The State of the Florida Legislature
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
FCCC Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 22, 2021 CONTACT: Patrick Manderfield EMAIL: [email protected] PHONE: (850) 577-4658 Florida’s Clerks and Comptrollers Honor Legislators with 2021 Legislative Awards TALLAHASSEE, Fla.— Florida Court Clerks & Comptrollers (FCCC) announced this week the recipients of the 2021 Clerk Legislative Awards. The award recipients are: • Senate President Wilton Simpson (Florida Senate District 10) received the Legislative Champion Award • Speaker of the House Chris Sprowls (Florida House District 65) received the Legislative Champion Award • Rep. Webster Barnaby (Florida House District 27), who sponsored House Bill 903 Clerks of the Circuit Court, received the Clerk Legislative Leadership Award • Sen. Jim Boyd (Florida Senate District 21), who sponsored Senate Bill 838 Clerks of the Circuit Court, received the Clerk Legislator of the Year Award • Rep. Charles Wesley "Chuck" Clemons, Sr. (Florida House District 21), who sponsored House Bill 31 Clerks of the Court, received the Clerk Legislative Partner Award • Sen. Ed Hooper (Florida Senate District 16), who sponsored Senate Bill 382 Clerks of the Court, received the Clerk Legislative Partner Award • Rep. Tommy Gregory (Florida House District 73) received the Clerk Distinguished Advocate Award • Sen. Keith Perry (Florida Senate District 8) received the Clerk Distinguished Advocate Award This year’s Clerk Legislative Awards recognize legislative partners for their work with Florida’s Clerks of Court and Comptrollers and FCCC staff to support sound public policy and highlight their leadership during the 2021 Legislative Session in addressing Clerk priority issues and legislation. “We are extremely grateful for the support of our partners in the Florida Legislature,” said Angelina “Angel” Colonneso, Esq., Manatee County Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller and 2021-2022 FCCC President. -
Prayer Practices
Floor Action 5-145 Prayer Practices Legislatures operate with a certain element of pomp, ceremony and procedure that flavor the institution with a unique air of tradition and theatre. The mystique of the opening ceremonies and rituals help to bring order and dignity to the proceedings. One of these opening ceremonies is the offering of a prayer. Use of legislative prayer. The practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer is long- standing. The custom draws its roots from both houses of the British Parliament, which, according to noted parliamentarian Luther Cushing, from time ”immemorial” began each day with a “reading of the prayers.” In the United States, this custom has continued without interruption at the federal level since the first Congress under the Constitution (1789) and for more than a century in many states. Almost all state legislatures still use an opening prayer as part of their tradition and procedure (see table 02-5.50). In the Massachusetts Senate, a prayer is offered at the beginning of floor sessions for special occasions. Although the use of an opening prayer is standard practice, the timing of when the prayer occurs varies (see table 02-5.51). In the majority of legislative bodies, the prayer is offered after the floor session is called to order, but before the opening roll call is taken. Prayers sometimes are given before floor sessions are officially called to order; this is true in the Colorado House, Nebraska Senate and Ohio House. Many chambers vary on who delivers the prayer. Forty-seven chambers allow people other than the designated legislative chaplain or a visiting chaplain to offer the opening prayer (see table 02-5.52). -
The Legislative Lawyer a Publication of the Legal Services Staff Section (LSSS)
The Legislative Lawyer A publication of the Legal Services Staff Section (LSSS) November 2014 State News Colorado | Delaware | Florida | Indiana | Kentucky | Maryland | Michigan | Minnesota | Missouri | Ohio | Pennsylvania Texas | Virginia | West Virginia panels underneath are being repainted to match the original Colorado | Debbie Haskins stenciling. The trim colors in the chambers are also being repainted to the original colors. Eventually, they hope to take out the dropped ceilings in the chambers and restore Every bill that is introduced in the Colorado General the atrium windows that are underneath the current ceilings. Assembly must be written, edited, revised and approved Colorado built a new judicial building a few years for form by the Office of Legislative Legal Services prior ago and relocated the attorney general’s office into the to introduction. One of the steps that the office follows is new judicial building, freeing up office space in a building that a senior level attorney revises every bill draft after it is across from the State Capitol. This has led to some relo- edited by a legislative editor. Revisors look for legal issues cation of legislative staff offices and some legislators will with bill drafts, such as whether the bill conflicts with a be moving their offices to the newly vacated space. OLLS state constitutional provision or complies with any number did not move, but the State Auditor’s Office moved and of statutory provisions affecting legislation. An internal parts of the Legislative Council moved to the state audi- committee of attorneys and legislative editors met last tor’s vacated space. Musical chairs! Some larger commit- year to see if we could create better standards for revising tee room spaces in the State Capitol are being created out changes. -
Aaron Bean from Fernandina Beach
2020 2022 THE FLORIDA SENATE HANDBOOK 1 2 MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT WILTON SIMPSON President of the Senate Welcome to the Florida Senate. During this unprecedented global pandemic, the Senate has partnered with an infectious disease team at Tampa General Hospital and hired an in-house epidemiologist to develop safety protocols designed to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and keep Senators and our Senate professional staff as safe as possible. Just like our Senators and staff, you also play an important role in the legislative process. Input from various stakeholders and members of the public is critical, and the Senate is working diligently to ensure Floridians have access to their elected officials as we consider important legislation for our state. Until the COVID-19 vaccine is widely available for those outside of high-risk designation, the Senate is proceeding with care and caution, limiting in-person meetings, and observing social distancing guidelines, mask requirements, and sanitation protocols. For the 2021 Regular Session of the Florida Legislature, the Senate is working in partnership with Florida State University to reserve three remote viewing rooms at the Leon County Civic Center, which provide the opportunity for members of the public to view meetings and virtually address Senate committees in a safe, socially distant manner. We also encourage you to stay involved by viewing all Senate meetings and floor sittings on our website and contacting your local Senator with suggestions, ideas, and feedback. I look forward to the day when we can all be together again walking the halls and chambers where Florida's citizen-legislators have served for generations. -
Michael J. Dl'eikorn Case No.: FEC 14-138
STAIE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA ELECTIONS COMMISSION In Re: Michael J. Dl'eikorn Case No.: FEC 14-138 TO: Michael l Dreikom Fidel Balan 5697 Bay Point Road 8300 Silver Birch Way Bokeelia, FL 33922 Lehigh Acres, FL 33971 NOTICE OF HEARING (INFORMAL HEARING) A hearing will be held in this case before the Florida Elections Commission on August 26, 2015, at 8:30 am, or as soon thereafter as the parties can be heard, at the following location: Seuate Oflice Buildfog, Room 110-S, 404 South Monroe Street, I allahassee, FL 32399. Failme to appear in accordance with this notice will constitute a waiver of your right to participate in the hearing Continuances will be granted only upon a showing of good cause This hearing will be conducted pursuant to Section 106..25, Florida Statutes, which governs your participation as follows: If you are the Respondent, you may attend the hearing, and you or your attorney will have 5 minutes to present your case to the Commission However, some cases (including those in which consent orders or recommendations for no probable cause are being considered) may be decided by an en masse vote and, unless you request to be heard or the Commission requests that your case be considered separately on the day of the hearing, your case will not be individually heard. If you are the Complainant, you may attend the hearing, but you will not be permitted to address the Commission. In addition, some cases (including those in which consent orders or recommendations for no probable cause are being considered) may be decided by an en masse -
Initial Brief of League of Women Voters
IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA ______________________________ ) IN RE: JOINT RESOLUTION ) OF LEGISLATIVE ) CASE NO. SC12-460 APPORTIONMENT ) ______________________________ ) BRIEF OF THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA, THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA, AND COMMON CAUSE FLORIDA IN OPPOSITION TO THE LEGISLATURE’S JOINT RESOLUTION OF LEGISLATIVE APPORTIONMENT Ronald G. Meyer Paul M. Smith* Florida Bar No. 0148248 [email protected] MEYER, BROOKS, DEMMA AND Michael B. DeSanctis* BLOHM P.A. [email protected] 131 North Gadsden Street Jessica Ring Amunson * Post Office Box 1547 [email protected] Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Kristen M. Rogers* Telephone: (850) 878-5212 [email protected] *Pro hac vice pending J. Gerald Hebert* JENNER & BLOCK, LLP [email protected] 1099 New York Ave NW, Suite 900 *Pro hac vice pending Washington, DC 20001 191 Somervelle Street, #415 Telephone: (202) 639-6000 Alexandria, VA 22304 Telephone: (703) 628-4673 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CITATIONS ......................................................................................... ii STATEMENT OF INTEREST .................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 2 STATEMENT OF CASE AND FACTS ................................................................... 4 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................................................................. 8 ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................ -
Omnibus Budget Bills and the Covert Dismantling of Canadian Democracy
Omnibus Budget Bills and the Covert Dismantling of Canadian Democracy by Jacqueline Kotyk supervised by Dr. Dayna Scott A Major Project submitted to the Faculty of Environmental Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Environmental Studies, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada July 31, 2017 1 Foreword: My major project, which is a study on the rise of omnibus budget bills in Canadian Parliament, supports my learning objectives and the curriculum developed in my plan of study in a number of ways. Initially, and as expounded upon in my major paper proposal, this project was intended to aid in my understanding of the role of law in extractive capitalism as the bills were linked to deregulation of extractive industries. In addition, the bills were at once decried as a subversion of Canadian democracy and also lawful, and thus I understood that an examination of the bills would assist me in understanding the manner in which law mediates power in the Canadian state. I further wanted to focus on legislative process to comprehend potential points of resistance in the Canadian Parliamentary regime. Upon the completion of this project, I enhanced my understanding on the above learning objectives and much more. This project on omnibus budget bills also brought with it a focused examination of the construction of the neoliberal political project and its influence on power relations within extractive capitalism. In addition, I gained knowledge of the integral role of law reform in re-structuring capitalist social relations such that they enhance the interests of the economic elites. -
MARCH —APRIL 1975 YEARBOOK EDITION Contents NO
PUBLISHED — BY THE FLORIDA SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION F IRST I INE OF DEFENSE IN LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT MARCH —APRIL 1975 YEARBOOK EDITION Contents NO. 1 MARCH-APRIL, 1975 VOLUME 19, Sheriffs Association Officers and Directors Directory of County Officials . 40 Editor, Carl Stauffer Executive Director, Florida Sheriffs Association Florida's Government Directory of State Agencies 16 Associate Editor, Al Hammock Executive Branch .. 10 Judicial Branch .. 30 Art Director, Frank J.Jones Legislative Branch .. 19 State Government Chart 8 Florida's Men In Washington . 35 THE SHERIFF'S STAR is published monthly during January, February, May, June, September and October, and bi-monthly Public Service Commission 15 during March and April, July and August, November and De- cember, by the Florida Sheriffs Association, a non-profit cor- Sheriffs' Telephone Numbers poration, P. O. Box 1487, Tallahassee, Florida 32302 (street and Addresses . ....... Inside Back Cover address, 1020 E. Lafayette St.). The subscription rate is $6 per year. Second class postage paid at Tallahassee, Florida and ad- ditional mailing offices. Presidents Message Don't be misled by our angry outbursts In recent months, Sheriffs have been openly critical of num- erous agencies and individuals in the criminal justice system. This criticism has been reported extensively by the news media, and it is also evident in this issue of THE SHERIFF'S STAR. We have been getting a lot of things off our chests. We have given vent to our frustrations, and, in some cases, our hostili- ties. We have benefited in the same way that the father admin- istering a spanking sometimes benefits more than the child re- ceiving the spanking. -
8Th Grade Social Studies Lesson 3
8th Grade Social Studies Lesson 3 Students will be reading a graphic text about the Compromise of 1850. They will then take a 10 question reading comprehension quiz over the graphic text. (8.1.24) During this lesson students will demonstrate their mastery of the following learning targets; ● Identify the causes and effects of events leading to the Civil War.(Compromise of 1850) During the lesson students will know they have mastered those learning targets because they are able to show they have fulfilled the following Success Criteria; ● Identify the causes and effects of events leading to the Civil War.(Compromise of 1850) ○ I can identify how the Compromise of 1850 led to the Civil War Summary: Students will read a graphic text about the Compromise of 1850 and answer 10 questions about the text. Directions: 1. Step 1 - Read the following graphic text https://drive.google.com/file/d/1--fa6zgt5XOSXE4p_P4eZKLPmDuUvUaw/view?usp=sha ring 2. Step 2 - Complete the following quiz over the Compromise of 1850 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-MGyX0xXSLlEkPRSWBW6-lFXvh3MOB6S Resources: Text - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1--fa6zgt5XOSXE4p_P4eZKLPmDuUvUaw/view?usp=sharing Quiz - https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-MGyX0xXSLlEkPRSWBW6-lFXvh3MOB6S In 1846, Polk gains the Oregon territory. More future northern free states. some panic for the south. Then Polk's war with Mexico gains an even greater amount of land that could potentially become southern slave states. Wait a minute, say northern democrats who oppose the spread of slavery to any more of the lands belonging to the United States. -
Immigrant Policy Project August 6, 2012 2012 Immigration-Related
Immigrant Policy Project August 6, 2012 2012 Immigration-Related Laws and Resolutions in the States (January 1 – June 30, 2012) Overview: In 2012, the introduction and enactment of immigration bills and resolutions in the states dropped markedly from previous years. Legislators found that state budget gaps and redistricting maps took priority, consuming much of the legislative schedule. Perhaps more significant, state lawmakers cited pending litigation on states’ authority to enforce immigration laws as further reason to postpone action. This summer’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Arizona v. United States upheld only one of the four state provisions challenged by the U.S. Department of Justice. That provision allows law enforcement officers to inquire about a person’s immigration status during a lawful stop. In 2011, five states enacted legislation similar to Arizona’s: Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah. The lower courts have either partially or wholly enjoined these statutes. Still pending in Arizona is a class action lawsuit to test additional constitutional questions not considered in Arizona v. United States. These include: the Fifth Amendment right to due process, First Amendment right to free speech and 14th Amendment right to equal protection. Also pending are complaints filed by the federal government against immigration enforcement laws enacted in 2011 in Alabama, South Carolina and Utah. Report Highlights State lawmakers in 46 states and the District of Columbia introduced 948 bills and resolutions related to immigrants and refugees from Jan. 1 to June 30, 2012. This is a 40-percent drop from the peak of 1,592 in the first half of 2011. -
Chart of Other States' Enacted Legislation.Xlsx
APPENDIX B: CHART OF ENACTED LEGISLATION IN OTHER STATES State Type of Legislation Summary Adopts the policy and procedure of the Legislative Council, prohibiting sexual harassment by members, officers, employees, lobbyists and other persons working in the legislature, as the sexual harassment policy of the Al. Senate. Alabama Senate Resolution 51 Policy specifies “touching a person’s body, hair or clothing or standing to close to, brushing up against or cornering a person,” and unwelcome and personally offensive behavior as prohibited. Prohibits a non-disclosure agreement from barring a party from responding to a peace officer or prosecutor’s inquiry or making a HB 2020 statement in a criminal proceeding in relation to an alleged violation of a sexual offense or obscenity under the Criminal Code. Arizona Expels Rep. Don Shooter from the House of Reps following an investigation by bipartisan team and special counsel found credible House Resolution 2003 evidence that he violated the House policy prohibiting sexual harassment and pattern of conduct dishonorable and unbecoming a member Creates the Legislative Employee Whistleblower Protection Act establishing criminal and civil protections for employees in the event AB 403 they are retaliated against for making a good faith allegation against a member or staffer for violating any law, including sexual harassment or violating a legislative code of conduct. Requires all publicly traded companies filing incorporation letters with the Secretary of State in California to have at least one woman on their SB 826 board by the close of 2019 and increase the number to at least 2 females on its board of directors by the end of 2021. -
From the Omnibus Act of 1988 to the Trade Act of 2002
AMERICAN TRADE POLITICS: From the Omnibus Act of 1988 To The Trade Act of 2002 Kent Hughes Director, Project on America and the Global Economy Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars A paper prepared for presentation at the Congress Project/Project on America and the Global Economy seminar on “Congress and Trade Policy” at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, November 17, 2003 Kent Hughes, Project on America and the Global Economy 2 Introduction: In 1988, the Congress passed the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 with broad bipartisan support. Unlike most post-World War II trade legislation, the Omnibus Act originated with the Congress rather than with a proposal from the Administration. Despite continuing Administration objections, final passage came in 1988 by wide margins in both the House and the Senate. In addition to a comprehensive competitiveness or productivity growth strategy, the Omnibus Act included negotiating objectives and fast track authority. Under fast track procedures, the Congress agreed to an up or down vote on future trade agreements without the possibility of adding any amendments. Neither the fast track procedures nor the bill’s negotiating objectives were particularly controversial at the time. Fast track authority (for completing negotiations) lapsed on June 1, 1993. President Clinton unsuccessfully sought to renew fast track authority in 1997. He tried again in 1998 only to lose decisively in the House of Representatives. In 2001, a new Administration made securing Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), a new name for fast track, an early Administration priority. Yet despite a newly elected Republican President, George W.