Dear Governor Crist,
We the undersigned write to you today as the People’s Governor and ask you to exercise your veto power on behalf of the People of the State of Florida by vetoing SB 900 a bill that most likely would do away with grassroots-driven citizen constitutional amendments.
SB 900 would have an enormously chilling effect on the constitutional amendment process by:
• Requiring that signed petitions be turned into the supervisors’ offices within 30 days of signing or they will be invalid.
• Creating a revocation process that allows signatures to be revoked within 120 days of the petition signature being verified.
SB 900 in all likelihood would:
• Relinquish all constitutional amendment campaigns to paid signature gatherers.
• Preclude any volunteer-driven constitutional amendment campaigns.
• Astronomically increase the amount of money required to get an issue on the ballot.
• Make it impossible to determine if the required number of signatures has been collected by the deadline.
• Create a “cottage industry” of harassment against those who sign petitions. Once a petition signature has been verified it becomes public record. Big money interests could set up “revocation campaigns” and then obtain information on those who have signed petitions and then spend 4 months calling, sending them mailings and even approaching them at their homes to convince them to revoke their signature.
The power of the veto is an important check and balance between the branches of government. It should not be exercised lightly but in times where the obvious limitations of one branch have precluded the goodwill of the people. This bill is a prime example of how those with money, power and influence overshadow the voices of the citizens. There is no public interest in imposing the limitations contained in this bill.
Further, we believe provisions of the bill relating to the initiative may be unconstitutional and are in conflict with existing law and another bill passed this session. A number of constitutional scholars and election law attorneys have indicated that they believe both the 30-day timeline for turning in petition signatures and the creation of the revocation process violate Article XI, Section 3 of the Florida Constitution. This section provides that "[t]he power to propose the revision or amendment of any portion or portions of this constitution by initiative is reserved to the people, provided that, any such revision or amendment, except for those limiting the power of government to raise revenue, shall embrace but one subject and matter directly connected therewith. It may be invoked by filing with the custodian of state records a petition containing a copy of the proposed revision or amendment, signed by a number of electors in each of one half of the congressional districts of the state, and of the state as a whole, equal to eight percent of the votes cast in each of such districts respectively and in the state as a whole in the last preceding election in which presidential electors were chosen." (Emphasis added.) Therefore, the right for citizens of the State of Florida to engage in the constitutional amendment process through petition is a constitutionally granted and protected right. Courts have upheld provisions regulating constitutional rights only if the degree of regulation does not impede on the right to the level that the right is still generally accessible and where the regulation is necessary to further the purpose of the constitutional right. The 30-day timeline to turn in signatures fails on both accounts. Further, one might note that the constitution is devoid of any authority allowing for this new revocation process outlined in SB 900. To argue that the right to petition as stated above allows for such a process would also clearly violate the general test set forth above.
SB 900's 30-day requirement may also very well run afoul of the U.S. Constitution. Both the Supreme Court and the Eleventh Circuit have recognized that state laws which unduly burden individuals participating in the initiative petitioning process violate the First Amendment. See Buckley v. Am. Constitutional Law Found., 525 U.S. 182 (1999); Meyer v. Grant, 486 U.S. 414 (1988); Delgado v. Smith, 861 F.2d 1489, 1494 (11th Cir. 1988). When state laws “discourage participation in the petition circulation process,” making it less likely that individuals will participate in the process, the speech and association engaged in during the petitioning process are reduced. See Buckley, 525 U.S. at 200. That reduction violates the First Amendment if not supported by a sufficient state interest. The 30-day requirement has the potential to seriously burden groups' petitioning efforts and to therefore reduce accompanying speech and association. Meyer, 486 U.S. at 423.
Additionally, currently in Florida Statutes, a penalty exists for a person who signs a petition form more than once. Section 104.185(1) of Florida Statutes provides that, “[a] person who knowingly signs a petition or petitions for a candidate, a minor political party, or an issue more than one time commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.” By creating a revocation process, SB 900 flies in the face of Floridians’ Constitutional right to engage in the petition process. In Smith v. Coalition to Reduce Class Size, 827 So.2d 959 (Fla. 2002), the Supreme Court of Florida stated that, “we must be careful that the legislative statute or implementing rule is necessary for ballot integrity since any restriction on the initiative process would strengthen the authority and power of the legislature and weaken the power of the initiative process…and any legislative act regulating the process should be allowed only when necessary to ensure ballot integrity.” (Emphasis added)
Furthermore, with SB 900 any signed petition that is turned in after 30 days from the date signed would be invalid, and there is no requirement that local elections officials notify voters that their petitions were thrown out. Since voters can only legally sign a petition once, thousands of voters could be disenfranchised from the process through no fault of their own. Voters who do become aware that their signature was thrown out and choose therefore to sign the petition a second time in an effort to make their signature count would still be committing a crime, since the penalty in section 104.185(1) does not tie the penalty to the validity of the signature.
Lastly, another bill passed during the 2007 Legislative Session also conflicts with SB 900. HB 537, the Elections Bill that includes the voter-verifiable paper ballot priority of yours, contains a section that also creates a petition revocation process. The section is slightly different from the revocation section in SB 900, in that HB 537 does not put a timeline on turning in petitions and its revocation process is open for 150 days from when the petition is signed, not verified. It would not be possible to apply both bills’ revocation sections. While we understand that since SB 900 passed after HB 537 that technically SB 900 would apply, we encourage you to recognize the clear confusion demonstrated by the Legislature in passing within a day of each other – two conflicting pieces of Legislation.
Based on all the above reasons, we respectfully request that you veto SB 900 and sound the voice of the people and preserve the citizen constitutional amendment process.
Sincerely,
American Cancer Society, Florida Division
Paul Hull
Vice President, Advocacy and Public Policy
Animal Rights Foundation of Florida
Heather Veleanu
Managing Director
Central Florida AFL-CIO
Debbie Booth
President
CIVIC Concern
Pamela Burch Fort
Executive Director
Clean Water Action
Kathleen E. Aterno
Florida Director
Common Cause Florida
Ben Wilcox
Executive Director
Consumer Federation of the Southeast
Walter Dartland
Director
Environment Florida
Mark Ferrulo
Executive Director
Florida ACORN
Delores Turner
State Board Chair
Florida AFL-CIO
Cindy Hall
President
Florida Chapter Sierra Club
Susie Caplowe
Governmental Affairs
Florida Consumer Action Network
Dan Hendrickson
Legislative Chair
Florida PIRG
Brad Ashwell
Legislative Advocate
Human Services Coalition
Daniella Levine
Executive Director
The Humane Society of the United States
Michael Markarian
Executive Vice President, External Affairs
League of Women Voters of Florida
Dianne Wheatley Giliotti
President
North Florida Central Labor Council
Andy Bell
President
Palm Beach-Treasure Coast AFL-CIO
Pat Emmert
President
People for the American Way Foundation
Reggie Mitchell
Florida Legal Counsel
Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE)
Kindra Muntz
President
South Florida AFL-CIO
Fred Frost
President
Space Coast AFL-CIO
West Central Florida Federation of Labor
WildLaw
Jeanne Zokovitch
Staff Attorney
50+1
Damien Filer
Founder
