ON THE BALLOT: THE TEA PARTY VOTES ON AMENDMENTS AND JUDGES

[FCTP]

CLICK HERE FOR THE PDF ABOUT CANDIDATES AND AMENDMENTS ON THE BALLOT.pdf

On October 5, 2010, the First Coast Tea Party held a Ballot Town Hall to discuss the Amendments and Judges appearing on the November 2 ballot in Duval County. The Supervisor of Elections, Jerry Holland, emceed a panel of legal experts and another panel of citizens who had performed their research on all Amendments and Judges. This event was limited in size and 114 people attended. The attendees listened to the presentations and voted on each amendment and judge. Those votes are noted below. These votes reflect the overall consensus of the attendees at the 10/5/10 FCTP Ballot Town Hall. To contact First Coast Tea Party, please go to www.fctpcommunity.org or contact us at [phone].

Information you should know:

 It takes 60% of the votes cast to pass the amendments and to 50% of the votes cast to retain a Judge.

 The language of a citizen amendment is limited to 75 words; amendments placed by the legislature are not limited in length

 To fully understand who is asking for this amendment helps you understand the "agenda" behind it. It is important to know who put the amendment on the ballot and check out the organization, individuals, etc. and their motives.

 Follow the motives and follow the money. What will this amendment cost the people and who will benefit from the amendment?

 Amendments to the Constitution will change the Constitution. In California they have passed so many amendments that the Constitution is almost a joke. And let’s take a look at California and ask ourselves, "Do we want to be them?"

 There are two organizations that have done a very good job in explaining the Amendments. One is the Collins Center at http://www.collinscenter.org/page/FL_Amend_Home and the other is James Madison Institute at http://www.jamesmadison.org/. Both have documents you can download and print out or forward to others and share the knowledge. The James Madison document will help explain some of the reasons why a Yes or No vote were made. We suggest you check out their sites and become engaged in their work. Both have some great tools and will make you a better, informed citizen activist.

 The Judges are more difficult to "judge." There was a lot of discussion about the fact some judges simply judge based on laws that relate to "auto accidents, civil disputes, etc." and you may not be able to determine if they are Constitutionally-driven. Where there was information about their "conservative" or "liberal" leanings, we had a conversation about them. The votes regarding the judges were made after a long discussion and from the eyes of many attorneys who must stand in front of them. Those votes are reflected in this document.

 We encourage you to share this document with everyone you know. We ask that you encourage everyone you know to vote on November 2nd. It is important that we secure Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for all.

[Theresa Pletcher]

Ricardo, I just looked at a sample Clay County Ballot they are the same judges.

[ricardo maxwell]

Where can I find info on the judges that will be on the Clay County Ballot?

[Debbie G]

LInk to Judge2010

http://fctpcommunity.org/group/judges2010

[Lyndee]

Forgive me if I am "Hijacking" this post but I received this today about Amendment 5 which I tried to post seperately but kept getting a error so I gave up and looked for a post about Amendments. This is important and you can bet there are bound to be other Amendments which are sponsored by Leftists and Special interest groups. I am voting NO on ALL Admendments. Each changes our Constitution until it is shredded. (I'm also voting against keeping all sitting Judges.)

U.S. News: Democrats’ Sneaky Plans in Florida Redistricting
By PETER ROFF
Posted: October 18, 2010
U.S. News & World Report

http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/10/18/Demo...


A bizarre alliance of so-called “good government groups” working with the usual suspects are trying to engineer an end run around the will of the people in Florida.

Fronted by a woman who used to be the cochair of Sen. John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign in the state, the group “Fair Districts Florida” is trying to overlay atop the existing redistricting process a series of limitations and restrictions that will make it that much easier to get the post-2000 Census remap into court.

Why? “A fair map,” meaning one favorable to the Democrats, “would probably produce another three to five Democratic [House] Districts,” the ultra-liberal National Committee for an Effective Congress’s Tom Bonior told Politico’s Ben Smith.

While not exactly “shady,” to borrow a word very much in vogue, it is nonetheless suspicious that Fair Districts Florida recently received a large cash infusion of more than $1 million, Smith reported, “most of it filtered through local groups” from “three major national Democratic allies,” all of whom hope to help Democrats win in court what they may lose at the ballot box.

All the usual suspects are there, in one form or another. One group is linked to liberal financiers George Soros and Peter Lewis. The National Education Association has given money. So have the Service Employees International Union and the pro-abortion Emily’s List operation. Even the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now wrote a check, Politico says, before it stopped being ACORN.

Using its several million dollar bankroll, Fair Districts Florida is pushing for two amendments to the state constitution that, which seemingly innocuous, would almost guarantee any new state legislative or congressional district would end up in front of some judge who would have to rule on its “fairness.”

This, in itself, is not new. It is increasingly the practice, regrettably in both parties, to short-circuit the political process by assigning to judges the responsibility for making the kinds of decisions elected officials should, and then be held accountable for doing so.

Under Florida’s Amendment 5, currently appearing on the November ballot, members of the state legislature retain the responsibility for and authority to draw state district lines but with the added caveat that “legislative districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party,” among other new requirements. The proposed Amendment 6 would apply the same standard to U.S. congressional districts.

Who makes the determination as to whether favoritism was shown? Some judge, asked to rule on a lawsuit probably filed by some aggrieved public interest group funded by a combination of union money and, no doubt, government grants.

Notice that this is being pushed in Florida, which has term limits for state legislators but is arguably a Republican state, despite the fact that Barack Obama carried it in 2008 and several of its statewide elected officials are Democrats.

It is not, however, being pushed in Massachusetts, where this seemingly sound piece of liberal public policy could be enacted quite easily.

Massachusetts, it is worth noting, has a seemingly permanent liberal Democratic majority in its legislature and, for the moment at least, has a delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives that is both all Democrat and all white, despite the 2000 Census having determined that Boston was now a majority-minority city.

It is also not being pushed in Illinois or New York, where the Democrats might just wield all the redistricting pens come January 2010.

No, the target is Florida, where the Democrats seem to think they just might be able to rewrite the constitution to achieve a political end favorable to their interests. It is not as though they are offering a nonpartisan commission to do the job or proposing that the responsibility for redistricting be shifted to a panel of retired federal judges; they are trying to keep the politics in the process, but in a way that helps them overturn the will of the electorate, which, if it wants a GOP-led state legislature, will vote one into office.

Having listened for months to “the smart set” opine that the U.S. Constitution is sacrosanct and only changeable by lawyers and judges--rather than by amendment as the founders and several of the more prominent Tea Party types running for office have suggested--it is surprising that this effort in Florida has not gotten more attention. Or maybe the people who are afraid to even discuss amending the U.S. Constitution don’t think that state constitutions, or the states themselves, are just that important anymore.

[Theresa Pletcher]

I generally do the same exact (vote "no" on all of the justices) thing and have been for years! I sincerely hope we all send enough of a message to these guys that they are accountable to someone besides themselves.

[Joanna B McDermott]

Amazing, I just had a Ponte Vedra attorney tell me the same thing, vote them all out.

[Edward Migues]

I have read many of the bloggers concerning the up or down vote on Judges. You have to excuse me on this but I personally vote no on all judges no matter what or how the vote. I am a retired police officer from Jacksonville and have first hand experiences with most of them personally. I find that most, not all are self centered and full of themselves. Excuse the french, but they usually are full of sh_t. Just like with the Taj Mahal, judges of the 1st. DCA, judges in Jacksonville have pushed their holy agenda, where they have demanded, and received the so called white elephant of a palace to sit in judgment over the mortal populace. Many times across this grand country, rule from the bench and agenda which suits their political thoughts and beliefs. My honest belief is they are nothing more then career politicians who are only interested in being voted back into their life long position's of power. Look at what has been or being done at this moment. We the people have made a statement, a statement that says WE are fed up with business as usual and DEMAND that common sense along with austerity be brought back into government. Judges, legislators, local or state, including our federal task masters need to be rained in where re-election is not a guarantee but an earned privilege, granted by those whom they supposedly represent.
I know I am preaching but I currently have come to my breaking point. Now is the time that no one can straddle the fence any longer. There is no middle ground, there are no independents, there are no votes cast on how decisions with effect only them. Now is the time to take a stand. Either you are for freedom, liberty, God and our country or you are against all that has made this a gift from God. Now it the time to wipe the counter clean and send a clear message to them, career politician that this is our country and they work for us. As said in that popular TV show the apprentice, "YOUR FIRED".

[tamara stephenson]

I tend to agree with a post on another blog about constitutional amendments merely make the state constitution cumbersome and unworkable. I plan to vote NO on all. Couple of questions about the judges: why NO on Padovano and Clarke? Also, shouldn't we be voting NO on Hawkes as apparently he is the judge who lobbied for all of the money for the "Taj Mahal" 1st DCA courthouse according to the auditors? I'm definitely voting NO on Hawkes but am on the fence about Padovano and Clarke. Any help would be appreciated as I am planning on voting early.

[FCTP]

Nellie: We were unable to find information about the school board and soil and water. So sorry. Thanks for your encouragement.

[Nellie Sue Moore]

Thank you so much for the ballot information on the Amendments and the Judges. I found this information very helpful. Keep up the good fight. God Bless America! P.S. Does the Tea Party have any information on the candidates running for School Board and Soil and Water Conservation? Thanks a bunch!