pass.
COUNTIES TO PAY FILING FEES TO ENFORCE
VIOLATION The Constitutional Revision Approved by Florida Voters in 1998 to Foot More of the Bill for the State Court System, A Part of that Burden is Now Being Kicked Back by Substantially Raising Court Fees Click here Overall assessment of the 2004 Legislative Session Lobbies gain - Poor Lose In Session. As Florida legislators declare the 2004 session a success and head into the long campaign season, many of their biggest campaign contributors -- healthcare vendors, telephone giants, developers, the National Rifle Association and others -- can declare victory, too. But the ''low-income working people'' have much less reason to celebrate. They saw lawmakers in the Republican-led legislator make cuts to programs that supply health insurance to children, and eyeglasses and hearing aids to the elderly and infirm. To read Click here.
2003 Legislative Session Constitutional Amendment/Initiative - Legislation has been introduced in the 2003 legislative session to increase the vote required to pass amendment to or revision of State Constitution proposed by initiative from majority of the electors voting on a matter in election to three-fifths of those electors voting on a matter. Thus, making the passage of a public initiative more difficult. House Bill No. 345 JOINT RESOLUTION by Green (Compare S 0318, S 1506, S 1672) Amends s. 5, Art. XI. House Bill No. 345 has been withdrawn and was referred to the Subcommittee on Ethics and Election - www.myfloridahouse.com/Committees.aspx under House Committees scroll down to Procedures and click on Subcommittee on Ethics and Elections. The objective was to make public referendum harder.
The bill died in the Committee
on Ethics and Elections
Limitation of Noneconomic
Damage/Fair Share; constitutional amendment to provide
limitation of $250,000 on noneconomic damages in tort cases,
which amount may be annually adjusted for inflation as
provided by general law; proposes that court shall supervise
arrangements for payment of damages to protect against
conflicts of interest that may have effect of reducing amount
of damages awarded that are actually paid House Bill No. 563 JOINT RESOLUTION by Mack (Compare H 0753, S 1302) The Legislature has adjourned without passing a bill to lower the malpractice insurance rates. The Florida House and the Senate have passed differing bills that they say would lower medical malpractice rates. A compromise measure will have to be worked out, possibly in a special session if any.
House Bill No. 847 GENERAL
BILL by Goodlette (Similar
H 0003) Amends FS. You can access the Florida Legislature at: www.leg.state.fl.us
_______________________________________________________________ 2002 Legislative Session Legislation was introduced for the 2002 legislative session to make public all complaints filed against judges with the Judicial Qualifications Commission. The objective was to make judges more accountable. House Bill No. 1181 by Joint Resolution with Senate Bill No. 0162, providing for a "constitutional amendment to make all records & proceedings of Judicial Qualifications Commission public upon finding of no probable cause, effective July 1, 2003..." The bill passed in the House with 79 YEAS and 33 NAYS, but it died in the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. That is it did not even get out of the Committee in the Senate. Even if bills are introduced by a legislator they have to go through a number of committees in both houses, before they are even voted on the floor. That is where the lobbyist come in. It is not only that many legislators are members of the Florida Bar but, The Florida Bar itself is powerful lobby group which actively lobbies to assure that no legal reform passes in the Legislature. __________________________________________________________________ 2001 Legislative Session House Bill 367 - Sponsored by Representative Frederick Brummer. The bill proposes to repeal current Section 43.20 Florida Statute. The bill makes certain changes in the composition of the Judicial Nominating Commission. There are a total of 26 Commissions who pick the nominees for openings in Florida's trial and appellate courts. Although the judges are elected in the trial court, when there is an opening the judges are appointed, who then run for election. The Governor chooses from a list narrowed down to three candidates by the Commission. Currently each of the Commissions consist of nine members. The Governor appoints three individuals, the Florida Bar appoints three and the six appoint the other three members. Under the bill the Governor would appoint all nine members of each of the Commissions. The reasoning behind is that the appointment process is an executive function and it should not be given over to the Florida Bar, whose members are not elected and do not answer to the people. Another major change is that the term of a Commission member ends concurrent with the term to which the Governor was elected. The terms may commence at any time following the inauguration of the Governor as a result of a general election. If a member is unable to complete his or her term, the Governor is required to appoint another individual to fill the remainder of the member's term. The office of any member of any judicial nominating commission appointed under current Sec. 43.29 Fla. Stat. terminates upon effective date of the new act. The Governor may reappoint thet individual to the Commission who has not completed the four year term. House Bill 627 - Is another bill by Representative Frederick Brummer. The Bill makes changes to Article V of the Florida Constitution governing the Judicial Branch. It is a proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution. If it passes the Legislature then it is put before the voters at the next general election. The following are some of the main issues from the proposed amendment. There must be an actual case before the court, an individual or an entity can't just go into court to declare a statute unconstitutional; under Article V the Florida Supreme Court has the authority to make rules for the courts, which the legislature can override by a 2/3 vote, the proposed amendment seeks to change that to a vote of a simple majority. Currently, the names of appellate judges appear on the ballot, asking voters if they want the judge to remain on the bench. For a judge to stay a simple majority of the votes of the electors is required. The proposed amendment seeks to raise that to 2/3 of the votes. The proposed amendment provides for loser to pay the costs. Currently The Florida Bar collects the fees from the lawyers and appropriates those proceeds, that is the Bar decides under the Florida Supreme Court for what purposes the moneys are to be used for. This is the very issue raised on this website that The Florida Bar cannot raise state mandated dues and avoid appropriation by the Legislature, because that is in violation of the constitutional separation of powers. The proposed amendment seeks to take away the control of the purse string from the Florida Supreme Court. The proposed amendment also seeks to continue the election of county and circuit judges and eliminates the gag rule, in judicial campaigns. The proposed amendment is summarized on the website as follows: 1. Limits the jurisdiction of the court, including the jurisdiction to issue most writs to actual cases in law, equity, admiralty, and maritime jurisdiction and to actual controversies arising under the Constitution and the laws of the State of Florida and the United States. 2. Prohibits rules of the Supreme Court from being inconsistent with statutes in place at the time of the adoption of the rules, and provides that the rules must be revised to conform to subsequently adopted statutes that regulate substantive rights and that rules may be repealed by general law adopted by a majority, rather than 2/3, of each house of the Legislature. 3. Provides that rules adopted by the court shall neither abridge, enlarge, nor modify the substantive rights of any litigant, but additional rulemaking power may be delegated to courts by general law. 4. Limits the District Courts of Appeal jurisdiction to appeals and the Supreme Court jurisdiction to appeals, advisory opinions authorized by the constitution, writs of habeas corpus, and prohibitions and adoption of rules, discipline, and review of questions certified by the Supreme Court of the United States or a United States Court of Appeal. 5. Provides that writs issued by the Supreme Court are subject to statutes of limitation and that in a criminal case the statute of limitation shall be no shorter than 2 years from the final judgement or mandate on direct appeal in a criminal case. 6. Provides for the retention of Supreme Court justices and district courts of appeal judges by a two-thirds vote rather than a majority vote. 7. Provides that the Governor shall nominate and appoint applicants for a court vacancy with the advice and consent of the Senate with a provision for confirmation when the Senate is not in session. Eliminates judicial nominating commissions. 8. Provides that any non-prevailing party in any civil proceeding or any defendant convicted in any criminal proceeding may be assessed, as provided by general law, the full cost of all services utilized and expenses incurred in such proceeding as determined by the clerk of the circuit or county court, to the extent that such services or expenses are provided by certain appropriations, fees, or service charges. 9. Provides for the state funding of "courts established by the constitution" rather than state funding of the "state court system." 10. Provides that the judiciary shall have no power to set or modify legislative appropriations. 11. Grants the Supreme Court exclusive jurisdiction to the discipline and regulate the admission of persons to practice law before the courts and provides for regulation, by general law, of the professional practice of law other than before the courts. 12. Provides that no attorney shall be required to pay dues to any organization as a condition to admission to practice law before the courts of the state and prohibits the court from assessing any fee as a condition to admission to practice law before the courts of the state. Conforms provisions relation to judge, state attorneys, public defenders, and members of the Judicial Qualifications Commission. 13. Removes The Florida Bar from appointing members of the Judicial Qualifications Commission and allows the Legislature to appoint attorney members to the commission. 14. Reduces judicial certification to optional advice rather than constitutional determination of need. 15. Restores the election of county and circuit judges by eliminating the 1998 amendment allowing local option for appointment and retention of such judges. 16. Removes ability to limit by rule the political rights of candidates for judicial office, but allows such limits by general law if consistent with other provisions of the constitution. House Bill 137 by Representative J. Dudley Goodlette seeks to overhaul the entire probate code. The additions and deletions were proposed by the legislative committee of The Florida Bar. The bill deletes certain portions of the probate code which are deemed to be procedural to be adopted by the Supreme Court as Probate Rules. Many of he proposals seek to increase the opportunity to produce fees for lawyers, the personal representative and for the professionals retained for the estate. This particularly as it relates to taking possession of the homestead property as shown below. Section 74 of the bill provides for an addition to §§733.106 Fla. Stat. providing that, "any attorney who has rendered services to an estate is entitled to compensation from an estate". Deleted is the section that requires an attorney to apply to the court for fees, with notice to interested parties. Section 141, §§733.705 Fla. Stat. provides for objections to claims. There is nothing here that the objection has to be made in good faith. Thus, any objection can made and litigated with no end in sight, creating lucrative fees for attorneys and the personal representative. In fact members of Citizens for Judicial Accountability were subjected to such litigation at great expense. Section 123, the addition to §§733.608 allows the personal representative to take possession of the "protected homestead property when it is not in the possession of the person who appears to have an interest". As shown below this has a substantial effect to increase fees. Section 129, §§ 733.705 Fla. Stat. allows the personal representative" to employ persons, including but not limited to attorneys, accountants, auditors, appraisers investment advisers, even if they are one and the same as the personal representative or are associated with the personal representative". Thus, this provides for multiple fees. Under Section 133, §§733.617 Fla. Stat. a personal representative is entitled to a percentage fee commission based on the gross estate plus on the income earned during administration, without court order for "ordinary services". This is at the rate of 3% for the first million, 2.5% for above one million not exceeding 5 million 2% from five to ten million and 1.5% above ten million. In addition to the above the personal representative is entitled to further compensation for so called "extraordinary services" such as the sale of real property, in the conduct of litigation, adjustment for payment of taxes, carrying on decedent's business, and added to the list is "dealing with protected homestead". Thus, it has become profitable to include the homestead, the decedent's home. It is further provided that if the personal representative is a member of The Florida Bar and has rendered legal services to the estate then additional fees are allowed for these services. Under Section 134, §§ 733.6171 an attorney is entitled to compensation on the gross estate plus the income earned during administration. There is a fee schedule of $1,500 on $40,000 to $70,000; an additional $750 from $70,000 to $100,000; 3% in excess of $100,000 to $900,000; 2.5% above one million; 2% from 3 to 5 million; 1.5% from five to ten million and 1% above ten million. The attorney is then allowed fees for the "extraordinary services" such as will contest, will construction, determining beneficiaries, contesting claims, proceeding in elective share, any tax matter including reviewing tax returns, any litigation, representing the personal representative in tax matters, purchase and sale of real property, specifically adding "services related to protected homestead" While the statute includes a detailed itinerary of services which includes just about any service to the estate or personal representative, there is nothing said as to what the ordinary services consist of for the fixed percentage fees. Under Section 142 of and §§733.707 Fla. Stat. fees are administrative expenses, which has the first priority to payment from the estate and comes even before funeral expenses and all other expenses and debts of the estate. ________________________________________________________________
Disposition of the Bills The full texts may be accessed on www.leg.state.fl.us.House Bill 367
- Sponsored by Representative Frederick Brummer the bill making
certain changes in the composition of the Judicial Nominating
Commission was passed. home |
|||||
.
|
A Feast
|
