State Seal Calendar

Meeting Proceedings for January 26, 1998


          1                          STATE OF FLORIDA
                             CONSTITUTION REVISION COMMISSION



                                    COMMISSION MEETING



              DATE:                   January 26, 1998
              TIME:                   Commenced at 1:00 p.m.
         11                           Concluded at 6:10 p.m.

         12   PLACE:                  The Senate Chamber
                                      The Capitol
         13                           Tallahassee, Florida

         14   REPORTED BY:            KRISTEN L. BENTLEY
                                      JULIE L. DOHERTY, RPR
         15                           MONA L. WHIDDON
                                      Court Reporters
         16                           Division of Administrative Hearings
                                      The DeSoto Building
         17                           1230 Apalachee Parkway
                                      Tallahassee, Florida









          1                             APPEARANCES


          3   CARLOS ALFONSO
              CLARENCE E. ANTHONY
          4   ANTONIO L. ARGIZ (ABSENT)
              PAT BARTON
          6   ROBERT M. BROCHIN
          7   KEN CONNOR
              CHRIS CORR (EXCUSED)
              VALERIE EVANS
              PAUL HAWKES
              DICK LANGLEY (ABSENT)
         13   JOHN F. LOWNDES
              STANLEY MARSHALL
         14   JACINTA MATHIS
              JON LESTER MILLS
         15   FRANK MORSANI (ABSENT)
              JUDITH BYRNE RILEY
              SENATOR JIM SCOTT
         18   H. T. SMITH
              ALAN C. SUNDBERG (EXCUSED)
              PAUL WEST
              STEPHEN NEAL ZACK
              IRA H. LEESFIELD (ABSENT)





          1                             PROCEEDINGS

          2             (Roll taken and recorded electronically.)

          3             SECRETARY BLANTON:  All commissioners indicate your

          4        presence, all unauthorized visitors please leave the

          5        chamber.  All commissioners indicate your presence.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I wonder if you would cast word

          7        around that we need everybody to get in the chamber.  We

          8        don't have enough yet so we don't have to clear the

          9        chamber yet.  I wonder if everybody that hasn't signed in

         10        that's on the floor, please sign in.

         11             SECRETARY BLANTON:  Quorum present, Mr. Chairman.

         12             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  If everybody would

         13        take their seats, please.  And all unauthorized persons,

         14        please leave the chamber.  And have a seat and we will

         15        start the session.

         16             Commissioner Nabors, would you-all have a seat,

         17        please, you and Commissioner Brochin.  Will the

         18        Commissioners and guests please rise for the opening

         19        prayer given today by the Reverend Jerry Knight, pastor of

         20        Lakewood Baptist Church in Tallahassee.  Reverend Knight.

         21             REVEREND KNIGHT:  Let us pray together.  Our Father,

         22        we are grateful to thee for thy goodness to us and for

         23        this good day you have shared with us.  We thank you,

         24        Lord, for your death, your burial, your resurrection.

         25        Thank you for the privilege to be here today with these


          1        friends who represent our community, our governments.

          2             We are admonished in your word to pray for those who

          3        are over us in governmental authority.  And, Father, we do

          4        on a regular basis.  We pray your blessings upon the

          5        session today, bless each one represented, give wisdom,

          6        give direction.  We thank thee again for what thou dost

          7        mean to us.  In Jesus' name, Amen.

          8             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Would Allison Freidin and

          9        Jonathan Freidin please come lead us in the pledge of

         10        allegiance to the flag.

         11             (Pledge of allegiance.)

         12             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Those are the children of

         13        Commissioner Freidin and they are here from Miami and we

         14        are delighted to have them.  Also this morning, I would

         15        like for the following pages that are serving us today

         16        from Belle Vue Middle School to come up front and stand as

         17        I call your name and we will introduce you.

         18             Marisha Ash, Marisha is coming over here, Kailah

         19        Berigan, Farrah Cannon, Rachel Glenn, Lauren Hayman, Tara

         20        Merck, and a young man who informed me that he was going

         21        to be Governor some day, or sent me word, and he seems to

         22        be on the right track, he is the only male representative

         23        in this group, Stanford Thomas.  Stanford, future

         24        Governor.

         25             (Applause.)


          1             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Stanford, since you want to be

          2        Governor, you come up here with me a minute.  I want

          3        everybody to get a good look at you.  Tell everybody

          4        hello.

          5             MASTER THOMAS:  Hello.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Anything else you want to say,

          7        Governor?

          8             MASTER THOMAS:  I'm glad to be here.

          9             (Applause.)

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  For the benefit of the members,

         11        you have a button on your desk there that says page.  And

         12        any time you need a Coke or anything, push the button and

         13        one of these fine young people will come take care of your

         14        needs.  They are going to get a photograph, then we will

         15        proceed.

         16             All right.  I recognize Commissioner Barkdull,

         17        Chairman of Rules.  Commissioner Barkdull.

         18             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman,

         19        Members of the Commission.  You have on your desk a

         20        proposed calendar which tracks this book which was sent to

         21        you in the mail.  You will also -- or Fed Ex'd to you.

         22        You will also find the same book on your desk, they are no

         23        different, it is the same volume.  I ask you to hang on to

         24        these books because I don't anticipate that we will finish

         25        these proposals today and they will recur probably


          1        sometime either tomorrow or Wednesday.  And you will need

          2        the packet to refer back to.

          3             The meeting schedule is on the front page of the

          4        calendar for the week.  I call your attention to the fact

          5        that there are committee meetings scheduled for tomorrow

          6        afternoon, Finance and Tax, and the Select Committee on

          7        Initiatives, which are 5:00 or when we adjourn tomorrow.

          8             The calendar that you received a month or so ago that

          9        indicated the schedule for February and March of the

         10        commission has been altered somewhat and you will

         11        receive -- new calendars will be placed on your desk for

         12        February and March and the remainder of the spring,

         13        either -- probably tomorrow.

         14             The public hearings which are referred to, they were

         15        the major change.  There was a move of one day in the

         16        first one.  The material that was distributed to your

         17        offices last week did not have the telephone numbers on

         18        them, they will be distributed to you before the session

         19        ends, probably tomorrow.

         20             I call your attention again that if you have any

         21        proposals that you are contemplating withdrawing, you make

         22        a note to yourself about it and do it at the conclusion of

         23        today.  Several members have already talked to me about

         24        other proposals that they will move to withdraw at the

         25        conclusion of the calendar.


          1             We are scheduled to go until 6:00 tonight.  At the

          2        moment I am not prepared to announce that there will be a

          3        Rules Committee.  There will be a further announcement on

          4        that later on in the session.  But at the present time I

          5        have no further announcements and the special order is

          6        available and on your desk.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Very well.  Then we will proceed

          8        to the special order.  First, matters on reconsideration.

          9        Proposal 91 by Commissioner Hawkes is on reconsideration.

         10        It failed and there was a motion to reconsider by

         11        Commissioner Barnett, which was adopted.  And it was then

         12        reconsidered and committed to style and drafting and now

         13        there is a pending motion to reconsider by Commissioner

         14        Mills.  Commissioner Mills.

         15             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Mr. Chairman, I don't think

         16        Mr. Hawkes is on the floor, so perhaps we shouldn't bring

         17        up the reconsideration until he gets here.

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well that's an option.  On the

         19        other hand, if you have got the votes, you might want to

         20        go forward.

         21             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Well we like to be fair.

         22             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I think he is here in town, I saw

         23        him this morning.  Here he is.  No, that's Commissioner

         24        Alfonso.  Tell him to get off the telephone back there --

         25        here he comes.  He is here, go ahead.


          1             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Well, Mr. Chairman, there were

          2        some questions raised about the actual impact of

          3        Commissioner Hawkes' proposal and my motion to reconsider

          4        was to allow us to raise those issues and allow

          5        Commissioner Hawkes to further clarify that.  And at this

          6        point I think we probably just want Commissioner Hawkes to

          7        do that.

          8             The reason I moved to reconsider was that my

          9        understanding of the purpose was to provide tax breaks for

         10        the utilization of pollution control devices.  The

         11        technical issues that were raised were, did the wording

         12        actually, because of the way it described certain devices,

         13        which are used by utilities, did it actually end up

         14        raising taxes by including devices which had not otherwise

         15        been included.  And Commissioner Thompson has a set of

         16        questions on that.

         17             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Mr. Chairman --

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Do you yield?

         19             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  I do.

         20             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  -- I have a question for

         21        Mr. Mills, and Mr. Hawkes is now back in the chamber.

         22        Would you have any objection, if it is okay with

         23        Commissioner Hawkes, to let's temporarily pass

         24        consideration of this, Mr. Chairman, and we will get back

         25        to it at a time when maybe we three can agree to do that?


          1             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Without objection, we will

          2        temporarily pass it until later in this meeting.

          3             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Well, we might want to put it

          4        off indefinitely, until some of us bring it up.  Thank

          5        you.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  I'd like to resolve

          7        this.  It is not one of the major issues we are

          8        considering, but we don't want to tie ourselves down with

          9        these type issues.  Okay?

         10             All right.  On Proposal 107 by Commissioner Connor,

         11        it was disapproved by the committee on the Declaration of

         12        Rights and it failed.  And a pending motion to consider by

         13        Commissioner Argiz, who is not here.  Would you read that

         14        so we will know what we are talking about?

         15             READING CLERK:  Proposal 107, a proposal to revise

         16        Article I, Florida Constitution; providing that the State

         17        Constitution does not restrict the right of parents to

         18        consent to medical treatment for their minor children.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Commissioner Connor,

         20        you rise to speak.  This was your proposal, which lost,

         21        and was moved for reconsideration by Commissioner Argiz.

         22        We are now on reconsideration.

         23             COMMISSIONER CONNOR:  As you can tell, Mr. Chairman,

         24        Commissioner Argiz is not here and I would simply request

         25        that we temporarily pass consideration of this matter at


          1        this time.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Without objection, it is passed,

          3        temporarily passed I should say.  Commissioner Scott.

          4             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Mr. Chairman, so that we are in

          5        the right posture on this Proposal 91 by Commissioner

          6        Hawkes, what we really should do is go ahead and adopt the

          7        motion to reconsider so that it is reconsidered and then

          8        it can be temporarily passed and be back before us.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I was going to suggest that, but

         10        that's why I said we had better get back to it today.  But

         11        with that in mind, all in favor of the motion to

         12        reconsider, say aye; opposed?

         13             (Verbal vote taken.)

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It will be on reconsideration and

         15        that will give you time to work on this and it will take

         16        care of it for the moment.  We will defer further

         17        consideration of it at this time.

         18             And now we will move to the proposed special order

         19        for this week and the first item, the first one on the

         20        special order is Proposal 134 by Commissioner Marshall,

         21        which has not been acted on, but has been withdrawn by the

         22        Committee on Legislative.  Would you read it, please?

         23             READING CLERK:  Proposal 134, a proposal to revise

         24        Article III, Section 3, Florida Constitution; providing

         25        for length of regular legislative sessions.


          1             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Marshall, you are

          2        recognized to present this proposal.

          3             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Mr. Chairman, I thought this

          4        had been withdrawn, it apparently has not been, I wish to

          5        do that now.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Without objection, Proposal

          7        No. 134 by Commissioner Marshall is withdrawn.

          8             Proposal No. 90 is the next proposal by Commissioner

          9        Hawkes, referred to Committee on Legislative and was

         10        withdrawn without recommendation or action.  Would you

         11        read it, please?

         12             READING CLERK:  Proposal 90, a proposal to revise

         13        Article III, Section 4, Florida Constitution; providing

         14        members of the Legislature with immunity with respect to

         15        any speech or debate in either house of the Legislature.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Hawkes, you are

         17        recognized.

         18             COMMISSIONER HAWKES:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

         19        Members, this proposal was suggested to me by one of the

         20        general counsels who felt that our Constitution was

         21        lacking because we do not have this provision in it.  It

         22        is copied from the U.S. Constitution, and basically the

         23        Florida Supreme Court has allowed this to take place

         24        anyway, but we really didn't have any constitutional

         25        footing.  So I view this as kind of a technical amendment


          1        that could be included, if we do one, in the technical

          2        provisions' part of our proposals.

          3             And unless there are some questions, I would ask for

          4        your favorable consideration.  Thank you.

          5             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Mills.  Do you yield

          6        to Commissioner Mills?  He yields.

          7             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Mr. Hawkes, I am trying to

          8        recall the case.  It seems to me that the Supreme Court

          9        said there was not a speech and debate clause, but did

         10        accord some privilege; is that correct?

         11             COMMISSIONER HAWKES:  Yes, that's my understanding is

         12        that, and they indicated that there was this lacking.  And

         13        this is just to provide that so when a member is on the

         14        floor, he would have the same protections as what most of

         15        us assume he would have anyway.  And that they have been

         16        granted by the court in specific cases.

         17             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Does the statement "privilege

         18        from arrest" relate to anything other than conduct on the

         19        floor?

         20             COMMISSIONER HAWKES:  No, it would not.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Scott.

         22             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Mr. Chairman, at the Legislative

         23        Committee I think we did not get a quorum when this came

         24        up, is the chairman's recollection.  But in any event,

         25        there was some serious question raised about whether we


          1        want to have on the ballot something that says that

          2        legislators are privileged from arrest.

          3             I mean, I think -- at least I did, and I think the

          4        ones present agreed with the idea of the speech and

          5        debate, but they were concerned about the way -- this is

          6        out of the Federal Constitution, which we think this needs

          7        a little bit of work here before we would vote to go

          8        forward with something that says legislators are

          9        privileged from arrest.

         10             What we really want to address is the Girardeau case,

         11        the former senator who was called and asked, and was

         12        questioned about his proposal and how whatever happened on

         13        the floor of the Senate.  So I think we did not -- this

         14        matter just came out of committee because that was the

         15        last meeting.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Scott, I think your

         17        comments should refer everybody to the summary that's in

         18        your red packet, to No. 90.  The case that's referred to

         19        was not a Florida Supreme Court case, it was a First

         20        District Court of Appeal, it was Girardeau versus State.

         21        The case you are referring to, is it.  And it also points

         22        out that there is federal case law by the U.S. Supreme

         23        Court and also that's a common law doctrine that had never

         24        been fully defined, as it is pointed out.

         25             The one other comment that I think Commissioner


          1        Hawkes would have mentioned to you, that a similar

          2        proposal was placed on the ballot in 1984 and it was

          3        defeated by the electors 2,216,910 to 1,110,743.  So if

          4        there is some idea that this isn't controversial, at least

          5        it was in 1984.

          6             I only ask that you read this because I'm assuming

          7        that everybody is reading the summaries that are provided

          8        to you that are before you.  Now Commissioner Hawkes,

          9        after we have emasculated your proposal, would you like to

         10        say something else?

         11             COMMISSIONER HAWKES:  Well, Mr. Chairman, it was not

         12        intended as any greater protection than they cannot be

         13        arrested for what they say on the floor.  And Commissioner

         14        Connor made a suggestion that if it was set off by commas,

         15        put a comma after the word "arrest" and after the word

         16        "place," and style and drafting can certainly do that, it

         17        is just to provide the debate protection.  It was viewed

         18        as relatively uncontroversial in my book, but if the

         19        commission doesn't want to do it, I understand that too,

         20        Mr. Chairman.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I'm going to ask Commissioner

         22        Thompson, weren't in the Legislature in 1984?

         23             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  (Nods affirmatively.)

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  And Commissioner Mills and also

         25        Commissioner Scott.  Do you-all remember this, it came


          1        from the Legislature, this proposal?

          2             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I remember the Girardeau

          3        case.  I don't remember.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Mills?  Do you

          5        remember this proposal that's mentioned here --

          6             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  (Indicates negatively.)

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  -- that was defeated by 2 million

          8        to 1 million?  It was similar because I'd like to know if

          9        anybody has looked at the exact proposal.  All right.

         10        Well that's all right.  If I'm the only one that has a

         11        question, I don't guess it matters.  All right.  Any

         12        further debate?  Commissioner Wetherington.

         13             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  Well assuming that the

         14        people, as you correctly stated, voted on it in 1984,

         15        common law recognizes a privilege, which the Supreme Court

         16        has affirmed, what's the necessity?

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Your question is addressed to the

         18        sponsor, Commissioner Hawkes?

         19             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  Yes, it is.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Hawkes, do you want

         21        to respond to that?

         22             COMMISSIONER HAWKES:  I just think it is better if we

         23        have the actual footing in place and not ask the court to

         24        reach out and do things that they think ought to be there

         25        and maybe people intended to be there but aren't really


          1        there.  And it just seemed to make sense that way.

          2             I would submit that if it was controversial in '84,

          3        if that's when it came up, it was perhaps because people

          4        didn't understand it.  And if they don't understand it,

          5        experience tells us they tend to vote against it.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.  Commissioner Barkdull.

          7             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Mr. Chairman, members of the

          8        commission, I certainly think that members of the

          9        Legislature ought to have all the protections in debate

         10        and discussions because they ought to have no -- nothing

         11        should be a chilling effect on them expressing their

         12        opinion.

         13             But as pointed out by Commissioner Wetherington, I

         14        think the protection is there now.  And I have got to say,

         15        as I have looked at what we have already passed and what

         16        we are about to consider in the days to come, I am

         17        concerned about us getting a Christmas tree out there of

         18        proposals.  And because I have not seen an overwhelming

         19        need for this, I am reluctant to vote for it at this time

         20        and I will vote against it.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Any further debate?  Okay, open

         22        the machine and we will vote.

         23             (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Lock the machine and announce the

         25        vote.


          1             READING CLERK:  Four yeas and 23 nays, Mr. Chairman.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  The proposal fails.  We will go

          3        to the next proposal, 105, by Commissioner Planas.

          4        Commissioner Planas called me or called the office this

          5        morning and he has gone to the doctor.  He has been having

          6        some medical problems, as most of you may know.  He is

          7        going to try to get here today sometime, but he is not

          8        sure.  Commissioner Scott.

          9             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Mr. Chairman, I would move that

         10        we temporarily pass this matter until he is, if he is

         11        going to be here sometime this week because there are some

         12        questions that we discussed in committee and we are going

         13        to have to have him here to agree to whatever version the

         14        members might ask questions about who is included and who

         15        isn't.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Without objection, it will be

         17        temporarily passed pending the presence of Commissioner

         18        Planas at a reasonable time, which would be like this

         19        week.  This proposal relates to term limits for State

         20        Senators and Representatives.  And as Commissioner Scott

         21        points out, the committee did not have an opportunity to

         22        recommend on this because of the lack of quorum.  Without

         23        objection it is temporarily passed.

         24             Our next proposal is 178 [sic] by Commissioner

         25        Thompson.  And it was also not acted on by the committee


          1        for lack of a quorum and it is referred to the calendar.

          2        Would you read the Proposal No. 179, please.

          3             READING CLERK:  Proposal 179, a proposal to revise

          4        Article III, Sections 8 and 19, Florida Constitution;

          5        providing guidelines for legislative consideration of veto

          6        messages; revising calculation of the 72-hour public

          7        review period for general appropriation bills.

          8             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Connor, you are

          9        recognized.  I changed your name, Commissioner Thompson, I

         10        was reading his name here.

         11             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Yes, sir.  The first thing

         12        this proposal does is clarify for the Legislature, and

         13        they have had some recent problems with this, as to when a

         14        veto message has to be taken up.  Now to kind of refresh

         15        your memory on this, a bill is finally passed by both

         16        houses, it goes to the Governor.  Many times -- most of

         17        the time, the Legislature is out of the session by the

         18        time the Governor would have the opportunity to veto that

         19        bill.

         20             And so what happens is the Governor does the veto and

         21        ultimately it gets sent back to the House where it

         22        originated.  If it is a Senate bill, it goes back to the

         23        Senate first, if it was the House, it goes back to the

         24        House first.

         25             And so the question is how long can veto messages,


          1        how many times can they come back for consideration.  As

          2        you know, it takes an extraordinary vote to override a

          3        Governor's veto and it is not done that often.

          4             The staff on both sides of the House and Senate

          5        staffs and the clerk's office and the secretary's office

          6        have been working on something that would clarify it for

          7        them.  And so the way this language reads on Page 2 of

          8        this proposal is that legislative action on a veto shall

          9        be available only during the next regular or next special

         10        session, whichever occurs first.

         11             So that if you have a special session intervening,

         12        the question has been, does the originating house have to

         13        take this up?  And if they fail to do so, does that mean

         14        it is put off until the next regular legislative session?

         15        This I think, for all concerned, is probably going to be

         16        the best answer.

         17             Now Commissioner Jennings is working on this a little

         18        with her staff.  And do you have a proposed amendment that

         19        you want to make to this?  Okay.  So I think they are

         20        going to make a proposed amendment that changes that a

         21        little bit.  And I guess is just clarifies it, if we can

         22        have that read for Commissioner Jennings.

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Is the amendment on the table?

         24        Would you read the amendment, please?

         25             READING CLERK:  By Commissioners Jennings and Scott,


          1        on Page 2, Lines 4 through 7, delete those lines and

          2        insert, special session, whichever occurs first, and this

          3        shall be entered on its journal.  If the originating house

          4        votes to reenact a vetoed measure, whether in a regular or

          5        special session, and the other house does not consider or

          6        fails to reenact the vetoed measure, no further

          7        consideration by either house at any subsequent session

          8        may be taken.

          9             If a vetoed measure is presented at a special

         10        session, and the originating house does not consider it,

         11        the measure will be available for consideration at any

         12        intervening special session and until the end of the next

         13        regular session.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  You are recognized,

         15        Commissioner Jennings.

         16             COMMMISSIONER JENNINGS:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman,

         17        Commissioners, you are really just helping the Legislature

         18        at the moment.  I'm not sure if the world will end if we

         19        don't do this, but it will certainly help us because at

         20        the present time the Constitution says that a vetoed

         21        measure will be taken up at the next special or regular

         22        session.  And there seems to be some confusion as to what

         23        that means.

         24             Now historically the Senate has taken the position

         25        that that just means the next time you can get to a veto


          1        message, you better take it up or it is deemed abandoned.

          2        Through the years, the House has shared that position with

          3        us.

          4             Most recently, and on pretty good legal basis, the

          5        House believes that perhaps that is not the way we should

          6        look at it, that in fact we probably have the measure

          7        available to us, that when they say "special" or

          8        "regular," the measures are available to us until the end

          9        of the regular session following the time in which the

         10        veto message takes place.

         11             It came up this year.  As you may remember, when we

         12        were here during the special session in November, there

         13        was some discussion as to whether there would be an

         14        override of the Governor's veto of several issues.  The

         15        Senate took the position that that was probably the

         16        appropriate time to take that up, the House took the

         17        position they felt it was still available to us at some

         18        future time.

         19             So to clarify all this, this is one of these

         20        housekeeping things that you will help the Legislature.

         21        Those of us who have been in the Legislature have talked

         22        about it and we think perhaps the most equitable way of

         23        approaching it -- and Commissioner Thompson put this in

         24        when we were talking early on -- the most equitable way is

         25        saying, in fact, those measures are available until the


          1        end of the next regular session following the veto.

          2             And that's essentially what we have done, that we can

          3        either take them up at a special session that comes after

          4        the veto occurs, or the next regular session.  But at the

          5        close of the regular session the vetoes are no longer

          6        available.

          7             Perhaps Commissioner Scott would like to enlighten us

          8        further.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I think you made it very clear

         10        that what this does is make it clear that you can take it

         11        up either at the special session, if you don't, or if one

         12        house doesn't it would carry forward to the end of the

         13        regular session, the next regular session; is that it?

         14             At the present time I think the Governor's staff

         15        agreed with the Senate interpretation as being the proper

         16        one under the existing Constitution.  What this would do

         17        is remove any question is what your amendment -- which I

         18        believe Commissioner Thompson supports.  Am I right,

         19        Commissioner Thompson?

         20             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Yes, Mr. Chairman, I support

         21        it.  And some of the members are asking for copies.  Does

         22        everybody have a copy of this?

         23             And the logic for changing it from what the proposal

         24        was is that you might have a special session, as the

         25        chairman has indicated, I think some of the problems that


          1        even the Governor has, is you might have a special session

          2        for a day or two days or whatever and it is just not

          3        proper to considered two or three vetoed messages.  Rather

          4        than that, go on to the regular session is what members of

          5        legislature past, present and others are saying.

          6             There is a second part to this proposal,

          7        Mr. Chairman, that Commissioner Scott has filed.

          8             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  We are on the amendment at the

          9        moment.

         10             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  That's right, I'm sorry.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  And Commissioner Barkdull was up.

         12        Do you have a question, Commissioner Barkdull, or a

         13        comment on the amendment?

         14             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Let me see if I can ask

         15        Commissioner Jennings a question to be sure I understand

         16        this.  If the Governor vetoed at the conclusion of the

         17        session in '97 a measure, and there had been a special

         18        session of the Legislature in September of '97 and nobody

         19        took it up, and then you get to the regular session of

         20        '98, then you would have until the conclusion of the

         21        regular session of '98 to reach this issue.  Is that the

         22        purpose of this amendment?

         23             COMMMISSIONER JENNINGS:  Yes.

         24             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Thank you.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well you had better correct that.


          1        It wouldn't be in '98 because this wouldn't become

          2        effective until it passed.  And it would not apply to '97.

          3             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  I stand corrected.  I was

          4        trying to get the chronological effect of what would

          5        happen, but I stand corrected on the dates.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barnett is up.  You

          7        are next, Commissioner Smith.

          8             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  For a question.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Question of whom?

         10             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Commissioner Jennings.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Jennings.  She

         12        yields for a question.

         13             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Friendly question.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  And definitely if it is friendly.

         15             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  On Line 19 it refers to a

         16        vetoed measure is presented at a special session.  You use

         17        the phrase "presented."  In the Constitution currently,

         18        presentment of a bill to a Governor, as you know, has a

         19        special meaning.  I mean, it is once the House and Senate

         20        have actually signed off on the measure and formally

         21        presented it.

         22             I mean, is that just -- does that word have any

         23        special meaning?  It seems to me that the bill would

         24        always be before, potentially before -- the vetoed measure

         25        would always be before the House or Senate, depending on


          1        where it originated.  So I wasn't sure what that term

          2        meant.

          3             COMMMISSIONER JENNINGS:  My lawyer had to tell me.

          4        But in fact there is a procedure where the Secretary of

          5        State must present the veto messages to the House or the

          6        Senate, and that's what it is termed.  They will present

          7        them to us.  Once they are vetoed, they reside with the

          8        Secretary of State, they don't reside with the body in

          9        which the bill originated.  So the veto message has to be

         10        presented to us.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Jennings, under the

         12        '68 Constitutional, isn't there language in there that

         13        says something like the Secretary must lay it before the

         14        Legislature?

         15             COMMMISSIONER JENNINGS:  Yeah.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I think the secretary told me

         17        that.  And what this would do is keep the Secretary of

         18        State from having to lay it before the Legislature, just

         19        present it.

         20             She says laying it before the Legislature is

         21        presenting it.  Is that what you understood?

         22             COMMMISSIONER JENNINGS:  Any kind of nice, clean word

         23        we can use is okay with me.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  "Presented" sounds better to me,

         25        particularly in today's climate, Commissioner Jennings.


          1             COMMMISSIONER JENNINGS:  My thoughts exactly,

          2        Mr. Chairman.

          3             (Off-the-record comment.)

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  She says both would be in the

          5        Constitution if this amendment is adopted.  Is everybody

          6        clear on the amendment?  Do you want to close on it?

          7             COMMMISSIONER JENNINGS:  Well just if there are no

          8        further questions I would move the amendment.  And, again,

          9        as I have tried to share with you, historically, the House

         10        and Senate have agreed on the interpretation.  And this

         11        year there was some disagreement, and we felt that that

         12        may be the way of things in the future.  So there is no

         13        reason to have a question.  Any way is okay with us, we

         14        just want to know what the rules are.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Does everybody understand the

         16        amendment?  All in favor of the amendment say aye;

         17        opposed?

         18             (Verbal vote taken.)

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  The amendment carries.  Now we

         20        are on the proposal.  Commissioner Thompson, do you want

         21        to explain the rest of your proposal or do you yield to

         22        Commissioner Scott?

         23             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I yield to Commissioner

         24        Scott.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Scott, you have the


          1        floor.

          2             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Mr. Chairman, Commissioners,

          3        this is the same issue that we previously addressed in a

          4        proposal that I had which clarifies the 72-hour waiting

          5        period on the passage of the budget.  It was intended to

          6        be the final budget in the form it would go to the

          7        Governor, which is what my proposal said.  This language

          8        says it a little bit differently, taking the last vote

          9        necessary before it would go.

         10             But we are going to ask, we are going to have style

         11        and drafting and the lawyers finally look at which

         12        version, but that's the basic idea.  And it is included in

         13        this proposal also.  We have already passed it

         14        unanimously.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Then this provision

         16        ties in with your previous proposal, is what you are

         17        saying, and is the same thing, except it makes it appear

         18        in this context as well.  All right.  Does everybody

         19        understand the proposal now, as amended?  Would you like

         20        to close, please, Mr. Thompson, Commissioner Thompson?

         21             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman and

         22        Members.  This is primarily a housekeeping measure, as

         23        Commissioner Jennings has told you.  I think it is wise to

         24        send it on to style and drafting and then if we come up

         25        with a package of things that we think are


          1        noncontroversial and needed, this is one that I think

          2        should be included.  And I think it fits about on that

          3        rung of the ladder and I recommend it to you.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Unlock the machine

          5        and let's vote.

          6             (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Everybody voted?  Lock the

          8        machine and announce the vote.

          9             READING CLERK:  Twenty-eight yeas and zero nays,

         10        Mr. Chairman.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  And so the proposal as amended

         12        passes.

         13             Now we'll move to the committee substitute for

         14        Proposal 170 by the Committee on Executive and

         15        Commissioner Mills, recommended as a committee substitute

         16        and disapproved by the Committee of Executive and sent to

         17        the floor.  Commissioner Mills, you are recognized.

         18             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Mr. Chairman, I've spoken to the

         19        chairman of rules about this.  I would like to move to

         20        temporarily pass this and take it up later.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barkdull, as

         22        chairman, did you have any input from anybody else?

         23             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  No, sir, not today.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Do you have any recommendation?

         25             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  No, sir, I think he should be


          1        accorded the same privilege the Chair has been giving

          2        other people.

          3             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I haven't been giving it,

          4        everybody else has, without objection.  So, without

          5        objection, we will temporarily pass it.

          6             Then we'll move to -- well, Proposal No. 2 by

          7        Commissioner Sundberg, who is not here.  Incidentally, we

          8        have not announced this and I think most of you are aware

          9        that Commissioner Sundberg's son passed away last Friday,

         10        and that the memorial service, as I understand it, is

         11        today.  We have all, those of us that knew about it,

         12        conveyed our sympathy and our prayers to the family,

         13        particularly to our own Commissioner Sundberg.

         14             I anticipate that he will probably be able to return

         15        to our work pretty soon.  But it is a very sad situation

         16        when anyone loses a child.  And for Commissioner Sundberg,

         17        I'm sure it is a difficult time.

         18             Commissioner Smith.

         19             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  While this, too, is a

         20        noncontroversial housekeeping matter --

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Has anybody read this?  Maybe I

         22        ought to have the title read.

         23             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  We ask that it be temporarily

         24        passed until Commissioner Sundberg can rejoin us, and we

         25        hope and pray that it is very, very soon.


          1             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I'm going to ask the Reader to

          2        read the title and then we will, without objection,

          3        temporarily pass it.  Read it.

          4             READING CLERK:  Proposal 2, a proposal to revise

          5        Article I, Section 2, Florida Constitution; providing for

          6        citizens to enjoy equal opportunity to employment,

          7        housing, public accommodations, public education, and

          8        other benefits and authorizing governmental agencies to

          9        take actions to remedy the effects of past discrimination

         10        in certain areas.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Without objection,

         12        it's temporarily passed and we'll move to Proposal

         13        No. 186.  Would you read it, please?

         14             READING CLERK:  Proposal 186, a proposal to revise

         15        Article VI, Section 1, Florida Constitution; limiting

         16        political contributions.

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  That's by Commissioner Thompson.

         18        It was approved by the Committee on Ethics and Elections,

         19        and consideration has been deferred until this week.

         20        Commissioner Thompson, you are recognized to introduce

         21        your proposal.  Was it a unanimous vote in the committee,

         22        sir?  I understand it was.

         23             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I'm not sure.  I think so.

         24        Commissioner Barton corrects me.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  There's also an amendment on the


          1        table.  Commissioner Thompson, you need to tell us just

          2        briefly what it is before we take up the amendment.

          3             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Yes, actually the amendment

          4        now is the proposal.  It might be wise, Mr. Chairman, to

          5        read the amendment.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  There's an amendment on the

          7        table.  Would you read it?  I've got it.  I think

          8        everybody may have it.

          9             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I'm sending it around now.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It's being distributed.  It's on

         11        everybody's desk, if it's not, it's being distributed.

         12        Let's go ahead and read the amendment which is offered by

         13        Commissioner Thompson.

         14             READING CLERK:  By Commissioner Thompson, on Page 1,

         15        Lines 16 through 19, delete a person, political party,

         16        political committee or committee of continuous existence

         17        may not accept more than $500 per election from any entity

         18        or contribute more than $500 per election to a candidate,

         19        and insert, (A) aggregate contributions from a contributor

         20        to a political party and its committees shall not exceed

         21        the amount that may be contributed to a candidate by an

         22        individual other than the candidate under Florida law; (B)

         23        a political party and its committees will not contribute

         24        an aggregate amount to a candidate that exceeds the amount

         25        that any other entity other than the candidate may


          1        contribute to a candidate under Florida law.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Now this is really the proposal

          3        now, the amendment, but we are on the amendment.  So you

          4        may address it, Commissioner Thompson.

          5             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman and

          6        Members.  This -- you will note that I have one other

          7        proposal here on the veto messages.  I filed that kind of

          8        as a facilitator since I chaired the Legislative

          9        Committee.  And also with Commissioner Evans-Jones I filed

         10        something to facilitate your deliberations on

         11        apportionment.  Those are things that I think were brought

         12        to us by a lot of many different people, and as chairman

         13        of that committee I felt like should stay alive and I was

         14        just trying to facilitate.

         15             The only measure that I have filed for consideration

         16        on a personal basis is this one.  And you have heard me

         17        say many times that I really like the Legislature and I

         18        like our government in Florida, but you have also heard me

         19        say that I think there's some dangers.  And I think those

         20        dangers are increasing every time we have an election.

         21        And I don't want us to turn into the kind of circus that

         22        we have had at that federal level and to have hearings and

         23        embarrassments and all of those kinds of things.  Because

         24        we have been lucky in Florida, we have got good public

         25        officials.  I think they really work hard for us.


          1             But I'll tell you something, we are getting real,

          2        real close.  And the reason is there's just too much money

          3        in the political and campaign system to have a healthy

          4        system.  Now, I don't think anybody in the public out

          5        there would deny that.  But I think we have a

          6        responsibility ourselves to take a look at it, and I think

          7        we have got to be careful and concerned about federal

          8        constitutional rights, and I am.  And I think we have to

          9        be careful and concerned about the rights of people, no

         10        matter what their means in life, to seek public office.

         11        And I think I am and I think we have been.

         12             And I first filed this bill and I was getting under

         13        the deadline and I hadn't filed a thing.  And I just kept

         14        feeling stronger and stronger about it.  And so I got with

         15        the staff and said, Well, this is the best I can do today.

         16        And that is, I wrote something that Commissioners Morsani

         17        and Riley told me last week, Well, by golly, your proposal

         18        is finally one that is nonlegalistic and we can all

         19        understand it, and we like it.  It's good and basic.

         20             Well, I have to apologize to you a little bit, I did

         21        feel like it needed to be changed, and I said that the

         22        last time.  I don't think it's good to put a dollar amount

         23        in the Constitution like that.

         24             So, if you will notice, at the top of my amendment,

         25        before sub A, I'm just deleting the language of the


          1        proposal and starting over.  But the concept is the same.

          2        And if it were the law today in our Constitution, the

          3        impact would be the same because our contributions are

          4        restricted in each election cycle to $500 now.

          5             I assume that everybody understands that you can give

          6        a candidate a total of $1,500 if they have a primary, and

          7        then if they have a runoff and then if they have a general

          8        election.  So that's really $1,500 per election cycle.

          9             And what I'm saying is, number two, nobody, nobody,

         10        including political parties or whoever it is, can give a

         11        candidate more than the amount set by statute.  Right now

         12        that's $500 per cycle or $1,500 per election.  Nobody can

         13        do that.  So there won't be this reason to raise all of

         14        this soft money, all of this slush that's out there.

         15             And you don't have this reason for all of these

         16        people to go around, who are in office, whether it's

         17        legislative or whether it's gubernatorial or whatever it

         18        is, and try to raise huge bucks for some party or PAC or

         19        whatever so that huge bucks can then go to that candidate.

         20        These candidates don't really need it, it's been proven.

         21        But because everybody else can do it, everybody else is

         22        scared not to do it.  And I'm tell you, we are going to

         23        get embarrassed about it before it's all over.

         24             So why not just take this basic, simple approach and

         25        say everybody can give the same thing, no matter how you


          1        form yourself up.  And then, the second part is, which is

          2        sub A, nobody can give to any of those groups, including a

          3        political party, any amount more than you could give a

          4        candidate.

          5             So the political parties can raise a lot of money

          6        that way.  And they can do everything for their slate,

          7        whether you are Democrat or Republican or whatever you

          8        are, except you can't put money into that race, over and

          9        above the amount that anybody else can put in that race.

         10             That's what soft money is.  That's what it is all

         11        about.  And I want to tell you, this has been going on 10,

         12        15 years and it has gotten progressively worse and worse.

         13        It used to be that people hadn't thought of this bright

         14        idea yet and you didn't have these huge amounts of money

         15        being solicited and being paid.

         16             So I would submit to you that a lot of people out

         17        there accused of being special interests and wanting to

         18        control politics by these big donations don't like it so

         19        much.  They feel like it's, in the words of one

         20        lobbyist -- and I started to send you-all a bunch of press

         21        clippings and all that, but I'll tell you something, I

         22        never did too much feel the need to be in a fraternity and

         23        I never did too much feel the need to run a poll to get

         24        somebody to tell me what I was supposed to think.  I've

         25        got that much respect for you.


          1             So I don't think you need the news media telling you

          2        what you should think.  This is just a simple, basic

          3        problem in the state of Florida and throughout this

          4        nation.  And we can start right here and start right now

          5        by this simple amendment to our state's Constitution.

          6             This says there ought to be a limit as to what you

          7        give, and that goes for everybody, and that goes to

          8        everybody.  And that's the end of it.  It's just not hard

          9        to understand.  I guarantee you, you put 22 votes up

         10        there, and the public will give you the vote they need.

         11        And so with that, I just want to recommend this issue to

         12        you and tell you that I think it could be one of the most

         13        significant things that we can do for the future of our

         14        state.  Thank you.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Any proponents?

         16             COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES:  Question.

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  You have a question?  Hawkes was

         18        up first.  Commissioner Hawkes, do you have a question?

         19             COMMISSIONER HAWKES:  No.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Ford-Coates,

         21        Commissioner Thompson yields to your question.

         22             COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES:  Commissioner Thompson, the

         23        law as it currently stands refers to person, political

         24        committee, a committee of continuous existence and limits

         25        it to $500 per election.  This proposal also refers to


          1        political party.  Is that the difference of what you are

          2        trying to get to as opposed to what the statutes currently

          3        say?

          4             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I think so, uh-huh.

          5             COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES:  So that people can

          6        currently give more than $500 to political parties, not to

          7        committees of continuous existence or political

          8        committees?

          9             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  No, I think you can currently

         10        give more than $500 to a committee of continuous

         11        existence.  I think through a dues type of donation you

         12        can give more than $500.

         13             COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES:  Right, but then those

         14        entities cannot give more than $500 to a candidate.

         15             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Today --

         16             COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES:  No person, political

         17        committee, a committee of continuous existence can give

         18        any more than $500 per election.

         19             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Nobody but the party, yeah.

         20        The party can give up to 50,000.

         21             COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES:  But the party can.  So

         22        what we are really doing is getting rid of that loophole?

         23             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Yes, and there will be no

         24        need then to give it to the party because the party is

         25        going to be restricted to $500 into the candidate's


          1        coffers.

          2             COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES:  Would you explain to me

          3        why you believe this should be in the Constitution and not

          4        in the statute?

          5             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Well, I'll tell you, it's

          6        like a lot of things that we have been working on here.  I

          7        don't think it'll find its way into the statutes.  I think

          8        it's been recommended several times and it hasn't been

          9        done.  And for that reason, I think it's something that's

         10        worthy of our consideration.  About 90, 95 percent of what

         11        we deliberated upon, in my judgment, would have been able

         12        to be done statutorily.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right now, proponent?

         14        Question from Commissioner Henderson.

         15             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Commissioner Thompson, would

         16        you believe me -- I have heard everything you said and I

         17        agree with everything that you have said.  What's

         18        troubling me is I want to understand the effect because

         19        now I'm starting to be confused.  Under your proposal, if

         20        adopted, would a political party have the ability to

         21        spend, as it does now, $50,000 in a legislative campaign?

         22             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  No, it would not.

         23             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  That would be the state

         24        Democratic or Republican party or federal, for that

         25        matter; is that right?


          1             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Right.

          2             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Now last year we saw in the

          3        presidential campaigns a tremendous amount of, shall we

          4        just say commercials paid for by the national parties that

          5        were run in the state that was not supposedly for a

          6        particular candidate, but for support of the party, which

          7        had the effect of helping particular candidates.  Would

          8        this address that issue at all?

          9             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I doubt it.  I think that's

         10        probably going to be covered by federal constitutional

         11        protections of free speech and association.  And as long

         12        as it doesn't go directly into the campaign of a

         13        candidate, I think political parties and others can spend

         14        unlimited funds.  And I don't think there's anything that

         15        we can do about that in our Florida Constitution.

         16             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  In a limited sense, let me

         17        ask this also.  We have seen in the last few legislative

         18        cycles, I think by both parties, large television buys

         19        that came out of their Washington or New York

         20        headquarters, you know, to buy up the local markets

         21        throughout the state and then those things were made

         22        available to local candidates, or actually it may have

         23        been that the expenditure was done from there.  Would this

         24        get to that at all?

         25             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I don't think so.  I think


          1        anybody that's worried about political parties and the

          2        role that they play shouldn't worry.  First of all, it

          3        will cut down on the amount of money they are able to

          4        collect per entity.  That's $500 per entity in Florida.

          5        And I think that's healthy.  I think that's very healthy.

          6             Secondly, it will cut back to $500 under today's law

          7        what they can give for elections, primary and so forth.

          8        And I think that's healthy.  But I still think -- there's

          9        going to be a great place for the political parties.  I

         10        think they will go back to doing really and truly what we

         11        need them to do, which is help us with the debate on

         12        philosophy and so forth.  And there may be times when that

         13        coincides very well with particular candidates, and I

         14        think that's part of freedom of speech and association.

         15        And we are somewhat limited as to what we can do about

         16        that.

         17             But as time goes by, if we do something like this, I

         18        think those other issues will be neatened up not only by

         19        our state but maybe by other states, maybe by the federal

         20        government and probably judicial decisions.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Now Commissioner Connor, then

         22        Commissioner Barnett, then Commissioner Barton for a

         23        question.  Commissioner Connor.

         24             COMMISSIONER CONNOR:  I have a question likewise.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  He yields.


          1             COMMISSIONER CONNOR:  Commissioner Thompson, if I

          2        understood the aim of what you are trying to get at is you

          3        have wanted to limit, both directly and indirectly, the

          4        amounts of money that an entity or person can contribute

          5        to a political campaign to avoid the abuses of excess

          6        money buying an election, in essence.  Am I correct about

          7        that?

          8             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Yes, excess spending in

          9        elections is not good for us.

         10             COMMISSIONER CONNOR:  The question that I have

         11        really -- and I think I understand that through Paragraph

         12        B.  The question I have, though, really relates to

         13        Paragraph A, which limits the contributions that people

         14        may make to a political party.

         15             Historically, from before the beginning of the

         16        republic, political speech has been deemed to be a

         17        preferred form of speech.  This goes well beyond, it seems

         18        to me, limiting the amount of money that flows into an

         19        election campaign, and by virtue of the provisions of

         20        Paragraph A strikes me that it might -- that it would

         21        significantly limit the ability of a political party to

         22        get its message out, in terms of philosophy.

         23             I'm not sure if that's what you intend, but you

         24        certainly cap out the amount of money that a private

         25        contributor can give to their political party, which will


          1        most certainly in today's media age have a substantially

          2        diminishing effect, I believe, on the ability of that

          3        party to get its message out, without regard to any

          4        particular election or candidate.

          5             I'm not sure if you intend that, but I have grave

          6        reservations about the potential unintended effect that

          7        may flow out of Paragraph A and I hope you will address

          8        that.

          9             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I'll be glad to.  I think

         10        that the issue for us there is, what is a campaign

         11        contribution and what is a contribution to a party.  And

         12        it is a couple of things.

         13             First of all, it is freedom of speech.  And secondly,

         14        it's freedom of association.  And what the courts have

         15        held, I think, the way I understand it, is that you

         16        have -- some reasonable limit can be put on that because

         17        you have other alternatives.  Now I do believe, as you

         18        say, that it will cut back on the amount of money that

         19        parties can collect.  I think you are correct in that.

         20             And that's exactly what I'm trying to do and that's

         21        exactly what I'm trying to convince you is wrong.  Because

         22        I believe not just money influences elections.  And that's

         23        what the court said, I think, in Buckley versus Valeo.

         24        And I don't know that case word for word, but I do know

         25        that what the court said and I think what the court


          1        intended there was that there are other things that you

          2        can do for that candidate or for that party that will

          3        espouse that philosophy.

          4             Anybody, for example, can make independent

          5        expenditures on behalf of those things and there's nothing

          6        that anybody can do about that.  Those are, I think,

          7        absolutely protected.

          8             So, instead of giving a political party to spend as

          9        it wants to 25,000, 50,000, having that money solicited

         10        from people in the public and particularly special

         11        interests, which is where it's usually solicited from by

         12        parties, then I think maybe some of those people will be

         13        interested enough in government and there will probably

         14        still be some solicitation, but there will be plenty of

         15        money that will be spent, I think we can all depend on

         16        that.  I think it is the way it's going to be addressed

         17        and the way that it's going to be solicited that this will

         18        help.

         19             But you are exactly right, I'm trying to limit what

         20        you are concerned about.

         21             COMMISSIONER CONNOR:  May I follow briefly?  So, if,

         22        for example, a contributor wanted to give designated funds

         23        to their party, to promote a campaign that would point out

         24        the philosophical points of distinction between their

         25        party and the opposing party, if I understand your


          1        amendment, their ability to do that would be limited by

          2        the limitations that would be involved as to how much they

          3        could contribute in the aggregate to a candidate; is that

          4        right?

          5             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Yes, but it would not in any

          6        way limit independent expenditures.  So they could do

          7        exactly the same thing without going through that

          8        apparatus.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barnett is next.  He

         10        yields.

         11             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Commission Thompson, I like

         12        this proposal and I plan to support it, but I wanted to

         13        ask you in, line A of your amendment you talk about a

         14        contributor.  If you would explain the scope of that word.

         15        I mean, I presume it is a person, a political party, a

         16        committee of continuous existence, but I think you might

         17        need to give us some idea about who is a contributor.

         18             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Well I think any legal entity

         19        is a contributor, just one entity now.  I think you can

         20        continue the practice that you now have.  I have no

         21        concern personally about, as long as you limit

         22        contributions, allowing corporations to make

         23        contributions, for example.  A corporation would be a

         24        contributor.

         25             In Florida I think it's been held that a corporation


          1        may have several subsidiaries and all of them can give

          2        money.  I think I can give money and I think my wife can

          3        give money and I think my children can give money as long

          4        as it's their own money.

          5             So there will be -- let me tell you, folks, there

          6        won't be any shortage of money, still.  There won't be any

          7        shortage of money.  But I think it's going to change

          8        things an awful lot.  But your point is well taken.  It

          9        means exactly just what you would think it would mean.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barton for a

         11        question.

         12             COMMISSIONER BARTON:  Yes.  I voted against this in

         13        committee, but only because I had a question that still

         14        remains unanswered.  And that was limited to the

         15        contributions from an individual to a political party.

         16        Are there any states where that's been limited?  It

         17        doesn't say in the background information.

         18             And my concern is, can we tell an individual that

         19        they can't contribute money to a political party any more

         20        than we can tell them that they can't contribute to a

         21        church or to their sorority or to their college or a

         22        charity?

         23             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Or to a candidate.  And we

         24        tell them everyday; we tell them everyday about a

         25        candidate.  And I think a party would fit that.


          1             Now you raise a good point and I'm not trying to

          2        avoid that point.  There's the possibility of

          3        constitutional concern about that.  But I think in my

          4        response to Commissioner Connor, freedom of speech has

          5        been considered, freedom of association has been

          6        considered.  You have other alternatives, you will have

          7        other alternatives in Florida rather than just giving to a

          8        party to express yourself as far as speech, to express

          9        your association.

         10             So as far as those are available, my understanding is

         11        that this should pass constitutional muster.

         12             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Commissioner

         13        Wetherington for a question.

         14             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  Let me ask this question.

         15        Number one, is this going to weaken, in any way, political

         16        parties, number one, major political parties, or also a

         17        possible effect on a minor political party?  How would it

         18        effect -- in other words, we have a party system in this

         19        country.  We have representative democracies.  Obviously,

         20        we all know that political parties have been very

         21        fundamental in this.  Is this going to undermine in some

         22        way or weaken the effectiveness of political parties?

         23             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Well, personally, I don't

         24        think that it will.  As I said, this is a practice of --

         25        this solicitation of 10, 15, 25, $30,000 for the party and


          1        then the party ultimately giving to candidates up to

          2        $50,000 I think is something that's kind of evolved over

          3        the last decade or so.  I think the parties were strong

          4        before it evolved and I think that they will be strong

          5        afterwards.  They may even be a little stronger because I

          6        think they will be working on their philosophy and not

          7        raising money just to stick straight into campaigns.

          8             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  Right now they could give

          9        $50,000 to the candidate.

         10             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  To a legislative candidate,

         11        that's my understanding.

         12             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  I could contribute $1,000

         13        or $5,000 to the party and the party could collect a lot

         14        of those and the party could give how much to the

         15        candidate, 50,000?

         16             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Up to 50,000 is my

         17        understanding.

         18             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  $50,000, I mean, for

         19        example, in Dade County, $50,000 in a countywide campaign

         20        in Dade County is basically nothing.  I mean, it literally

         21        wouldn't even begin to make a difference.

         22             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Well, I'll tell you

         23        something, I know people the run statewide that spend

         24        many, many hours trying to raise $50,000.  Dade County may

         25        be a little different than statewide.  But I think that


          1        amount is significant.  I think that's too much for any

          2        one entity to put into an individual campaign, and I think

          3        it can be done otherwise.

          4             You know, as the old fellow said to the king fish

          5        when he was dying in that book -- what was the name of it,

          6        I can't remember the name of it -- but he said, It could

          7        have been done different.  And I think this could be done

          8        different and better.

          9             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  Would it affect

         10        minority -- let's say a small party, a minority party is

         11        trying to get started and has a good cause and would like

         12        to raise money to support minority candidates.  How would

         13        it affect the ability of minority parties to advance in

         14        our political system?

         15             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Well, they would have to play

         16        by the same rules that everybody else does.  And I think

         17        that's healthy.  I think the candidates themselves, in

         18        particular, if you want to look at that, everybody else

         19        out there in that person's legislative district or in that

         20        Dade County can't give them but $500 apiece, and along

         21        comes a party that may get all of those funds from a Ross

         22        Perot or a Chinese Government and give it to that person,

         23        I don't want that, personally.

         24             I would just as soon go along with this and everybody

         25        play by the same rules.  And I think if minority parties


          1        are going to flourish in Florida, they will do it in spite

          2        of this.  I don't know that they have done so well so far

          3        any way, so I don't think this will hurt them.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Any more questions?  Commissioner

          5        Thompson, you have the right to close, so I'll come back

          6        to you.  Commissioner Hawkes, you have been very patient.

          7        It's your turn.

          8             COMMISSIONER HAWKES:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I

          9        would like to start with a couple of disclaimers.  One, I

         10        don't like opposing Commissioner Thompson.  Normally I'm

         11        very supportive of what he's supportive of; I think we

         12        share a lot of philosophies.

         13             Secondly, I would like to point out that when we are

         14        talking about limiting the money in campaigns, we had some

         15        other proposals, Commissioner Corr's and I guess a

         16        disclaimer, I voted for those because I thought those

         17        might have an effect of actually limiting the money in the

         18        campaigns.

         19             I think this proposal, though, however, is really

         20        going to protect incumbents.  I would challenge anyone to

         21        show me a race where an incumbent member was defeated by a

         22        member of the opposite party where he didn't have party

         23        help.  I would also challenge the commissioners to go up

         24        to the Secretary of the State's office and look at the

         25        campaign reports for members of the legislature who have


          1        already opened up their campaign accounts, which is

          2        probably the vast majority.  And they have 35 to $50,000

          3        probably on-hand already.

          4             I would also ask you to remember some of the things

          5        that have already been said, in other words, corporations

          6        can give money, their subsidiaries can give money.  And,

          7        also, there's nothing to prevent you from creating 30 PACs

          8        or 100 PACs and each one of your PACs could then give

          9        $500.  And that's not just a hypothetical, in fact, many

         10        organizations in Florida do have numerous PACs that they

         11        can write checks from.

         12             This was illustrated to me in a rather graphic way

         13        when I saw that my opponent had the Realtors' support and

         14        blessing and then I looked at his campaign report and

         15        there was a contribution from the, I think it was the Relo

         16        PAC or something, and then Real PAC, and Realtor PAC.  And

         17        they all have the same address, they were all given the

         18        same day, they had different names and they were in fact

         19        different organizations, but they all came and they were

         20        signed by the same individual.

         21             Obviously if I had someone in my district who

         22        supported me, they couldn't make additional individuals;

         23        they had just what they had.  I raised more money in my

         24        district when I first ran, in 1990 when I won, than my

         25        opponent did.  But my opponent out-raised from


          1        contributors probably better than ten to one from what I

          2        raised because he had the Tallahassee connection.

          3             You know, I'm sure that lobbyists would love to give

          4        money to the person they think is best able to represent

          5        the district that they are coming from, but in reality,

          6        they support the people who they think are going to win,

          7        and that's the incumbent.  There is no way that the

          8        incumbent can be successfully challenged unless -- and if

          9        this is your philosophy and this might be fine -- unless

         10        he's independently wealthy.

         11             In other words, a man or woman of average means would

         12        not be able to successfully challenge and take on the

         13        typical legislative candidate.  And it doesn't happen now.

         14        The only time an incumbent is unseated in Florida now by a

         15        member of the opposite party is when his own political

         16        party comes and gets involved.

         17             Now, there are some other questions that I would ask

         18        you to consider before voting on this.  In 1992, we

         19        reduced the amount that you could receive from one person

         20        from $1,000 down to $500 per election cycle.  So it used

         21        to be you could get $3,000 from any entity and now you can

         22        get $1500 from an entity.

         23             And if we look at the campaign reports, it's clear

         24        that the money involved in campaigns hasn't gone down at

         25        all.  It's just as much money, it's just that now we have


          1        had to find other ways, and I would submit less

          2        accountable ways, to fund these campaigns.  We have

          3        created more entities, we write more checks.  And so the

          4        professional players, they do well and they prosper

          5        because they find ways, they're there every year, year in,

          6        year out.  And they find ways to get around to achieve

          7        their goals.

          8             Of course, the people who might support you if you

          9        decide to run for office from your district, they might

         10        just get enthusiastic because maybe they belong to a civic

         11        club with you or they go to your church, and they want to

         12        help you out.  They don't know all these fancy rules.

         13        They think, I'm allowed to give 500 bucks and they give

         14        500 bucks, and that's it.

         15             I would also tell you from personal experience that

         16        right now when a party spends $50,000 on a legislative

         17        race, there has to be accountability.  They work with the

         18        candidate and the candidate signs off on what they do.

         19        And sometimes they will tell the party, No, I don't want

         20        to do that, or, Yes, I do want to do that.

         21             Florida is the fourth largest state in the union and

         22        there is a lot at stake when you have a $44 billion

         23        budget, which we might have next year.  This year I think

         24        it was $42.5 billion.  Obviously, Florida's industry is

         25        concerned about who is making these decisions.  And they


          1        are going to become involved and they are going to give

          2        money to the parties and the parties are going to become

          3        involved and they are going to participate.

          4             If you make it so the party can only give $500 to the

          5        candidate, then the party is going to do independent

          6        expenditures.  Why did we never have independent

          7        expenditures to the extent that we had them last cycle in

          8        previous cycles?  Because we tried to make artificial

          9        rules.  It's expensive to run for office because there is

         10        a lot at stake.  We ask these people to carry an awful lot

         11        of obligation and responsibility.

         12             People are concerned, the way we get our message out

         13        is through spending money.  And if we pass this, I agree

         14        with Commissioner Thompson, I think the voters would

         15        probably adopt it.  But they would be adopting it to

         16        achieve a goal that they are not going to achieve with

         17        this proposal.

         18             If you want to make it so that we can still have

         19        competitive elections, Florida I think by most accounts is

         20        a two-party state, if you want to make it so that both

         21        parties can compete, then we ought to not make it so that

         22        we just favor incumbents.  I think to make it competitive

         23        we need to allow the parties to participate and we need to

         24        allow them to participate directly so that we have

         25        accountability from the candidate.


          1             So when a mail piece goes out that you think is

          2        offensive, there is somebody that has to answer to that

          3        because it came through his campaign account.  You know,

          4        maybe there's some ability to dodge there, but it's not

          5        the same as independent expenditures.

          6             There's still going to be big money in these races,

          7        it's just that it's going to be more hidden.  And so for

          8        those reasons, I would ask you to vote against the

          9        proposal.  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Connor.

         11             COMMISSIONER CONNOR:  Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak

         12        in opposition to the proposal with reluctance because of

         13        my great respect for Commissioner Thompson, and because I

         14        believe I share many of his thoughts as they relate to

         15        financial abuses associated with campaign spending.

         16             But I'm particularly concerned about the effects of

         17        Paragraph A of the proposal, which imposes what I would

         18        submit to you are very draconian limits on the amount of

         19        money that a person can contribute to a political party.

         20        It seems to me that the real evil, if you will, that

         21        Commissioner Thompson wants to get at is the undue

         22        influence that money can have on a campaign.

         23             But I think the political parties play a role in our

         24        society that go well beyond just a given election cycle.

         25        Because the political parties, when they are doing what


          1        they ought to be doing, are supposed to be promoting a

          2        philosophy of government, a world view, if you will, about

          3        how we ought to order ourselves within the political

          4        arena, a view about the role of government in the place of

          5        our lives, and other important contributions that

          6        political parties make to developing the ideas that

          7        ultimately will take hegemony in the marketplace of ideas.

          8             When we come in and limit the amount of money that an

          9        individual can contribute to a political party, we have a

         10        chilling effect on the dialogue that takes place,

         11        notwithstanding what may happen in a given election cycle,

         12        but we have a dramatic, and I would submit to you chilling

         13        effect on the ability of a political party to get its

         14        message out.  We live in a state with 14 million people,

         15        with 13 or 14 major media markets.  And money is the means

         16        by which the message gets disseminated to the people.

         17             While I support in the strongest way the elimination

         18        of special interest money and undue influence of

         19        contributions in elections, I don't wish in any way to

         20        limit the ability of a party to disseminate its message,

         21        to distinguish itself from other parties who may be

         22        contending for primacy in the marketplace.

         23             This will not only have the effect of benefiting

         24        incumbents, this will have the effect of perpetuating the

         25        hegemony of the Republican and Democratic parties in our


          1        existing political landscape because they will continue to

          2        travel forward, in large part, based on their history,

          3        their name recognition, their ideas, et cetera.

          4             But a fledgling new party who wishes to compete in

          5        the arena will be at a decided disadvantage because it

          6        will have a dramatically restricted ability to get its

          7        ideas into the forefront for consideration by the public.

          8             So while I support in the strongest of terms the

          9        efforts to limit the undue influence of special interest

         10        money -- and frankly, I'm not as concerned about the

         11        contribution of money to political parties to candidates

         12        as Commissioner Thompson is, although I understand what

         13        has happened in terms of the abuse of the system with the

         14        soft money contributions.  I am profoundly concerned about

         15        limiting the ability of people to disseminate their ideas

         16        in the marketplace.

         17             And while I may be able to go into the marketplace

         18        and spend $5,000 on trying to get a particular political

         19        message out, that $5,000 in and of itself, through an

         20        independent expenditure campaign, won't gain nearly the

         21        leverage it will if it's combined with the contributions

         22        of 100 others who have contributed $5,000 to get that

         23        message into the marketplace.

         24             So I think the political parties play a proper and

         25        profoundly important role in developing political


          1        discourse in this state.  And I think this proposal is

          2        frankly too draconian in its impact and I will vote

          3        against it.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Any more opponents?  Commissioner

          5        Wetherington.

          6             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  I would just say I have

          7        to join in and agree with what Commissioner Connor said.

          8        In our representative form of government, people can't

          9        know everything, we have to have some way to bring the

         10        message to people to make our system work.  The way we

         11        have selected in this country to do it is through our

         12        political parties, this allows representative democracy to

         13        function.

         14             And the political parties have to have the ability to

         15        get the message out.  And presumably they are not soft

         16        money.  Presumably a political party is not some low-level

         17        kind of thing that has no interest in the public

         18        well-being.  It's theoretically something that promotes

         19        well-being and helps to allow our representative democracy

         20        to function.

         21             To say that a political party can contribute up to

         22        $50,000 doesn't seem to me, number one, like a terrible

         23        thing.  In fact, it seems to me like in many areas you

         24        could argue that maybe it should even be more money.

         25             I totally agree with this soft money and with the


          1        abuses of money and all like that.  If it were anything

          2        else, I would agree totally.  But to say that political

          3        parties can't raise the money is what disturbs me.  So I

          4        would vote against it.

          5             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Thompson to close.

          6             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman and

          7        Members.  I certainly respect the people who have spoken

          8        in opposition to this, and I'm kind of wondering what they

          9        are going to do about the problem because I haven't heard

         10        anybody make any real suggestions.

         11             People talk about soft money, but every time an issue

         12        comes up about it, it's not soft money.  People worry

         13        about fledgling political parties.  Who in the world do

         14        you think if -- who do you think is going to get the money

         15        if a fledgling, new political party goes and solicits

         16        money from the next ten special interests?  Is it going to

         17        be that new little political party, or is it going to be

         18        one that's got people in office and especially people in

         19        office that are calling them about it?

         20             So don't feel too sorry for the little party and vote

         21        against this.  Give them a chance, maybe, to get into the

         22        ball game and let everybody be on the same and level

         23        playing field.

         24             Now, you know, we talked about the role of the party.

         25        And I respect what Mr. Connor said and others about the


          1        party, the party's role in our society and in our history.

          2        But constitutionally there are lots of things a party can

          3        do besides just collect money and give it.

          4             And I will submit to you that that's all they are

          5        doing today in Florida, and it's getting worse and worse

          6        and worse.  And while I didn't send you out a bunch of

          7        newspaper clippings, I assume that all of you are

          8        listening and reading and watching TV and you hear and you

          9        read and you know what's going on, and it's wrong and it's

         10        bad.  And as I said earlier, it's certainly going to

         11        embarrass us all before it's all said and done.

         12             I think the political parties have a real role and I

         13        think they need to get back to fulfilling those roles and

         14        they do need to be espousing philosophy and they need to

         15        be working on philosophy and working on voter turnout and

         16        all of those things that are healthy.

         17             But they don't need to be giving or receiving this

         18        big money.  And they don't need to be using these elected

         19        officials to get it.  And the very idea that this idea

         20        right here is in favor of incumbents is unbelievable to

         21        me.  Because it is the incumbents that go to get the money

         22        to go to the party that go back to them.

         23             Where in the world do you think the influence comes

         24        from to get the money to those parties to begin with?  It

         25        is not from the people that are not in office.  It is from


          1        the people who are in office.  That's the problem.

          2             So this is not a measure to help or to hurt

          3        incumbents.  It is a measure to put everybody on the same

          4        playing field, to clean up our campaign laws in Florida,

          5        and it is a step hand-in-hand with some limited, measured

          6        form of campaign finance, government campaign finance.

          7             And if you will take this step, if you will take this

          8        step, I think you will see other steps.  I want to see it

          9        squeezed until we do know who gave and who got and until

         10        we do know what the person says and what the person wants

         11        and who they got money from.  And it doesn't have to go

         12        through some third entity to get to them.  That's wrong.

         13             Give them $500 or don't give them anything.  Don't

         14        give $25,000 to the party so they can end up with it.

         15        That's what I'm saying.  Squeeze this system a little bit.

         16        Take a little risk, take a little risk, and you will be

         17        glad you did.  Thank you.

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Scott, would you

         19        take the chair?  The Chairman wants to exercise a

         20        prerogative which is given in the rules to close on this

         21        issue.

         22             (Commissioner Scott assumes the chair.)

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioners, I'm not going to

         24        do this -- usually I'm going to leave the podium and come

         25        down when I am involved in presenting something, but


          1        listening to this debate I felt it was necessary that at

          2        least I express the Chair's views on this issue.

          3             Anybody who has dealt with politics over a period of

          4        time or elections over a period of time will tell you that

          5        Commissioner Thompson, who has as much knowledge about

          6        this subject as anybody in the state of Florida, having

          7        raised money as Speaker, having done all of the things

          8        that he has discussed, and he has outlined to you a very

          9        modest constitutional provision, which is the only way we

         10        will ever get election reform or financial participation

         11        in elections put on a reasonable basis.

         12             I say to those of you who say $50,000 is not much

         13        money, I say to you that that's more money than about

         14        85 percent of our people make in a year in their families.

         15        I say to you when that's the case, it is obscene to allow

         16        that amount of money to go to political parties to go back

         17        into races to defeat people.

         18             To those of you who say that this would help the

         19        incumbents, I say to you, the incumbents are already

         20        helped.  If you don't believe it, look at the incumbents

         21        and the amounts of money they raise depending on their

         22        positions in the Legislature.  $300,000 I recall reading

         23        about one who doesn't have an opponent.

         24             Now we cannot expect nor can we demand that the

         25        Legislature deal with this problem at all.  They are


          1        handcuffed by the need in their view to raise money to

          2        stay in office to prevent their views.  I think that this

          3        one measure, and any measure which goes from this body

          4        forth to the public that would reduce the influence of

          5        obscene money, of large amounts, of these terrible amounts

          6        being paid to achieve the purposes of those people who

          7        happen to have been fortunate enough to have the money, no

          8        matter where it came from.

          9             Whether it is inherited money, which is the easiest

         10        kind to spend, Commissioners, or whether it is hard-earned

         11        money, which is the pretty hard kind to spend, or whether

         12        it is money that falls easily from stock options or from

         13        corporations that have millions and billions of dollars of

         14        income a year, it is still something that we cannot sit

         15        here in good conscience and let this amendment be defeated

         16        and give the people an opportunity to vote on this.

         17             There is no other way that we will achieve election

         18        reform in our time.  And those of us that are approaching

         19        the end of our careers have seen this work both ways.  It

         20        is not a political party issue at all.  We have seen it

         21        where one party has got all the money and we have seen it

         22        where the next party has got all the money and we have

         23        seen it where the candidates here and there raise large

         24        sums.

         25             But I can assure you that those that have dealt with


          1        this, and those that have had to go raise the money, to go

          2        out and beg for the money, to go out and do those things,

          3        need an overall revamping of this system that we have to

          4        make sure that we go back to voting on issues and voting

          5        intelligently.

          6             And I urge you each to give this an opportunity to go

          7        to the people in the forum in which it's been offered by

          8        Commissioner Thompson, who has made one of the most

          9        eloquent presentations for it that could be made.  And I

         10        add my meager voice to his.  Thank you very much.

         11             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Okay.  The secretary tells me

         12        that we never acted on the amendment and so at this point

         13        we need to vote to I assume adopt the amendment which will

         14        then become the proposal that has been debated at length

         15        here and discussed by proponent Commissioner Thompson.

         16        All in favor of the amendment, say aye; opposed?

         17             (Verbal vote taken.)

         18             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  And so the amendment is adopted.

         19        And now the question -- I'm sorry, for what purpose,

         20        Commissioner Connor?

         21             COMMISSIONER CONNOR:  To inquire whether or not

         22        Commissioner Douglass would yield for a question, inasmuch

         23        as he has not had the opportunity to receive questions at

         24        this point.

         25             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Commissioner Douglass, will you


          1        yield for a question?

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Provided the rules allow it, I

          3        will.

          4             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  I don't think there is a rule on

          5        it, so he yields.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Provided the Chair allows it.

          7             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  He yields.  Go ahead with your

          8        question.

          9             COMMISSIONER CONNOR:  Thank you.  Commissioner

         10        Douglass, my question very simply is whether or not every

         11        single concern that you raise isn't adequately addressed

         12        by part B of the proposal without the necessity of

         13        Paragraph A.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  My answer is no.

         15             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  And so the question recurs on

         16        final passage of Proposal 186.  Unlock the machine and

         17        Commissioners prepare to vote.

         18             (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)

         19             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Have all Commissioners voted?

         20        Lock the machine and record the vote.

         21             READING CLERK:  Twenty-one yeas and 9 nays,

         22        Mr. Chairman.

         23             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  And so the proposal is adopted

         24        and referred to Style and Drafting.

         25             Read the next proposal.


          1             READING CLERK:  Proposal 135, a proposal to revise

          2        Article VII, Section 4, Florida Constitution; adding lands

          3        used for conservation purposes to those lands that may by

          4        law be assessed for tax purposes on the basis of their

          5        character or use.

          6             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Commissioner Henderson.

          7             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Mr. Chairman, thank you.

          8        This is beginning to sound like a broken record on this

          9        one.  I'll ask that this be deferred until the day after

         10        tomorrow inasmuch as your committee that you will be

         11        chairing tomorrow, F&T, will be taking up its sister

         12        proposal at that time.

         13             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Okay.  Let me suggest to you

         14        that we remind us to try to get -- the question here was a

         15        definition of conservation.  Let's see if we can work on

         16        that before tomorrow night.

         17             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Your staff put together a

         18        very nice memo on this and I'm assuming that we will be

         19        able to resolve the issue in your committee tomorrow.

         20             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Without objection, the proposal

         21        is temporarily passed.

         22             Read the next proposal.

         23             READING CLERK:  Proposal 33, a proposal to revise

         24        Article VII, Section 5, Florida Constitution; eliminating

         25        the prohibition against levying a state income tax.


          1             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Commissioner Barnett.

          2             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  I was trying to think of

          3        something different to say other than temporarily pass.

          4             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  How about you are sorry?

          5             (Laughter.)

          6             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Oh, but I'm not, I am not at

          7        all.  I just want to make sure that it is a slow press day

          8        when this comes up.

          9             No, actually, I talked with the chairman, the Rules

         10        Committee chairman, and asked that it be temporarily

         11        passed until probably tomorrow afternoon when the issue

         12        will come up, assuming there is time on the calendar.

         13             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Okay.  In fairness to the rules

         14        chairman why don't we just temporarily pass it and then it

         15        will be up to the committee to reschedule it.  Any

         16        objection?  Without objection, show the matter temporarily

         17        passed.

         18             Read the next proposal.

         19             READING CLERK:  Committee Substitute for Proposal

         20        No. 184, a proposal to revise Article VI, Section 1,

         21        Florida Constitution; providing that the Legislature shall

         22        prohibit certain conduct in connection with elections.

         23             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Okay.  Our executive director

         24        informs me that they are distributing a staff analysis and

         25        an amendment or substitute proposal; is that right,


          1        Commissioner?

          2             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Yes, Mr. Chairman.

          3             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  We will go ahead and recognize

          4        Commissioner Mills to explain the proposal.

          5             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Yes, Mr. Chairman.  We discussed

          6        this previously last time.  Commissioner Freidin and

          7        others had some technical questions about the language and

          8        its effect.  Commissioner Freidin and I have an amendment

          9        on the desk to address that.

         10             But conceptually what this does is provide a basis

         11        for the Legislature to deal with one of the other issues

         12        that the public tells us they care about in terms of

         13        elections.  It is not just money, it is deception, fraud

         14        and lying.  This provision will allow us to direct the

         15        Legislature to impose the most serious penalty on a person

         16        running for public office who is deceptive, and who has

         17        lied to the public; that is, remove them from office.

         18             The law as it currently stands does not allow us to

         19        do that because the law limits removal from office to a

         20        felony.  Now, this won't change the process in terms of

         21        how it is done.  Each house of the Legislature will judge

         22        its own members, the Governor would deal with executive

         23        officers, the Legislature would deal with impeachable

         24        officers, the Supreme Court justices, et cetera.

         25             But currently you can have fraud, deception, libel


          1        and slander in an election and remain in office.  It seems

          2        to me, and it seemed to the committee which voted

          3        unanimously on this, that this is an opportunity for us to

          4        direct the Legislature to do something which should fully

          5        restore faith in elections.

          6             I'm sorry Commissioner Thompson isn't here because I

          7        was going to, I think it was in Commissioner Thompson's

          8        district, for those that are concerned about truth in

          9        elections, it was either -- it was James Harold Smith who

         10        was running for election.  And he had, his two campaign

         11        managers came in, one from Jackson County, one from

         12        Gadsden County.

         13             The one from Jackson County said, You have got to get

         14        to Jackson County fast, you have got to get to Jackson

         15        County very fast, they are lying about you.  Well the

         16        campaign manager who came from Gadsden County said, Well,

         17        that's nothing, you can't go there, you have to come to

         18        Gadsden County.  He said, Why?  He said, Because they are

         19        telling the truth about you in Gadsden County.

         20             (Laughter.)

         21             So while lying isn't always the most derogatory thing

         22        that we can say about some politicians, what this does do

         23        is say that honesty in elections counts.  And Commissioner

         24        Freidin and I have an amendment on the desk.

         25             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Read the amendment.


          1             READING CLERK:  By Commissioners Mills and Freidin,

          2        on Page 1, Lines 13 through 24, delete those lines and

          3        insert Section 1, regulation of elections, (A), all

          4        elections by the people shall be by direct and secret

          5        vote.  General elections shall be determined by --

          6             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  It has been distributed, a

          7        lengthy amendment.  Commissioner Mills, do you have any

          8        further explanation?

          9             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  That is what I described.

         10             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Questions on the amendment?

         11        Anyone wish to debate the amendment?  Any further --

         12        Commissioner Barkdull, for what purpose?

         13             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  If that amendment is on the

         14        desk, I don't have it.  It started out -- when he started

         15        reading it, I haven't seen one like that.

         16             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  How about it, Staff, is it on

         17        the desk?

         18             The secretary says it has been distributed.  Who

         19        doesn't have it?  Let's get them another copy.

         20             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  I certainly don't want to

         21        suggest that we temporarily pass something when we have an

         22        opportunity to vote.

         23             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Commissioner Barnett, for what

         24        purpose?  Question, he yields.

         25             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  The amendment before us


          1        begins, undue influence in connection with an election.

          2        Is that the current amendment?  The question is presumably

          3        this is, these are actions taken by the candidate, as

          4        opposed to perhaps people on the candidate's behalf, but

          5        it is not clear from the language that it would be solely

          6        the actions of the candidate.

          7             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  The question is you are

          8        suggesting that there are people who are capable of lying

          9        on the candidate's behalf, as opposed to just the

         10        candidate?

         11             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Yeah, the         question --

         12        yes, I mean, I think that there are many times some of

         13        these activities that you are trying to get to might well

         14        be committed by others, but I just think -- the question

         15        is, what's your intent because the language is unclear to

         16        me whether it is limited to the candidate or anyone acting

         17        on the candidate's behalf, plus the candidate.

         18             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  I don't think it would be fair

         19        to have anyone acting on the candidate's behalf, but it

         20        should be the candidate or knowingly done on behalf of the

         21        candidate, it would seem to me.  So with the candidate's

         22        knowledge.

         23             So -- well I think we have -- if Commissioner Freidin

         24        wants to prepare language to do that, I would accept that.

         25        The intention is not that an unknowing candidate for


          1        actions by others could be removed from office.  Because,

          2        I mean, it is true, that could happen.

          3             But nonetheless, I would think a candidate who

          4        knowingly allowed fraud, libel and slander to occur should

          5        be in the same position as having done it personally

          6        because it is not likely that they are going to personally

          7        do a campaign mailer, they are going to approve it.

          8             Are there other questions other than that?

          9             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Any questions?  Commissioner

         10        Rundle.

         11             COMMISSIONER RUNDLE:  Commissioner Mills, I really

         12        like what you both are trying to accomplish with this and

         13        I am in fact working with a group down in Dade County to

         14        try to design something similar through an ordinance, but

         15        some of what I see in Dade County at least I'm concerned

         16        wouldn't be covered by this.  So I would almost be in

         17        favor of broadening this language.

         18             And I wonder if you wouldn't consider any reference

         19        to racial or ethnic background of either the candidate or

         20        a candidate's relative.  There are a lot of I think really

         21        disgusting types of activities that I have seen that

         22        aren't going to be covered by this, whereas a lot of this

         23        is already covered.  For instance, bribery is covered,

         24        fraud is covered, and I believe libel is covered because

         25        that is also a crime.


          1             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  That's true but none of them are

          2        removable offenses.  But if you want to --

          3             COMMISSIONER RUNDLE:  Well aren't they all felonies?

          4        Bribery --

          5             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Bribery could be.

          6             COMMISSIONER RUNDLE:  -- fraud.  And libel is a

          7        misdemeanor or a felony?  We could look this up real

          8        quick.  I was wondering if you would consider --

          9             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Consider a special Dade County

         10        provision, but --

         11             COMMISSIONER RUNDLE:  Listen, we are just a crystal

         12        ball.

         13             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Mr. Chairman, if you want, it

         14        seems like there are a couple suggestions here that are

         15        probably noncontroversial if the overall topic is, it

         16        seems to me, basically what the commission has in mind.

         17        If you could let us temporarily pass this for a few bills,

         18        we could probably bring it back and let the Chair know

         19        when that occurred.

         20             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Okay.  Any further questions?

         21        Commissioner Smith.

         22             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  My

         23        concern as I'm reading this is the part that talks about

         24        publishing of a falsehood about a candidate.  And I'm

         25        thinking about the degrees of falsehoods.  And I have some


          1        serious concern about that.

          2             You know, I hear all the time the complicated basis

          3        upon which legislation is made where someone can vote

          4        against a proposal, you know, three or four times because

          5        of procedural matters and the candidate can then say,

          6        well, this person opposes a particular issue, but it is

          7        not that he opposed the issue, but they oppose maybe an

          8        amendment, or the procedure in which it was going or

          9        whatever.

         10             I mean, that's a falsehood, but is that the basis to

         11        actually remove somebody from office?  I'm just saying I

         12        see a lot of -- you know, if a person said, knew a person

         13        was 40 and said they are 39, that's a lie.  You can remove

         14        them from office for that?

         15             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  No.

         16             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Okay, what?

         17             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  This is the amendment which --

         18             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Well I don't have the amendment.

         19             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Here.

         20             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Okay.  Thank you very much.

         21             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Further questions?  Commissioner

         22        Wetherington, for what purpose?

         23             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  We're not speaking on it

         24        at this time; is that right?

         25             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  We are going to temporarily pass


          1        it.

          2             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  All right.

          3             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  If you have a question, though,

          4        I thought -- all right, question.

          5             COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON:  Question.  Commissioner,

          6        under the law of defamation, if I said about a public

          7        official that he is not competent to hold office, that

          8        would be defamatory under the law.  If I was not, if I

          9        deliberately made that up and I really didn't believe it,

         10        that would be defamatory under the law.  There is no

         11        question about it.  Because I'm saying to somebody, and

         12        this is back in one of the areas of defamation, per se, to

         13        say somebody is incompetent in their profession or calling

         14        is the classic defamation, per se.

         15             So that means that if I get up and I say to somebody,

         16        This particular incumbent is not qualified, is incompetent

         17        to hold office, I have now defamed him.  Now the only

         18        question that remains then would be whether I believe that

         19        or I don't believe that because if I don't believe it, and

         20        I'm therefore lying about it, therefore it is actionable.

         21             So the problem is that we are opening up standard

         22        political colloquy in hot races to a subsequent

         23        determination after the fact about whether you want to

         24        remove somebody, the Legislature wants to remove somebody

         25        under an extremely vague standard.


          1             Because political campaigns frequently bring forth

          2        some heated statements and some factual observations like

          3        this.  They are defamatory beyond belief except that we

          4        give a privilege to them to some extent.  And if I can

          5        show that he reasonably believed it or he believed it or

          6        didn't know it was false, then I can escape being held

          7        liable.  But technically speaking, a statement about any

          8        professional that they are incompetent to do their job and

          9        a person is an incompetent lawyer, if he is a lawyer, that

         10        is defamatory, per se.

         11             So how in the world, if we are going to talk about

         12        defamatory statements, or misrepresentations, how in the

         13        world can that practically be brought into this without

         14        opening the whole thing up to just the Legislature doing

         15        whatever they want to?  Because you can always come back

         16        after the fact and take some political speech and show

         17        that there is enough doubt as to whether or not it is true

         18        or there is enough doubt as to whether or not somebody

         19        believed it.  How in the world can this possibly be a

         20        workable proposal?

         21             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Glad you asked that question.

         22        Commissioner Freidin had that same concern last time,

         23        which is why she introduced this fine amendment.

         24        Commissioner Freidin might address that question.

         25             (Chairman Douglass resumes the chair.)


          1             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Freidin -- are you

          2        yielding to her?  Is that what I understand you are doing?

          3             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Yes.

          4             COMMISSIONER FREIDIN:  He is yielding to me to answer

          5        the torts professor over there.  I don't know, I think I

          6        might be in trouble here.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  We are going to grade you and not

          8        a professor.  So go ahead.

          9             (Laughter.)

         10             COMMISSIONER FREIDIN:  Commissioner Wetherington,

         11        there was a concern that I raised at our committee meeting

         12        on just this subject.  And based on that concern, rather

         13        than having language in there that talks about a

         14        falsehood, which is what Mr. Smith was referring to that

         15        was in the original proposal, the amendment talks about a

         16        judgment of libel or slander, which would then put us in

         17        the whole realm of constitutional law and constitutional

         18        protections for political speech.

         19             And it is my understanding that a statement that a

         20        politician for, who is a candidate for office, for

         21        political office, a statement that that person is not

         22        competent to hold the political office would not be

         23        actionable, couldn't be the subject of a judgment for

         24        libel or slander because there is no statement in there of

         25        a fact that the person knows to be false.


          1             In fact, it would be a statement of the person's

          2        opinion not based on any fact.  If they then stated false

          3        facts that they knew to be false, then there would be

          4        subject -- then they would be subject to a judgment.

          5             The whole purpose here is that, is to leave to the

          6        underlying, to leave to the court in the first instance if

          7        there was, if there was libel or slander, if there wasn't

          8        libel or slander then there could be no removal from

          9        office.  On the other hand, if the candidate who had

         10        spoken the words that were alleged to be false did have a

         11        judgment against him, then that would be the subject of a

         12        possible removal.

         13             And similar -- but I think you need to notice though

         14        that what you are not talking about here is having to go

         15        to court for any, for bribery or the other things that are

         16        listed -- I have given away my copy of the amendment so I

         17        don't have it here -- for bribery, fraud, deceit and such

         18        other similar conduct.  Those grounds for removal would be

         19        determined by the removing body, whoever that might be.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Zack.

         21             COMMISSIONER ZACK:  Question of Commissioner Mills.

         22        I have sat on the fair campaign practices committee, we

         23        have one in Dade County, for probably a dozen years.  And

         24        it is very ineffective, generally speaking, because it has

         25        no power.  That's why I am in favor of what you are


          1        proposing.  The power it has is to call a press conference

          2        and deal with the court of public opinion, which from time

          3        to time is effective but it is often too late.

          4             Let me give you an example of a situation.  I want to

          5        know how it would be interpreted under your proposal.

          6             But you have a candidate who in running for office

          7        states to the newspaper that they are in favor of the jury

          8        override of the death penalty.  And the night before the

          9        election, the people in that district receive a postcard

         10        from a person whose daughter was killed and that postcard

         11        says that the candidate is, in effect, in favor of

         12        criminals because they believe that a judge should not

         13        override the jury.  Now, is that a -- is that deceit?  Is

         14        that fraud?  Or is that fair comment?  Or is that

         15        manipulation?

         16             Similar type of allegations when you have a lawyer

         17        who represents -- who is a criminal defense lawyer and

         18        represents drug dealers.  And a similar postcard is sent

         19        saying that this person represents these drug dealers, and

         20        they do in fact represent the drug dealers, and therefore

         21        you can assume that lawyer is not in favor of tough drug

         22        laws.

         23             I mean, is this fair comment?  Or is it fraud and

         24        deceit?  And my concern, because I like what you are

         25        trying to do, is I'm trying to avoid these cases ending up


          1        in court for long periods of time and the public not

          2        knowing who is elected, and potentially going through a

          3        number of new elections which are very, very expensive in

          4        the large counties.

          5             So if you could respond to how applying what you

          6        propose to those two fact situations, what the results

          7        would be, I'd like to know.

          8             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Partially this would depend on

          9        what the Legislature implements because this authorizes

         10        the Legislature to do something and to augment the penalty

         11        to include removal.  It seems to me though, and from what

         12        you are saying, there is no ability or really no intent

         13        and it probably is not a good idea to do away with

         14        campaign comment.  Exaggeration is not a crime.  You can't

         15        be removed from office for exaggeration.

         16             If I understand what you are saying, they would not

         17        rise to the level of libel or slander.

         18             (Off-the-record comment.)

         19             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Well fraud and deceit would have

         20        to be proved as well by a legislative standard.

         21             COMMISSIONER ZACK:  You are saying that neither of

         22        those comments would constitute fraud or deceit?

         23             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  I'm not sure I understood the

         24        entire context of both of those comments.

         25             COMMISSIONER ZACK:  Do you think either of those have


          1        any element of deceit?

          2             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Well --

          3             COMMISSIONER ZACK:  I just want to know what we are

          4        passing.  And I'm all in favor of eliminating the fraud

          5        and deceit, I hope we can do it.  But I want to make sure

          6        that if we are going to do it, we do it.  And I want to

          7        make sure your amendment provides for what is necessary to

          8        make this an effective amendment.

          9             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  What I would suggest is

         10        Commissioner Barnett and Commissioner, I think, Rundle

         11        wanted to have a chance to insert some language in this,

         12        so --

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I believe Commissioner Scott told

         14        me we were sort of waiting here for an amendment; is that

         15        correct?

         16             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  That's correct, Mr. Chairman,

         17        but I think we are better off if we can temporarily pass

         18        it for a few minutes and come right back to it.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  If we temporarily pass it for a

         20        few minutes, we are going to move on to one and we are not

         21        going to come right back to it.  I'd like to go ahead and

         22        finish it if you can hurry up and do this.  No

         23        filibusters.  Do you have a question over here?

         24             I do have a question for you, you are an expert in

         25        Florida history, if we had outlawed lies in campaigns,


          1        would we have much history left?

          2             (Laughter.)

          3             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Well I think all the results

          4        that have elected the fine people of this state so far

          5        have been fairly honest.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  How about the Governor Scholtz

          7        election?  He got elected, but -- you are familiar with

          8        that; aren't you?

          9             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  I am familiar with that and for

         10        that reason I think we probably need to discuss future

         11        elections.

         12             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  In other words, that's a good

         13        example of what you are talking about?

         14             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Yes.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Let everybody in on what that is.

         16             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  I'm not sure --

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well that's the one where the

         18        opponent, ex-Governor Martin's people -- Governor Scholtz,

         19        later became Governor, had a very, very attractive and

         20        lovely wife and her name was a certain maiden name.  And

         21        they found a prostitute by the same name who had been

         22        arrested in Jacksonville and spread around the state that

         23        that was his wife.  And as luck would have it, most of us

         24        know, once they saw this lady and how gracious she was, it

         25        backfired tremendously and helped elect Governor Scholtz.


          1             But that's just a little minor example of some of our

          2        great history as it relates to campaigns.  They are not

          3        nearly as dirty now as they were then.

          4             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  I certainly believe you if you

          5        say that.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well I'm old enough.  I'm just

          7        killing time for you.  Commissioner Evans.  You are next,

          8        Commissioner Rundle.  Question?

          9             COMMISSIONER EVANS:  Question of Commissioner Mills.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Mills, do you yield

         11        to Commissioner Evans?  Go ahead.

         12             COMMISSIONER EVANS:  Commissioner Freidin brought

         13        this to my mind.  She said, you know, whoever the removing

         14        body would be.  And I guess I have a concern that who the

         15        removing body is is not here in the Constitution, who do

         16        you envision being the removing body and is it an elected

         17        body or an appointed body?

         18             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Commissioner, it doesn't change

         19        the existing procedures.  I think I mentioned, each house

         20        of the Legislature would continue to judge its own

         21        members, based on this standard.  The Governor for

         22        executive officers and the Legislature for impeachable

         23        officers.  In other words, it doesn't change the process

         24        for removal, it adds a new standard.

         25             COMMISSIONER EVANS:  Okay.


          1             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  And the Supreme Court for

          2        judges.  Those are the -- as the staff researched this --

          3        in other words, the concept is it simply provides a new

          4        basis upon which you can remove.  And each house of the

          5        Legislature will judge based on, that's what it does now

          6        for removal; the Governor for executive officers, the

          7        Legislature for impeachable officers and the Supreme Court

          8        for judges.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Let's see, somebody

         10        else was up.  Nod if you are about ready over there.

         11        Commissioner Henderson.

         12             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I was reminded of another

         13        piece of history over here and I thought I would ask

         14        Commissioner Mills if he might see if this would help out,

         15        a reflection of history.

         16             But I recall -- I don't recall, I wasn't born yet --

         17        but I recall reading about the election of 1952 where it

         18        was alleged that Senator Pepper had matriculated in

         19        college and that his sister was a known thespian.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It was 1950.

         21             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  1950, all right.  I don't

         22        know if those statements were true or not, but it

         23        certainly could have -- would this have affected that at

         24        all, sir?

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well they were true as I


          1        understand.

          2             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I guess they were true.

          3             (Laughter.)

          4             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Mr. Chairman, we do have three

          5        constitutional scholars and one staff member here and if

          6        we could temporarily pass this until the end of the day, I

          7        think we need to because they are in a language dispute.

          8             COMMISSIONER ZACK:  Question for Commissioner Mills.

          9        I want to go back to Commissioner Henderson's discussion.

         10        My first employer, as you know, Senator Pepper, who

         11        honestly felt there was a little deceit there.  And can

         12        you doubt there is any deceit intended when you have a

         13        known thespian and -- these are comments that were made

         14        only for one purpose and there can't be a question that

         15        they were made for deceit purposes; isn't that correct?

         16             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Commissioner Thompson, are you

         17        prepared to answer this question?

         18             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Well, are we waiting on

         19        something?

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Yeah.

         21             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I have a story I'd like to

         22        tell, Mr. Chairman.

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Very good.  I think the thespian

         24        question begs itself.

         25             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Now wait a minute, I don't


          1        know anything about them.

          2             No, I'll tell you what, I had just gotten elected to

          3        the Florida House of Representatives.  My district went

          4        from Chattahoochee to Perry and all the way down to the

          5        coast.  I mean that was a big district.

          6             And so it was the first session, and it was in the

          7        old capitol, we were still in the old capitol.  Although

          8        the House and the Senate wings were already occupied, we

          9        were still meeting in the old capitol.  So I was sitting

         10        there during the first session, and I mean I was as quiet

         11        as a mouse.

         12             And here comes the sergeant at arms in and says,

         13        Representative Thompson, would you mind if we put a chair

         14        here?  And I said, No, help yourself.  Who is going to sit

         15        there?  And he said, Senator Claude Pepper.  And I said,

         16        Senator Claude Pepper, why is he wanting to sit by me?  I

         17        knew he was from Dade County, you know, and been

         18        representing Dade County for years.

         19             And he came in and he sat down by me, you know, and

         20        he said, Mr. Thompson, he said, it is a privilege and a

         21        pleasure to meet you today and share with you some of my

         22        thoughts about Perry and Taylor County, Florida.

         23             (Laughter.)

         24             Well if anybody ever heard him, you might notice a

         25        little resemblance.  Well, as soon as he left, of


          1        course -- I learned this imitation because the first

          2        commentator on TV here, Mr. Chairman, was his brother,

          3        Frank Pepper, you know.  And I was about 15 years old when

          4        we got our first TV and we had been sitting around at the

          5        supper table every night trying to mock everybody we knew.

          6        So we had some new characters to work with.  So anyway,

          7        we, all of my family, everybody got to where they could

          8        talk like that guy.

          9             So anyway, as soon as he left, I jumped up and got

         10        the microphone and I just kind of imitated him a little

         11        bit, you know.  So I made -- I wanted everyone to hear

         12        what he said to me, I wanted to share with you my thoughts

         13        about the people in Perry and Taylor County, Florida,

         14        where I began my political career, and --

         15             (Off-the-record comment by Commissioner Thompson.)

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  They have cut you off.

         17             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  They keep cutting me off.

         18             The next year he came back.  So he was escorted in by

         19        the Dade delegation, you know, and they got him up to the

         20        rostrum and that's what he always did.  He would just

         21        stand up there and grab both sides.  And if you ever heard

         22        him speak, I mean, he could talk.

         23             And he said, My friends in the Florida Legislature,

         24        it is a privilege and an honor to be with you today and

         25        share with you my imitation of Representative James Harold


          1        Thompson.

          2             (Laughter.)

          3             And I do that with all honor and respect for him

          4        today, Mr. Chairman.

          5             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Thank you.  Now you have had

          6        plenty of time and good stories.

          7             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Well unless there are a lot of

          8        other good stories that will go on for a couple hours, we

          9        still need to temporarily pass this, Mr. Chairman.  But I

         10        want to take credit for all of this entertainment.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  We are going to temporarily pass

         12        it, but as soon as we finish with the next item, the next

         13        is going to be a significant item for discussion.  So, you

         14        know, you can quit standing around in the chamber and

         15        doing this, and we will proceed to the next proposal,

         16        which is a Committee Substitute for Proposals 159, 163 and

         17        182.  Now, do you have that committee substitute that you

         18        can read the title?

         19             READING CLERK:  Committee Substitute for Proposal

         20        Nos. 159, 163 and 182, a proposal to Article IV, Sections

         21        3(b), 4, and 8, and Article XII, Section 9(c), Florida

         22        Constitution; and create Section 22, Article XII, Florida

         23        Constitution; providing for membership of the Florida

         24        Cabinet.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  This is Cabinet


          1        reform and the committee chairman, Commissioner Alfonso,

          2        is recognized to present the committee substitute.

          3             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I

          4        guess, as you said, this is one of the most important

          5        issues that we are going to address, or at least we

          6        thought so when we began and I still believe so.  I would

          7        like to recognize the good work of my committee, this did

          8        pass favorably out of our committee.  Again, what we have

          9        presented is a substitute for Proposals 159, 163 and 182.

         10             Just to bring you guys back to our organizing

         11        session, if you will remember the comments made by

         12        Governors Chiles, Kirk and Askew, I would like to just

         13        remind you of those very quickly.  Governor Chiles

         14        expressed his hopes that the commission would take a look

         15        at developing a better way for the Governor and the

         16        Cabinet to serve our people.  And he explained that

         17        Cabinet reform would not impact him, but it impacts the

         18        people of Florida.

         19             Governor Kirk, and I would like to quote him because

         20        I enjoyed his quote, "No unaccountable Cabinet can lead to

         21        or even toward any of the freedoms that we pay for

         22        everyday.  Convince yourselves and then convince our old

         23        fainthearted of the state, as well as the new and confused

         24        folks of Florida to make the Governor the Governor.

         25        Demand a leader to lead."


          1             And then Governor Askew shared that in the beginning

          2        our legislative branch had been weak and had been

          3        distributed over many offices and the power had been

          4        dispersed.  And checks and balances were added to ensure

          5        that the executive did not become too strong.  Well, we

          6        have corrected the legislative branch.  The judicial

          7        branch is also strong, as it should be, but the executive

          8        branch isn't.  It remains not as strong as the other two.

          9             Governor Askew had these words for us, and I quote

         10        him, "Don't be hesitant to take a look at this.  It may be

         11        your feeling that it won't pass, maybe you don't want to

         12        change it.  You do not have an executive branch of

         13        government that can respond to the people on public policy

         14        as a Governor could with a singular voice.  One of the

         15        things we found in the Legislature with my predecessor is

         16        that as much as we disagreed, we were diffused and

         17        couldn't really get any public forum.

         18             "The Governor is still the one that has the forum and

         19        is the only one that, in effect, can challenge the people.

         20        If you really want to have a Governor lead and not just

         21        respond to what the polls say, frankly, you need to give

         22        the Governor the authority of the office and then I think

         23        you will find it better than it is now."  That is the end

         24        of this quote.

         25             Now we didn't hear directly from Governor Martinez,


          1        but I have taken the opportunity to discuss with Governor

          2        Martinez his feelings.  And he shares these sentiments and

          3        it's clear from the records of the Askew Commission that

          4        he favors this philosophy.

          5             Our first speaker in Panama City I believe was a

          6        representative of the Florida League of Women Voters which

          7        strongly urged Cabinet reform.  Their proposal was even

          8        stronger than the one that we are going to propose today.

          9             The Common Cause group, to quote them also, said

         10        "Florida should" -- this is a quote from their statement,

         11        "Florida should have a Governor that is the elected

         12        executive accountable for all state departments.  There's

         13        not one person that we can hold accountable for the

         14        actions of the executive branch currently."  And that is a

         15        quote from their statement.

         16             Now I know a number spoke against this, but we have

         17        had a great outcry or a great bit of dialogue in our

         18        public hearings, as you remember, on this.  I'm sure that

         19        you will remember in Tampa when we had a joint appearance

         20        from General Milligan, the Comptroller, and Treasurer Bill

         21        Nelson.  They presented a compromised position, which was,

         22        I guess, kind of in the middle between the wholesale

         23        abolishment of the Cabinet and what we have today.

         24             And let me just go back to where we were in our

         25        committee.  The hardest thing for us I think in this


          1        committee was just to try to get our hands around this.

          2        We really started with charts and diagrams and just trying

          3        to understand really what this meant and how it worked and

          4        what these proposed changes could lead to.

          5             The proposals we had, and we had speakers really

          6        referring to all aspects of changing it, and also a good

          7        sentiment to leave it the way it was.  We have kind of

          8        settled on this proposal, or a form of this proposal

          9        brought forth by General Milligan and Treasurer Nelson.

         10        And what this proposal does is it decreases the size of

         11        the Cabinet so that the Governor and the Cabinet become a

         12        three officer board.  They are all three elected.

         13             The Attorney General and a Treasurer, which combines

         14        the duties of the Comptroller and the Treasurer, they --

         15        it allows for collegial decision-making with the Governor,

         16        but an affirmative action of this Cabinet involves the

         17        Governor's vote and the vote of one other member of the

         18        Cabinet.

         19             They will -- their decision-making powers are going

         20        to be I guess vital in areas of law enforcement, taxes,

         21        bonding and environmental policy.  And those issues will

         22        still remain debatable in the public forum, as it is

         23        today.

         24             We have got -- other sections of this bill that we

         25        have proposed is the State Board of Administration.  And


          1        the makeup of the board would be comprised of the

          2        Governor, the Treasurer, and the Attorney General, or this

          3        new Cabinet.

          4             We have had -- this new Cabinet continues to exercise

          5        authority over the trustees for the ownership of state

          6        land, and I guess these duties remain constitutional

          7        duties.

          8             Now, there is schedule language which has been added

          9        to the proposal which says that this system would apply

         10        beginning with the general election cycle in the year

         11        2002, and the operative changes taking effect on January

         12        the 7th of 2003, when those new officers take office.  We

         13        have added a statement that the newly-created officers of

         14        Treasurer and Attorney General are to be considered new

         15        offices, and not simply extensions of the offices as they

         16        exist today.  And that is to avoid foreseeable litigation

         17        in regard to whether term limits would apply to this or

         18        not.

         19             We have provided some documents for you, we have got

         20        charts, we have got copies of the proposals that were

         21        presented to us in committee that you can look at and kind

         22        of see what we tried to get our hands around and what we

         23        encompassed in our rationale to get to this point.

         24             I guess at this point, Mr. Chairman, we could go to

         25        the amendatory process and I will reserve further comments


          1        for the closing.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  I had a question.

          3        Does this still leave the right for the Legislature to

          4        give these people additional departments, or has that been

          5        taken care of in this?

          6             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  No, it still leaves that

          7        right, as I understand.

          8             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  So that the Legislature could

          9        still make the Treasurer the Insurance Commissioner and

         10        this sort of thing.

         11             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  As I understand it, that's

         12        correct, sir.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Riley.

         14             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  A question for the Commissioner.

         15        Proposition 182 specifically was one that was recommended

         16        by the Common Cause and League of Women Voters.  You have

         17        changed that, not a great deal, but you have changed that.

         18        Are they still in support of this as a committee

         19        substitute, or did they speak to that?

         20             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Well, I think they would

         21        rather have their own proposal.

         22             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Which was 182.

         23             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  I think that the intent of

         24        their proposal or at least the strengthening of the

         25        executive, of the Governor's Office is there.  Their


          1        proposal called for six appointed by the Governor.  So

          2        whether -- I really haven't talked to them whether they

          3        are in favor of this proposal or not.  I mean, we got the

          4        world as far as proposals went.  I mean, we had really, as

          5        you can see from the chart, we had a lot of different

          6        makeup proposals come to us.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Butterworth.

          8             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  Mr. Chairman, if the

          9        Commissioner will yield for a question.

         10             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  I will yield.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  He yields.

         12             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  Back in 1993, the Governor

         13        and Cabinet on their own motion looked at themselves and

         14        studied themselves as a Governor and Cabinet and what they

         15        should do.

         16             Since they could not do a constitutional amendment at

         17        that time, they could only make suggestions to the

         18        Legislature, they did a lot of things that you are asking

         19        for right here, with the exception of abolishing some of

         20        them, even though there is a lot of conversation about

         21        doing that, but of course the Legislature can't abolish,

         22        only the people can through the Constitution.  Then again

         23        in 1996, we had the Askew-Martinez Commission that also

         24        dealt with this area.  The Legislature made some changes,

         25        did not make other changes.


          1             The one thing which I would like to basically ask you

          2        a question on is that in 1993, when we went very far with

          3        the proposals, we found that the one issue that most of

          4        the legislators and perhaps some of the public were

          5        concerned about was what the makeup of the Florida

          6        Department of Law Enforcement was different than most

          7        state polices perhaps in the country, to where the Florida

          8        Department of Law Enforcement works very closely with

          9        three entities of government, and that's the Governor, the

         10        Comptroller, Treasurer and the Attorney General.

         11             I do believe -- did you have any discussion on that

         12        particular issue of keeping the Florida Department of Law

         13        Enforcement under these three Cabinet members or did you

         14        pretty much not discuss that?

         15             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  We had so many discussions.  I

         16        think that we discussed it at one time briefly, and we

         17        said that we would keep it under that, under this Cabinet.

         18        Commissioner Thompson, do you recall that?  We discussed

         19        it briefly in one of our meetings.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Thompson, he yields

         21        to you.

         22             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I think I can help him on

         23        that.  Based on my memory, I believe we discussed that.

         24        And I know that the consensus of the group was that we

         25        don't want a state police force, we want a collegial body


          1        to have that jurisdiction.  Now, I don't know of anything

          2        that's in here about that.  If we need to change that, we

          3        might want to consider that.  But the alternative we had

          4        before us was to do otherwise and we didn't want to do

          5        otherwise.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.  It would take an

          7        amendment, as I read this, to do that.  And I think that

          8        was probably what the committee thought they were going to

          9        do; is that right?

         10             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Yes.  And just to clarify,

         11        right now this proposal allows the Legislature to retain

         12        this.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.  So if somebody drafts an

         14        amendment, we can consider that to this proposal.

         15        Commissioner Thompson.

         16             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I don't think we need an

         17        amendment unless you want to nail it down in the

         18        Constitution.  If you do, that's fine, I'll vote for it.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  What I'm saying is that you

         20        nailed down several other things and it would probably be

         21        appropriate to nail this too.

         22             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  Okay.  I certainly am in

         23        favor of that.  And that it was the tenor of the group I

         24        think.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  My recollection is the discussion


          1        I heard was the most powerful agency in many places is the

          2        gun.  And you never wanted to put the gun under one

          3        particular person, and that it was therefore appropriate

          4        to put the gun under the collegial body.  I think that's

          5        what General Butterworth had said.  It would take an

          6        amendment to do that; is that correct?  I think that's

          7        right.  All right.

          8             Commissioner Riley, I believe you were up.

          9             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Mr. Chairman, my question is

         10        this:  There is an amendment on what was handed out that

         11        affects Article IX, specifically the State Board of

         12        Education, which, in fact, is very specifically also

         13        Proposal 166.  So my question is this:  If this does not

         14        pass, can Proposition 166 then stand on its own merits?

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well, it's still on the calendar,

         16        it would have to be dealt with after this.

         17             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Thank you.

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barkdull.

         19             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  I was going to give the same

         20        response that the Chair did.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I'm glad.  I'm not always right,

         22        but I'm not very seldom in doubt.  Commissioner Nabors --

         23        excuse me, Commissioner Henderson.

         24             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Same issue, you recognized

         25        him first.


          1             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  How do you know?

          2             COMMISSIONER NABORS:  Because we have been winking at

          3        each other.

          4             The question is is that previously we passed a

          5        proposal which changed who could head an executive agency

          6        that eliminated the provision that said that an executive

          7        agency can be headed by the Cabinet.  That would create

          8        the problem that's been raised in terms of the Florida

          9        Department of Law Enforcement.  I don't think that

         10        anything in here prevents the current Constitution from

         11        allowing the Legislature to allow an executive head to be

         12        even the revised Cabinet as a whole.

         13             You might want to nail this down specifically, but

         14        the problem that we have, to be candid with the body, is

         15        that that's a concern that I hadn't thought about on that

         16        proposal that Commissioner Henderson and I had talked

         17        about.  We may want to revise that proposal if it survives

         18        the process when it comes up to make sure that we didn't

         19        inadvertently allow all of the power of the police to be

         20        placed in one executive department.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Correct.  All right.  Is that the

         22        point that you had?

         23             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I would answer his question

         24        by saying I agree with him.  I think that in the Corr

         25        proposal that was passed out at our last session, we


          1        eliminated the Governor and Cabinet as a plural executive,

          2        as collectively the head of a department.  So this would

          3        have had that effect.  I see nothing in this proposal

          4        which addresses that issue of the plural executive.

          5             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Am I understanding what you are

          6        saying is that, my original question I think asked was

          7        this does not limit this group, collegial group, when they

          8        are acting as a collegial group, to have additional items

          9        put under them.  Because my understanding was that that

         10        was one of the major proposals, that we would create a

         11        Cabinet which would be a Cabinet limited to their

         12        constitutional duties.  And that's not the case with this

         13        proposal; is it, Mr. Chairman?  All right.  So your

         14        question goes to that point.

         15             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Yes.  My point is that

         16        that's one bit of Cabinet reform that we have already

         17        undertaken as a body here.  My question is to my chairman,

         18        Commissioner Alfonso.  For the benefit of the other

         19        commissioners, this was -- although this was a favorable

         20        report from the committee, there was some dissension on

         21        that.  And so if I could inquire just a little bit as to

         22        some of the things that we actually accomplished here.

         23             I think with regard to Ms. Riley's question, the

         24        proposal as it stands, it eliminates the elected education

         25        commissioner, and how then does it -- what do we do about


          1        that position?  Let me ask that.

          2             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Well, in our discussions, we

          3        would then take up another proposal or other proposals to

          4        deal with the Commissioner of Education and Commissioner

          5        of Agriculture, or however those things may need to be

          6        dealt with by the body.  But in this proposal, yes, it

          7        does eliminate them.

          8             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  So, it would eliminate the

          9        position of Agricultural Commissioner; is that correct?

         10             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Correct.

         11             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  You mentioned and you know

         12        this is an area that's near and dear to my heart, but you

         13        said, and I haven't been able to find this, that it is

         14        your opinion that this provision retains the ability of

         15        the revised Cabinet to handle environmental matters.

         16        Where is that language?  I'm missing that.

         17             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Well, it's really over the

         18        ownership of state lands is the way that we have dealt

         19        with it here.  So I don't know, you know, environmental

         20        matters.  I mean, for example, now the new Game and Fish

         21        Commission stands constitutionally alone.  So it really

         22        is, right now, in this proposal limited to that.

         23             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  So this does not address

         24        then the issues of the Cabinet acting in an appellate

         25        capacity handling or acting as land and water, help me out


          1        here, acting in an appellate capacity either as the Board

          2        of Administration or the land and water -- help me with

          3        it, Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission; is that right?

          4             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  That's my understanding, yes.

          5             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Okay.  Thank you.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barnett.

          7             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  For some questions, please.

          8             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Yes.

          9             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  This may be a question

         10        actually for Commissioner Henderson or Nabors, I'm not

         11        sure.  Unfortunately, I was not here on Thursday when we

         12        met and I would like someone to explain in a little bit

         13        more detail the discussion that I've been hearing about a

         14        proposal that was adopted, which it sounded to me like

         15        what we did then was to adopt a proposal that deleted the

         16        Cabinet as the collegial head of state agencies, such as

         17        Department of Revenue, Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles,

         18        Management Services.  Is that what was done last Thursday?

         19             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  That's correct.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  That's what we thought we did.

         21             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  That's what I recommended to

         22        the body.  So there's no slight of hand here, the very

         23        commission report, the Martinez Commission, I read from

         24        and made the recommendation based on that report.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  That's exactly right.  If you had


          1        been here, I don't think you would have had any doubt from

          2        Commissioner Henderson's explanation of that.  It was not

          3        your proposal, it was Commissioner Corr's proposal we were

          4        dealing with.

          5             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  So combining that proposal

          6        with this proposal, if it is adopted, then the function of

          7        a Cabinet as revised would be limited to those entities

          8        actually specified and those activities -- the collegial

          9        duties of the Cabinet would be limited to Trustees of the

         10        Internal Improvement Trust Fund, if you do an amendment on

         11        FDLE, the various things that we heard, and all of the

         12        functions the Cabinet currently performs as State Board

         13        of -- I mean, Board of Education, Department of Revenue,

         14        Highway Safety, Management Services, that whole litany

         15        would no longer be Cabinet functions.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I think that's correct.

         17        Commissioner Alfonso, that's why it wasn't in this

         18        proposal, because it was in the other one.

         19             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  That language has not been

         20        removed that says that duties specified here, they shall

         21        exercise such powers and perform such duties as may be

         22        prescribed by law.

         23             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Except that the question I'm

         24        having is that when you look -- you need to mesh this

         25        proposal -- this is truly a question, I need to understand


          1        this to know how I feel about this proposal -- you need to

          2        mesh this with the one that Commissioner Henderson had on

          3        Thursday.

          4             And what I think my question is is if both passed,

          5        would we be in a position where the current functions of

          6        the Cabinet, which is to sit as a collegial head of a

          7        number of state agencies, would be constitutionally

          8        prohibited, and that the Cabinet, as a collegial body,

          9        would be limited to those matters actually detailed in

         10        this proposal?

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  The answer to that, I'll

         12        volunteer this.  Because if this one passed, as it is, and

         13        the other one has already passed, when they go to Style

         14        and Drafting, they may want to consider combining those

         15        for presentation, because they do affect what you say.

         16             And since we have already passed by a significant

         17        margin the Corr and the Henderson, Commissioner Henderson

         18        spoke to it, then if that's there and then we adopt this,

         19        which specifies certain duties, then it would be within

         20        the, and I would so rule, within the duties of the Style

         21        and Drafting Committee to make sure that those two were

         22        either combined or were complementary.  Does that answer

         23        your question?

         24             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Procedurally that does, but

         25        substantively is what I'm -- the substantive effect of --


          1        assuming both of these proposals receive the requisite

          2        votes, the substantive effect will be that the Cabinet

          3        will consist of three individuals and that the current

          4        collegial duties of the Cabinet, which are generally

          5        specified by statute, are now constitutionally limited to

          6        just Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund,

          7        State Board of Administration and whatever else we add,

          8        and clemency, and whatever else we add.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I think that's correct.

         10             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  That is correct, that is if

         11        Style and Drafting chooses to put these together.

         12             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  It doesn't have anything to do

         13        with Style and Drafting --

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  No, no --

         15             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  -- if these are separate

         16        proposals, the combined effect -- the question is:  Is the

         17        combined effect of the two proposals what I just stated?

         18        And I think I hear yes, the answer is yes.

         19             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Yes.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Now, we have passed that already,

         21        Commissioner Barnett, so that if this passed in its

         22        present form, you are absolutely correct, we would have

         23        proposed that the Cabinet that survives in 2003, I believe

         24        is the date this becomes effective, that these functions

         25        would have to be provided as provided by law, but not by


          1        this collegial body.

          2             All right, Commissioner Riley again.

          3             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  My question is to anybody who

          4        can answer it, I guess.  Understanding Commissioner

          5        Barnett's question and the answer to that question, does

          6        that mean that that is simply limited to that?  Can the

          7        Legislature not add other responsibilities of oversight to

          8        this?

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  If you read the Corr amendment,

         10        which I believe everybody voted for --

         11             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Okay.

         12             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  -- it says they won't.  All

         13        right.  Further discussion?  Have we read this?  Maybe we

         14        ought to read it, it would sure help.

         15             READING CLERK:  By Commissioner Thompson, on Page 2,

         16        Line 7, and on Page 3, Line 1, on Page 3, Line 9, on Page

         17        3, Line 16, on Page 8, Line 1, strike "treasurer" and

         18        insert "chief financial officer."

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  The amendment --

         20        Commissioner Thompson, your amendment has been read.

         21        Would you like to --

         22             COMMISSIONER THOMPSON:  I think it's

         23        self-explanatory.  Everywhere the word "treasurer" is

         24        referred to in the proposal I want to change it to "chief

         25        financial officer."  I think that is a more accurate term


          1        for the new office.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Does everybody

          3        understand the amendment?  Any discussion?  If not, all in

          4        favor say aye; all opposed?

          5             (Verbal vote taken.)

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well, I cast the tie-breaking

          7        vote, which is yes.  Now, do you want everybody to vote on

          8        that amendment or do you want to let it ride?  All right.

          9        The next amendment, please.

         10             READING CLERK:  By Commissioners Butterworth and

         11        Thompson, on Page 3 between Lines 19 and 20, insert, (f),

         12        the Governor as chair, the Treasurer and the Attorney

         13        General shall constitute the agency head of the Department

         14        of Law Enforcement.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Butterworth.

         16             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  Mr. Chairman, I think I

         17        have explained it to you before.  I'd be willing to accept

         18        any questions.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Any further

         20        discussion or questions?  What this does is make the

         21        Florida Department of Law Enforcement constitute one of

         22        the, more of the agencies that the collegial body, in this

         23        case the Governor, the Attorney General and Chief

         24        Financial Officer would be the agency head.  It would be

         25        an exception to what you were asking about.


          1             Is that right, Commissioner Butterworth?  Do you have

          2        a questioner, Commissioner Barnett?

          3             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  I do, of Commissioner

          4        Butterworth, just to understand how this would work.

          5        Currently we have FDLE and we also have the Department of

          6        Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, which has the Florida

          7        Highway Patrol.  The Cabinet currently sits as head of the

          8        Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles and has a

          9        collegial body control over that agency, including the

         10        Highway Patrol.

         11             Would you envision, in light of the proposal that

         12        limits collegial bodies for state -- the Cabinet being the

         13        collegial head of state agencies, as that having any

         14        impact on the Highway Patrol?  Would they be incorporated

         15        into this proposal or is there any impact at all on that?

         16             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  Mr. Chairman, it is the

         17        intent of the motion not to affect the Highway Patrol.

         18        Highway Patrol is under Department of Highway Safety.  If

         19        at a point in time in the future the Legislature was to

         20        move Highway Patrol or Marine Patrol, whatever, into the

         21        Department of Law Enforcement, then the Cabinet would have

         22        authority.  But as it stands right now, they would not.

         23        It would take legislative action to bring it in there.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Any further

         25        questions?  All in favor of the amendment say aye.


          1             (Verbal vote taken.)

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  The amendment carries.  All

          3        right.  We have another amendment on the table.

          4             Oh, for the record, correct your copy of that to show

          5        that where it says the "treasurer," that should read the

          6        "chief financial officer," in order to be consistent with

          7        the proposal.  That is the way it is on the table, so

          8        correct your copies of that.  Thank you very much.  All

          9        right, the next amendment.

         10             READING CLERK:  By Commissioner Alfonso, on Page 7,

         11        Lines 25, insert Section 5, Section 2 of Article IX of the

         12        Florida Constitution and revised by amending the section

         13        to read:  Article IX, education, Section 2, State Board of

         14        Education, the State Board of Education shall be a body

         15        corporate and have such supervision of the system of

         16        public education as is provided by law.  The State Board

         17        of Education shall consist of seven members appointed by

         18        the Governor to staggered four-year terms, subject to

         19        confirmation by the Senate.  The State Board of Education

         20        shall appoint the Commissioner of Education.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Alfonso, that is

         22        your amendment.  You are recognized to speak on your

         23        amendment.

         24             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  This is just really a fit with

         25        Commissioner Riley's amendment.  If she wants to explain


          1        it, it's pretty self-explanatory.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Riley.

          3             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I have a whole speech on it,

          4        actually.

          5             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Please go ahead and make your

          6        speech.  If you prepared it, we all are waiting with bated

          7        breath to hear it.

          8             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Just to understand, though, that

          9        this proposal can and will also be voted on its own as

         10        Proposal 166, even if it passes with this, correct?

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It could be.

         12             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Well, I would like it to be.  So

         13        do I want to speak against this amendment?

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  No, not if you are for what it

         15        does.

         16             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I'm very much for what it does.

         17        And speaking for it, I'll tell you that I'm not the only

         18        one that is for what it does.  So is the Cornerstone

         19        Report from the Committee of 100, so is the Governor's

         20        commissioner on Education, Commission on Education.  And

         21        this was one of their four specific things that they came

         22        out with.

         23             I feel very strongly that this type of change in our

         24        organization will do, in fact, what seems to continually

         25        be happening with commissions, such as the Commission on


          1        Education that was taken as a special group that was

          2        pulled together to do what a State Board of Education

          3        should do.  It would provide better continuity, better

          4        oversight and a better overall planning and overall

          5        interfacing of the entire educational system.

          6             So, I do feel very strongly about this.  I don't want

          7        this proposal as a whole to live or die on this State

          8        Board of Education.  But I will support this part of it.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well, let me say that no proposal

         10        is off the table.  So if you are for it, you better be for

         11        it when it comes up and then you can be for it again, if

         12        you like.  I mean, if that's what you want to do.

         13             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I speak in favor of the

         14        amendment.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Very well.  Commissioner

         16        Evans-Jones.

         17             COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES:  I have a question of

         18        either Commissioner Henderson or Commissioner Nabors.  In

         19        the Corr amendment that we passed the other day, where was

         20        the Department of Law Enforcement going to be?  Who would

         21        be in charge of that?

         22             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I would be glad to answer

         23        that.  It did not address that issue.  So the Legislature

         24        would have had to designate the Governor or the Attorney

         25        General or an additional department head.


          1             COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES:  So under that it could not

          2        have been the collegial body which is now this amendment;

          3        is that correct?

          4             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I think we have already

          5        passed that amendment, so.

          6             COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES:  Yes, we did.  But I have a

          7        question now about the Division of Motor Vehicles and

          8        Highway Safety.  Explain that to me in the Corr amendment,

          9        exactly what that did.

         10             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Mr. Chairman, I'll be glad

         11        to answer that question, but I think that we are kind of

         12        off the subject.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I think so.  Maybe, Commissioner

         14        Evans-Jones, at a later time you can address that with

         15        Commissioner Henderson.  Commissioner Marshall, you are

         16        recognized unless -- do you yield to Commissioner

         17        Marshall?  You have the floor.

         18             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Thank you.  A question for

         19        either Commissioner Riley or Commissioner Alfonso.  There

         20        appears to be no stipulation in the measure for the

         21        appointed Commissioner of Education to have oversight of

         22        the state university system or the community college

         23        system.  What is your intention about that?

         24             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  The intent is that it not.  The

         25        intent is that it interface with the Board of Regents and


          1        also with the community college board, but that in no way

          2        does it -- is it an umbrella organization over those two

          3        bodies.

          4             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Would the Commissioner of

          5        Education sit on those boards as he does now?

          6             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I would certainly recommend it,

          7        but that would be at the decision of those boards.  It is

          8        not a part of this amendment.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Henderson has an

         10        amendment to the amendment that probably should be

         11        presented in connection to your question, Commissioner

         12        Marshall.  So I'm going to recognize his amendment to the

         13        amendment, which is on the table.  Would you read it,

         14        please?

         15             READING CLERK:  Amendment to amendment by

         16        Commissioner Henderson, delete last sentence.

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Now, Commissioner Henderson, tell

         18        us what that does.

         19             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

         20        This will be -- beginning my discussion here, we talked

         21        about this in the committee, I am a fervent believer in

         22        our current Cabinet system.  So as we continue to move on

         23        to this discussion, this will be the first part of this.

         24             But the amendment which I have proposed deletes the

         25        last sentence of the Riley amendment, which would say that


          1        the Board of Education shall appoint a Commissioner of

          2        Education.  The first part of this amendment, of the Riley

          3        amendment would take -- would accomplish some Cabinet

          4        reform by creating a new Board of Education that would not

          5        be the Cabinet, currently now the Cabinet is the Board of

          6        Education.

          7             So you could accomplish some Cabinet reform by

          8        creating a new Board of Education and transferring that

          9        responsibility from the Cabinet to a new Board of

         10        Education, which might well be a good idea.  But in

         11        keeping with the arguments that I'm going to be making in

         12        a few more minutes, I like the idea of an elected

         13        Commissioner of Education.

         14             We had a very wonderful debate in these chambers the

         15        last time that we were here.  Actually, there were two

         16        pieces of it.  We had an extraordinary debate on

         17        Commissioner Mills' proposal about adequacy in education,

         18        about the discussion of the language from the 1868

         19        Constitution that education is paramount.  And I think we

         20        all agree, it is the most important thing we do.  It is

         21        what more state resources are spent on than anything else.

         22             And we had an extraordinary debate in these chambers

         23        on a proposal by Commissioner Brochin on the fundamental

         24        right to education.  I think it is the most important

         25        thing we do, I think we all agreed to that.


          1             So tell me why we would detract or take away or step

          2        back from electing someone with a statewide perspective on

          3        education?  I think the system we have works fine.  I

          4        think it's nice to have some person run for a position

          5        focusing on the needs of education in this state, from

          6        colleges down to the schools, and to take that debate out

          7        to the state, from one end to the other.  It is a

          8        wonderful exercise.

          9             The same is true for the other provision, other

         10        members of the Cabinet, but I would say particularly for

         11        the issue of education.  So, that is my amendment.  It

         12        would keep an elected Commissioner of Education.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  The amendment to the

         14        amendment is on the floor which has the effect of -- well,

         15        it does strike the last sentence to the amendment which

         16        reads, "The State Board of Education shall appoint the

         17        Commissioner of Education."  That would be stricken on the

         18        amendment to the amendment.  All right.

         19             Before we go forward, the discussion now should be on

         20        the amendment to the amendment.  And you are next,

         21        Commissioner Scott, but Commissioner Marshall was in the

         22        middle of a question I think relating somewhat to this

         23        subject so I'm going to recognize him to complete his

         24        inquiry.

         25             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Mr. Chair, I really wanted to


          1        try to respond to Commissioner Henderson's question a

          2        moment ago.  So I'm not sure that I'm before Commissioner

          3        Scott.  Am I?

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  You go ahead while you are up.

          5             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  The question that

          6        Commissioner Henderson raised I think is very basic.  I

          7        served on that commission on Cabinet reform, 1995-'96, I

          8        guess it was, along with Commissioner Evans-Jones.  We

          9        debated that at length.  If there was a unanimous

         10        sentiment on the part of the members of that commission,

         11        it was that we ought to do something to strengthen the

         12        executive branch.  We have a weak Governor and we are all

         13        impeded by that.

         14             It's hard for me to come to the support of

         15        Commissioner Riley's amendment, but I think I'm going to

         16        do so.  For the reason that if we are going to -- if we

         17        are serious about strengthening the Governorship, there's

         18        no better place to start than with education.  It is the

         19        biggest piece, as far as I'm concerned, the most important

         20        piece of state government.  It's that to which we give

         21        most of our money, and therefore we ought to give most of

         22        our sentiment, our attention, our heart.

         23             But if we are going to strengthen the Governorship,

         24        it seems to me we have to be serious about it.  And

         25        therefore, Commissioner Henderson, in a sense, I'm saying


          1        that I'm making the sacrifice, that's with tongue in

          2        cheek.  But I think there has to be a sacrificial attitude

          3        on the part of somebody, if we are going to move to the

          4        executive branch real strength and real support.

          5             And for that reason, I hesitantly but sincerely come

          6        to support Commissioner Riley's amendment.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Jennings, didn't

          8        your committee recommend that the Commissioner of

          9        Education be appointed, by lopsided vote as I recall?  I

         10        think I was there when you-all voted.

         11             COMMMISSIONER JENNINGS:  Well we did a couple of

         12        things.  Seemed like we sent it out, and I would have to

         13        have somebody revisit the vote as to whether it was

         14        substantially lopsided, but the secretary is looking as we

         15        go.  But I think we sent out a recommendation for an

         16        appointed commissioner that then went to the Executive

         17        Branch Committee, the committee handling the executive

         18        branch.

         19             We also dealt, help me, Commissioner Riley, with the

         20        issue of the State Board of Education as it would

         21        interface with an appointed commissioner.  And I think we

         22        sent one of those out as well and I think it went that way

         23        too.  So I don't know what they looked like once the next

         24        committee got through with them.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well my question was I thought


          1        that your committee voted for whatever amount it was, to

          2        have an appointed Commissioner of Education.  I read that

          3        when your report came through, Commissioner Marshall is on

          4        that --

          5             COMMMISSIONER JENNINGS:  That's safe to say.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  -- Commissioner Marshall is on

          7        that committee and Commissioner Riley is the vice

          8        chairman, too.  And then you are telling me that went to

          9        Executive on the next referral and, Commissioner Alfonso,

         10        your response.

         11             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Well as I remember they were

         12        voted on in both committees, I'm on both committees.  And

         13        they were referred to both committees, I think that's

         14        correct, they were voted on in both committees.  I don't

         15        remember what the votes were, but they came favorably out

         16        of both committees.

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  In other words, Executive also

         18        was for the appointed.  If this proposal passes it would

         19        be an appointed official anyway.  Okay.  Is that right,

         20        Commissioner Riley?

         21             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Yes, the suggestion of taking

         22        this last line out was not a part of any amendment

         23        presented at either of the committees that this proposal

         24        came before.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  So you rise to oppose the


          1        amendment to your amendment then?

          2             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I do indeed.

          3             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Scott, you have been

          4        very patient.  You have the floor.

          5             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  I think I want to speak in favor

          6        of the amendment.  I couldn't find it to read it, but I

          7        want to talk to you just a minute about this education

          8        subject.

          9             Last summer, you know, it sounded good.  Let the

         10        Governor be the Governor, and all of that, I remember two

         11        former Governors at least saying that.  But I have to tell

         12        you something that, I mean, just as recently as this past

         13        week, we had a number of meetings in Broward County where

         14        Commissioner Brogan was there discussing charter schools,

         15        cities getting into starting charter schools.

         16             The interest level in education in this state is

         17        tremendous.  A few years ago, three or four years ago we

         18        will say, there was great concern that progress was not

         19        being made in education and people were not happy.  I

         20        mean, it is obvious why.  Our test scores, two-thirds of

         21        the kids coming out of the public school system couldn't

         22        qualify for, they needed remediation in community colleges

         23        in either English or math.  The test scores were bad.

         24             We have made a lot of progress.  We have awakened the

         25        state.  And I think a part of that is having an elected


          1        person who is out there all the time trying to help with

          2        anything from having cities in Broward County, showing

          3        them how to start charter schools, which may not be and

          4        are not, and he says so, a panacea for everything but at

          5        least they inject some competition, maybe they will work

          6        better, maybe it will make the whole system better.

          7             I am very concerned about now trying, when we have

          8        gotten this heightened interest in education, it is now in

          9        a level with concern about crime in this state, I think

         10        people have recognized that, you know, we have to deal

         11        with crime, but we also have to get back to some of the

         12        causes, which education provides the best answer.  And I

         13        think at this point we have got to think long and hard

         14        about putting out something that's going to say, well, we

         15        are not going to have summarily an elected Commissioner of

         16        Education anymore.

         17             The Board of Education, interesting idea.  Frankly,

         18        the Cabinet in general, and no reflection on any current

         19        members, but their positions do not, other than being

         20        elected statewide, make them experts in education, but it

         21        is a big step to take away the people's right to vote and

         22        have input.  And the input that comes with having someone

         23        that's out there that has to meet with them on a regular

         24        basis, that has his staff out there.

         25             One of the concerns we have had at some of the other


          1        levels of education has been perhaps in some cases the

          2        lack of responsiveness to the people in the state by

          3        appointed people.  And that's been a continuing discussion

          4        in the Legislature and throughout the state.

          5             So I think it sounded good last summer to talk about,

          6        and I'm sure we can make some progress in this area, but I

          7        think in education to say that we are going to not have an

          8        elected Commissioner of Education is a pretty big step.

          9        And I'm not ready to take that at this time.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Commissioner Nabors?

         11             COMMISSIONER NABORS:  Mr. Chairman, I have a question

         12        for Mr. Henderson on his amendment to the amendment.  I

         13        want to make sure that I understand what this does.  As I

         14        read your amendment to the amendment, it deletes the last

         15        sentence in Commissioner Riley's to delete the language,

         16        "The State Board of Education shall appoint the

         17        Commissioner of Education."  Is that correct?

         18             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  That's correct.

         19             COMMISSIONER NABORS:  But even if you delete that and

         20        then the amendment passes as amended, you still go back to

         21        the main proposal which eliminates the Commissioner of

         22        Education.  So it is unclear to me who then governs the

         23        State Board of Education, because your amendment, as I

         24        read it, doesn't really go to the issue of whether you

         25        have an elected Commissioner of Education or not.  It goes


          1        simply to the issue on this amendment to the amendment.

          2             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I think you raise a very

          3        good question.  Of course, I am not only opposed to

          4        abolishing the Commissioner of Education but the others as

          5        well.

          6             I think, however, if you are going to accomplish this

          7        drastic Cabinet reform that you probably ought to do, you

          8        ought to do something else -- you ought to do something

          9        specific with education.  So if this, if the amendment

         10        passes, then obviously we are going to have to tinker with

         11        it back in the main body, to answer your question.

         12             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Incidentally, that amendment

         13        should reflect that it is on Page 4, Line 18, insert

         14        Section 4, instead of what it reads.  Make that correction

         15        on your amendment.  And now we are on the amendment to the

         16        amendment.  We are still on striking the last sentence.

         17        Commissioner Smith.

         18             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  I just have a question,

         19        Mr. Chairman.  With regard to the amendment to the

         20        amendment, based on the question that was asked, is it

         21        germane now to discuss our position with regard to an

         22        appointed versus an elected?  I'm -- I want to be in

         23        order.  How do you rule?

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I'm going to rule it is in order

         25        if you want to discuss it, although I think you can say


          1        Commissioner Henderson effectively said, don't pass my

          2        amendment, and we will get to it later.

          3             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Okay.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Am I right, Commissioner

          5        Henderson?

          6             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Mr. Chairman --

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  You are not giving it up.

          8             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  No, sir, I'm trying to be

          9        intellectually honest with everybody.  I am against the

         10        whole thing.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  We know that.  We saw your

         12        sneakiness in advance.

         13             (Laughter.)

         14             No, we knew that.  I don't think anybody is misled by

         15        your intellectual approach.  Commissioner Smith.

         16             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I too

         17        serve on the Education Committee and I share Commissioner

         18        Scott's concern that we not take a leap like this without

         19        careful consideration.  Probably one of the most profound

         20        presentations that I saw, having not served in the

         21        Legislature and being privy to a lot of the information

         22        our legislators have, was the presentation that was made

         23        by my colleague Commissioner Marshall, which has in total

         24        been distributed by video by Commissioner Nabors.

         25             First of all, I think that we can look at the history


          1        of how Florida has been doing in education over the last

          2        20 years and it is shameful.

          3             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Smith, if you are

          4        addressing a question to Commissioner Henderson, he is

          5        engaged in high-level consultation while you are asking

          6        him the question.

          7             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Well I was hopeful that that

          8        would end in his withdrawal of the amendment, but just in

          9        case it doesn't.

         10             And while the numbers, the test scores, et cetera,

         11        have been so consistently appalling that the public has

         12        required of our elected officials in both the executive

         13        branch and the legislative branch to do more, I am not

         14        certain that the elected commissioner has anything to do

         15        with the little progress we have seen.  I think it has to

         16        do with the person, and not with whether the person is

         17        elected or appointed.

         18             As a matter of fact I think if we look at the past

         19        record, I think if we started to make changes, one of the

         20        things that we would probably say is since things have

         21        been so bad for so long under an elected Commissioner of

         22        Education, that should be one of the first places we would

         23        start.

         24             I believe, and I think some of you would agree, that

         25        we have some Cabinet members now who are so trusted and


          1        well liked by the public that they could run for any of

          2        the Cabinet positions if they wanted to, whether it is

          3        agriculture or some other position because the people like

          4        them, feel they are competent, they have great name

          5        recognition and they are well organized.  But that

          6        wouldn't be good for the people of the state of Florida.

          7             Education is very, very specific.  It is very, very

          8        critical.  We need to do something radical, Commissioner

          9        Scott.  We need to tell the people of the state of Florida

         10        that we are going to change this, we are going to go from

         11        worst to first.  And we are going to do it by putting

         12        professionals in charge, we are going to do it by holding

         13        the Governor responsible.  And those who don't do the job

         14        can't duck and hide anymore and we are going to get them

         15        out of there if they don't do the job.

         16             And so, Commissioner Henderson, this may be the first

         17        time we have publicly disagreed on the floor, but I'm

         18        proud of the fact that we are disagreeing on this because

         19        having two daughters in school, as far as I'm concerned,

         20        this is one of the most important things that I can do.

         21        And I definitely will support Commissioner Riley.

         22             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Riley, I have

         23        recognized you about four or five times.  If somebody else

         24        wants to speak, I'm going to recognize them first.  You

         25        know where we are?  We are on the amendment to the


          1        amendment to the amendment.  Commissioner Butterworth.

          2             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  No, I was just going to

          3        say, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate those kinds words from

          4        Commissioner Smith.  That was all.

          5             (Laughter.)

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barkdull.

          7             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Mr. Chairman, I suggest we

          8        read the amendment to the amendment and take the vote.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Read the amendment to

         10        the amendment.  Commissioner Riley.

         11             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I have not spoken to this

         12        amendment, if I may have just a few quick points to make.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Are you against the amendment to

         14        the amendment?

         15             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Yes, sir.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  You may talk yourself out of a

         17        favorable vote.

         18             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Okay.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Then again, you may not.  You

         20        will have another chance to discuss it.

         21             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I would like to make a couple of

         22        points in answer to the points that Commissioner Scott and

         23        Commissioner Henderson made.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Go ahead.

         25             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  And that is that exactly to what


          1        Commissioner Smith said, and to remind people that we are

          2        talking about a State Board of Education in conjunction --

          3        not in conjunction but working with a State Board of

          4        Community Colleges that does not elect its head, a Board

          5        of Regents that does not elect its head.  So I would

          6        suggest that we vote against the amendment, thank you.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  All in -- we are

          8        going to vote on the amendment to the amendment at this

          9        time.  All in favor of the amendment to the amendment --

         10        did I have him read it again?  Okay.  All in favor of the

         11        amendment to the amendment, say aye; all opposed?

         12             (Verbal vote taken.)

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It fails.  Now we go to the

         14        amendment.

         15             (Off-the-record comment.)

         16             (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Lock the machine and announce the

         18        vote.

         19             READING CLERK:  Eight nays and 18 nays, Mr. Chairman.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  My ears, even though one of them

         21        is not very good, were excellent on that particular

         22        occasion.  Now we're on the amendment, which I would like

         23        to ask you to read again.

         24             READING CLERK:  By Commissioner Alfonso, on Page 4,

         25        Line 18, insert Section 4; Section 2 of Article IX,


          1        Florida Constitution, revised by amending this section to

          2        read:  Article IX, education, Section 2, State Board of

          3        Education; the State Board of Education shall be a body

          4        corporate and have such supervision of the system of

          5        public education as is provided by law.  The State Board

          6        of Education shall consist of seven members appointed by

          7        the Governor to staggered four-year terms, subject to

          8        confirmation by the Senate.  The State Board of Education

          9        shall appoint the Commissioner of Education.  Renumber

         10        subsequent Section 5.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Now on the amendment,

         12        anybody want to be heard further on the amendment?  If

         13        not, we will proceed to vote.  All in favor of the

         14        amendment, say aye; opposed?

         15             (Verbal vote taken.)

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  The ayes have it and therefore

         17        the amendment is adopted.  Do you want a recorded vote on

         18        that, Commissioner Henderson?

         19             (Off-the-record comment by Commissioner Henderson.)

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I wanted to make sure.  All

         21        right.  We are now on the proposal as amended.  And we

         22        adopted two amendments; is that right?  Two amendments.

         23        We adopted the last amendment and then we adopted the one,

         24        a total of three.

         25             Can you -- would it be appropriate to read the


          1        amendments, one, two and three, so we will know exactly

          2        what we are voting on?

          3             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Mr. Chairman, I have one more

          4        question while they are getting those in order if I could

          5        ask it please.  It is a clarification.  It appears to me

          6        that in the clemency area, it requires -- if this proposal

          7        were adopted, Commissioner Alfonso, with regard to

          8        clemency it requires one vote, just one vote for clemency.

          9        And then later on in the proposal -- later on in the

         10        proposal it requires the Governor to be on the prevailing

         11        side.  Is there a conflict in those two things?

         12             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  As I understand it, the

         13        Governor has to be on the prevailing side.

         14             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  But if it requires one vote

         15        for clemency, it does not require that vote be of the

         16        Governor.  So the question is --

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barnett, it requires

         18        one vote of the Cabinet, which is two people.  The

         19        Governor is not a member of the Cabinet.  So what he is

         20        saying is that it requires the Governor's vote and one

         21        other member.

         22             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  And one other member.

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I think that was the way I

         24        understood it was presented.

         25             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Well the Governor has to be


          1        for it.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Correct.  The Governor has to be

          3        for it, but he has to get one of the two Cabinet members

          4        to vote with him in order to grant clemency.  Let's read

          5        the three amendments.  If everybody would listen

          6        carefully, then we will know what we are voting on I hope.

          7             READING CLERK:  Amendment 1 by Commissioner Thompson,

          8        on Page 2, Line 7, on Page 3, Line 1, on Page 3, Line 9,

          9        on Page 3, Line 16, on Page 8, Line 1, strike "treasurer"

         10        and insert "chief financial officer."

         11             Amendment 2 by Commissioners Butterworth and

         12        Thompson, Page 3 between Line 19 and 20 insert "the

         13        Governor as chair, the chief financial officer and

         14        attorney general shall constitute the agency head of the

         15        Department of Law Enforcement."

         16             Amendment 3 by Commissioner Alfonso, on Page 4, Line

         17        18 insert, "Section 4, Section 2 of Article IX of the

         18        Florida Constitution is revised by amending the section to

         19        read, Article IX, Education; Section 2, the State Board of

         20        Education, the State Board of Education shall be a body

         21        corporate and have such supervision of the system of

         22        public education as is provided by law.  The State Board

         23        of Education shall consist of seven members appointed by

         24        the Governor to staggered four-year terms subject to

         25        confirmation by the Senate.  The State Board of Education


          1        shall appoint the Commissioner of Education.  Renumber

          2        subsequent Section 5."

          3             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I'm going to ask Commissioner

          4        Henderson, as I understood what you were trying to do,

          5        Commissioner Henderson, if I am right, is you wanted a

          6        clean proposal on the Cabinet reform issue, whether you

          7        were for it or against it, and you felt that this was an

          8        issue that should be addressed separately; is that

          9        correct?  It is coming up later.  I mean, as far as the

         10        proposals are concerned, there is one still on the

         11        calendar that does that.

         12             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure I

         13        understood the question.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well then I won't ask it again.

         15        We will ask for debate on the proposal.

         16             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Mr. Chairman, at the

         17        appropriate time I would like to stand in opposition to

         18        it.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Correct, I was aware of that.

         20        All right, proponents.

         21             Opponent, Commissioner Henderson.

         22             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I

         23        heard -- first of all, I want to compliment Chairman

         24        Alfonso and members of the Executive Committee for giving

         25        this issue a tremendous amount of attention and working


          1        through the various proposals that came through it and

          2        coming forward with a proposal that is well thought out,

          3        and has, comes to it with a unique opportunity because of

          4        the support from a couple of current members of the

          5        Cabinet.  So I applaud them for that effort.

          6             But I would also applaud the members of this

          7        commission who have heard all the things that Governor

          8        Askew said and Governor Chiles said and remarks from

          9        Governor Martinez and Governor Kirk.

         10             And we have undertaken Cabinet reform in these

         11        chambers, we have done that.  The first thing we did, and

         12        you know it was near and dear to my heart as well as

         13        Commissioner Alfonso's, is that we decided that it was not

         14        an appropriate thing to waste the Governor and Cabinet's

         15        time on to decide the size of a lobster that should be

         16        taken in Florida Bay.  And so by stripping the Cabinet of

         17        dealing with all of those issues, we have undertaken

         18        Cabinet reform.

         19             The Corr Amendment that we talked about earlier is

         20        also Cabinet reform.  We have acceded to the

         21        recommendation of the Martinez Commission and we said the

         22        Cabinet should no longer be the head of a department.  Now

         23        we have come back and said, okay, but we did that with

         24        FDLE, and I guess I would support that too, but we have

         25        taken away that aspect of it that has taken up a lot of


          1        their time.

          2             And frankly, I even support the Riley Amendment that

          3        we just adopted which would transfer the responsibilities

          4        of the Board of Education from the Cabinet to a new Board

          5        of Education because I agree with my colleague, I do agree

          6        with my colleague Commissioner Smith that that is a step

          7        in the right direction and that is something that the

          8        public would support.

          9             But I would suggest to you that things have changed

         10        since Governor Martinez was governor and Governor Graham

         11        was governor and Governor Kirk was governor and that is

         12        the voters of the state have already undertaken a

         13        tremendous amount of Cabinet reform.  They did it with

         14        Eight Is Enough.

         15             Back in the old days we did have a problem when you

         16        had, say, a Commissioner of Agriculture that was there for

         17        longer than anyone could remember, or a Secretary of State

         18        that was there for longer than anyone could remember.  And

         19        governors, as in the case of Governor Kirk, or governors

         20        before Governor Askew came and went.  They couldn't even

         21        succeed themselves.  They would serve for four years and

         22        be the minority voice on a Cabinet where the other members

         23        could serve forever, or would seem like to be forever.

         24             But Eight Is Enough has leveled that playing field.

         25        We no longer have a Cabinet where you have very senior


          1        people being Secretary of State or Commissioner of

          2        Agriculture who are holding an equal weight of a plural

          3        executive.  So I would suggest to you that we have changed

          4        the system and that we have a level playing field.

          5             I'll tell you that I like the Cabinet, I don't know

          6        that I can tell you why.  I think it is like that debate

          7        we had in these chambers about a unicameral Legislature

          8        and we all decided that we were not the state of Nebraska.

          9        Well, you know, the plural executive is what makes us

         10        different.  It is unique.

         11             And I'll tell you as someone who stood before it in

         12        front of four different governors, there is something

         13        magical about it.  I can't tell you why that is, but I can

         14        tell you that collectively I have seen these good

         15        individuals over time come together and work together for

         16        the best interest of the state and take decisions and make

         17        decisions which couldn't have happened in any other

         18        context.

         19             An area that obviously is very important to me is as

         20        steward of our natural resources.  And I can tell you that

         21        observing the Cabinet over Democratic and Republican

         22        governors, over splits between Democrats and Republicans

         23        on the Cabinet, that the environment has always been a

         24        bipartisan issue before that Cabinet.  And decisions that

         25        they have made have been in the public trust.


          1             And I'll just give you a couple of examples of things

          2        I have observed over the years.  And some people might

          3        have a difference of agreement with me.  In fact, my

          4        colleague Commissioner Butterworth may have disagreements

          5        on some of these things, but from my perspective I think

          6        the system has worked well.

          7             Several years ago, the Cabinet was concerned about

          8        the fate of the West Indian manatee and asked the

          9        Department of Natural Resources to come forward with a

         10        plan on how to protect the manatee.  The Cabinet looked at

         11        that plan and heard from the people and collectively said,

         12        That is not enough, you must do something more.  And they

         13        did that.

         14             A few years ago, the Cabinet heard an appeal from

         15        decisions of a Hearing Officer involving growth management

         16        decisions in the Florida Keys.  The Hearing Officer opined

         17        that the carrying capacity of the Florida Keys had been

         18        exceeded and we should do something more.  The Cabinet

         19        said, yes, we should do something more, and it held

         20        everybody to a higher standard to go find a way to solve

         21        that problem.

         22             Last year there was a very controversial issue that

         23        came before the Cabinet concerning the change of fuel that

         24        Florida Power and Light wanted to use at a plant in

         25        Manatee County called orimulsion.  Most people never heard


          1        of orimulsion.  Most people in the state of Florida still

          2        have never heard of orimulsion.

          3             When this permit went about the usual course of

          4        business, it was approved because it was no big deal.

          5        When it went before the Governor and Cabinet, the Governor

          6        and Cabinet accurately saw that this issue is one of

          7        statewide importance and held it to a higher standard.

          8        Some of those things are still being worked out, but that

          9        is how it works.  They have the ability to do that.

         10             You know, each of us have had a really interesting

         11        and unique experience.  You know, in going to the 11

         12        public hearings as we did around the state, we gained,

         13        whether we liked it or not, a statewide perspective.  I

         14        think what I have learned is that there are so few people

         15        in this state who truly have a statewide perspective, that

         16        know the difference between the way things act and play

         17        out and policy deals between Pensacola and Key West.  It

         18        is an incredibly diverse state that we have.

         19             And because of that, I value the fact that we have

         20        not one, not three, but seven people who every four years

         21        we get to elect to have a statewide perspective.  And

         22        true, we may ask some of these candidates, What is your

         23        perspective, primarily on education.  And some may

         24        primarily have that perspective in agriculture, and others

         25        may primarily have that perspective in banking.


          1             But it is a statewide perspective that requires them

          2        to go out there and run for office from Pensacola to Key

          3        West and gain the confidence of the 14 million people who

          4        live in this state.

          5             My colleagues, I'll tell you that the system works.

          6        I don't know why it works, but it works, there is

          7        something magical about it, and I think we should retain

          8        it.  I think it would be a mistake to step away from it

          9        because I don't think we will ever be able to explain to

         10        the voters of this state why they should give up their

         11        right to vote on four people who set policy of something

         12        that's so important.

         13             Every engineer that I know looks at the design of a

         14        bumblebee.  It is fat, it has got short wings, they will

         15        tell you that it can't fly.  There is no way in the world

         16        that that bumblebee can fly.  And that's the Cabinet.

         17        Every political scientist that looks at it, everybody that

         18        thinks they understand accountability looks at it and

         19        says, It can't work.  I believe it works, I'm proud to

         20        defend this system here, and I believe that the people of

         21        the state of Florida, as they did in 1978 would support it

         22        as well.

         23             Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Smith.

         25             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.


          1             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  You are next, Commissioner

          2        Evans-Jones.

          3             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  It is a big difference between

          4        an engineer saying that a bumblebee can't fly and the

          5        bumblebee saying it can't fly.  Governors, Democrat and

          6        Republican alike, who have been a part of this system, who

          7        have no vested interest now tell us that the Cabinet

          8        system is a relic of the old Florida.

          9             They say to us, this bumblebee can't fly.  And I

         10        trust their judgment with regard to that.  And let me

         11        commend Commissioner Alfonso because there were a

         12        tremendous number of proposals and I think he and his

         13        committee have done a wonderful job.

         14             Question number one, what I call the Wetherington

         15        question, is this necessary for the Constitution?  We all

         16        can resoundingly say yes.  And the Commissioner Barkdull

         17        question, where should this be on our priority list?  And

         18        I would suggest within the top three to five things we can

         19        do because this involves the balance of power in our

         20        government.

         21             And while Commissioner Henderson probably has made

         22        the best possible argument for a bad system, I suggest to

         23        you that one issue he did not address is the issue of

         24        accountability.  Because I think that's the strongest

         25        reason why Governors and those who want Florida to move


          1        forward with real change in our particular system argue

          2        with regard to this proposal.

          3             I think that there may be some magic, there is magic

          4        to almost everything in the past.  You know, we wax about

          5        the good old days.  But usually with most of the things we

          6        do, the good old days were not really as good as our

          7        memories about the good old days.  And I think with regard

          8        to -- because we continue to get better, we continue to

          9        improve.  We continue to learn the lessons of our past,

         10        and the mistakes that we made.

         11             And I think where Florida has come from 1968 to 1998,

         12        we can all be proud of.  This one relic, though, this one

         13        dragon, needs to be slain.  And I am proud of the fact

         14        that I believe that this Commission is prepared to put

         15        before the public a proposal that will take us into the

         16        21st century and balance out the power that we need

         17        between our different branches of government.  And I

         18        believe that for that reason, we all should support this

         19        very fine work of our executive committee.  And I intend

         20        to vote yes.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Evans-Jones.

         22             COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES:  Thank you.  I rise with

         23        fear and trepidation because Commissioner Alfonso has done

         24        a terrific job on this in the Executive Committee, which I

         25        am also a member of.  But I guess as an old relic here in


          1        Florida, Commissioner Smith, I kind of like old relics,

          2        and I think that the system that we have today has worked

          3        really very well.

          4             And it's really interesting to see the people who

          5        come in front of the Cabinet.  They like the diversity of

          6        having all of these elected officials be able to listen to

          7        them and to offer their opinion and to help.

          8             And I know, for instance, we had a problem in little

          9        ole Nassau County that came up with Metro Marine, which

         10        I'm sure some of the commissioners remember.  And we would

         11        not have been able, I don't think, to have defeated that,

         12        had there not been a Cabinet, and the Governor.  It was

         13        quite helpful to us.

         14             We didn't want to have a dry dock in an aquatic

         15        preserve.  We thought that was really not appropriate for

         16        Amelia Island.  And those of you who know Amelia Island,

         17        it is a beautiful community.  And none of us who live

         18        there, except maybe an attorney who represented Metro

         19        Marine, most of us were really, you know, very, very

         20        against this.

         21             And I just think that it is serving a useful purpose,

         22        has served a useful purpose.  We did work for a year on

         23        trying to get rid of some of the unimportant duties that

         24        the Cabinet had to go into detail with, and we have done

         25        that legislatively.  And about half of those things have


          1        passed and I hope the rest of them will pass.

          2             And I agree with Commissioner Henderson.  With the

          3        limitation of terms, you have an opportunity to put new

          4        people in there who are very effective and who really

          5        listen to the citizens of Florida.  I don't think three

          6        people are going to really be representative of the state

          7        that we are living in.  And I would urge you to vote

          8        against this very good bill.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Any further

         10        discussion?  Commissioner Barnett.

         11             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I

         12        came into the chamber today prepared to vote for this

         13        proposal.  I was very impressed with Bill Nelson and

         14        General Milligan and the concept they advanced, which is

         15        largely included in the proposal before us.

         16             But I have decided that I'm going to vote against

         17        this proposal today, and I want to tell you why.  And it

         18        has to do with the issue I raised a few minutes ago, and

         19        that is about the intimate interrelationship of the

         20        proposal that was passed on Friday, which takes away from

         21        the Legislature, constitutionally prohibits the

         22        Legislature from allowing the Cabinet to be a collegial

         23        body, a collegial head of various state agencies.  And

         24        that -- that provision, I think you have -- I have to look

         25        at that provision in conjunction with this provision.


          1             I have always, like Commissioner Henderson, I have

          2        always been a proponent of the Cabinet, I think the

          3        Cabinet system works.  To me, the fact that we are the

          4        only state that has this system makes us unique, but

          5        unique in a positive way.  We are the only state in the

          6        union where any citizen of this state every two weeks has

          7        the opportunity to approach, address, and usually get a

          8        reaction and a response from the highest elected officials

          9        in the state of Florida.

         10             The Cabinet meets every two weeks, and often

         11        citizens, real citizens, not citizens who are represented

         12        by lawyers or associations or other entities, citizens'

         13        groups appear before the Cabinet.  And it's been my

         14        experience, as I've sat in those Cabinet meetings, that

         15        those citizens are listened to carefully, and that the

         16        elected officials try to address their issues.  I think

         17        that is a very positive aspect of our government.

         18             I've never been Governor and it's clear I never will

         19        be with my personal income tax proposal, but my

         20        observation of a number of governors is they are not weak.

         21        They may not be as strong as they would like to be in any

         22        given situation, they may have to balance more interests

         23        and more issues, but, you know, I would like somebody to

         24        tell the tobacco industry how weak Governor Chiles is.

         25        They are not weak, and I just have never been impressed by


          1        that.

          2             But I really felt that as long as we retained a

          3        Cabinet of three people, then we still had the right of

          4        the public to approach those elected officials on a

          5        regular basis, that we maintain that unique aspect that I

          6        think is so positive.  As long as we have that, I could

          7        support this proposal as opposed to an outright abolition.

          8             But once we take away from the Legislature the

          9        authority to create some of these collegial bodies, I

         10        mean, the agencies that are headed by the Cabinet as a

         11        collegial body, such as the Department of Revenue, such as

         12        the Highway Safety, such as Management Services, such as

         13        the State Board of Administration, such as Trustees.

         14             Now granted, a couple of those we have preserved in

         15        the Constitution, but basically we have now dramatically

         16        limited what the Cabinet will hear.  They won't hear

         17        education issues, they won't hear about the tax structure

         18        of the state, they won't hear about all the buildings and

         19        construction and management of issues in state government.

         20        Their role will be dramatically limited.

         21             And on many of those issues, other than thankfully

         22        the environmental issues, and that is a key component of,

         23        this is the Trustees' function, there's not going to be

         24        much that the average citizen is really going to utilize

         25        that forum for.  So I think that while we have maintained


          1        a forum for citizens' access, we have so limited the

          2        issues that will be considered by the Cabinet that it

          3        causes me great concern.

          4             At a later point, because I'm certain this proposal

          5        is going forward, at a later point, if we can address the

          6        concerns that I have about what was done earlier, you

          7        know, with the constitutional restriction on the

          8        Legislature, then I would reconsider, you know, voting for

          9        this.

         10             But in the current posture and because of the

         11        relationship with the two, and because I believe that the

         12        Cabinet is a very positive thing for a state as diverse

         13        and dynamic as Florida, that I'm going to have to, with

         14        great reluctance now, vote against it.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barkdull.

         16             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Will Commissioner Barnett

         17        yield for a question?

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  She yields.

         19             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Commissioner Barnett, if I

         20        was to put the proposal that we passed in the previous

         21        session on reconsideration, would you vote for this

         22        proposal?

         23             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  That's difficult to answer,

         24        Commissioner Barkdull.  I certainly would vote for it if

         25        that proposal were up on reconsideration and disposed of


          1        in a way differently than it was last Thursday.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It's still available for

          3        reconsideration, for your information, Commissioner

          4        Barnett.

          5             Commissioner Butterworth and then Commissioner

          6        Ford-Coates.

          7             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  Mr. Chairman, having the

          8        opportunity to sit on the collegial body called the

          9        Governor and Cabinet -- and the Governor is not part of

         10        the Cabinet, which every governor will tell you.  People

         11        make the mistake by considering him a member of the

         12        Cabinet.  If you ever want to get Governor Askew a little

         13        bit upset, you talk about that issue.

         14             But on the issues which Commissioner Barnett was

         15        talking about, where people come and speak before the

         16        Governor and Cabinet, I wish to say that it is good to

         17        hear from a number of people.  But I believe that what is

         18        preserved right now in the proposal before us is the vast

         19        majority of a number of issues that we hear from people

         20        anyway.

         21             And when the Governor and Cabinet had the opportunity

         22        to address this issue twice, they preserved these type

         23        issues because those are the ones that we do hear from in

         24        the public.  We are talking about, we want to sit as a

         25        collegial body for the environment, for pledging the full


          1        faith and credit of the state of Florida, for law

          2        enforcement and a couple of the other issues.  And those

          3        are the ones that usually they don't receive that

          4        unanimous 7-0 vote.

          5             Having sat there for 11 years, I believe what we are

          6        preserving are things that, by and large, the public comes

          7        and talks to us about.  And some of the public that comes

          8        and talks to us, we probably don't have authority anyway

          9        right now to even do what they want us to do, but we

         10        listen to them anyway.  I don't believe that's going to

         11        stop in the future.

         12             So I would urge adoption of this proposal.  Thank

         13        you.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Now Commissioner Ford-Coates.

         15             COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES:  During our public

         16        hearings, I heard Commissioner Barnett speak several times

         17        about the need for the public to have access to the

         18        government and how incredible it is that any average

         19        citizen can speak to the Cabinet, as she has mentioned

         20        here today.

         21             And I would like to add that after looking at what we

         22        have done before -- and the Corr amendment, just to

         23        refresh memory, we haven't brought up the actual subject

         24        of that proposal, which was the limitation of the state

         25        departments to 25 departments and to whom those


          1        departments report.  And as we passed unanimously last

          2        time, those departments report to one person, be it the

          3        Governor, Lieutenant Governor or any Cabinet member.  But

          4        just to clarify that proposal.  That to me handles the

          5        accountability issue.

          6             But this idea of the public having access to their

          7        government, to me, is as impacted by this proposal, even

          8        though there are three people still left as the Cabinet, I

          9        think the people are greatly impacted by the fact that

         10        they no longer elect four of their statewide officials.

         11        And as I see it, the ability of the public to contact a

         12        person for whom they vote on issues as important to this

         13        state as agriculture and education, elections and business

         14        that the Secretary of the State handles, those issues are

         15        equally important to the public.

         16             And I don't think the citizens of the state of

         17        Florida want to give up the right to have the opportunity

         18        to elect those statewide officials.  I would endorse what

         19        Commissioner Henderson has said strongly and urge you to

         20        vote against this proposal.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Marshall.

         22             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Mr. Chairman, there are some

         23        days when one is really proud to be a member of this

         24        commission -- well, maybe every day.

         25             But the quality of this debate seems to me to be such


          1        that I hope it's shown in every class on government in the

          2        state.  I mean, we are really coming to grips with one of

          3        the most basic issues of government.  And when I hear

          4        other commissioners talk, Martha -- Commissioner Barnett,

          5        I want to say, Man, you are right, that is a compelling

          6        point.  But I think there's some very compelling points on

          7        the other side and I'm still on the affirmative side of

          8        this.

          9             I want to make one point and I will make that point

         10        briefly.  Commissioner Smith touched it off but didn't

         11        really speak to it in this context, and that's

         12        accountability.  I've never heard of a Commissioner of

         13        Agriculture running for office and saying, I'm going to be

         14        the Education Commissioner of Agriculture, or even the

         15        Attorney General say, I'm going to be the Education

         16        Attorney General.

         17             But I've heard any number of governors over the past

         18        30 or 40 years say, If you will elect me, I'll be the

         19        Education Governor.  I would like to give him or her the

         20        chance to do that, to be the chief officer for education

         21        that I can look to and hold accountable and say, I heard

         22        what you promised and now I'm going to hold you to it, or

         23        at least do my best to.

         24             I have heard a number of Commissioners of Education

         25        over the years say, I was really in favor of that, but I


          1        couldn't convince the other Cabinet members to support me,

          2        or the Governor to go along.  I don't think we have very

          3        good accountability in the management of education.  And

          4        the primary reason, at least one of those that I favor

          5        this measure is that I do think it contains real

          6        accountability.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Commissioner Alfonso

          8        to close.

          9             COMMISSIONER ALFONSO:  Thank you, Mr. Chair.  And I

         10        want to thank you, Commissioners, for the quality of this

         11        debate.

         12             Really a lot of my argument has been made by

         13        Commissioner Smith and Commissioner Marshall, but I want

         14        to touch on a few points here.  Commissioner Henderson --

         15        and by the way, Commissioner Henderson and Commissioner

         16        Evans-Jones, I would like to welcome all of you to our

         17        committee because you heard what went on there.

         18             But Commissioner Henderson said he doesn't know why

         19        the Cabinet works.  I would suggest and submit to you that

         20        the general public doesn't know what the Cabinet does.

         21        When someone is voting for the Commissioner of Education,

         22        he expects someone to be really specifically knowledgeable

         23        about education, and the same goes for Agriculture.  He

         24        doesn't expect that these commissioners will have aides to

         25        explain to them what some of the 400 duties that the


          1        Cabinet has that deal with other parts of government.

          2             The Askew Commission noted those 400 different

          3        duties -- statutes that assign duties to the Cabinet and

          4        they recommended about 200 of them could be transferred or

          5        assigned elsewhere.  I think that if you look at

          6        perspective, statewide perspective, ours is a very diverse

          7        state.

          8             I would rather that those commissioners, or whatever

          9        they be, Commissioner of Education, et cetera, be very

         10        specifically knowledgeable about the perspective that it

         11        takes for them to govern or for them to decide on the

         12        issues that they deal with across the state in their

         13        specific field, not worrying about agriculture in this

         14        very diverse state when one is the Commissioner of

         15        Education.  I would like to submit that point to you.

         16             I think that Commissioner Barnett's point is well

         17        taken, but I would suggest that her point -- that proposal

         18        also deals with a seven-member Cabinet.  So I believe, you

         19        know, we need to look at this proposal for what it is and

         20        what it stands for.  It stands for a more efficient

         21        government, one that is accountable to the people.  One

         22        that when the people vote on these three officers and on

         23        the strength of the Governor, when they vote for the

         24        Governor, they know what they are voting for.  They know

         25        that that Governor is going to be accountable for his


          1        decisions.

          2             I would say, Commissioner Marshall, no other state

          3        has copied this system of executive government.  The

          4        national trend has been for states to actually hold their

          5        elected officials more accountable for their positions as

          6        we head into the future.

          7             So though this is a very complex issue, and we faced

          8        it during our committee meetings, I ask you to consider a

          9        bipartisan proposal made to us by two members of this

         10        Cabinet to consider another member of the Cabinet, and

         11        what his suggestions have been made to us here,

         12        Commissioner Butterworth.  I would ask you to consider

         13        making the Governor's power his own and let's really look

         14        at taking a historic step here.  And really looking at the

         15        possibility of changing this system that's been in place

         16        now for a very, very long time.  Thank you.

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Ready to vote?  We'll

         18        open the machine and vote.

         19             (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Lock the machine and announce the

         21        vote.

         22             READING CLERK:  Twenty yeas and 9 nays, Mr. Chairman.

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  You have adopted the

         24        proposal as amended.

         25             At this time I have a couple of things that I would


          1        like to do.  First, I would like to recognize that

          2        Commissioner Freiden is not only accompanied by her

          3        children, but by her spouse, Phillip Freiden, who is

          4        sitting up here.  We are glad to have you, Phil.  It's a

          5        pleasure to have you with us.  We know who takes care of

          6        the children while you are here now, Commissioner Freiden.

          7             In addition to that, I would like to announce that

          8        I'm adding to the Style and Drafting Committee, which

          9        presently consists of Chairman Mills, Commissioner

         10        Barnett, Commissioner Lowndes and Commissioner Alfonso,

         11        that I have asked Commissioner Scott and Commissioner

         12        Ford-Coates to serve on that committee as well, and they

         13        have agreed to do so.

         14             And I'm going to appoint a Select Committee on

         15        Sovereign Immunity issues because we have four or five

         16        separate proposals that have been moved.  And the chairman

         17        of that committee will be Commissioner Connor.  Members of

         18        that committee will be Commissioner Hawkes, Commissioner

         19        Morsani, Commissioner Lowndes and Commissioner Zack.  And

         20        they will meet at the call, or announcements some time

         21        today will make announcements as to when these committees

         22        will meet.

         23             Commissioner Barkdull, I think we can take that up

         24        now or later, if you'd like, whichever you'd prefer to do.

         25             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Mr. Chairman, I'm going to


          1        suggest that they meet upon adjournment today to get

          2        organized.  We have no other committee meetings other than

          3        Rules and Calendar.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.  Then those committees --

          5        if the chairman of the committee, the select committee,

          6        would make some arrangements to have an organizational

          7        meeting at least following the session today.  And I

          8        think -- is Style and Drafting scheduled for a meeting,

          9        Commissioner Mills?

         10             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  No, Mr. Chairman, we were going

         11        to try to do at least an organizational meeting during

         12        approximately the lunch hour on Wednesday.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Then you would prefer

         14        to have your meeting then scheduled on Wednesday at some

         15        time.

         16             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  At noon.  I'm getting a lot of

         17        frowns here.  Why don't I announce that tomorrow morning,

         18        as soon as I get a consensus?

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.  Since you have got frowns

         20        at least from Commissioner Barnett who doesn't want to

         21        miss lunch, we'll discuss that.  Commissioner Barkdull, is

         22        that okay?

         23             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Yes, sir.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Do you have something further?

         25             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman.  I


          1        want to announce for the purpose of the commission as a

          2        whole, the Rules and Calendar Committee will meet this

          3        afternoon to establish the special order for the next two

          4        days in Room 309, which is directly behind the chamber,

          5        down one floor.

          6             And now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to move, and I

          7        was one of those that voted for Proposition 168, which was

          8        the Corr amendment that Commissioner Barnett spoke about,

          9        that it be on reconsideration please.  Leave pending.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  And leave pending.  Without

         11        objection, it will be left pending.  Also, I had intended

         12        to ask Commissioner Anthony, who is up, to serve along

         13        with the -- on the Select Committee on Initiatives, but he

         14        tells me that he has got meetings that conflict.  But I'm

         15        going to suggest that at the appropriate time we'll

         16        discuss that and see if you can't participate, since you

         17        have done a lot of work on this.  Did you want to be

         18        recognized?

         19             COMMISSIONER ANTHONY:  Yes, sir.  Mr. Chairman, I

         20        appreciate that appointment, but I would like to ask your

         21        consideration of the appointment to the Select Committee

         22        on Sovereign Immunity to provide some balance in the

         23        discussion so that -- it's not going to meet at the same

         24        time as Finance and Taxation, which I'm already a member.

         25             But I would prefer, if possible, your consideration


          1        to the Sovereign Immunity instead of the Initiatives,

          2        which both are very important, but that Sovereign Immunity

          3        discussion is very important.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I will consider your request.

          5             COMMISSIONER ANTHONY:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  You are still on the other

          7        committee for the moment.  You should have been here the

          8        other day.

          9             COMMISSIONER ANTHONY:  I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barkdull.

         11             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Mr. Chairman, Members of the

         12        Commission, I also want to move to reconsider a voice vote

         13        that was taken on the Cabinet proposal.  It was an

         14        amendment offered by Commissioner Thompson to change the

         15        title of the office of treasurer and leave it pending.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Sorry about that, you are out of

         17        order.  You better discuss this with our parliamentarian

         18        before you go further, and me.

         19             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  The Rules Chairman is not

         20        going to appeal the ruling of the Chair.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  We are still going to be here for

         22        awhile.  Why don't we take -- I think everybody might be a

         23        little bit tired.  Why don't we take a five-minute recess

         24        and come back.  Let's make it -- that clock is wrong,

         25        incidentally, but since we are operating off of it, let's


          1        come back here at 4:45, all right?  So we'll stand in

          2        recess, without objection, until 4:45 on this clock.

          3             (Brief recess.)

          4             SECRETARY BLANTON:  All commissioners indicate your

          5        presence.  All commissioners indicate your presence.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Try again.  Madam

          7        Secretary, try them again.

          8             (Quorum taken and recorded electronically.)

          9             SECRETARY BLANTON:  A quorum is present,

         10        Mr. Chairman.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  We'll come to order,

         12        please.  Come to order, please.

         13             Commissioner Riley, the next proposal would be

         14        Committee Substitute for 166, which was included in the

         15        last proposal.  Would you like to withdraw that?

         16             (Off-the-record comment by Commissioner Riley.)

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Would you like to

         18        pass it then or would you like to take it up now?

         19             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I would like to pass it, yes,

         20        and take it up now.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  It's there.  Come to

         22        order, please, and we are going to take up the next item

         23        on special order, which is Committee Substitute for

         24        Proposal 166 by the Committee on Executive, Commissioner

         25        Riley.  Would you read the proposal, please?


          1             READING CLERK:  Committee Substitute for Proposal

          2        166, a proposal to revise Article IX, Section 2, Florida

          3        Constitution; providing for the appointment of the State

          4        Board of Education by the Governor and the appointment of

          5        the Commissioner of Education by the State Board of

          6        Education.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Riley, you are

          8        recognized.  Now let's everybody please come to order.  We

          9        have got to move on here.  Is everybody now seated and off

         10        their telephones yet?

         11             Commissioner Riley.

         12             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I'm going to make this real

         13        short.  So if you-all are in the back, if you come up here

         14        then you can vote for this.  In fact, Commissioners,

         15        there's only eight of you that I'm talking to anyway,

         16        because nine of you voted against the other one and

         17        Commissioner Henderson said he would already vote for

         18        this.  So I figure there are eight of you left that I have

         19        to convince.  If any of the eight who voted against the

         20        last proposal are in the back, if they would come back and

         21        listen to my argument, I would really appreciate it.

         22             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Henderson trumped

         23        you because he's not here.

         24             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Did he leave?

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  No, he's behind you, he's hiding.


          1        Did you close?

          2             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Just real briefly.  Commissioner

          3        Henderson said a couple of times ago, and Commissioner

          4        Thompson being from a north county knows this same phrase,

          5        which is, I don't have a dog in that hunt.  But this is a

          6        hunt that we have all got a dog in.  There is nobody in

          7        this room that education doesn't affect.

          8             So I would ask that we give the voters an opportunity

          9        to vote in a State Board of Education that would allow

         10        better continuity, nonpartisan, and interface well with

         11        the Board of Regents and with the State Board of Community

         12        Colleges, both of whom have looked at these proposals,

         13        neither of whom have spoken against them.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Mills.

         15             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Well perhaps Commissioner Riley,

         16        since I told her I was going to ask that question has

         17        answered it.  But we have two other statewide -- well, we

         18        have a statewide board with the Board of Regents and then

         19        we have a community college board.  And the question is,

         20        do you have any vision of -- is this board supervisory

         21        over those?

         22             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Absolutely not.  Any more than

         23        the Regents is supervisory over the Board of Community

         24        Colleges, or that the acting State Board of Education is

         25        supervisory over the Board of Regents or the existing


          1        Community College Board.

          2             I see it as three boards working together but -- they

          3        deal with different bodies.  So, no, I don't.  And I know

          4        they have both looked at this proposal.  And as I said,

          5        they have not spoken against it.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Now --

          7             (Off-the-record comment.)

          8             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Yes, it does.  It only deals --

          9        everything under 12th grade.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Henderson.

         11             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I'm trying to find my dog,

         12        Mr. Chairman.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well, that's not one of

         14        Commissioner Thompson's sayings.  He very seldom uses that

         15        dog-in-the-hunt thing.

         16             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Commissioner Riley, I think

         17        with the last question, I'm not sure I got the answer, but

         18        let me just ask it directly.  What does this do?  It's a

         19        nice idea to create, but what will it do?

         20             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I think it will make for better

         21        continuous -- no, that's not what you are looking for?

         22             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I don't know what I'm

         23        looking for.  I think --

         24             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Let me tell you what I think it

         25        will do.  It will bring expertise to education that's


          1        already brought to other parts of education, such as the

          2        Board of Regents, such as the Board of Community Colleges.

          3        What about pre-K through 12?  Why shouldn't they have a

          4        group that meets specifically for them, and specifically

          5        to bring the issues before them and put together a better

          6        educational system?

          7             There's nobody here that thinks that we have got the

          8        best educational system in the United States.  In fact, we

          9        have talked about the figures; the figures are terrible.

         10        So let's give an opportunity to do what they do in 22

         11        other states, which is to have a different system.  This

         12        is a different system.

         13             This is not Cabinet reform.  It has been tied to

         14        Cabinet reform because it affects it only in that it

         15        changes -- well, you know why it changes it.  But this

         16        isn't a Cabinet reform bill, this is an education bill.

         17        And we need to look at it in that manner and vote on it

         18        for that reason.  Does that answer your question?

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Henderson, you have

         20        the floor.

         21             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Just to follow the question,

         22        to help educate me.  Okay, does it abolish the Board of

         23        Regents?

         24             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  No.

         25             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Does it abolish the State


          1        Board of Community Colleges?

          2             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  No.

          3             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Does it abolish any of the

          4        individual boards of the community colleges for each of

          5        the individual --

          6             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  No.

          7             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Will it set standards for --

          8        what does it do?  I mean, I just --

          9             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  It is a State Board of Education

         10        which will do better, I think, what the existing State

         11        Board of Education does.  So what does the existing State

         12        Board of Education do?  Sets standards to make decisions

         13        that affect pre-K through 12, that's what this board will

         14        do.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Riley, does the

         16        present State Board of Education have jurisdiction over

         17        the Board of Regents?

         18             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  No, nor was it recommended by

         19        the groups who have really looked at this, such as the

         20        Commission on Education.  And they didn't recommend that a

         21        system like that be set up.

         22             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  The reason I ask that is I recall

         23        that the State Board of Regents is appointed by the

         24        Governor with a concurrence of the Cabinet.  Isn't that

         25        control?


          1             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Actually, it isn't in fact

          2        appointed by the Governor.  I thought that it was elected

          3        by the Board of Regents.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  No, the Board of Regents -- if I

          5        want to be appointed to the Board of Regents, I have first

          6        got to get the Governor to appoint me and then I have got

          7        to get the Cabinet to go along with it.

          8             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I thought you were talking about

          9        the head of the Board of Regents.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I think his question was, does

         11        this affect that?  And the answer was, if you pass the

         12        other thing, you still have a Cabinet.

         13             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  So I don't understand what the

         14        question is.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I think what he's saying is it's

         16        not superfluous.  Am I right, Commissioner Henderson?

         17             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  No, sir, I probably will

         18        support it.  And I'm not trying to be argumentative.  I'm

         19        really trying to understand what it is that we have done

         20        and what we are trying to do.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  In the last one, you were against

         22        electing, not electing all of these people, and now you

         23        are for this; is that correct?

         24             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  We have done that.  You

         25        know, we have done that.  So, honestly, I think if you are


          1        going to do that, then you need a State Board of

          2        Education.  But in terms of the issue of the structure of

          3        government, I think it is a legitimate question as to what

          4        does it do?  And it was a legitimate inquiry as to what

          5        thinking went into that process.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I understand and that was the

          7        purpose of my question.  Commissioner Barkdull.

          8             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Will Commissioner Riley yield

          9        for a question?

         10             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Yes.

         11             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Commissioner Riley, is the

         12        purpose of you having this as a freestanding proposition

         13        to have it voted on separately in the ballot?

         14             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Yes, it is.

         15             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  And not be merged into the

         16        Cabinet?

         17             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Exactly.  As I said, this is not

         18        Cabinet reform.

         19             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Some of us may differ with

         20        you and we are now right at what the issue is and that is

         21        packaging.

         22             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  And I would strongly prefer this

         23        to stand on its own as an educational measure and not as

         24        an executive.

         25             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  I understand your desires,


          1        but we have also got a limit on how much we can put on the

          2        ballot.

          3             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Mills.

          4             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Well, Mr. Chairman, and this

          5        isn't in opposition, this is just in clarification.  The

          6        State Board of Education, Commissioner Jennings and

          7        Commissioner Barnett and I have been trying to figure out

          8        the relationship.  It seems to me, the current Section 2

          9        says, the Governor and the members of the Cabinet shall

         10        constitute the State Board of Education.  And it

         11        supervises the system of public education.

         12             So, the question is, is the system of public

         13        education everything or only K through 12?  And

         14        Commissioner Jennings and I seem to recall that the

         15        Cabinet has supervisory authority over issues besides K

         16        through 12.  I'm not even suggesting this is a bad idea,

         17        I'm just trying to figure out what it does.

         18             In other words, does this board -- if this board does

         19        precisely the same thing as the current Board of Education

         20        does -- which I guess much of that is statutory, there is

         21        a good bit of oversight over lots of parts of the

         22        educational system.

         23             So there is definitely an answer to Commissioner

         24        Henderson's question, which if this is to replace them,

         25        but the question is -- if we are not going to define their


          1        duties, then the question I guess remains only, what does

          2        public education mean?  And if public education means

          3        something more than K through 12, then I -- I think we

          4        would have to look at Section 1, which says, Adequate

          5        provision shall be made by law for a uniform system of

          6        free public schools, and for the establishment,

          7        maintenance and operation of institutions of higher

          8        learning and other public education programs.

          9             So in the context of that alone it would seem it

         10        would be all public education, I think, unless

         11        Commissioner Riley may understand otherwise or may know

         12        otherwise.

         13             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I don't know otherwise, but it's

         14        never been my understanding from either the proposal or

         15        from the recommendations from the bodies that have looked

         16        at the problem and put this forward.  Have you?

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Somebody's clock rang.

         18        Commissioner Marshall, that gong was for you.  You are

         19        recognized.

         20             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Thank you.  I think public

         21        education, as the term is used here, simply means K-12, or

         22        pre-K-12.  The only articulation relationship existing

         23        that I know of in which the Cabinet is involved in either

         24        the system of higher education, the state university

         25        system, or the community college system is through the


          1        commissioner who not only serves as a member of the

          2        Cabinet but serves as a Regent and as a member of the

          3        Community College Board.

          4             I've never known of an instance when the Cabinet

          5        intrudes on the business of the Board of Regents, the

          6        state university system.  And I think that's also true of

          7        the community college system.  So I think the working

          8        definition of public education here is essentially

          9        pre-K-12.

         10             Other education functions would include the school in

         11        St. Augustine for the deaf and blind, some vocational

         12        education programs like Lively Tech here in town, in Leon

         13        County.  There are a number of special education programs,

         14        school districts entering into contracts with education

         15        vendors of various kinds, and that's overseen by the

         16        Cabinet.  There are a number of public education functions

         17        related to K-12, but I don't think the Cabinet or the

         18        commissioner -- excuse me, the Cabinet has any direct ties

         19        to either the state university system or the community

         20        college system.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Mills.

         22             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  A follow-up question in terms of

         23        looking at this.  Maybe Commissioner Marshall can help us.

         24             It says, and it says in I guess the final version,

         25        Shall have such supervision of the system of public


          1        education as provided by law.  And the only other public

          2        education, use of public education is in Section 1.  So

          3        even if the current practice is so -- is limited, do you

          4        believe that there would be a problem or that, in fact,

          5        the Legislature would be authorized by this to accord

          6        additional authority to the Board of Education relating to

          7        higher education?

          8             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  I would think so.  I would

          9        think it would be authorized to do that.  Well, let me

         10        stop there.

         11             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Okay.

         12             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Let me ask you this, Mr. --

         13        Commissioner Marshall and Commissioner Mills.  My

         14        recollection is that the Constitution authorizes the Board

         15        of Education, in this present context, to have and has

         16        jurisdiction over all of these if the, what's happened --

         17        there's been statutory changes that don't affect the

         18        jurisdiction necessarily, but do affect the procedural

         19        operation of the school system, the whole school system.

         20             And my recollection at one time was that the Cabinet

         21        did exercise some supervisory capacity over higher

         22        education, Commissioner Marshall, under this

         23        constitutional provision.

         24             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  You are testing my memory,

         25        Mr. Chairman, but I think that's right and I think that


          1        occurred in Ralph Turlington's time as Commissioner of

          2        Education, because I remember wondering why he was letting

          3        that get away.  I think that's true.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  So I think the question

          5        Commissioner Henderson is raising, as is Commissioner

          6        Mills, does the constitutional language being what it is,

          7        assuming this proposal passed and that the Cabinet reform

          8        did not, then how would that play off against each other

          9        in the surviving Constitution?  I think that is the

         10        question that's being posed by those that are asking.

         11        They are not necessarily against this, they just are

         12        asking that.

         13             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Mr. Chairman, I think you

         14        need a good education lawyer for that one.  I don't know

         15        the answer to it.  But while I'm on my feet, may I ask if

         16        Commissioner Riley will yield for a question?

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Yes.

         18             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  And the question has to do

         19        with what I think is the lack of any coordination in the

         20        structure that you have defined between the K-12 and the

         21        state university system and the community college system.

         22        The Commissioner of Education now does provide a measure

         23        of that.  And to the extent that he's influential on the

         24        Cabinet, I suspect he brings other Cabinet members along

         25        on that, on issues.


          1             We now acknowledge that, people in education now

          2        acknowledge that there is an enormous problem of lack of

          3        articulation between K-12 and higher education.  The

          4        university presidents complain that they have a tough time

          5        getting people through college because students come to

          6        them so ill-prepared after graduation from high school.

          7        And the K-12 people have similar complaints about their

          8        lack of help and understanding from the state university

          9        system, and feed the community college system in there

         10        likewise.

         11             The system now isn't perfect by any means, but at

         12        least the Commissioner of Education does have some

         13        influence on the other two systems.  Your provision

         14        doesn't allow for that, and I am wondering if you would

         15        consider that.

         16             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Commissioner, I would be happy

         17        to accept an amendment that solves that problem, that

         18        would put the Commissioner of Education as a member of

         19        both the Board of Regents and the Community College Board.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Mills.

         21             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Mr. Chairman, we found that good

         22        education lawyer, it is Commissioner Ford-Coates.

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well, I notice you now have a

         24        laptop and that's always dangerous.

         25             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  She's probably going to make me


          1        give it back though.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.

          3             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  It says the state system of

          4        public education.  The state system of public education

          5        shall consist of publicly-supported and controlled

          6        schools, institutions of higher learning and other

          7        educational institutions and other educational services as

          8        may be provided or authorized by the Constitution or laws

          9        of the state.

         10             So the current definition in the statutes is pretty

         11        broad.  And, again, after having said that, I may be

         12        perfectly willing to vote for and support it.  It's just

         13        that we ought to know -- what it could be, I suppose, is

         14        coordinated with all of them.

         15             (Off-the-record comment.)

         16             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  228.041, Definitions.

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  That is what I thought I

         18        remembered, Commissioner Marshall.

         19             Where are we?  Does anybody wish to speak?

         20        Commissioner Barton.

         21             COMMISSIONER BARTON:  I rise for a question, and a

         22        comment, if I may.  It seems to me that in lieu of the

         23        vote that we had just a little while ago that some people

         24        might view this as a disenfranchisement of their right to

         25        elect and I'm assuming that that would be true with the


          1        larger population as well.

          2             But my question is this, I have seen no data or

          3        research which supports either this change as a catalyst

          4        for higher student achievement, which I always assumed was

          5        part of the function of schools.  Can you answer that,

          6        Commissioner Riley?

          7             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  I wish I had the comparison of

          8        the charts that we were given at the last Education

          9        Committee meeting that Commissioner Marshall brought in

         10        comparing the state to the 22 states that do have an

         11        appointed state board of education.  So I apologize, I

         12        don't have that.

         13             COMMISSIONER BARTON:  But wouldn't funding of

         14        education be related to that as well?  You know, not

         15        whether one is elected or not elected.  Florida has not

         16        got a very good reputation as a funder of education.

         17             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  It may, but that's a separate --

         18             COMMISSIONER BARTON:  Or other children's issues as

         19        well.

         20             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  It might, but that's a separate

         21        issue than this proposal.  Perhaps we will get into that

         22        with the Lottery fund issue.

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Anything further?  All right.

         24        Are you ready to vote?  Open the machine and record the

         25        vote.


          1             (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Has everybody voted but me?  Lock

          3        the machine and record the vote.

          4             READING CLERK:  Fourteen yeas and 12 nays,

          5        Mr. Chairman.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well if it didn't get the vote,

          7        it wasn't because we didn't give you the chance.  It bodes

          8        well however for the future of this.

          9             All right.  The next is Committee Substitute for

         10        Proposal 69 by the Committee of Executive and Commissioner

         11        Riley.

         12             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Mr. Chairman, I'd like to

         13        withdraw this proposal.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Without objection it is

         15        withdrawn.  It is the same thing over again, almost.

         16             All right.  The next one is Committee Substitute for

         17        Proposals 36 and 38 by the Committee on General

         18        Provisions, recommended as a substitute combined with

         19        Proposal 38, disapproved by the Committee on General

         20        Provisions.  Would you read it?  Commissioner Mills.

         21             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  Mr. Chairman, we took the advice

         22        of the committee to heart and are in the process of

         23        redrafting that so we would appreciate that being

         24        temporarily passed and we are working with Commissioner

         25        Barnett and others to come up with something that makes


          1        more sense.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It will be on special order

          3        tomorrow morning first thing, if it is temporarily passed

          4        without objection.  It is.

          5             All right.  Committee Substitute for Proposal 102 by

          6        the Committee on General Provisions and Commissioner

          7        Henderson, recommended as a committee substitute and

          8        approved by the Committee on General Provisions.  Read it,

          9        please.

         10             READING CLERK:  Committee substitute for Proposal No.

         11        102, a proposal to revise Article X, Florida Constitution;

         12        adding Section 18 to provide restrictions on the

         13        disposition of conservation and recreation lands.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Henderson.

         15             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

         16        Now that the -- I would suggest to my fellow commissioners

         17        that now that you have taken the action to significantly

         18        change the way that the Cabinet does business, that this

         19        is something now that you must do.

         20             In the provision that you just passed, you declared

         21        that it was extremely important that the Cabinet still

         22        retain its functions as Trustees of the Internal

         23        Improvement Fund.  And so what the provision is before you

         24        is something that can only be done by Constitution, and it

         25        involves how lands which have been acquired for


          1        conservation purposes, such as under our current

          2        Preservation 2000 program, how that can be disposed of.

          3             The proposal would say that it can only be disposed

          4        of by a two-thirds' vote of the trustees or the governing

          5        board of the Water Management District, and a finding that

          6        the lands are no longer needed for the purposes for which

          7        they were acquired.

          8             Now this did come out of the committee favorably.  I

          9        think it is consistent with the action that you just took

         10        on the Cabinet.  I also think it is extremely consistent

         11        with the vote that was taken last time where we extended

         12        the authority for acquisition of endangered lands.  And I

         13        would tell you that in keeping with that or consistent

         14        with that argument, because there is a deadline or an

         15        expiration date in the bonding of which we have now in the

         16        Preservation 2000, that once the bonds are concluded, in

         17        the year 2003, there is no protection for the lands that

         18        we have acquired.

         19             So we have acquired now almost a million acres of

         20        land in the Preservation 2000, after the year 2003, unless

         21        this is, unless this is adopted, there will be no

         22        restriction on a future Cabinet or Water Management

         23        District from disposition of those lands.  Now this

         24        proposal is not a complete restriction on the ability to

         25        do that.  It just says there has to be a two-thirds' vote


          1        and there has to be a finding that the lands are no longer

          2        needed for conservation purpose.

          3             Now this issue is not in a vacuum.  I tell you the

          4        last year it seems that we have been fighting this battle

          5        time and again.  I won't revisit a number of these issues

          6        before you, but the Cabinet has had a number of matters

          7        before them in the last year, including whether or not to

          8        build a prison at a place called Tate's Hell.  I think

          9        that might be a nice name for a prison anyway, but that's

         10        in Franklin County.

         11             Or whether or not to use a piece of Topsail Hill, the

         12        lands acquired in Walton County, one of the most beautiful

         13        places in the state of Florida, whether or not some of

         14        those should be disposed of for the use of a new town

         15        center in South Walton County.  I can tell you that my

         16        home county of Volusia County, adjacent to the Tiger Bay

         17        State Forest, on lands which were acquired in the '70s

         18        under the very first environmental endangered lands

         19        program, is something called the Tomoka State Correction

         20        Institution.  And, in fact, you have to go through the

         21        prison to get to the Tiger Bay State Forest.

         22             So these issues are coming up time and again.  And I

         23        would suggest to you that this is something which does

         24        command great public support.  I can also suggest to you

         25        that in every year that the Legislature passed extensions


          1        of Preservation 2000, that legislators took the floor and

          2        said what they thought was the truth, that when we passed

          3        Preservation 2000 and we buy these lands, that we were

          4        protecting them for future generations and forever.  And

          5        of course what we have discovered is that that's not

          6        necessarily the case.

          7             So, Mr. Chairman, this fixes that problem, it is

          8        something that's good public policy, and it is a way for

          9        us to keep faith with the people of the state.  I suggest

         10        to you it is a good proposal with a favorable

         11        recommendation of the committee.

         12             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Butterworth.

         13             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman,

         14        Members of the Commission.  This is a very good proposal.

         15        It has come before the Cabinet a number of times and some

         16        people were in doubt as to whether or not you can or

         17        cannot sell the land.  And many of us up there making

         18        decisions believe that a lot of times when we buy land,

         19        unfortunately we have to buy more than we need because the

         20        willing seller says you must take this disturbed area and

         21        at a point in time we might want to get rid of that.

         22             This will allow us the procedure to get rid of it and

         23        it protects the public from the standpoint of a

         24        two-thirds' vote.  I think it is a very good policy.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Six out of seven?


          1             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  Yes, Mr. Chairman.  It has

          2        been changed to two-thirds which is very realistic.

          3             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  The summary still says --

          4             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  The summary states --

          5             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Beg your pardon?

          6             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  The summary indicates a

          7        change.  It originally was six out of seven and the change

          8        in the committee substitute is two-thirds.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It goes to two-thirds.  And

         10        that's what you are referring to here.

         11             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  Yes, Mr. Chairman,

         12        two-thirds I think it is.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  My recollection is that when you

         14        bought Topsail Hill, the Governor announced, and I think

         15        you did too, that it was more than they should have bought

         16        and they intended to sell part of it.

         17             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  That was Point Washington,

         18        Mr. Chairman.  It was a unique situation.  We bought it

         19        from the RTC at the courthouse steps and they said, You

         20        cannot buy this land unless we give you Point Washington,

         21        19,000 acres, for free.  It took the Cabinet about 13

         22        seconds to decide that was a pretty good idea.

         23             But we knew at that point in time that we would have

         24        to give some back to the community, and that was pretty

         25        much what we had to do.  The only problem is whether we


          1        could even do it or not.  So in order to keep faith with

          2        the community I think we did it, or we are about to do

          3        some of it.  But I do believe this will resolve a lot of

          4        the problems for the future.

          5             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  So now this proposal

          6        would be a two-thirds -- how many votes is that?  Is that

          7        of those present and voting?

          8             COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH:  Two-thirds of seven, so

          9        whatever that might be.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I should ask Commissioner

         11        Barkdull, he is head of Rules.  Is it of those present and

         12        voting or of the actual membership?

         13             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  I haven't analyzed it from

         14        that standpoint, but if the other proposal that we have

         15        got on the ballot passes it is going to take the Governor

         16        and one Cabinet member.

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.  Commissioner Smith.

         18             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I have

         19        a question of Commissioner Henderson.

         20             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I yield, but only if it is a

         21        friendly question.  You have been quite friendly today,

         22        but we have been disagreeable and that troubles me.

         23             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  A friendly disagreeable

         24        question.  I hope it is friendly because I want to

         25        understand this.


          1             I heard what you said and I heard what Commissioner

          2        Butterworth said.  And I'm trying to see just how

          3        important this is.  Tell me what you consider a worst-case

          4        scenario if this doesn't pass so I can see just how

          5        important it is.

          6             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I think that's a fair

          7        question and I apologize for sometimes being too

          8        technical.  I would suggest the situation that I alluded

          9        to earlier is a good example.  Tomoka State Correctional

         10        Institute is now the entrance to the Tiger Bay State

         11        Forest.  After the year 2013, we will no longer have a

         12        standard of protection of this inventory of lands that we

         13        have bought for conservation purposes and told the public

         14        we were buying for our children and our grandchildren and

         15        in perpetuity.

         16             And so some future Legislature can decide that that

         17        piece of property might well be the site for that new

         18        prison.  Now what Commissioner Butterworth and I are

         19        saying is what we are doing here today is setting, is

         20        defining -- how do I say this -- is trying to solve a

         21        couple of people's problems.

         22             We want to agree on a procedure and a standard.  And

         23        that this procedure and standard are workable, because it

         24        will give a future Governor and Cabinet and future -- what

         25        are we going to call it now if it is only three -- the


          1        future trustees and future members of governing boards of

          2        Water Management Districts time to pause and say, Is this

          3        property still for the purpose it was intended to be

          4        acquired and protected?

          5             And so this is one of those things that is going to

          6        allow us to protect our inventory of lands for future

          7        generations.

          8             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.  To whom did you address

          9        the question, on what we are going to call it?  Did

         10        anybody answer it?

         11             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, I

         12        think I answered the question.  In the proposal which is

         13        adopted, it is still the trustees.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Very good.  We were going to call

         15        it the Henderson Memorial Group.

         16             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I think, Mr. Chairman, you

         17        can call it a smaller bumblebee and we will see whether or

         18        not it flies.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  And refer it to Commissioner

         20        Smith for definitions.

         21             Has anybody got anything on this?  Commissioner

         22        Marshall.

         23             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Yes, Mr. Chairman, a question

         24        for Commissioner Henderson.  I guess it is not unfriendly

         25        anyway.  The language in the staff summary is a little bit


          1        different from the language in the amendment itself.  And

          2        could you explain what is meant by, to look at the last

          3        three sentences, three lines under the staff summary,

          4        Dispose of lands acquired by those boards for conservation

          5        and recreation purposes for any purposes other than the

          6        purposes for which they were acquired by the Board of

          7        Trustees of Water Management Districts?

          8             I will tell you before you answer that I am not in

          9        favor of anything that increases the power of the Water

         10        Management Districts, for good reasons.  So I'm concerned

         11        about this stipulation about the purposes for which they

         12        were acquired.  To what extent is the judgment of the

         13        Water Management Districts at issue here?  Do I make

         14        myself clear?

         15             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I am a bit confused with the

         16        question because I'm not sure which staff summary that you

         17        are looking at.  I couldn't find exactly what it is that

         18        you are referring to.

         19             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  The one at the top of Page 1,

         20        under --

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  There has been another one I

         22        think that -- the language you read I believe is on the

         23        second page, if I'm not mistaken, where it says --

         24             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Same question, committee

         25        substitute, fine, thank you.  Other than the purposes for


          1        which they were acquired by the Board of Trustees of Water

          2        Management Districts.

          3             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I think I can answer your

          4        question is that this in effect says that some future

          5        Water Management District governing board can't go beyond

          6        that decision that was made today.

          7             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  I'm concerned with the

          8        breadth.

          9             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I understand that.  And so I

         10        think this is a limitation on that authority, in effect.

         11        I would answer it that way.

         12             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Have lands been acquired by

         13        Water Management Districts in the past other than for

         14        strictly conservation and recreation purposes?

         15             COMMISSIONER HENDERSON:  I think that Water

         16        Management Districts have acquired lands for water

         17        storage, for restoration in the case of the Everglades,

         18        for creation of reservoirs in the South Florida Water

         19        Management District.  There are other purposes, that is

         20        correct.

         21             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Thank you.

         22             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Does that answer your question,

         23        Commissioner Marshall?

         24             COMMISSIONER MARSHALL:  Yes, Mr. Chairman.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Does anybody have anything


          1        further?  Proponent or opponent or questions?  All right.

          2        If not, we will proceed to vote.  Unlock the machine.

          3             (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Lock the machine and announce the

          5        vote.

          6             READING CLERK:  Twenty-three yeas and 3 nays,

          7        Mr. Chairman.

          8             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It is adopted.  Now we will move

          9        to Committee Substitute for Proposal 83 by the Committee

         10        on General Provisions.  Would you read it?  It is

         11        recommended as a committee substitute and disapproved by

         12        the Committee on General Provisions.  Would you read it,

         13        please?

         14             READING CLERK:  Committee Substitute for Proposal

         15        No. 83, a proposal to revise Article X, Section 6, Florida

         16        Constitution; providing conditions under which private

         17        property is assumed to be taken for a public purpose.

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Anybody on the

         19        committee present?  Commissioner Anthony.

         20             COMMISSIONER ANTHONY:  Mr. Chairman, Commissioner

         21        Corr is the sponsor of this legislation that came before

         22        our committee.  We did vote it unfavorable.

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  What was the vote?

         24             COMMISSIONER ANTHONY:  It was 3 to 1 unfavorable

         25        recommendation.  The Chair may want to consider TPing this


          1        since, I'm not pushing to do either.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  We have done that when people

          3        weren't here, but I don't recall having any excused

          4        absence in this case.

          5             (Off-the-record discussion.)

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  They say he will be here tomorrow

          7        and as a courtesy -- but, you know, we can't not take

          8        things up when people aren't here, particularly when they

          9        have a 3-to-1 negative vote in the committee.  But we will

         10        do it this time at your request without objection.

         11             COMMISSIONER ANTHONY:  Well don't use my favors on

         12        this one, Mr. Chair.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  So you used your favor when I put

         14        you on that special --

         15             (Laughter.)

         16             COMMISSIONER ANTHONY:  Correct, but if you would like

         17        to take it up, I'm very --

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I don't want to be rude.

         19             COMMISSIONER ANTHONY:  Thank you.

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barkdull might and

         21        it takes unanimous consents to TP it.

         22             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Mr. Chairman, I guess this is

         23        as good a time as any to make it known that we have taken

         24        up other propositions when people weren't here and passed

         25        and defeated them.  This one we are going to pass until


          1        tomorrow because Commissioner Corr is supposed to be here

          2        and I'm not going to object, but I think from now on when

          3        there is no excused absence by a member and we reach the

          4        proposal, that this type of motion, at least I would

          5        object to it as being out of order.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  But without objection

          7        then it will be passed and put on the special order for

          8        tomorrow.

          9             Proposal 123 by Commissioner Barkdull, please read

         10        it, please.  Wait a minute, it is approved by the

         11        Committee on General Provisions, adopted as amended, and

         12        committed to Style and Drafting on motion to reconsider by

         13        Commissioner Scott.  And the consideration was deferred.

         14        So we passed it.

         15             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Do you want me to explain it?

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Yes.

         17             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  When it was before the

         18        committee, it was a proposal to abolish the Tax and Budget

         19        Commission.  When it came before the floor, it was amended

         20        to change the method by which the Tax and Budget

         21        Commission votes out a proposal, which struck the awkward

         22        language that's in there now, and I believe on an

         23        amendment by Commissioner Butterworth it would now take a

         24        two-thirds' vote of the Tax and Budget Commission to put

         25        something on the ballot.  And that is the posture that it


          1        is in now.

          2             And although I originally was for abolishment, as I

          3        said at the time, this makes a better bad proposition out

          4        of it and I will vote for it.  And I recommend that the

          5        commission vote for it.  The impact is to do nothing but

          6        to change the method of the vote of the Tax and Budget

          7        Commission.  It prevents four members of an appointing

          8        body from stopping the action of 23 or 21 others of the

          9        body.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barnett.

         11             (Off-the-record comment.)

         12             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Any four of an appointing

         13        body, which is either the President of the Senate or the

         14        Speaker of the House, which is the seven people they name.

         15        So any four of that group can stop a proposal from going

         16        on the ballot.  Commissioner Barnett served on that

         17        commission, and I think she recognizes that that was quite

         18        a problem.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barnett.

         20             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  The reason I am rising is to

         21        ask the Chair to explain to me the posture of where we

         22        are.  What Commissioner Barkdull just described is the

         23        proposal that we passed and that we then had reconsidered.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It is on reconsideration.

         25             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  But what was the purpose for


          1        reconsideration?

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Somebody voted, moved to have it

          3        reconsidered and it was carried over until today.

          4        Somebody that voted with the prevailing side.

          5             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  There is no proposed change on

          6        the floor?

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  No.  The proposal as I understand

          8        it as the one that was adopted is we retain the commission

          9        and we deleted the provision that it took -- in other

         10        words, four people could block the whole thing.  And we

         11        deleted that.

         12             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  And that was the proposal that

         13        I supported and I continue to strongly support this and

         14        would urge you-all to vote in favor of this proposal.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Senator Scott made the motion to

         16        reconsider and he is now here.  Senator Scott, do you want

         17        to be heard on this?  This is the Tax and Budget

         18        Commission.  The original proposal was to abolish it, it

         19        was amended so it wasn't abolished but it took -- it

         20        deleted the requirement that we had to have a majority of

         21        the appointing authorities' votes and you moved to

         22        reconsider.

         23             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  And we did reconsider the

         24        proposal.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  We have it on reconsideration.


          1             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  So at this time the motion would

          2        be to reconsider Commissioner Barnett's amendment and then

          3        we would be back, if it should pass, if this motion should

          4        pass, then we would be back to the original proposal to

          5        abolish the commission.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  That's correct.  I so rule.

          7             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  So did anybody move to do that?

          8             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  No, we were waiting on you to

          9        make that motion.

         10             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  I move to reconsider the vote by

         11        which Commissioner Barnett's amendment was adopted, which

         12        had the effect of eliminating the original proposal.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Then we would go back to the

         14        original -- if this should carry, in other words, if you

         15        are successful, Commissioner Scott, then we would proceed

         16        to vote on whether or not to abolish it.  Is that the way

         17        you understand it?

         18             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Wouldn't it be easier,

         19        Mr. Chairman, for Commissioner Scott simply to propose

         20        that in the form of an amendment rather than to go back

         21        and continue to reconsider all these votes so at least we

         22        know what we are debating?

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I don't care how you get there.

         24             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  I move an amendment which would

         25        have the effect of reversing, striking Commissioner


          1        Barnett's amendment and that would then put it back to the

          2        proposal to abolish the Tax and Budget Commission.

          3             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Which has passed.  The proposal

          4        passed.  All right.  What we are going to do is vote on

          5        whether or not we continue with the proposal amendment,

          6        which was to amend the proposal so that it continued as

          7        the Tax and Budget Commission, but the amendment which did

          8        that is under consideration on reconsideration and

          9        includes the provision that it took four votes to

         10        eliminate the provision, that it took four votes of each

         11        authority.

         12             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Can I make an inquiry?  Is this

         13        engrossed or not?  So it has been engrossed and we need to

         14        make a motion for an amendment to strike, strike the

         15        language that, strike the substitute, strike the language

         16        and go back to the original proposal.

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  They are preparing an amendment

         18        for you which they are going to lay on the table, somebody

         19        is.  Now we have completely confused everybody else, but I

         20        think we know where we are.  But -- so we will TP it and

         21        then when the amendment is prepared, we will put it on the

         22        table, have it read, and then you can explain it,

         23        Commissioner Scott.  Is that agreeable?  Okay, without

         24        objection we will TP it and move to the next item.

         25             The next proposal is Committee Substitute for


          1        Proposal 64 by the Committee on Bonding and Investments

          2        and Commissioner Nabors.  It is recommended as a committee

          3        substitute and approved by the Committee on Bonding and

          4        Investments.  Read it, please.

          5             READING CLERK:  Committee Substitute for Proposal 64,

          6        a proposal to revise Article VII, Section 11, Florida

          7        Constitution; providing for state bonds pledging all or

          8        part of a dedicated state tax revenue or the full faith

          9        and credit of the state for certain uses as provided by

         10        general law.

         11             COMMISSIONER NABORS:  Mr. Chairman, since this is a

         12        committee substitute, I don't think I can withdraw this,

         13        but this is no longer needed.

         14             Part of this provision had to do with the

         15        Preservation 2000, which has already been adopted.  The

         16        other portion clarifies some language to allow bonds to be

         17        issued, full faith credit bonds, for the construction of

         18        school facilities, which we no longer really need anyway

         19        because of the fact that the Legislature has already

         20        operated and pledged the Lottery funds, we have other

         21        issues dealing with Lottery.

         22             So this just isn't needed, but I don't think I can

         23        withdraw it on my own since it is a committee substitute.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Could I ask you a question --

         25             COMMISSIONER NABORS:  Uh-huh.


          1             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  -- Commissioner Nabors?  The one

          2        you are talking about that we did pass, which was the

          3        Preservation 2000 thing, did it include a provision in it

          4        that was not subject to the cap on pledging the full faith

          5        and credit of the state that was in Section 1 of that part

          6        of the Constitution?  Did you eliminate the cap when we

          7        passed the other proposal because this one does eliminate

          8        a cap, this proposal does.  Did you do that, it wasn't

          9        explained that way but this is different.

         10             COMMISSIONER NABORS:  I think in the debate in the

         11        Preservation 2000, that we had talked about that this was

         12        a full faith and credit pledge.  We had a big debate on

         13        that.  I can't remember exactly where we placed that.  I

         14        believe it was placed in the same provision, but I can't

         15        recall unless I see that exact --

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  The reason I raise that is when I

         17        looked at what we did, it was implied or said in the

         18        debate that we were, these bonds would be subject to the

         19        limitations in the existing Constitution on how much could

         20        be pledged to the full faith and credit of the state.  And

         21        it was a formula in Section 1, was it not?  And then we

         22        turned around and you offered this new section.  And in

         23        that section, it doesn't refer back to the cap.

         24             And if that's true, then this one here is more

         25        straightforward because it says we just waive, we can go


          1        full faith and credit, pedal to the metal, all the way to

          2        the end, without reference to the cap.

          3             And is that what you did in the other proposal and we

          4        didn't know it?

          5             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Mr. Chairman.

          6             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Barkdull.

          7             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  I ask that the other proposal

          8        be engrossed into the Constitution and received it and

          9        what you have recited is adequate.  The first section has

         10        a cap in it and has it subject to the vote of the people,

         11        where this section was included, which becomes number

         12        three, I believe, there is no cap, there is no vote of the

         13        people.

         14             I unfortunately do not have that engrossed copy with

         15        me because I turned it over to staff counsel and asked

         16        them to do some research for me on it.

         17             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well I would entertain a motion

         18        to temporarily pass this provision until we study that

         19        because we may want to use this as a vehicle to straighten

         20        that other one out, because I don't think anybody thought

         21        they were opening up the treasury without that cap when we

         22        passed the other proposal.  I am assuming that you

         23        certainly didn't intend to do that, did you, Commissioner

         24        Henderson?  You don't know?  It was your proposal.

         25             (Off-the-record discussion.)


          1             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Then without

          2        objection we will TP it.  The next proposal -- are we

          3        ready on the one I passed back awhile ago?  Not ready yet?

          4        Okay.

          5             Proposal 187 by Commissioner Connor, disapproved by

          6        the Committee on Declaration of Rights.  Commissioner

          7        Connor has left the room.

          8             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Mr. Chairman, prior to

          9        Commissioner Connor leaving and prior to our discussion on

         10        the Corr proposal, which we made an announcement that

         11        there would be no more temporarily passes, I had agreed

         12        with Commissioner Connor that I would make a motion to

         13        temporarily pass this until tomorrow morning in which he

         14        will be here.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Without objection it is

         16        temporarily passed.

         17             Proposal 183 -- whenever you get this one that we

         18        just temporarily went over waiting for the amendment, let

         19        me know so we will take that up.  This one is by -- 183 by

         20        Commissioner Brochin.  It is referred to the Committee on

         21        Legislative, but there was no quorum so it was calendared

         22        without action.  Would you read it, please?

         23             READING CLERK:  Proposal 183, a proposal to revise

         24        the Florida Constitution providing that the Florida

         25        Constitution Revision Commission should revise the


          1        Constitution to allow certain constitutional provisions to

          2        be converted into general law.

          3             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commission Brochin, you are

          4        recognized.

          5             COMMISSIONER BROCHIN:  Yes, I would like to withdraw

          6        Proposal No. 183.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Without objection, Proposal No.

          8        183 is withdrawn.

          9             Proposal 126 by Commissioners Mathis, Connor, Hawkes,

         10        Evans and Alfonso, disapproved by the Committee on

         11        Declaration of Rights.  Would you read it, please?

         12             READING CLERK:  Proposal 126, a proposal to revise

         13        Article I, Section 2, Florida Constitution; providing that

         14        the basic rights of natural persons accrue at the point of

         15        their conception and continue until their natural death.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Which of you wants to be

         17        recognized?  Commissioner Mathis, you have been very quiet

         18        today.

         19             COMMISSIONER MATHIS:  Yes, Mr. Chair.  I talked to

         20        Commissioner Barkdull and he has agreed to temporarily

         21        pass these matters until tomorrow where we will have

         22        information available and be able to fully consider this.

         23        And that was done before we did the issue with

         24        Commissioner Corr.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  So without objection,


          1        it is temporarily passed.

          2             The next proposal is No. 125 by Mathis, Connor,

          3        Hawkes, Evans and Alfonso, disapproved by the Committee on

          4        Declaration of Rights.  Would you read it, please?

          5             READING CLERK:  Proposal 125, a proposal to revise

          6        Article I, Section 2, Florida Constitution; providing that

          7        born and unborn natural persons are equal before the law

          8        and have inalienable rights.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Mathis.

         10             COMMISSIONER MATHIS:  Same thing.

         11             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  You want to TP this one, too?

         12             COMMISSIONER MATHIS:  Yes, sir.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Without objection, it is TP'd

         14        until tomorrow.

         15             Proposal 17 by Commissioner Riley.  It was

         16        disapproved by the Committee on Declaration of Rights,

         17        referred to the Committee on Declaration of Rights again,

         18        I guess, disapproved again.  So it got a double

         19        disapproval.  Would you read it, please?

         20             READING CLERK:  Proposal 17, a proposal to revise

         21        Article I, Section 2, Florida Constitution; providing that

         22        no person shall be deprived of any right because of gender

         23        or sexual orientation.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Riley.

         25             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  It was in fact disapproved the


          1        second time, but just barely.  I think the commissioners

          2        should know that, by one.

          3             There are certain questions that we have asked

          4        ourselves periodically as we have gone through; is this a

          5        constitutional matter; is it necessary; is there a cost to

          6        it, and so forth.  So let me start there.

          7             And as we are doing this, as a matter of fact if I --

          8        and excuse me, Commissioner, Mr. Chairman.  I need to

          9        amend this and take out gender, since that's already been

         10        decided separately.  So as that amendment is being done,

         11        eliminating and deleting the term gender, if I may discuss

         12        then just the sexual orientation portion.

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  What are you proposing to do?

         14             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  What I am arguing is to leave

         15        sexual orientation in as a protected class.  The issue of

         16        adding gender as a protected class has already been

         17        decided last time we were here.

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  By an amendment which we did

         19        adopt.

         20             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Correct.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  And so now you want to limit this

         22        to the sexual orientation --

         23             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Correct.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  -- language being included as a

         25        protected class; is that right?


          1             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Correct.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Then go ahead.  Go ahead.  We

          3        will treat it as if it is here for purposes of argument.

          4             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  Back to the questions that we

          5        have asked on various issues; is it a constitutional

          6        matter?  My answer to that is, yes, it is.  There is no

          7        doubt and no one disputes the fact that there is

          8        discrimination to people specifically because of their

          9        sexual orientation and that is clear.  The figures show

         10        that and the percentages show that.

         11             Is it necessary?  I would again say, yes, that it is.

         12        We have rights, civil rights acts, we have the Americans

         13        with Disabilities Act, the ADA act, all of those address

         14        specific areas and try to override discrimination.

         15             There is nothing that prevents discrimination based

         16        upon sexual orientation and this is an opportunity to do

         17        something about that.  The reason it was brought back to

         18        the committee is because the members of the committee

         19        understand that there is a problem that needs to be

         20        addressed.

         21             There is nothing that prevents anyone from

         22        discriminating against a person because of sexual

         23        orientation either in their employment, in the place where

         24        they live.  There is nothing that says that they can't be

         25        fired, that they cannot rent an apartment because of the


          1        way they may look.

          2             A 1992 survey of about 1500 gay and lesbians reported

          3        that 76 percent of men and 81 percent of women hide their

          4        sexual orientation simply because they know that given

          5        that, they will be discriminated against.  So I would ask

          6        you to strongly consider that we give some protection to a

          7        group of people that are very vulnerable.

          8             And I would like to read a few things that were sent

          9        to me in a letter, you may all have gotten a copy of it.

         10        It is not signed because the person was afraid to put

         11        their name on it.  It is from --

         12             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  The amendment is on the table.

         13        Would you read the amendment?

         14             READING CLERK:  By Commissioner Riley, on Page 1,

         15        Line 21, delete gender.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  She has deleted

         17        gender from this and it is left now to the sexual

         18        orientation that she is now discussing.  All in favor of

         19        the amendment, say aye; opposed?

         20             (Verbal vote taken.)

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It carries.  Now proceed on the

         22        argument on the proposal which has been read.

         23             COMMISSIONER RILEY:  If I may just close by reading

         24        the words of a person from Tallahassee.  I don't know if

         25        it is male or female.  All I know is that the person is a


          1        homosexual and that the person was afraid to write their

          2        name on here, they were afraid to tell us who they were

          3        because they are a professional in the city of

          4        Tallahassee, and they are afraid of the repercussions.

          5             And this person writes that this issue is about

          6        principle, it is not politics, not religion, not

          7        superiority, not perversion and not finance.  This issue

          8        invokes whether or not we embrace principles of integrity,

          9        fairness, tolerance, and decency and whether we continue

         10        to turn our heads and therefore condone outright

         11        discrimination and prejudice.

         12             I would suggest to you that we have an opportunity

         13        now to tell those out there who are in fact hurt and

         14        discriminated against that we support them and that we

         15        think that they should be protected in our Constitution.

         16        They are not now and this will be an opportunity to do

         17        that.  Thank you.

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Freidin wants to be

         19        heard on this.  And I'm going to recognize her first,

         20        Commissioner Smith, because she has -- just a moment,

         21        Commissioner Barkdull -- she has a request I think.

         22             COMMISSIONER FREIDEN:  Mr. Chairman and

         23        Commissioners, I would request that we temporarily pass

         24        this issue until tomorrow morning.  I know that there's

         25        other business that we do need to take up this afternoon.


          1        I also notice that, as I look up to the press box, that it

          2        is a lot emptier than it usually is, although there's some

          3        very fine members of the press that are still there.

          4             And I think that this is a very, very important issue

          5        for our state and I would like for the people who care

          6        deeply about this issue in our state, to know about the

          7        debate that we are going to have on this issue.  I would

          8        request that we postpone further discussion of this issue

          9        until tomorrow morning.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  I'll treat that as a motion to

         11        temporarily pass this until tomorrow morning.  Without

         12        objection, it'll be temporarily passed.  All right.  It is

         13        temporarily passed until tomorrow morning.

         14             Now, we are ready to do 123.  We have the amendment.

         15        Commissioner Barkdull, you want to be recognized first.

         16             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Yes, I would like to move

         17        that the time of adjournment be postponed until the

         18        conclusion of the discussion on this proposal that Senator

         19        Scott has the amendment on, Proposal 123, I believe, and

         20        announcements.

         21             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well, you want to continue it

         22        until the vote, don't you?

         23             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Yes, sir, until it is

         24        concluded.

         25             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Without objection, that will be


          1        the case.

          2             And, Commissioner Scott, you are recognized on

          3        Proposal 123 with an amendment on the table.  Would you

          4        read the amendment?

          5             READING CLERK:  By Commissioner Scott, delete

          6        everything after the proposing clause and insert Section

          7        1, Section 6, of Article XI of the Florida Constitution is

          8        repealed.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.  Commissioner Scott, on the

         10        amendment, please.

         11             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Okay.  In view of Judge

         12        Barkdull's motion, I want to make this short and sweet,

         13        right.

         14             Look, the Tax Commission is supposed to meet again in

         15        two or three years, they have direct access to the ballot.

         16        I think that this creates, among other things, too much

         17        confusion, too much hesitancy about economic development

         18        in this state.  I have spent a lot of time in the past two

         19        or three years talking to people about what might or might

         20        not happen just in the Legislature.  To have this group

         21        sitting out there is just not a good thing.

         22             We are here, we put -- I helped put or sponsored an

         23        amendment so that these tax issues that Commissioner

         24        Nabors and others were raising could be brought before

         25        this commission.  And we all now, having been here awhile,


          1        see how much deliberation and what we are all about.

          2             And to have all of this come back again and have

          3        anything from personal income tax and others rediscussed

          4        here in another couple of years by another group of people

          5        who we have no idea who they will be, to me is just not a

          6        good idea.  Originally this came about about six or eight,

          7        ten years ago when Bob Crawford was president, I remember

          8        that.  And it was put forth as something that would be

          9        good to have, a separate commission look at tax reform.

         10             But now to have them back here again in the year 2000

         11        or 2001, Judge Barkdull's original proposal would have

         12        abolished them.  I don't disagree with the change, if they

         13        were going to keep them, that Commissioner Barnett made

         14        about not having each appointing authority having a

         15        supermajority.  But we really should go ahead and abolish

         16        this commission.

         17             And that's what this amendment will have the affect

         18        of doing and that would become the proposal.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Does everybody understand this?

         20        If we adopt the amendment, then we have abolished or

         21        proposed the abolition of the Tax and Budget Commission.

         22        Am I correct, Commissioner Scott?

         23             Now are there any proponents other than Commissioner

         24        Barnett?  Are you on the commission?  Were you on the

         25        commission?


          1             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Yes, I was.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Do you want to be recognized?

          3             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Uh-huh.

          4             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Go ahead.

          5             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  Unless there are any more

          6        proponents.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well, they may show up after your

          8        speech.

          9             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  I know it.  I should sit down

         10        while I'm ahead, maybe.

         11             I want to urge you to vote against Commissioner

         12        Scott's proposal.  I did serve on the Tax and Budget

         13        Reform Commission, and found it, as I shared with you-all

         14        the last time, very frustrating in some respects.  But my

         15        frustration came not from the substance and the quality of

         16        the debate and the deliberation and the public input, it

         17        came from the voting process, which is cumbersome and made

         18        it very, very difficult for our group to be successful.

         19             You had to have a majority vote, a supermajority vote

         20        of the whole group and a majority of the members of each

         21        appointing, of the group appointed by each appointing

         22        officer.  So my amendment was an effort to eliminate that

         23        voting process.

         24             Let me tell you why I think it's important to have

         25        the Tax and Budget Reform Commission.  It is designed to


          1        meet in the year 2000; it meets every ten years.  It came

          2        about as a result of a legislative referendum.  This was

          3        proposed by the Legislature to give a group of citizens,

          4        not unlike us, an opportunity to address not just the tax

          5        system of the state of Florida, but the budget system.

          6             And you need to take a look at the jurisdiction of

          7        this commission.  It deals with things like

          8        accountability, efficiency and a look at the whole revenue

          9        structure.  Now we have heard in our public testimony, I

         10        think many people believe that for a state like Florida,

         11        our tax system needs constant review.  And I think it is

         12        going to take a commission of people who do nothing but

         13        study the revenue structure and the budgeting spending

         14        process of this state to really come up and suggest some

         15        comprehensive, coordinated changes that will take our

         16        state into the millennium.

         17             It will meet in 2000, and we do need to address the

         18        revenue structure of this state.  We have enough money

         19        now, no question we do, but we are stressing various

         20        aspects of our revenue system.  And we need to continually

         21        monitor the spending practices of state government.

         22             Now people are doing a very good job of that.  I

         23        think the last couple of years we have seen government get

         24        more accountable, more concerned about the spending side,

         25        accountable to the people.  I think some of that is an


          1        attribute of the Tax and Budget Reform Commission.  There

          2        were a number of changes adopted that dealt with the

          3        budgeting process, the spending process, not just the tax

          4        side.  And that is an important function.

          5             As good as our Tax Committee is and as good of a

          6        chair as Commissioner Scott has been of our Tax Committee,

          7        of this citizens' commission, we simply have not had the

          8        time to really give a comprehensive look at our revenue

          9        and budget system.  And I think this is an area that

         10        deserves a special commission for that.

         11             One aspect of this group that's interesting is that

         12        it specifies in the Constitution that the Tax and Budget

         13        Reform Commissions can certainly put things on the ballot.

         14        But it also reports and makes recommendations to the

         15        Legislature for statutory changes.  So it's not a

         16        statutory initiative, but it's similar to what we are

         17        hearing people talk about in terms of trying to get the

         18        Legislature to act.

         19             It gives them constitutional authority to place

         20        things on the ballot.  But an important aspect of it is it

         21        says, Go to the Legislature with recommended statutory

         22        changes.  And, frankly, those were the changes that -- the

         23        Legislature did adopt some.  They rejected many, but they

         24        did adopt some.  And I think those things have been

         25        positive.  Things like making sure that legislators had a


          1        copy of the budget on their desks before they had to vote

          2        on it.  That's just one of the things that came out of the

          3        commission.

          4             So I would urge you to vote against Commissioner

          5        Scott and to keep this commission in place, but with a

          6        more realistic procedure for voting.

          7             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Smith.

          8             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Thank you.  Would Commissioner

          9        Barnett yield for a question?

         10             You have just about convinced me, but I didn't hear

         11        you address what I consider to be the main concern of

         12        Commissioner Scott.  I haven't heard a lot of questions or

         13        concerns about the budgetary aspect of it, questions about

         14        the tax aspect of it which we all share.

         15             And what is your view of Commissioner Scott's

         16        observation that having this commission meeting as it is

         17        required to meet causes a dampening of investment and

         18        infusion of capital with the concern that, you know, in a

         19        couple of years we don't know what may come out of this.

         20        What's your view?  First, do you share that view?  And

         21        secondly, if so, how does it balance out with the other

         22        positive benefits?

         23             COMMISSIONER BARNETT:  I do not share that view.  I

         24        do not share Commissioner Scott's view on that.  The

         25        business community that I'm involved in on a regular basis


          1        is more concerned about some aspects of our tax structure

          2        today than they are about possible uncertainty.  It's

          3        always up -- the Legislature always has the opportunity to

          4        change the tax structure of Florida.  Unless there are

          5        constitutional limits on it.

          6             The business community -- and I think our tax

          7        structure has had an impact on economic development in

          8        this state, if only in that we have had a structure that

          9        really is not designed for the next century and it has

         10        limited our ability to invest in things like human

         11        capital.  It's limited some of our educational

         12        opportunities.

         13             The level of education and the type of work force we

         14        offer the business community has far more impact on their

         15        willingness and ability -- their willingness to relocate

         16        to Florida than the fact that some commission might change

         17        their taxes.  They always know that.  I mean, they always

         18        know that a Legislature may or may not change their taxes.

         19             I think it is the things that we have not been able

         20        to do to attract business that is a direct result,

         21        sometimes, of our revenue structure that has had a more

         22        negative impact on our state in economic development.

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Anyone else want to

         24        speak to this?  Does everybody understand what this does?

         25             Commissioner Scott to close.


          1             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Just briefly, and I don't know

          2        that this is the biggest thing in the world -- and by the

          3        way, let me just say that the prior commission, if all of

          4        the members of a new commission were like Commissioner

          5        Barnett, that would be great with me, other than a couple

          6        of proposals she's made lately.

          7             (Laughter.)

          8             COMMISSIONER SCOTT:  Let me just say that you really

          9        need to think about whether you want the Constitution --

         10        even the Constitution Revision Commission is every 20

         11        years.  Now this group would be meeting again in two

         12        years.  I don't think that anybody that would be listening

         13        in the business world would think that it is a good thing

         14        to have -- let's just take an example for the members of

         15        the Finance and Tax Committee.

         16             This leasehold, which all of you are going to be

         17        hearing a lot about in the next couple of weeks, we have

         18        had meeting after meeting, we have had various ideas, it's

         19        very complicated.  And just that one issue alone, to have

         20        that issue go back to another group of citizens, after all

         21        of the work that Marilyn Evans-Jones and several others,

         22        Commissioners Hawkes and Anthony and on and on have put

         23        in, I mean, it just -- I don't think it is a good idea.

         24             I do know -- and I've talked to a lot of people and

         25        Governor Chiles and I, and I know President Jennings, I've


          1        been trying to assure them of some stability of what's

          2        going to happen with everything from their accounts

          3        receivable, and they are taxable or not taxable and

          4        whatever.

          5             So I just think that we have got the initiative

          6        process, we have got the Legislature meeting every year.

          7        I don't think to have another group come up and spend

          8        whatever time -- and as far as the budget process, let me

          9        make a couple of comments here.  They did suggest some

         10        things, they are things that generally we tried to do.

         11        They put them in the Constitution, we are having to fix a

         12        couple of them now due to drafting errors.  But I really

         13        think that that's solved.  I think that commission did

         14        fine.  I just don't think we need another one two years

         15        from now.

         16             I would urge you to vote yes on this amendment, which

         17        would have the affect of abolishing it.

         18             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Let's prepare to vote.  Open the

         19        machine.  A vote for this would -- Senator Scott's

         20        amendment, the effect of this, Senator Scott, is to

         21        abolish.  So if you want to abolish it, you vote yes.

         22             (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  Lock the machine and

         24        announce the vote.

         25             READING CLERK:  Fifteen yeas and 12 nays,


          1        Mr. Chairman.

          2             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  So we have to turn around and

          3        vote again now on the proposal as amended, which abolishes

          4        the Tax and Budget Commission.  So now you get to vote

          5        again.  If you are for abolition, vote yes.  If not, vote

          6        no.  Open the machine and we'll vote again.  Yes,

          7        Commissioner Smith.

          8             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  It won't make any difference,

          9        but I voted the wrong way on the last.

         10             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Well you've got a shot here,

         11        vote.

         12             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Can I change my last vote?  It

         13        won't change the vote.  It will be 14-13.

         14             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  You can change it.

         15             COMMISSIONER SMITH:  Thank you.  I meant to vote no.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Maybe I ought to announce the

         17        vote.  I'm not so sure that doesn't take unanimous

         18        consent.  Anyway, we are going to let you do that.

         19             (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Has everybody voted?  Lock the

         21        machine and announce the vote.

         22             READING CLERK:  Fifteen yeas and 12 nays,

         23        Mr. Chairman.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  It came out the same way,

         25        Commissioner Smith.  By your vote, you have adopted the


          1        proposal, which was as it was originally, I think, was it

          2        not?  Okay.

          3             We have announcements now, so sit tight, because the

          4        Rules Committee has to announce some meetings.

          5             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Immediately following

          6        adjournment, the Rules Committee will meet in Room 309,

          7        which is one floor down and behind where the rostrum would

          8        be.

          9             Sovereign Immunity is going to meet at noon on

         10        Wednesday, Commissioner Connor indicated to me.

         11        Commissioner Mills is here and Style and Drafting is going

         12        to meet --

         13             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Commissioner Mills.

         14             COMMISSIONER MILLS:  8:00 a.m. Wednesday morning in a

         15        room to be announced.

         16             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  8:00 a.m. Wednesday morning,

         17        where?

         18             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  We will find a room for them.

         19        And we have to find one for --

         20             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Somebody's hotel room probably.

         21             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  No, here somewhere.  We'll

         22        announce it tomorrow.

         23             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Very well.

         24             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  I want to remind

         25        commissioners, anybody that's got any withdrawals they


          1        want to make, any proposals that are on the calendar to

          2        withdraw them.

          3             Not seeing any, I have no other announcements and I'm

          4        ready to move --

          5             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Do you have a Rules Committee

          6        meeting following this meeting?

          7             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Yes, sir, immediately upon

          8        adjournment in Room 309.

          9             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  If there's nothing

         10        further, we'll reconvene in the morning at 9:00 a.m., not

         11        at 8:30, but at 9:00.  Just a minute.  Commissioner

         12        Barkdull.

         13             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Commissioner Marshall wants

         14        to withdraw Proposal 129.

         15             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  What is that, Commissioner

         16        Marshall?

         17             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  Relates to sports authority

         18        financing.

         19             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  Okay.  Without objection,

         20        Proposal No. 129 is withdrawn on the motion of

         21        Commissioner Marshall.

         22             COMMISSIONER BARKDULL:  I now move that we recess

         23        until 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.

         24             CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS:  All right.  We'll see you in the

         25        morning.


          1             (Session adjourned at 6:10 p.m.)


























          1                             CERTIFICATE

          2   STATE OF FLORIDA:

          3   COUNTY OF LEON:

                        WE, JULIE L. DOHERTY, KRISTEN L. BENTLEY and
          5   MONA L. WHIDDON, Court Reporters, certify that we were
              authorized to and did stenographically report the foregoing
          6   proceedings and that the transcript is a true and complete
              record of our stenographic notes.

          8             DATED this ______ day of ____________, 1998.


         11                      JULIE L. DOHERTY, RPR


         13                      _________________________________
                                 KRISTEN L. BENTLEY

         16                      MONA L. WHIDDON
                                 Court Reporters
         17                      Division of Administrative Hearings
                                 1230 Apalachee Parkway
         18                      Tallahassee, Florida  32399-3060
                                 (850) 488-9675  Suncom 278-9675
         19                      Fax Filing (850) 921-6847