A group that is intent on destroying our bears, panthers, manatees and every piece of green we have in our state. It’s also quite obvious that RIck is ruled by the Koch brothers because his agenda is their agenda. Not ours.
Last year we saw an incredible dysfunctional Florida legislature and the will of the people even for little things was just totally ignored. Like we didn’t exist.
They really don’t care. Not Rick Scott nor the people who represent you.
“AFP is extremely disappointed in leaders in Florida suggesting that the Sunshine State should create a health insurance exchange” said Slade O’Brien, AFP’s Florida State Director. “An exchange will increase insurance premiums on consumers and taxes on hardworking families. Florida’s best intentions will be masked by the federal government’s onerous requirements.”
“Americans for Prosperity, the free-market advocacy group financed by the billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch, is going on the attack.
The group sent mail ads Monday to the districts of Senate President Andy Gardiner, R-Orlando, and 24 other senators over their support for a plan to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare.
“The Florida Senate continues to move forward on a plan to give good people bad coverage,” the mailer states.
AFP sent the mailers to the districts of senators who voted for the Medicaid expansion plan in committee. Gardiner, who is vice president of external affairs at Orlando Health, doesn’t sit on any committee as Senate President, but pushed expansion from the onset of the legislative session.”
“The heated race for governor in the Sunshine State is just around the corner, and after throwing his tantrum on national television, Rick Scott needs something of a miracle to win reelection. Luckily for Scott, he’s got the support of the billionaire Koch brothers and their extensive political network: Koch Industries has made large contributions to Scott’s campaign, and the Kochs’ primary political arm, Americans For Prosperity, has put more than 40 paid staffers on the ground in the Sunshine State.
Scott’s ties to the Koch brothers go back a ways. In 2013, Scott spoke at Americans For Prosperity’s “Defending the American Dream Summit” in Orlando the very same week that he skipped his own three-day education summit, a stark juxtaposition of priorities that drew this rebuke from Tampa Bay Times:
“Unless he’s worried about his base or the lingering threat of a primary challenge, it baffles us that Scott – who couldn’t find time to attend any of a three-day education summit he called himself – would find the time to speak at the AFP “Defending the American Dream Summit”… Maybe he hopes the Koch brothers, who founded AFP, will show some love to Scott’s Let’s Get to Work Committee.”
“This year, AFP’s annual summit was hosted in Texas, and Scott’s fellow Republican governor and friend Rick Perry joked about razzing him because the Texas summit was better attended than Scott’s Orlando event. Perry recalled, “Rick Scott always tries to one-up me, so you know, he was the first to call me and say ‘Hey, we got Americans for Prosperity, what’d you get?’”
Of course Scott called Perry to brag about his support from the Koch brothers. And of course the Koch brothers support Rick Scott, they share the same agenda – opposition to raising the minimum wage, denying the science of climate change, refusing to expand Medicaid. It’s a match made in heaven.
When Floridians go to the polls on Tuesday, they should bear this in mind. Rick Scott is the special interests governor. The Koch brothers are just one of his many interests.”
Florida legislators file bills that would prevent communities from regulating fracking
Posted By Erin Sullivan on Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:45 AM
“On Sept. 17, the League of Women Voters of Florida held a town hall on fracking. The event, which featured speakers from both pro- and anti-fracking factions, was well-attended by people concerned about the idea that utility companies are eyeing our state as fracking’s new frontier.
What better time, then, for two state legislators to quietly file pro-fracking bills, while so many activists were occupied?
On Sept. 17, Sen. Garrett Richter, R-Naples, introduced SB 318 (aka, “Regulation of Oil and Gas Resources”). The bill summary is completely blunt about what it’s proposing: “Preempting the regulation of all matters relating to the exploration, development, production, processing, storage, and transportation of oil and gas.” Not only that, if a municipality has already decided that it does not wish to allow fracking within its jurisdiction, this bill would declare “existing ordinances and regulations relating thereto void.” The bill would provide an exception for certain zoning ordinances (it doesn’t say which zoning ordinances, but we like to think that it would at least respect your right to not have fracking companies set up shop in your residentially zoned backyard) but only if those ordinances were in place before Jan. 1, 2015. Interestingly, the bill doesn’t contain the word fracking anywhere in its text – nor does it contain the words “hydraulic fracturing.” Instead, it refers to fracking as the very innocuous-sounding practice of “high-pressure well stimulation.”
Meanwhile, over in the House, Rep. Ray Wesley Rodriques, R-Fort Myers, filed a bill the same day that would do essentially the same thing as SB 318. Rodrigues’ bill, HB 191, declares that it’s the state’s job to regulate all things relating to the oil and gas industry, “to the exclusion of all existing and future ordinances or regulations relating thereto adopted by any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state. Any such existing ordinance or regulation is void. A county or municipality may, however, enforce an existing zoning ordinance adopted before January 1, 2015, if the ordinance is otherwise valid.”
Sen. Darren Soto, D-Orlando, is one of the legislators leading the charge against fracking – he’s put forward a bill for the 2016 session that would ban fracking in the state completely: “We have a very unique geology here,” he says, pointing out that the fragile limestone bed beneath our soil would not be able to withstand the practice of shooting chemicals into it at high pressure. “Our geology does not allow for fracking to be done safely.”
Soto predicts that these pro-fracking bills will likely “sail through the House,” but that there will be a battle in the Senate. Soto says that if people do care about how fracking could impact the state, or about the state’s attempt to pre-empt home rule, they should contact their legislators. “We need all the help we can get from Floridians across the state,” he says. “We’d love support for the ban. Other states have done it. New York did it last year, so it’s not like it can’t happen here.”
If these bills pass, he says, “there would be no sanctuary against this in any county in the state. … it’s concerning, to say the least.”
Something similar happened recently in Texas. The small city of Denton, Texas banned fracking within its borders in late 2014. Less than six months later, the state of Texas signed a bill into law that banned any bans on fracking, nullifying Denton’s law. A story in the Dallas Morning News pointed out that “numerous studies” have tied fracking to earthquakes, and here has been a marked increase in seismic activity in the Dallas area recently. On Sept. 21, an earthquake that measured 2.6 M on the Richter scale shook the city. The San Antonio Current says it was the “more powerful than any of the other multiple earthquakes that hit the area this year.”
Although the U.S. Geological Survey has said that the cause of recent quakes in Dallas is not clear, a study released in May by Southern Methodist University concluded that stresses caused by “oil and gas activity” in the area are likely contributors.
“That was the message from a press conference held Monday afternoon in St. Petersburg, as state Representatives Dwight Dudley (D-St. Petersburg), Jose Javier Rodriguez (D-Miami), and Amanda Murphy (D-New Port Richey) spoke out against a decision last week by the Florida Public Service Commission that would allow Florida Power & Light to collect up to $500 million per year from customers to further invest ratepayer money in natural-gas production. FP&L has roughly 4.6 million customers, but none in the Tampa Bay area (where Duke Energy and TECO are the main providers).
“Consumers are getting screwed again,” Dudley said in a phone call with Florida Politics late Monday afternoon. “A five-member panel of unelected people decide they’re going to allow this huge corporation get $500 million a year from ratepayers to subsidize and pay for fracking – drilling exploration and production of natural gas and oil,” he said with obvious disdain, adding, “It’s a staggering ripoff.”
More unelected people stealing thing from us.
Fracking is not happening right now in Florida. In late April, a proposal by Naples Republican state Senator Garrett Richter that would put “responsible regulations” in place for fracking failed to advance.
What’s it to him?
Our savings BTW will be 2 bucks a year. We can buy what two cucumbers with that. I can’t even buy the ingredients for my smoothie with that (cucumber, cantaloupe, almond milk, local honey and ice cubes). FPL wants 500 million dollars from you and can’t even buy you a smoothie.
Drilling has come under increased scrutiny in the past year, partly because the Collier-Hogan well, south of Lake Trafford, was fracked at the end of 2013.
Richter’s bill (SB 1468) defines the process as a “well intervention performed by injecting more than 100,000 gallons of fluids into a rock formation at high pressure” to create fractures to increase production at an oil or gas well.
He said the bill was crafted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, with input from other stakeholders including Collier County and the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
Dee Ann Miller, a spokeswoman for the DEP, said the agency collaborated with Richter on the language of the bill but could not confirm if it would suggest changes or push for its passage.”
You can go on the link and read the rest. He said. She said.
But here is deal. We want no fracking. Just one more thing we do not need here.
My county Martin County said a big fat no to fracking.
My friend and tireless advocate for the water Merilee Malwitz-Jipson came to town. ( Where was I?)
The vote was unanimous and unequivocal, with Palm City, and Indiantown Commisioner John Haddox leading the way with the motion to sign a state-wide ban on fracking.
The worst oil price rout since 1986 is beginning to claim victims in the shale oil patch, and now its every man for himself.
Investors in $158.2 million of Goodrich Petroleum Corp.’s debt agreed to take 47 cents on the dollar in exchange for stock warrants for some note holders and a lien on Goodrich’s oil acreage, according to a company statement today…
“In the industry it’s called ‘getting primed,’” said Spencer Cutter, a credit analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence. “It’s every man for himself. They’re trying to get in and get exchanged, and if you can’t you’re getting left out in the cold.”
Investors in shale oil frackers like Goodrich aren’t the only ones writing off huge losses.
Earlier this month, Halcon paid about 65 cents on the dollar to investors in $1.57 billion of the company’s debt, in exchange for being third in line to get paid if the company fails… “The bubble is bursting,” Cutter said. “And if oil stays where it is, the worst is yet to come.”
With creditors of fracking companies taking huge losses on their investments, and with more losses coming, it isn’t surprising that frackers have been basically locked out of the bond market, and regulators are worried that banks are overexposed.
On one side are the bankers who have been grappling with the plunge in oil prices and the need to shore up billions of dollars in credit extended to the energy industry. On the other are regulators eager to prevent another financial crisis while not knowing what it might be. Caught in the middle are the small- and medium-size exploration and production companies that rely on credit lines that use their energy reserves as collateral.”
So it very interesting that a person who was prescient of bank is all for fracking.
So again as happened last year there are people in our legislature that say they are for local control. They tell that to you when they are running. “I’m for you!”
Here is a trailer for program that at UCF. It’s called Booktalk. My son was really involved with the project. It was a program that made trailers from books and then showed them to kids so they would get interested in reading. The two people in opening are my son Adam and Dr Kenny.
“The City of Ember is a post-apocalypticscience fiction novel by Jeanne DuPrau that was published in 2003. Similar to Suzanne Martel‘s The City Under Ground published in 1963 and Helen Mary Hoover‘s This Time of Darkness published in 1980, the story is about Ember, an underground city threatened by aging infrastructure. The young protagonist, Lina Mayfleet, and her friend, Doon Harrow (the second protagonist), follow clues left behind by the original builders of the City of Ember, to safety in the outside world.”
Every time I thing about electricity I think about this trailer. I think about the darkness and I think about the light. Then I think about the sunshine that is completely devoid in the State of Florida.
At about 1:07 “I’m your man!” That’s what I hear when people who do not have our best interests at heart do bad things. Then he says “it’s alright!”
Will they save ember or will the city be lost in darkness forever?
Harvard Law School’s Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics is out with a fascinating new report measuring legal and illegal corruption in American states, and Florida does not fare particularly well.
Illegal corruption is “moderately common” in Florida’s executive branch.
Illegal corruption is “very common” in the state’s legislative branch.
No state has a high ranking for illegal corruption in its judiciary.
When it comes to “legal” corruption, Florida falls into the “very common” category in both the executive and legislative branches.
Florida is also listed as one of America’s most corrupt states, along with Arizona, California, Kentucky, Alabama, Illinois, New Jersey, Georgia, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Rhode Island, and Texas.
The Safra Center compiled its corruption rankings in part by surveying news reporters covering state politics across the country, in addition to the investigative reporters covering issues related to corruption during the first half of 2014.
A few weeks ago I put out a call for books that people thought would be good for our Florida Legislators to read. I got a great response. Thank you all so much. I put up my poll. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for the 27 people who cared and took the time to vote.
I’ve done this before. Sent books that I thought was important. Not just to politicians but to friends. I think I have bought at least 50 copies of my favorite book “The Art of Racing in the Rain.”
I can tell you that people from both sides that have never read “The Swamp.” Many have not even heard “Paving Paradise.” Most can’t be bothered. They just don’t want to hear about it.
Our elected officials need to be bothered. They need to read.
If you don’t have time put it in your bathroom and read a little everyday.
Why? Because reading matters. It really does.
“New technology allows us to see the living brain at work. Reading can help unlock remarkable powers. Reading builds new connections in the brain which in turn helps to create stepping stones to understand other people’s worlds.
A good book literally has the power to change you.”
We should be asking the candidates what was the last five books they read. Take note question askers.
I forgot one book and I apologize to fellow WordPress blogger and future Martin County Commissioner Jacqui Thurlow-Lippisch. I totally forgot The RiverKids Workbook. Yikes. So I’m adding it in. Because like me you guys forgot also.
“In an award-winning newspaper series, two investigative reporters from the St. Petersburg Times chronicled how federal rules meant to protect the nation’s wetlands were more illusion than law. Now, that series has been expanded into a book, delving into how we got to this point, starting with land speculators making waterfront property out of sand dredged from the bottom of the ocean. Now, read how the nation’s wetlands protections were formed in clashes between developers, bureaucrats, judges, activists and con artists over Florida swamps.”
This is an exhaustive, timely and devastating account of the destruction of Florida’s wetlands, and the disgraceful collusion of government at all levels. It’s an important book that should be read by every voter, every taxpayer, every parent, every Floridian who cares about saving what’s left of this precious place.” — Carl Hiaasen
I am amazed, horrified and delighted that you wrote Paving Paradise! You have uncovered the perfidy that we always knew existed … You have named the key figures that led to the loss of thousands of acres of Florida wetlands.” —Nathaniel Reed
“The Everglades: River of Grass is a non-fiction book written by Marjory Stoneman Douglas in 1947. Published the same year as the formal opening of Everglades National Park, the book was a call to attention about the degrading quality of life in the Everglades and remains an influential book on nature conservation as well as a reference for information on South Florida.
Douglas was a freelance writer who submitted stories to magazines throughout the 1920s, ’30s and ’40s. Her friend Hervey Allen was an editor at Rinehart, responsible for the Rivers of America Series. Allen asked her to write a story about the Miami River, but Douglas did not find it very interesting, calling it only “an inch long”. She began learning more about the Miami River though, and in her research, she instead suggested to her editor to write a story about the Everglades. Douglas spent five years researching the Everglades, consulting with Garald Parker of the US Geological Survey, who was studying the Everglades hydrology systems, and eventually wrote nearly 40 papers on the ecosystems in the Everglades.
The Quarterly Review of Biology reviewed the book and commented on Douglas’ “convincing evidence” in her assertion that the Everglades are a river instead of a swamp, and declared that “it is hoped that this excellent account of the area and its history may provide the needed stimulus for the establishment of an intelligent conservation program for the entire Everglades.”
“The Everglades was once reviled as a liquid wasteland, and Americans dreamed of draining it. Now it is revered as a national treasure, and Americans have launched the largest environmental project in history to try to save it.
The Swamp is the stunning story of the destruction and possible resurrection of the Everglades, the saga of man’s abuse of nature in southern Florida and his unprecedented efforts to make amends. Michael Grunwald, a prize-winning national reporter for The Washington Post, takes readers on a riveting journey from the Ice Ages to the present, illuminating the natural, social and political history of one of America’s most beguiling but least understood patches of land.
The Everglades was America’s last frontier, a wild country long after the West was won. Grunwald chronicles how a series of visionaries tried to drain and “reclaim” it, and how Mother Nature refused to bend to their will; in the most harrowing tale, a 1928 hurricane drowned 2,500 people in the Everglades. But the Army Corps of Engineers finally tamed the beast with levees and canals, converting half the Everglades into sprawling suburbs and sugar plantations. And though the southern Everglades was preserved as a national park, it soon deteriorated into an ecological mess. The River of Grass stopped flowing, and 90 percent of its wading birds vanished.
Now America wants its swamp back. Grunwald shows how a new breed of visionaries transformed Everglades politics, producing the $8 billion rescue plan. That plan is already the blueprint for a new worldwide era of ecosystem restoration. And this book is a cautionary tale for that era. Through gripping narrative and dogged reporting, Grunwald shows how the Everglades is still threatened by the same hubris, greed and well-intentioned folly that led to its decline. ”
“Long before “going green” was mainstream, Dr. Seuss’s Lorax spoke for the trees and warned of the dangers of disrespecting the environment. In this cautionary rhyming tale, we learn of the Once-ler, who came across a valley of Truffula Trees and Brown Bar-ba-loots (“frisking about in their Bar-ba-loot suits as they played in the shade and ate Truffula Fruits”), and how his harvesting of the tufted trees changed the landscape forever. With the release of the blockbuster film version, the Lorax and his classic tale have educated a new generation of young readers not only about the importance of seeing the beauty in the world around us, but also about our responsibility to protect it.”
Between roughly 25 and 31 degrees north latitude, a combination of flat topography, poor soils, and limited surface water produce deserts nearly everywhere on earth. In Florida, however, these conditions support a lavish biota, more diverse than that of any other state east of the Mississippi.
In this first comprehensive guide to the state’s natural resources in sixty years, thirty top scholars describe the character, relationships, and importance of Florida’s ecosystems, the organisms that inhabit them, the forces that maintain them, and the agents that threaten them. From pine flatwoods to coral reef, Ecosystems of Florida provides a detailed, comprehensive, authoritative account of the peninsular state’s complex, fragile environments.
In this book a master scientist tells the story of how life on earth evolved. Edward O. Wilson eloquently describes how the species of the world became diverse and why that diversity is threatened today as never before. A great spasm of extinction — the disappearance of whole species — is occurring now, caused this time entirely by humans. Unlike the deterioration of the physical environment, which can be halted, the loss of biodiversity is a far more complex problem — and it is irreversible. Defining a new environmental ethic, Wilson explains why we must rescue whole ecosystems, not only individual species. He calls for an end to conservation versus development arguments, and he outlines the massive shift in priorities needed to address this challenge. No writer, no scientist, is more qualified than Edward O. Wilson to describe, as he does here, the grandeur of evolution and what is at stake. “Engaging and nontechnical prose. . . . Prodigious erudition. . . . Original and fascinating insights.” — John Terborgh, New York Review of Books, front page review “Eloquent. . . . A profound and enduring contribution.” — Alan Burdick, Audubon
My Florida by Ernie Lyons
Publications of books “My Florida” and “The Last Cracker Barrel,” compilations of Mr Lyons columns from the Stuart News, can be purchased at Stuart Heritage Museum, 161 SW Flagler Avenue, Stuart, FL.(http://www.stuartheritagemuseum.com)
Here is a blogpost about Ernie Lyons that could simply be emailed.
A Land Remembered focuses on the fictional story of the MacIveys, who migrated from Georgia into Florida in the mid-19th century. After settling, this family struggles to survive in the harsh environment. First they scratch a living from the land and then learn to round up wild cattle and drive them to Punta Rassa to ship to Cuba. Over three generations, they amass more holdings and money, and move further from their connection to the native, untamed land.
I love this book and I’m including it because it was geared towards a second grader. It simply is a marvelous accomplishment and enjoyable to read. I sent my niece’s in Colorado a copy each because I want them to know about what goes on here at Aunty Cyndi’s house.
When I call them on the phone they asked me “How is Barney?” then “How are the Dolphins?” then “How are you?”
“The first verse of the River Kidz’ Song, written by River Mom, Nicole Mader, and the River Kidz goes:
“The River Kidz are here; Our mission’s quite clear; We love our river and ALL its critters; Let’s hold it all dear…”
The rest of this wonderful song can be found on page 36 of the new workbook below.
After over a year of creative preparation, and community collaboration, the River Kidz’ 2nd Edition Workbook is here!”
This is from Jacqui’s blog:
”
The really cool thing about this workbook is that it was written “by kids for kids,” (Jensen Beach High School students for elementary students). The high school students named the main character of the book after Marty Baum, our Indian Riverkeeper. The students had met Mr Baum in their classroom (of Mrs Crystal Lucas) along with other presenters and field trip guides like the Army Corp of Engineers, South Florida Water Management District, and politicians speaking on the subject…
The books will be going into all second grade public school classrooms and many private school classrooms beginning in February of 2015. Teacher training will be underway this February at the Environmental Studies Center in Jensen.
River Kidz will make the booklet available to everyone. Some will be given away, and some will be used to raise money at five dollars a booklet. To purchase the booklets, please contact Olivia Sala, administrative assistant for the Rivers Coalition at olivia@riverscoalition.org —-Numbers are limited.
In closing, enjoy the workbook and thank you to Martin County, Superintendent, Laurie J. Gaylord for encouraging the workbook and for her beautiful letter in the front of the booklet. Thank you to Martin County School Science Leader, Valerie Gaylord; teacher, Mrs Crystal Lucas; Mom, Mrs Nicole Mader; Sewall’s Point artist, Ms Julia Kelly; Southeastern Printing’s Bluewater Editions’ manager and River Dad, Jason Leonard; to River Kidz founders Evie Flaugh and Naia Mader, now 14/13; years old–they were 10 and 9 when this started,—- to the Knoph Foundation, and the Garden Club of Stuart, and to the hundreds of kids, parents, students, businesses, politicians, state and federal agencies, and especially to Southeastern Printing and the Mader Family who made this concept a reality through education, participation.”
So that’s it. I’m going for the top five. Also if you have read any of these books please feel free to write a review and I’ll post it.
“Seems Florida’s Palm Beach County is considering a mandatory spay/neuter law, and some kind constituent sent each of the county commissioners, the ones who’ll be voting on the issue, a copy of Nathan Winograd’s “Redemption: The Myth of Pet Overpopulation and the No Kill Revolution in America” to assist them in making this decision that will impact the lives of dogs, cats, and people in their county.
Now it seems that one of the commissioners, Burt Aaronson, has no plans to read the book, saying, “If people want me to read something, they could have enclosed a letter: ‘We’d like you to read this, we are giving it to you as a gift.’”
Wow, commissioner, you’re a tough guy to do a favor for. It wasn’t enough that this constituent purchased the book and sent it to you, you wanted them to schmooze you up, too?”
True Story. That person was me.
At the time and still today there are many pets that die at Palm Beach County Animal Care and Control. We were trying to do a few things. We were trying to create a village of knowledgeable people in all aspects dog and cat to cut down the death of the animals which is atrocious. We had a big, diverse circle of friends.
This was probably the last public event I ever did in rescue. Most of commissioners were corrupt. The Palm Beach Post was awful. I hold them just as responsible as the commissioners.
One day I will write more but the big issue for me was that my friends the veterinarians are the one’s that sold the licenses. I did not want this to come between them and their clients.
Really deserves a full blog post because it is an interesting story.
One person, Bob Kanjian, read the book. He totally got it. I think if I asked him today he would say this book changed his life. I am forever grateful to him for reading and understanding.
What I found out this past winter is our Supermajority Florida Legislators don’t read books apparently. They have no idea how the water works, what the Everglades need. They take their order’s from Tallahassee. Very Scary. Apparently you go there with goodness in your heart and you come back a scoundrel. Anything goes. Everything went out the window.
I have written that they need to be credentialed. I don’t think it’s too much to ask them to do what I have to do my job as a nurse.
They need to read and there needs to be a quiz.
I would really like a lot of people to vote so I can honestly say ” We had a poll and lots of people voted and we think it’s important for you to read and understand these books.
I promise I’ll write a note. I’d hate for Burt Aaronson to come back and haunt me.
Poll: Florida Legislators reading list. Yes there will be a quiz.
Thanks to everyone that gave me such good suggestions. I have to create a poll so I’m just doing environmental books. So please vote so we can have the top five books and we’ll take it from there.
Docs VS Glocs. Gag me. Oh ya. you did. Welcome to loony bin coming to state near you.
I was going to write this nice blog about Jensen Beach or the Treasure Coast. Then this happened. I was looking around the twittersphere and I found this.
Only in Florida do our legislators think it ok to kill bears but want to jail you for feeding them. (You really shouldn’t feed them) and it’s ok for health care workers not to ask people if they have a gun.
That’s just for now because it could be coming to a state near you so listen up!
As I have said before this is a long list of questions that we ask as mandated by Medicare, Medicaid, JCAHO and AHCA and all those other governing bodies that tell us what we have to ask that have been rolled up in lovely computer program and I don’t care what program you have they all ask the same questions. Yes its a run on sentence.
Sue me. Because that’s whats going happen if there is a gun in the house and someone gets hurt.
How do you mitigate this? Who signed this bill. I want names.
Because clearly it wasn’t a person who even understands how medicine works and what we are REQUIRED TO DO. A firearm is more than a gun. A weapon is more than a gun. A person could have big knives. Do you care about the big knives? Nooooo Do they care about the giant bottles of medicine the person could OD on? No. All they care about it the guns. They don’t care about the people.
They took this story and they ran with it. This girl takes her kid to the pediatrician in Ocala. He asked about guns which is part of his assessment ( again thousands of questions) She goes off. No one questions the mental health of a person going off in a doctor’s office. The NRA certainly does not care about mental health. They just care about gun sales.
I know this story because I personally spoke to the the representative sponsoring this in the first place. I totally understood where he was coming from but instead of doing something about the issue like helping the poor girl that went off he created a lot of havoc for a lot of people. Especially those of us that go to people’s houses to take care of them.
Who is protecting me? No one. I have no protection. I could get shot tomorrow and it would be too bad for me.
The big issue was the doctor told her not to come back. No reason to rehash. Why? Because this is loony land. Run by loonies with loony ideas.
He told her to not come back because she could not control herself in his office. Not because she owned a gun. The office is in Ocala.
For some reason this just wreaked havoc in the brains of some Republican Lawmakers who don’t understand this goes on all the time for a variety of reasons. Doctor’s do not have time for people going off in their offices. Sometimes this is recognized as depression and many times if the person is elderly a psych home health nurse like myself is ordered to assess the situation and make recommendations.
No one likes to see anyone in anyone be in that much anguish that they have to go off in order to get relief.
Except for out Florida Legislature that doesn’t give a rat’s behind. They just want to make everyone life crazy over their guns.
There’s many different weapons and when you’ve been doing this for 25 years everything in the house is a potential weapon. In a house with a pool and no fence that pool is a death trap for a child.
I usually ask “Do you have any firearms.” and then I apologize and then I crack a joke about fire arms. It looks like this. Then I apologize for my bad acting skills and it ends with a good laugh. As it should. I can’t discuss how I would handle this because of HIPPA. The same HIPPA that would prevent lists to be made of paranoid gun owners so Obama’s secret agents can come to your house and take your guns away.
For many of our older generation asking if they have a gun is actually a conversation starter to their time in war and for many of these older veterans they really don’t get a chance to talk to anyone about this. Why would anyone want to take this away from them? This is the issue with stupid laws. They have unintended consequences.
“The gag law, nicknamed the Docs vs. Glocks law by its detractors, was passed by an overwhelmingly Republican Legislature brimming over with money from NRA lobbyists. It would seem to be an obvious First Amendment violation: For asking a patient a question that could save his child’s life, a doctor in Florida could lose her medical license or be fined $10,000. The state has no rational—let alone compelling—interest in censoring doctors from asking this basic question, much less preventing doctors from making evidence-based recommendations about public health and safety. And the law is so broad and vague that even an indirect inquiry could potentially qualify as illegal “harassment of a patient regarding firearm ownership.”
Ten thousand bucks. Do nurses get a sliding scale discount? EMTS?
Here is a sample of an self evaluation form from a psychiatry clinic.
Out of pages of evaluation there is one question. The nono
Do you own any guns or knives? ______________________________________________
So it’s good to know we can ask the knife part but have to skip the gun part. Please free to insert “firearm” and do your own “Hunger Games” reenactment.
On Tuesday, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an injunction against Florida’s notorious “Docs vs. Glocks” law, aka the Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act. The case could easily wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court. It should. It’s a dangerous decision that must not stand. The groups that sued to overturn the law say they’ll dispute the ruling and are advising their physician members that the law is still on hold while they fight. If it survives, legal experts say it will represent the first time the courts allow a state to silence physicians from counseling their patients. Two of the court’s three judges suggested the state’s Docs vs. Glocks law isn’t a limit on free speech but “legitimate regulation of professional conduct.” Think about what that would mean: If it’s OK to ban doctors’ questions about guns, then every industry with an effective lobby could pass a similar gag law. What will be next? Sodas? Red meat? Electronic cigarettes? Motorcycle helmets? The goal here was to chill doctors’ speech. Gun-makers aren’t the only industry with an interest in doing that. The law would prohibit doctors from “harassing” patients about gun ownership and collecting such information in a database, if the issue is “irrelevant to or unnecessary for the provision of medical care.” The odious law had been on hold since 2011, when a lower court granted an injunction on First Amendment and due process grounds.But what, exactly, constitutes “harassment” as opposed to sound medical care? In these polarizing times, the simple question, “Is there a gun in the house?” can raise hackles. A doctor with his patient’s best interest at heart could be hauled before the Florida Board of Medicine and forced to pay costly legal fees to answer a complaint from anyone who took offense. A politicized board could impose penalties as extreme as revocation of a doctor’s license to practice medicine. The court suggests there are only limited times when it would be relevant for a doctor to ask about gun ownership, such as when a patient expressed suicidal thoughts. So now we are to presume that scholars of law and legislators know more about the practice of medicine than actual physicians and their professional societies? The problem with the court’s flawed logic is that when it comes to health, the issue of gun ownership is never irrelevant or unnecessary. Don’t take our word. Take the word of the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American College of Physicians. Research shows that an average of seven children and youths younger than 20 are killed by guns every day. For people between 13 and 34, homicide and suicide are the second and third leading causes of death in the United States. As pediatricians conduct regular school physicals, they must now decide for themselves whether to follow the advice of their professional medical societies or two judges on the subject of guns in the home. Palm Beach Gardens pediatrician Dr. Tommy Schechtman is a plaintiff in the case. It’s standard practice for him to ask parents if there’s a gun in the home, and if the answer is yes, to discuss the importance of keeping the gun locked away, with ammunition stored separately. He suggests parents consider the added protection of a combination trigger lock. He plans to keep asking. We applaud him.”
No offense to the court there are plenty of times that you want to ask if there is a gun the house. People going thru a divorce. At risk are the elderly in the case of one being a caregiver and the other person having dementia. Just a person with dementia. What happens to the lone person that lives by himself has dementia and has a gun? Because you never know. You just don’t know. It’s not like it’s never happened before.
So understand there are many situations. In the case of an elderly person with dementia I would do the same thing a pediatrician would do. I would make sure it was locked up along with any medications and anything else that could cause a person harm.
But if I can’t ask then I don’t know and you’ve just put my patient, the family and the neighbors and myself at risk. Why? Because guns trump people.
Please don’t even start to call me a gun hater. We had a rifle in our cottage in Maine over the door for my whole life. My uncle sold guns in Maine. We had guns in our house in our parents army chests complete with bullets. I even took the bullets for show and tell in grade school. I went to summer camp and became a sharpshooter as well as many archery awards when I was a kid. You wanna have a gun have a gun. You want to have dead parents or dead children don’t lock them up.
We, your healthcare workers, don’t deal in guns. We don’t care that you have a gun. We care that you are safe.
“Schechtman was one of the lead plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit that took aim at the Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act that was signed into law by Gov. Rick Scott in June 2011. The law forbid doctors from asking a patient whether she owns a firearm, unless the practitioner in good faith believed the information was relevant to the patient’s medical care or safety.
But Schechtman and others argued that the law had a “chilling effect,” violated the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship and kept them from providing potentially life-saving gun safety information.
Friday, a federal judge put a permanent injunction on the law.
Marion Hammer, with the Florida chapter of the National Rifle Association, said many members were calling, upset about Judge Marcia Cooke’s ruling.
“No doctor should tell you not to own a gun,” Hammer said.
She said the governor will appeal the ruling. A spokesman for Gov. Scott could not immediately confirm that.”
No one is telling anyone not to own a gun? How dense are these people that actually believe this. But believe me these are the first people who will start yelling and calling for justice if there was a nurse or a social worker in the house and someone got hurt. “Why didn’t they do anything?”
My new answer
“Sorry Dude. you gagged me.”
Maybe I should ask Rick Scott what to do? He’s worked in medicine before.
A moment of silence, please, for Zuri Chambers, who died in Lake Worth this spring at age 3; also for Nick Minor, who died in West Palm Beach at age 17, and for Patrick Appleton, who died in Palm City at age 13.
All three youths had been playing, unsupervised, with guns they found in their homes. The guns went off accidentally, killing them.
MIAMI — A Florida law that restricts what doctors can ask patients about gun ownership should be reinstated because it doesn’t limit free speech as a federal judge ruled, an attorney for the state argued Thursday.
The law, which has become popularly known as “Docs vs. Glocks,” does not flatly ban physicians from having discussions about firearms with patients, Florida Solicitor General Allen Winsor told a three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
“The wording in the law is `should refrain,'” Winsor said. “It’s not mandating anything. It’s recommending. The use of the term is critical in this case.” ( A ten thousand dollar fine and the loss of your medical license is NOT a recommendation. It’s a mandate.)
Passed by the Legislature in 2011, the Firearm Owners Privacy Act prohibited doctors from asking patients about gun ownership or recording such information in medical records unless it was medically necessary – although that term was not defined. U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke declared the legislation unconstitutional last year as an impermissible restriction on free speech, and the state appealed.
In his rebuttal, the attorney representing physicians and gun-control advocates, Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, said the law was sufficiently strong to prompt doctors to censor themselves, because none would risk a potential loss of license or fines up to $10,000 for violating it.
He said most doctors ask about gun ownership as a common practice on questionnaires filled out by patients and that it’s particularly important in homes where children are present or in cases of mental illness.
“We think it’s relevant to ask every patient, every time,” Hallward-Driemeier said. “Doctors will self-censor.”
But one member of the panel, U.S. Circuit Judge Gerald Tjoflat, had a different concern.
Tjoflat grilled Hallward-Driemeier about the possibility that allowing doctors to ask about gun ownership could devolve into a situation in which they are somehow used by the federal government to collect lists of gun owners.
“It goes to Uncle Sam in Washington. You understand my concern,” the judge said. “You can put it in a computer and spit out everybody who owns a gun.”
Hallward-Driemeier said he knew of no state or federal provision for doctors in Florida or elsewhere to provide gun owner lists to the government, noting that medical records are already protected by strict privacy laws. He argued that the law restricting doctors’ ability to discuss guns only came into being because the Republican-dominated Florida Legislature was trying to make a political point.
“The state simply cannot stop speech it believes to be a political attack,” Hallward-Driemeier said.
The panel did not issue an immediate ruling and seemed split on what to do. Judge Charles Wilson said the law appeared to him a “classic content-related restriction on speech” that impermissible singles out doctors.
Judge L. Scott Coogler, an Alabama district judge sitting by invitation on the appeals panel, said one possible ruling could be to allow doctors to ask about guns but leave intact the law’s restrictions on record-keeping and the requirement that the information be medically necessary.
“Do you have some other reason other than medical treatment that you want to ask patients about guns?” Coogler asked.
The law has been challenged by organizations representing 11,000 Florida health providers, including the Florida chapters of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Physicians. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the American Civil Liberties Union and numerous other groups have joined them.
If Obama Is Actually Coming For Your Guns, He’s Really Terrible At It.
That time he signed a bill allowing concealed loaded firearms in national parks.
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) introduced an amendment in 2009 permitting concealed, loaded guns in national parks to a bill about credit cards, saying differences in state and federal laws inhibited gun owners from travel between state and federal lands.
And signed a bill allowing Amtrak passengers to store handguns in their checked baggage.
Advocates of the bill, also introduced in 2009, said it gave train riders rights comparable to those possessed by plane passengers. Amtrak had allowed firearms to be carried on trains before 9/11, so the bill represented a victory for gun rights activists.
After Newtown, Obama assembled a task force to address gun violence.
Obama charged Vice President Joe Biden in December 2012 with overseeing an administration-wide process to develop proposals for Congress to take up. He urged lawmakers to reinstate a ban on assault weapons, close loopholes that allow buyers to avoid background checks and restrict high-capacity ammunition clips.
Then unveiled proposals to combat gun violence…
Obama’s legislative proposals, released in January 2013, touched upon not just access to firearms and ammunition but school safety and mental health care.
This BS has got to end.
Because of all this BS it has really brought the nuttiness out of the gun lobby and because of that we really need to keep the nuttiness out of our lives. We need to look closely at the people who are lobbying for these kinds of laws. Guns like corporations are not people. Gun’s don’t vote. Nor can they get pregnant.
Here’s the thing. This whole situation is a result of bad reactions and people going off and making emotional and bad decisions. I really believe that if talked out this could have been taken care of like rational adults and not a bunch whining babies who think that everyone coming for their guns.
No one wants to come for guns. Least of all the medical profession. We just want to make sure that people are safe.
So please take your politics out of my medicine.
Someone please talk some logic here.
It seems that the gun lobbyists can’t control themselves and apparently they think everything is about them.
Look who is right here in our hood! Bring it on home! Let James help you cause we sure do got dem blues! A love affair with the Pacific Legal Foundation and the Economic Council of Martin County. Wow! Who would have thunk?
“PALM BEACH GARDENS, FL; March 12, 2014: Florida attorney Mark Miller, a veteran of business, property rights, and constitutional litigation, has joined Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) as managing attorney with PLF’s Florida (Atlantic Center) office based in Palm Beach Gardens.
It’s a privilege to join Pacific Legal Foundation and be part of America’s most successful legal organization that works to defend and advance freedom,” said Miller. “PLF is dedicated to ‘rescuing liberty’ from coast to coast. I’ll be promoting that mission aggressively throughout Florida and along the Eastern Seaboard, by putting my legal skills to work on behalf of property rights and other constitutional liberties, and to help victims of overreaching government.
In 2012, he served as lead local counsel for former U.S. Representative Allen West in the 2012 election battle for the 18th District congressional seat in Florida.”
“Mark Miller, an attorney with PLF, said he wants a court to rule a state law prohibiting craft breweries, restaurants and taverns from selling or filling beer growlers unconstitutional.”
Personally, I don’t have an issue with the case. I have issue with the camaraderie between this group and Rick Scott who calls himself the Governor but really and obviously in cahoots with a very right winged agenda that is affected us, our water and our Florida Black Bears, Panthers and Manatees. I’m sure they are the one’s distributing all the “land grab propaganda” that we had to deal with.
It’s so sad is that what the Libertarian party set out to do has morphed into a group that is totally operated and owned by a bunch of old rich white guys. The very freedom they want has been taken away. I feel bad for you Libertarians! You want freedom but you don’t want us to have the freedom to swim in clean water.
Please don’t think I’m Libertarian Hater. I am not! There are parts of the platform I really appreciate like the leave me alone stuff and no government intrusion stuff. What a bunch of hypocrites you guys are! You working for the people are intruding on our very right to have clean drinking water. Let’s have a conversation about the first amendment and my right to free speech which has been taken away by a bunch of legislators that have no idea what they voted for.
In this particular case it is illegal for me to ask my patients if they have a gun even though its required of me through my computer program. In the end I get punished not the makers of the computer program or the people who require me to ask this question. Who does that?
You have way become hateful and single minded there is no talking to you. All you know is the talking points that have drummed into your heads. Were you all hypnotized? Did the legislators go to a meeting and have some strange hypnotic music? You must have because I cannot think of one rational reason that our entire GOP Florida Legislature would hate Floridians so much and really go against your own party standards of state rights and local control. Please explain the hypocrisy! Libertarians should be against the wasting of water and sending millions of gallons of water out tide. That’s how I know these are not Libertarians. But boy they got them fooled.
Now check this out. Guess who is a partner with the Economic Council of Martin County?
Yes! 200 points for you. The Pacific Legal Council.
This stuff in nothing new. We need to put an end to it.or we really will have zombie Apocalypse. Only in our case its the zombies of the extreme right.
“Restoration of the Everglades, however, briefly became a bipartisan cause in national politics. A controversial penny-a-pound (2 cent/kg) tax on sugar was proposed to fund some of the necessary changes to be made to help decrease phosphorus and make other improvements to water. State voters were asked to support the tax, and environmentalists paid $15 million to encourage the issue. Sugar lobbyists responded with $24 million in advertising to discourage it and succeeded; it became the most expensive ballot issue in state history.[62] How restoration might be funded became a political battleground and seemed to stall without resolution. However, in the 1996 election year, Republican senator Bob Dole proposed that Congress give the State of Florida $200 million to acquire land for the Everglades. Democratic Vice President Al Gore promised the federal government would purchase 100,000 acres (400 km2) of land in the EAA to turn it over for restoration. Politicking reduced the number to 50,000 acres (200 km2), but both Dole’s and Gore’s gestures were approved by Congress.
The purpose of this case study was to examine the impact that environmental activism can have on agriculture by focusing on the Florida sugar industry’s reaction during the 1996 “sugar tax” amendment campaign. During the campaign, proponents and opponents of the three proposed Everglades-related amendments to Florida’s constitution spent more than $40 million to sway the public. As a result of the public relations and political campaigns, communicators from Florida agricultural industries realized that they must increase their efforts to project a positive public image.
In 1996, the issue finally was contested when a small, but well-funded environmental activist group named Save Our Everglades Committee authored three proposed amendments to the Florida Constitution, collected enough signatures to get the proposals on the November 1996 ballot, and began a campaign aimed at voters in support of the amendments (U.S. Sugar Corporation, 1997). The Florida sugar industry spent $24 million and the Save Our Everglades Committee (SOE) spent over $14 million on the most expensive public relations campaign in the state’s history (Marcus, 1997). The three proposed amendments were as follows:
• Amendment Four: if passed, this amendment would put a penny-a-pound tax on all sugar grown in Florida. If passed, it has been estimated that sugar farmers would have had to pay $1 billion (U.S. Sugar Corporation, 1997). • Amendment Five: this proposed amendment, commonly known as the “polluters pay” amendment stated that those in the Everglades Agricultural Area “who cause water pollution within the Everglades Protection area or the Everglades Agricultural area shall be primarily responsible” for paying the costs of clean-up (Kleindienst, 1997). • Amendment Six: this amendment was designed to establish a state trust fund reserved for Everglades clean-up.
The fight
For several months before Election Day in November, Florida voters were the targets of television and radio advertisements, direct mail pieces, persuasive phone calls, and door-to-door campaigning — all related to the proposed amendments. The sugar industry, which is comprised of two large corporations, a farming cooperative, and numerous small, independent farmers, was unprepared to face a serious challenge from a well-organized activist group. In addition, the industry was surprised by early polls that indicated widespread public support for the measures.
The sugar industry considered the proposed amendments a threat to its very existence. Seldom if ever before had a single agricultural commodity been singled out as “primarily responsible” for nonpoint-source pollution (pollution that is not the result of a direct, detectable environmental accident or contamination). One sugar industry statement said that “there are few times in the life of a business when one event can have a literal life or death impact; for U. S. Sugar and the Florida sugar industry, the threat of the $1 billion tax was such an event” (U.S. Sugar Corporation, 1997).
For two months, the public relations battle continued, with each side of the argument accusing the other of distorting facts and deceiving the public. On November 6, Amendment Four was defeated, while Amendments Five and Six passed. Although the second two amendments passed, the sugar industry claimed the victory since the penny-per-pound tax was voted down.
Over the course of the campaign, the sugar industry responded to being referred to as “Big Sugar” (a derogatory term) by attacking the founders of SOE. The industry referred to chairperson Mary Barley as “a millionaire land development heiress” and to financial supporter Paul Tudor Jones as a “mega-wealthy Connecticut commodities broker” (U.S. Sugar Corporation, 1997). In addition to attempting to promote a negative image of SOE, the sugar industry also aired television and radio advertising portraying employees of the South Florida Water Management District (the regulatory agency with primary jurisdiction over the Everglades) as bureaucrats with a reputation for squandering public money on luxuries such as limousines and jet planes. This particular advertisement provoked then-Governor Lawton Chiles (who had remained quiet about the amendments issues thus far) to write a letter to the sugar industry chastising it for intentionally damaging the reputation of the water management district’s employees (Marcus, 1997).
The sugar industry also distributed a number of press releases geared toward informing the public about the progress the sugar industry had already made toward cleaning up farm run-off. The message conveyed in several of the releases (that phosphorous levels in farm water had been reduced by 68% in just three years of voluntary management practices) was well-received by the mass media. In addition, just two weeks before the election, the start of the sugar harvest was delayed so that almost 2,000 employees could go door-to-door and personally ask communities to vote “no” (U.S. Sugar Corporation, 1997).”
(Miami Herald LTE, Jan 31, 2012) For 15 years Florida taxpayers have been carrying dirty water for the sugar billionaires. When Florida’s voters passed the Polluters Pay Amendment to Florida Constitution, the sugar industry was supposed to pay 100 percent of their pollution cleanup costs. In one of the most cynical abdications of governance in history, the Legislature has refused to implement Polluters Pay. In doing so, they have dumped billions in extra property taxes on the homeowners of South Florida and enabled Big Sugar to dump millions of tons of excess pollution on the Everglades.
So not only do the sugar billionaires get unearned taxpayer dollars through unnecessary federal import quotas and subsidies, but they get their pollution cleanup costs paid by the taxpayers of South Florida. Our legislators need to swear off their addiction to sugar campaign money and make them pay all their cleanup costs.
Albert Slap, Key Biscayne
Fast forward to our present legislators and Rick Scott and you’ll hear in the video they changed the law.
The measure, HB 7065, would rewrite the state’s plan to clean pollution flowing from farms in the Everglades’ agricultural zones to the protection areas in the south. Supporters say the legislation is needed to codify the agreement between Scott and the federal government that calls on Florida to spend $880 million over 12 years to build storm water treatment and water storage to intercept runoff from the farms, preventing further pollution of an ecosystem that is vital to the state’s economy, environment and drinking water needs.
The legislation, though, does far more than that. It would roll back the enforcement of water discharge permits, clearing the way for farming operations to pollute regardless of how much the state erred in issuing them a permit or policing it. That opens a door for polluters and increases the pressure on regulators at the South Florida Water Management District to follow the Legislature’s lead in going soft on the industry. Even the district opposes that measure. It would rather keep the permitting process intact than create a public impression that the system is corrupt.
The measure also caps the industry’s financial obligation for funding the cleanup. While the legislation would extend the $25 per acre agriculture tax until 2024 — eight years longer than under current law — it holds that those payments and improved management practices would “fulfill” the industry’s obligation for the cleanup under Florida’s “Polluter Pay” requirement in the state Constitution.
That is an outright sellout. Extending the agriculture tax generates less than $7 million per year — pennies compared to the $880 million that taxpayers will spend to treat the polluted water. The very governor who forced the water management districts to cut their budgets now intends to ask Florida taxpayers to commit $32 million a year for 12 years for this program — all in addition to the money that will come from property owners in South Florida. Meanwhile the industry responsible for two-thirds of the pollution entering the Everglades walks away from any long-term obligations even before the new water projects are in place.
Just two weeks into the legislative session, HB 7065 has sailed through two committees and is headed for the House floor. This bill has leadership’s blessing, which is why Scott and the Senate are likely the last defense. Sen. Wilton Simpson, R-New Port Richey, who is shepherding the Senate bill, which is much better, needs to do what the House and several of his bay area counterparts failed to do and insist that the polluters pay their share. Shifting these costs onto the public is unfair, and every dollar the state spends on behalf of polluters is a dollar it won’t have for police, schools and other legitimate priorities.
Audubon and other organizations have objected to these changes to the Everglades Forever Act. We are hoping for some serious discussions about increasing the amount of money sugar growers pay to clean up the pollution coming off their land. We have also objected to the part of the bill that nullifies enforcement of discharge permits. This section of the bill seems deliberately written to eliminate the basis of a recent legal challenge to three discharge permits for the dirtiest Everglades farms.
The Senate companion bill – SB 768 – has none of the offending provisions.
Why Your Voice is Important
The sugar industry has dozens of lobbyists.Money has been given to legislators and political committees. Many members of the Florida House have already made up their mind on this bill. Some have been, by their own admission, heavily lobbied by the sugar industry.
“Back when he first ran for governor of Florida as a self-styled outsider, Rick Scott lambasted his opponent in the Republican primary for taking campaign money from U.S. Sugar, one of the worst corporate polluters of the Everglades.
Scott indignantly squeaked that Bill McCollum had been “bought and paid for” by U.S. Sugar. He said the company’s support of McCollum was “disgusting.”
“I can’t be bought,” Scott declared. Seriously, that’s what the man said. Stop gagging and read on.
Four years later, the governor’s re-election campaign is hungrily raking in money from U.S. Sugar, more than $534,000 so far.”
So to review, and please if I got this wrong help me out!
In 1996 the Save the Everglades Committeeauthored three proposed amendments to the Florida Constitution, collected enough signatures to get the proposals on the November 1996 ballot.
• Amendment Four: if passed, this amendment would put a penny-a-pound tax on all sugar grown in Florida. If passed, it has been estimated that sugar farmers would have had to pay $1 billion (U.S. Sugar Corporation, 1997). • Amendment Five: this proposed amendment, commonly known as the “polluters pay” amendment stated that those in the Everglades Agricultural Area “who cause water pollution within the Everglades Protection area or the Everglades Agricultural area shall be primarily responsible” for paying the costs of clean-up (Kleindienst, 1997). • Amendment Six: this amendment was designed to establish a state trust fund reserved for Everglades clean-up.
We lost the penny-a -pound tax but we got polluters pay and the Everglades trust. Then under Rick Scott, The measure, HB 7065, would rewrite the state’s plan to clean pollution flowing from farms in the Everglades’ agricultural zones to the protection areas in the south. Supporters say the legislation is needed to codify the agreement between Scott and the federal government that calls on Florida to spend $880 million over 12 years to build storm water treatment and water storage to intercept runoff from the farms, preventing further pollution of an ecosystem that is vital to the state’s economy, environment and drinking water needs.
What it ended up doing was rolling back the enforcement of water discharge permits, clearing the way for farming operations to pollute regardless of how much the state erred in issuing them a permit or policing it. This opens a door for polluters and increases the pressure on regulators at the South Florida Water Management District to follow the Legislature’s lead in going soft on the industry.
Then, the very governor who forced the water management districts to cut their budgets now intends to ask Florida taxpayers to commit $32 million a year for 12 years for this program — all in addition to the money that will come from property owners in South Florida. Meanwhile the industry responsible for two-thirds of the pollution entering the Everglades walks away from any long-term obligations even before the new water projects are in place.
So we went from polluters paying to us paying, the voters.
Remember us.
Slick.
Sick.
Slicky RIcky
omg
But don’t forget folks your getting ten bucks back on your inflated cell phone bill and no taxes on your textbooks.
Where was the news when this happened?
So it all comes down to one thing really. We have to make sure that we have legislators that cannot be bought off by an industry that pollutes, that really does nothing for our economy and fills the pockets of corrupt politicians. We have to pay attention and we must vote.
Instead, as Craig Pittman and Michael Auslen of the Tampa Bay Times reported, that great pile of Amendment 1 money is going to pay for items that normally would have been funded out of the regular budget. For stuff like park maintenance.
But the legislators, in cynical disregard of their constituents’ intent, earmarked $13.65 million of the Amendment 1 money to bail out a water storage project that auditors from the South Florida Water Management District had found was wildly out of whack in terms of cost effectiveness.
That’s just $3.75 million less than what Florida Forever will be getting for new land purchases.
The $13.65 million will bail out agricultural outfits like Alico, with major Florida holdings in citrus, ranching, farming and the very lucrative operations known as “water farming.”Alico is the largest of landowners around Lake Okeechobee paid to store water behind earth berms, meant to keep it from exacerbating the problems of the polluted estuaries of the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee rivers. As the Tampa Bay Times reported, a 57-page auditor’s report last year found these water farming contracts cost the public 10 times more if these than storage projects had been built on public land. Water farming is a massive boondoggle.
Which might have been beside the point, given that the South Florida Water Management District had run out of money to fund water farming anyway. But all that Florida Forever money presented the likes of Alico another fat funding source.
The money will be used for water and land conservation, management, and restoration in Florida. The funds dedicated by Amendment 1 will:
Restore, manage, and acquire lands necessary to protect Florida’s drinking water sources and protect the water quality in our rivers, lakes and streams;
Protect our beaches and shores;
Protect and restore the Everglades and other degraded natural systems and waterways;
Manage fish and wildlife habitat, protect forests and wetlands, and restore conservation lands that are an important part of Florida’s economy and quality of life;
Provide funding to manage existing state and local natural areas, parks, and trails for water supply, habitat and recreation.
All this will be achieved with no increase in taxes.
Why did we need to amend the state constitution?
Since 2009, the Legislature has dramatically reduced funding for water and land protection, cutting key programs by more than 95%. Amendment 1 would ensure that water and land conservation projects are adequately funded – the funds cannot be diverted to other purposes – without increasing taxes. The only way to secure significant, sustainable resources for water and land conservation, management and restoration for the long-term is to take this issue directly to Florida voters through a constitutional amendment.
The legislature taketh and then they taketh some more.
How do I know the funds will be spent wisely?
Florida’s conservation programs have a great track record of spending these funds wisely. Amendment 1 ensures that funds are used solely for conservation purposes and cannot be used for any other purpose by the Legislature. Using the state’s existing successful programs as a model, objective criteria will continue to determine how funds are spent in order to keep politics out of the process.
Florida Forever and its predecessor Preservation 2000, for example, have been the most successful state land conservation programs in the nation, protecting more than 2.4 million acres of critical water resources, natural areas, wildlife habitat, parks, greenways and trails. Restoration of the Florida Everglades is the most comprehensive ecological restoration project in history. Florida’s land managing agencies and water management districts have done a tremendous job restoring degraded natural systems, including the state’s longleaf pine forests, the upper St. Johns River watershed and Rookery Bay. Amendment 1 ensures funding so that this critical restoration work will continue.
Now that Amendment 1 has passed, who will be in charge of the money?
While citizens can dedicate funding for water and land conservation in the state constitution, we cannot appropriate funds via the constitution. Appropriations are solely the Legislature’s responsibility. Fortunately, Florida has a number of excellent programs already in place for making project selection decisions. The state has a stellar track record of selecting conservation projects based on objective criteria and science, which includes review by citizens and oversight panels composed of experts from the appropriate fields. The existing Acquisition and Restoration Council is one good example. Amendment 1 does not change these existing project selection systems. So while the Legislature must appropriate the funds, the existing tried and true systems in place for project selection would not change now that Amendment 1 has been ratified.
One source for money to revive the water-farming contracts was money from the taxpayers from the rest of the state, via the Legislature. But the water district’s governing board, under state law, is not allowed to hire its own lobbyists to pursue funding.
Instead, Alico did it for them.
The company employed 16 lobbyists last year, and it turned them loose on the Legislature to get $13 million to pump new life into the project. Alico spokeswoman Sarah Bascom said the company was just helping out a state agency in need, and its lobbyists did not specifically ask for money for Alico’s own contract.”
“More specifically, state Sen. Joe Negron, R-Palm City, advocated cuts to so-called soft services, which include mental health and drug-addiction programs, because many of these services address what Negon views as “a lack of willpower, a lack of discipline, a lack of character.” Negron was the chair of appropriations for health and human services in the state Senate.”
This attitude has got to change. We cannot have legislators that do not believe in taking care of our most vulnerable people and do not believe in science.
Mental illness knows no parties. It is a bipartisan disease.
Let’s educate our legislators. Let’s make a difference.
Let’s make June “Educate your legislators on mental illness month.”
Society is Judged By How They Treat the Most Vulnerable.
Brain circuit problem likely sets stage for the ‘voices’ that are symptom of schizophrenia
Scientists have identified problems in a connection between brain structures that may predispose individuals to hearing the ‘voices’ that are a common symptom of schizophrenia. Researchers linked the problem to a gene deletion. This leads to changes in brain chemistry that reduce the flow of information between two brain structures involved in processing auditory information.
Here is a video by ROCHE that is a simple explanation on schizophrenia.
The biology of schizophrenia.
Mental Disorders as Brain Disorders: Thomas Insel at TEDxCaltech
cyndi lenz 