Someone is trying to pull a fast one on the people of Florida. Voters are supposed to consider an amendment to the State Constitution that bundles several different proposals into a single amendment, to the utter confusion of voters, who will not be able to vote individually on the proposed changes.
The former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Florida filed a brief to the panel of his former colleagues, asking that they either seek justification for this bundling or toss it off the ballot.
How can it be possible to justify an effort to mislead and trick voters?
One member of the Constitutional Revision Commission was Patricia Levesque, who heads Jeb Bush’s foundation; she said that the state constitution was obsolete because it did not contemplate the creation of charter schools, online education or other innovations of the current era. Another Commission member is a charter school founder, who claimed that the current wording in the state constitution was designed to protect the “education monopoly.”
Retired Florida chief justice Harry Lee Anstead has asked his former panel to require justification for why six proposed constitutional amendments including Amendment 8 should remain on the November ballot, or to toss them out.
Anstead, joined by former Florida Elections commissioner Robert Barnas, contend in their filing to the state Supreme Court that the six proposals from the Constitution Revision Commission are unconstitutionally bundled, preventing voters from making a simple “yes” or “no” decision on them.
They challenge Amendment 8, which includes three ideas collectively grouped under education, as well as amendments 6 (rights of crime victims), 7 (first responder and military survivor benefits), 9 (offshore oil drilling and vaping), 10 (state and local government structure), and 11 (property rights).
Their key argument:
“Petitioners submit herein that each and every one of the foregoing proposed revisions bundles independent and unrelated proposals in a single ballot question in a manner that requires a voter to vote ‘yes’ for a proposal that the voter opposes in order to vote ‘yes’ for an independent and unrelated proposal the voter supports and to vote ‘no’ for a proposal the voter supports in order to vote ‘no’ for an independent and unrelated proposal the voter opposes. This is logrolling and a form of issue gerrymandering that violates the First Amendment right of the voter to vote for or against specific independent and unrelated proposals to amend the constitution without paying the price of supporting a measure the voter opposes or opposing a measure the voter supports.”
The plaintiffs recognize the CRC’s ability to propose a comprehensive revision of the state constitution. However, they argue, this would require several discrete amendments and not a single overarching one.
The CRC has instead bundled independent and unrelated items, they argue: “All are beyond the power the Constitution has bestowed upon the Constitution Revision Commission and must be removed from the ballot.”
Additionally, regarding Amendment 8, they specify that the proposal does not clearly state its intent.
“This ballot language is clearly and deceptive misleading because it does not disclose to the voter that the proposed amendment to Article IX § 4(b), adding the language ‘established by the district school board,’ eliminates the constitutional requirement in Article IX § 1(a) that Florida have a uniform …system of free public schools, which has been a continuous constitutional imperative in Florida beginning with the Constitution of 1868. This measure seeks sub silentio to subvert decisions such as Bush v. Holmes, 919 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 2006),” they write. “This subterfuge must not be perpetuated upon Florida voters.”
One senses the hand of Jeb Bush in this subterfuge.
Never forget: Dark money never sleeps.
This is a quote from the first link, dated August 14, 2018:
Retired Florida chief justice Harry Lee Anstead has asked his former panel to require justification for why six proposed constitutional amendments including Amendment 8 should remain on the November ballot, or to toss them out.
Anstead, joined by former Florida Elections commissioner Robert Barnas, contend in their filing to the state Supreme Court that the six proposals from the Constitution Revision Commission are unconstitutionally bundled, preventing voters from making a simple “yes” or “no” decision on them.
They challenge Amendment 8, which includes three ideas collectively grouped under education, as well as amendments 6 (rights of crime victims), 7 (first responder and military survivor benefits), 9 (offshore oil drilling and vaping), 10 (state and local government structure), and 11 (property rights).
Their key argument:
“Petitioners submit herein that each and every one of the foregoing proposed revisions bundles independent and unrelated proposals in a single ballot question in a manner that requires a voter to vote ‘yes’ for a proposal that the voter opposes in order to vote ‘yes’ for an independent and unrelated proposal the voter supports and to vote ‘no’ for a proposal the voter supports in order to vote ‘no’ for an independent and unrelated proposal the voter opposes. This is logrolling and a form of issue gerrymandering that violates the First Amendment right of the voter to vote for or against specific independent and unrelated proposals to amend the constitution without paying the price of supporting a measure the voter opposes or opposing a measure the voter supports.”
The plaintiffs recognize the CRC’s ability to propose a comprehensive revision of the state constitution. However, they argue, this would require several discrete amendments and not a single overarching one.
The CRC has instead bundled independent and unrelated items, they argue: “All are beyond the power the Constitution has bestowed upon the Constitution Revision Commission and must be removed from the ballot.”
This is the second, published April 16, 2018:
Despite calls to treat each idea separately, the Florida Constitution Revision Commission has sent a proposal to voters that would set school board member term limits, require civic education in public schools, and allow for the creation of a state charter school authorizer.
Commission member Roberto Martinez, a former State Board of Education chairman and key legal adviser to Jeb Bush, pressed the panel Monday to unbundle the package [P 6003].
The portion to give control of some public schools to an entity other than a local school board would be a “game changer” that would radically alter public education governance, Martinez argued. Voters should have a clear understanding of the proposal and then decide on its own merits — not because it’s tied to another concept, he said.
“These are three separate issues,” former state senator Chris Smith said in agreement. “I don’t even realize how I’m going to vote. I’m strong on some of it. I’m against some of it.”
The opposition reflected a growing drumbeat across Florida, where several organizations have raised concerns about the “power grab” they suggested Republican government leaders are attempting. They had a coordinated campaign in newspapers over the weekend, signaling this could likely be a most challenged ballot item, and wrote a letter to CRC chairman Carlos Beruff asking for each proposal to be taken up independently.
Beruff was among the 22 members to vote against unbundling the proposals, and among the 27 to support placing the package on the November ballot. A proposal needed 22 votes to advance.
Unlike those who suggested the measure would decimate local control of public education, supporters of the initiative said the ideas “absolutely” belong together because they are all part of Article IX.
They contended it would unshackle the Legislature in any future efforts to come up with new ideas to improve the system.
The current constitutional language of Article IX authorizes local school boards to operate, supervise and control all free public schools within their jurisdiction. The amendment would limit that authority to the schools “established by the district school board.”
That has been read by many observers as a method to allow creation of an unelected state charter school approval system, which in the past has been rejected in court because of this section of the constitution.
Commission member Patricia Levesque, who heads Jeb Bush’s education foundation, argued that a state charter authorizer is not spelled out in the proposal. Rather, Levesque said, the idea is to upgrade 50-year-old language written when Florida’s population was less than half of what it is now.
Floridians did not contemplate charter schools, online education, dual enrollment or other ideas that have emerged since. Levesque contended that new concepts face political hurdles because of the constitution, and called for the change.
Commission member Erika Donalds, a Collier County School Board member and charter school founder, said the constitution needs to be forward looking.
“When these reforms run their course, will [lawmakers] be able to respond?” asked Donalds, who is attempting to open charter schools outside Collier County.
The time has come, she suggested, to get rid of the “unfair, antiquated” wording that is used to “protect the education monopoly,” and to give parents more opportunities for school choice.
“It is our duty to take the hogtie off the Legislature,” said Donalds, whose husband serves in the state House and recently sponsored a measure to create a private school scholarship for students who claim to be bullied in public school.
Commission member Frank Kruppenbacher, a longtime lawyer for district and charter schools, rejected that the Legislature cannot make any education reforms it wishes.
“What it needs is the leadership to do it,” he said, noting all the initiatives that have been implemented over the years.
Kruppenbacher was among the 10 members to vote against the proposal. The others were Martinez, former Florida Bar president Hank Coxe, state Rep. Jose Felix Diaz, State Board of Education members Tom Grady and Marva Johnson, former state Sen. Arthenia Joyner, state Sen. Darryl Rouson, Indian River County Commissioner Bob Solari, and Florida education commissioner Pam Stewart.
The ballot measure would require 60 percent voter approval to become effective.
One other education proposal, which would allow high-performing school districts to avoid certain portions of the state education code similar to charter schools, is to be considered separately. Commission Style and Drafting chairman Brecht Heuchan explained that the fourth proposal could not fit with the others and meet the wording limitations for amendments.
UPDATE: The “innovation school districts” proposal failed 13-23.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Ed reformers working hard on yet another political campaign to harm public schools.
They contribute absolutely nothing to of value to students in existing public schools.
That’s the main reason to fire and replace them the next election- they add no value.
Go read across the ed reform spectrum and search for one proposal or initiative or idea what benefits any PUBLIC school student, anywhere. There are none.
They simply don’t serve our families. They offer us nothing.
This is considered incredibly generous and fair-minded in ed reform circles:
“NewSchools has long been known as a funder of charter schools. But back in 2015, we said this broader definition of success and all the ideas we need from folks about how to create schools that can really help every single kid … that work is going on in schools of all kinds, not just in charter schools. We began for the first time in our history to say, “We’re willing to fund teams in school districts, too.”
They will reluctantly admit that public schools actually exist and might be worthy of support by the Best and Brightest, but only if those schools accept the ed reform dogma as a condition of their continued existence.
If you’re a public school family WHY would you hire and pay public employees who don’t support your kid’s school? That’s nuts. Fire them. Hire someone who values public schools and public school students.
The tens of privately-funded ed reform lobbying groups are one thing, but we don’t have to also HIRE these people and put them on the public payroll.
When I read Amendment 8 of the proposed changes to the state constitution, alarm bells went off in my mind. I addition to the log rolling of proposed changes, what stood out for me was the change is how charters are approved and funded. Currently, charters need the approval of the county superintendent, which makes sense because local tax dollars would have to fund them. Amendment 8 would make charter approval a state decision. Tallahassee would be given a blank check, and the county would lose its input. Since Tallahassee is owned by the charter lobby, this could have disastrous consequences for county districts, which could potentially bankrupt them. The League of Women Voters has filed a lawsuit over Amendment 8 as well. http://floridapolitics.com/archives/268631-league-sues-education-amendment
Maybe just me, but neither of these links opens to content, just a white page. In any case, your blog is a great service in circulating key points in a huge media landscape. I would not be surprised to see the legislative bundling in Florida be duplicated in other states with Jeb Bush being the person who wants to get rid of state constitutional requirements for free public schools.
Thanks. I will try to add content from the links.
Laura,
Please see the update.
I added content from both articles.
Helpful. Thanks.
Jeb Bush up to dishonest tricks?
What a surprise.
Seems to.be genetic.
Jeb Bush, having failed to become president, now devotes his energies to destroying and privatizing public schools. His foundation is supported by DeVos, tech companies, Gates, Walton, etc.
He tries out his most devious bad ideas in Florida where he still has lots of clout. Opening up the state constitution is like ringing the dinner bell to a grifter like Bush.
FYI. Hanna Skandera, who worked for Jeb Bush in Florida, who became NM Secretary of Education, is now the Editor In Chief for “The Link”, which can be found at: http://www.thelinek12.com. Skandera took the position 12 June 2018. It is interesting to read what “The Link” is about. Just like Jeb Bush, Skandera has no business being involved with public education. She, along with Governor Martinez, screwed up New Mexico eduction really bad and it will take years to straighten out.
I had a five hundred word essay ready to say the same thing.
More about Amendment 8 here: http://accountabaloney.com/index.php/2018/08/01/why-no-on-8-consider-this-analogy/
It seems to me that bundling these things together would actually hurt the chances of the ballot measure to pass. Why would anyone vote for a morass of language they don’t understand. For me, that would be an automatic no vote. And were I running the campaign against the measure that is the message I would be pounding home-“Hey, they are trying to fool you, just look at the wording. If you can’t understand it how can you vote for it! Vote NO!” But then again, I ain’t no political consultant.
A wise lawyer once told me “when people’s eyes glaze over someone’s stealing”.
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
our Supreme courts are bought! and if this guy gets confirmed, the distinction between region and the state will be lost.
The Court Nominee’s Hint on Tax Dollars for Religious Schools https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/14/us/politics/kavanaugh-vouchers-religious-education.htmlBy ERICA L. GREEN
Brett M. Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court could advance efforts to make publicly funded vouchers available to students attending religious schools!
This is right out of the ALEC playbook to change the state constitutions with amendments. Look at the 6 crazy amendments the GOP now wants on the NC ballot in November. Have someone research this with ALEC and you will find that this is a major step in their game plan. So while David Koch distracts us with supposedly disagreeing with Trump, his real mission is playing out in the states.
Duane,
I think it would be a bit of an understatement to say that you are not the ordinary voter.😀
It’s bad enough that ordinary voters vote for things and people without knowing anything about them.
But it is downright pathetic that lots of legislators — including many members of the US House and Senate do not read the bills that they vote on.
Many members of Congress simply vote the way their corporate donors tell them to vote. In many cases, the donors actually write the bills and the members of Congress simply rubber stamp them without even reading them.
If you have an interest in state constitutional requirements for public education see http://www.ecs.org/wp-content/uploads/2016-Constitutional-obligations-for-public-education-1.pdf
One of Jeb Bush’s several operations, The Foundation for Excellence in Education is abbreviated to ExcelinEd. At the website you can see that it is devoted to school choice and four policies for funding schools. In brief, Jeb Bush and his fans want governors and state legislatures to:
–adopt voucher schemes for any variety of choice in education;
–eliminate local school boards and funding for brick and mortar schools (except as a pass-through for vouchers and a state-determined scheme for “equitable” funding of facilities);
–subsidize (incentivize) providers of instructional delivery by computers to individual students (wrongly called personalized learning).
— credit students for “mastery” of the content and tasks provided by instructional delivery systems, not by seat time in age-grade based schools
In 2017, ExcelinEd was funded by over $1 million from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; Bloomberg Philanthropies; and Walton Family Foundation.
Among forty-two other contributors (none less than $5000) were the W.K. Kellogg; Charles & Helen Schwab Foundation; News Corporation; College Board; Exxon Mobil Corporation; U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation; Amplify Education; Charter Schools USA; CHARLES KOCH INSTITUTE; National Math & Science Initiative; Northwest Evaluation Association; State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.; Cambridge Assessment International Education; Edgenuity; Edmentum; Florida Virtual School; Institute for Quality Education; JustGive.org; Renaissance Learning; Stone Soup Films Endowment.
https://www.excelined.org/quality/education-funding/
Betsy Devos and Trump supporters have the same agenda as Jeb Bush. For the many entanglements of Jeb Bush with politics in and beyond education see https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Jeb_Bush
The ultimate goal is to upend the traditional brick and mortar schools and replace them with various forms of technology despite the fact there is no evidence this is a positive, and there is mounting evidence various virtual platforms fall short on quality. These big money players have invented an entire system based on false assumptions and no understanding of the needs of diverse learners. Bush and company are backed by dark money that is willing it to happen by hook or crook methods.
“These big money players have invented an entire system based on false assumptions and no understanding of the needs of diverse learners.” Here you’re giving them the benefit of the doubt. Their only assumption is, they can make an inordinate profit off the public purse w/hastily slapped-together content — & they could care less about the needs of diverse learners.
Thanks for posting links! Very informative.
That is really getting over into a scary place ! Folks need to be very awake when the reform crowd get this crazy. Diane had a wonderful explanation about the origins of our public schools recently. We need to educate the public !
In July, The League of Women Voters filed a lawsuit asking Amendment 8 be removed from the ballot, claiming the proposed title an summary fail to inform the chief purpose of the revision and are affirmatively misleading. The lawsuit is scheduled to have its first hearing August 17th. Former Chief Justice of Florida Supreme Court (1994 – 2009) Charles T. Wells, explained why he believes Amendment 8 is “misleading” and deceptive in an eight page opinion he sent to the League. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4619603-Wells-Amendment-8-Opinion.html
Editorial Boards across the state are declaring support for the League’s lawsuit and removal of Amendment 8 from the ballet. Sun Sentinel wrote- “Revision 8 does not even mention charter schools. Backers want the appeal of term limits and feel good idea of civic education to hide that chief purpose. The courts should see through the ploy and strike revision 8 from the ballot.” Palm Beach Post wrote-” This is so misleading you have to wonder if the deception was deliberate. The Leon County Circuit Court should quickly rule to strike this insult to voters from the November ballot”.