ReportWire

Tag: Florida 2024 legislative session

  • Florida urges federal judge to speed up ruling in high-stakes wetlands case

    Florida urges federal judge to speed up ruling in high-stakes wetlands case

    click to enlarge

    Florida is asking a federal judge to speed up a final ruling in a high-stakes case about permitting authority for projects that affect wetlands, as the state sets the stage for a likely appeal.

    U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss on Feb. 15 ruled that federal officials did not follow required steps in 2020 before transferring wetlands-related permitting authority from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to the state. Moss vacated the shift but said the state and the federal government could seek a stay of his ruling. He also did not decide certain legal issues in the case.

    In a filing Monday, attorneys for the state urged Moss to issue a final judgment, which would help clear the way for an appeal. The filing said Moss’ Feb. 15 decision has effectively resolved the case’s key issues in favor of environmental groups that challenged the shift.

    “This single judicial ruling, which gave complete relief to plaintiffs, immediately placed over 1,000 projects across Florida (including permit applications for environmental restoration, roads and bridges, hospitals, schools, affordable housing, senior living facilities, and grid reliability, among many others) in regulatory limbo with no clear timeline or expectation for a permit decision,” the state’s 21-page filing said. “The situation was immediately urgent and becomes more so with each passing day.”

    The state on Feb. 26 also filed a motion for a stay of Moss’ decision. The judge has not ruled on the motion and has scheduled an April 4 conference in Washington, D.C. The plaintiffs have opposed a stay.

    The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved the transfer of the permitting authority to the state in December 2020, about a month before former President Donald Trump’s administration ended. Florida became the third state, after Michigan and New Jersey, to receive the permitting authority.

    The Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, the Sierra Club, the Conservancy of Southwest Florida, the Florida Wildlife Federation, Miami Waterkeeper and St. Johns Riverkeeper filed the lawsuit in January 2021 against the federal government. The state later intervened in the case.

    In his Feb. 15 ruling, Moss found that actions by the EPA and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in approving the shift violated the Endangered Species Act.

    The ruling focused, in part, on whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service properly prepared a biological opinion and what is known as an “incidental take statement” as part of the process of approving the transfer. Incidental takes are situations in which threatened or endangered species could be killed or harmed as a result of what are allowed activities.

    Moss said a biological opinion and incidental take statement did not comply with the Endangered Species Act and another law known as the Administrative Procedure Act. He wrote that because the biological opinion and incidental take statement that the Fish and Wildlife Service “issued in this case were facially and legally flawed, the EPA unreasonably relied on those documents in approving Florida’s assumption application.”

    The plaintiffs and the U.S. Department of Justice have not filed responses to the state’s request Monday to speed up a final judgment in the case. But the environmental groups last week pushed back against a stay of Moss’ ruling, saying a stay would “create confusion and perpetuate violations” of the Endangered Species Act.

    “The least disruptive path forward, which would also serve developers’ interest in clarity … is therefore to deny a limited stay, leave permitting authority with the (Army) Corps, and allow Florida to propose a new program subject to EPA approval,” attorneys for the groups wrote.

    The state’s filing Monday appears to make clear that an appeal is looming. As an example, it said that “because the court (Moss) has granted complete relief to plaintiffs, rendering the remaining claims (in the case) moot, this court should proceed with entering final judgment in a separate appealable order.”

    Meanwhile, Moss’ ruling also could affect a separate lawsuit filed in 2022 by the Miccosukee Tribe challenging the permitting-authority shift. The Justice Department on Feb. 29 filed a motion for a stay of that case, which is pending before a different federal judge in South Florida.

    The motion pointed to Moss ruling.

    “If that decision remains intact, it would render this case moot because plaintiff (the Miccosukee Tribe) is seeking the same relief,” the motion said.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Florida lawmakers approve watered-down bill anti-vaping bill

    Florida lawmakers approve watered-down bill anti-vaping bill

    click to enlarge

    Florida lawmakers this week approved a watered-down bill targeting vape products geared toward children, setting up a process for Attorney General Ashley Moody to go after illegal electronic-cigarette manufacturers and sellers.

    The legislation underwent a major overhaul before it was unanimously passed Tuesday by the Senate and overwhelmingly approved Thursday by the House.

    The bill (HB 1007), now ready to go to Gov. Ron DeSantis, targets single-use electronic cigarettes. Senate sponsor Keith Perry, R-Gainesville, said the proposal is narrowly focused on single-use devices, a significant change from a plan floated earlier.

    “It’s still a really good bill,” Perry said in an interview Friday. “The attorney general, kind of through things she has to prove, can determine that they’re marketing towards children, then she can regulate those (products) and take those off the market. That’s really where the problem has been, anyway. We’re not concerned with adults that vape. That’s their decision.”

    Lawmakers earlier considered a proposal that would have severely restricted products that could be sold. According to legislative analyses of the earlier plan, about two-dozen products sold by Juul Labs and other businesses affiliated with tobacco companies would have been deemed legal.

    The original measure sparked outcry from vape sellers and manufacturers, who maintained that the plan would have shuttered mom-and-pop businesses throughout the state. The changes adopted this week would allow Moody’s office to set up a registry of products deemed off-limits, after an administrative process.

    “We are grateful that the Legislature listened to the concerns of all of us who traveled to Tallahassee to share our views throughout the committee process,” Nick Orlando, president of the Florida Smoke-Free Association, said in a statement Friday. Perry said after Juul and other companies stopped producing single-use electronic cigarettes Chinese companies made them.

    Juul Labs over the past few years has agreed to pay nearly $3 billion to settle lawsuits with states for allegedly luring children to buy addictive nicotine products. Moody’s office in October filed a lawsuit against the company alleging it improperly marketed to children and offered misleading information about nicotine content in its products.

    The case is pending at the Hillsborough County circuit court.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Florida exempts some social media sites from new limits on teens; no one knows which ones

    Florida exempts some social media sites from new limits on teens; no one knows which ones

    click to enlarge

    The new ban on social media in Florida for young teens the Legislature rewrote and passed this week is so narrowly crafted that it’s not clear which popular online platforms might be covered — if any of them.

    Just days after a veto of an earlier measure by Gov. DeSantis, lawmakers approved legislation that would block anyone under 16 from using some social media but would allow 14 and 15 year olds to use the online services with a parent’s permission. The House passed the bill 109-4 late Wednesday, after the Senate voted 30-5 to approve it.

    The new version of the proposed law — rushed through by lawmakers with only days remaining in the legislative session — covers only social media platforms with 10% or more of daily active users who are younger than 16 and who spend an average of two hours or more on the service. Both conditions must be met, or the law doesn’t apply to that social media provider.

    Lawmakers haven’t identified which social media companies would be affected and which wouldn’t. They won’t meet again after this week until March 2025.

    The narrow requirements under the new legislation would appear to exclude Facebook, X formerly known as Twitter, Instagram, Reddit and other popular platforms but may include Snapchat and TikTok, which are more oriented toward young users, according to recent demographic figures each company has released publicly.

    To be clear, it’s not clear: Not every company has released data covering exactly how many of its users are under 16 and how many of those young users spend two hours or more online every day. The proposed law doesn’t say whether those figures must include a platform’s users only in the U.S. or globally, who would measure those figures or how they would measure them.

    On TikTok, according to usage data from the company, users across all age groups spent about 95 minutes on the app daily and young users spend an average of 87 minutes daily — below the two-hour daily threshold that Florida’s proposed law would require for users under 16.

    Even the top lawyer for NetChoice LLC, the trade association for social media companies that led the fight against the proposals, said it’s unclear which platforms would be covered — if any of them — if DeSantis signs the law. Carl Szabo, the group’s general counsel, said data on age demographics and usage are self-reported by each social media company.

    Szabo said the group was hopeful DeSantis would veto even the new version of the legislation.

    “Right now we’re looking at all options and really holding out hope that the governor will do the right thing, not support it for the Internet and veto a clearly unconstitutional law,” he said.

    Lawmakers dropped a requirement for social media companies to adopt strict age verifications that would have potentially required everyone in Florida to show an ID to prove their age online.

    The new legislation separately would require social media platforms that “knowingly and intentionally” publish or distribute material harmful to minors — or platforms that contain a substantial portion of material harmful to minors — to verify each user’s age. Legislative aides cited adult websites that include Xvideos and Pornhub.

    Many websites with pornographic or gambling content already require users to click past a window asking them to confirm they are at least 18 but requiring no proof of this.

    The proposed law also doesn’t describe exactly how those companies would verify a user’s age.

    Websites and social media services are already restricted in ways they can interact with users under 13 years old under a 1998 federal law, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. That law requires companies to notify and obtain a parent’s permission before any personal information can be collected or used.

    DeSantis had complained that the earlier version of the legislation did not take parents’ rights into account. The proposed law doesn’t specify how social media companies — even for ones that are covered by the new rules — would verify that a parent approved a 14 or 15 year old to be online. The legislation will formally be presented to the governor soon for his signature.

    “Protecting children from the harms associated with social media is important, as is supporting parents’ rights and maintaining the eligibility of adults to engage in anonymous speech,” DeSantis told lawmakers in his veto letter.

    The new provisions in the Florida law won over some Democrats who had previously voted against the bill, including Reps. Ashley Gantt, D-Miami, and Michael Gottlieb, D-Davie. Both had criticized the earlier efforts.

    Gantt had proposed a similar amendment in January requiring parental permission for minors using social media — instead of a ban — when the House was considering the earlier legislation. Her amendment did not pass.

    Although the vote was less divisive than before, the bill continued to spark debate on the House floor on Wednesday. Rep. Daryl Campbell, D-Fort Lauderdale, said he was worried the bill was unconstitutional. He said the state government would be impinging on the rights of parents of children younger than 13.

    “I think by opening this Pandora’s box and setting this standard, we are going to start seeing a lot of things come forward where we’re starting to push back on things that are a foundation to our state, the foundation to our nation,” Campbell said. “We are taking away parents’ rights to actually be parents to their children.”

    One of the Democratic bill sponsors, Rep. Michele Rayner of St. Petersburg, championed the bill because of what she described as concerns about the mental health effects of social media on young children.

    “I don’t know if this is going to be the fix-all … but what I’m asking us to do is act,” Rayner said on the House floor. “I don’t know about you, but I am tired of seeing stories about children who are dying because of what’s happening on social media. If that is not enough for you to act, I don’t know what is.”

    In the Senate, the new version of the legislation won over all Republican Senators who previously voted against it and a few Democratic senators, such as Sen. Jason Pizzo, D-Hollywood, and Senate Minority Leader Lauren Book, D-Davie.

    Sen. Bobby Powell, D-West Palm Beach, had concerns over government overreach that he said still lingered with the new version.

    “I wasn’t elected to come and run your household,” Powell said during debate. “Sometimes I think that we start passing legislation that I believe is well intentioned but it really starts to become invasive into a person’s household.”

    Sen. Erin Grall, R-Vero Beach, who led support for the effort in the Senate, cited research that 13-year-olds found content about suicide and eating disorders on their algorithms on social media apps.

    “We have to do something. We can’t stand by any longer and allow these companies to own our children,” Grall said.

    House Speaker Paul Renner, R-Palm Coast, called the bill the “best state legislation in the country” at a press conference Wednesday. It has been a top priority of his leadership in the House. Renner said he believed the bill would survive legal challenges.

    “It gives us a chance to be both effective as well as constitutional in protecting our children,” Renner said.

    ___

    This story was produced by Fresh Take Florida, a news service of the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications. The reporter can be reached at [email protected]. You can donate to support the students here.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    Erina Anwar, Fresh Take Florida

    Source link

  • Gov. DeSantis casts doubts on new Florida bill making it illegal to hog the left lane

    Gov. DeSantis casts doubts on new Florida bill making it illegal to hog the left lane

    click to enlarge

    Gov. Ron DeSantis said Friday he will talk with law-enforcement officials before deciding whether to sign a bill that would bar motorists from cruising in the left lanes of highways.

    The Senate voted 37-0 on Thursday to approve the measure (HB 317), which had earlier passed the House.

    During an appearance Friday in Pensacola, DeSantis said he wants to hear the practical implications to law officers of enforcing the measure, which would apply to drivers on highways with at least two lanes in the same direction and speed limits of 65 mph or higher.

    “Are we going to be pulling people over for that? How would that work?” DeSantis said.

    He added, “So, I’m going to actually talk to people that do this for a living, whether they think it would be a benefit, both in terms of safety but also we want convenience. We want people to be able to get where they can go as quickly and as safely as possible. But then also enforcement, is that going to radically change how they (officers) do their job, in terms of enforcement?”

    The bill would prevent drivers from using left lanes unless they are passing other motorists, preparing to exit on ramps, turning from left lanes or are directed to left lanes by officers or traffic-control devices.

    High occupancy vehicle lanes would be excluded from the term “furthermost left-hand lane.” The bill would set fines up to $158.

    The House voted 113-3 last week to pass the bill.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Florida House approves bill to proposal to allow chaplains in schools

    Florida House approves bill to proposal to allow chaplains in schools

    click to enlarge

    The Florida House on Thursday passed a measure that would allow school districts to authorize volunteer chaplains to provide “support, services and programs” to students in public schools, amid a debate about whether the bill would be constitutional.

    Under the proposal (HB 931) chaplains would have to meet background screening requirements, and school districts or charter schools would have to get parental consent before students could receive chaplains’ services.

    Supporters of the measure say allowing chaplains would add another tool to help schools address children’s mental-health issues.

    “I think all of us agree that our children are in crisis, we agree that parents need help. We agree that there are a lot of spiritual needs that people could meet if a parent felt it was necessary for their child,” bill sponsor Stan McClain, R-Ocala, said.

    The Republican-controlled House voted 89-25 to pass the measure, with some Democrats questioning whether allowing chaplains in schools would be constitutional.

    “Can you point to me, in your bill, what lines and language will prevent religious proselytization and coercion of students as well as other violations of the U.S. Constitution?” Rep. Ashley Gantt, a Miami Democrat who is a lawyer, asked during a floor discussion Wednesday.

    “There are none in the bill,” McClain replied.

    Rep. Anna Eskamani, D-Orlando, pointed to the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

    “At the end of the day, when we put into place any type of established religion in a public-school setting, it does raise those flags. And I don’t want to put our school districts in a situation where they’re going to be faced with litigation on these issues,” Eskamani said during a debate Thursday.

    A House staff analysis of the bill said that, in “general, the Establishment Clause prevents public schools from engaging in activities which could be construed as sponsoring or endorsing religion. Prayer and Bible readings in public schools during school hours are impermissible.”

    The ACLU of Florida has argued the bill is unconstitutional.

    “Courts have repeatedly ruled that it is unconstitutional for public schools to invite religious leaders onto campus to engage in religious activities, such as prayer and religious counseling, with students,” Kara Gross, legislative director and senior policy counsel for the ACLU of Florida, said in a prepared statement.

    “If passed, this bill will likely create public education environments ripe for religious coercion and indoctrination of students,” Gross added.

    School districts and principals that want to allow chaplains would have to meet various requirements. For example, principals would be required to inform parents about the availability of chaplains. Parents would have to be able to choose chaplains from lists provided by school districts, with the lists including “the chaplain’s religious affiliation, if any.”

    Critics of the bill have also questioned why the bill would not mandate training or credentials for chaplains.

    “Now we are saying that, first, we don’t have to have any qualifications for these chaplains. So any Joe Schmo who says, ‘Hey, I’m a chaplain, I want to go into these schools,’ all they need to do is a background check and claim to be a chaplain without any verification,” Gantt said during debate Thursday.

    Rep. Robin Bartleman, a Weston Democrat who is a former educator, asked Wednesday if parents would be informed about chaplains’ levels of experience.

    “Since you’re mandating the information be posted on a website, and this is really important, are you mandating a disclaimer to let them know that these chaplains may or may not have experience or be licensed health-care professionals?” Bartleman asked.

    “The school boards would have the authority to do that if they so choose,” McClain replied.

    Rep. Adam Anderson, R-Palm Harbor, argued that faith-based mentors are a valuable part of providing services to young people and families.

    “Just like there’s no replacement for a licensed mental-health professional or a doctor who can write prescriptions, there’s never going to be a replacement for what a faith-based counselor — a chaplain, a pastor or a rabbi — can add to a child or to a family,” Anderson said.

    The measure would need approval from the Senate before it could go to Gov. Ron DeSantis. Senate President Kathleen Passidomo, R-Naples, and Senate bill sponsor Erin Grall, R-Vero Beach, said Thursday they think the bill would pass constitutional muster.

    “Anytime somebody doesn’t like a bill … the first thing they say is, it’s unconstitutional. That’s their default objection,” Passidomo told reporters.

    “I think that it actually is squarely within the Constitution. Not only would parents have to consent to the consultation with a specific chaplain. But there’s also, they can’t prevent any specific chaplain from being a part of the program either based on religion. So, these are the bare minimum guidelines to participate,” Grall said.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    Ryan Dailey, NSF

    Source link

  • DeSantis calls for more parental control, as Florida Legislature passes blanket social media ban for kids under 16

    DeSantis calls for more parental control, as Florida Legislature passes blanket social media ban for kids under 16

    click to enlarge

    Photo via Ron DeSantis/Twitter

    Florida’s Republican-led Legislature passed a sweeping bill Thursday in Tallahassee that would ban all kids under 16 from using social media – even with a parent’s permission – and would require everyone else in the Sunshine State to prove they are adults to continue using their online accounts.

    Within hours of the Senate’s vote, Gov. Ron DeSantis resurfaced his own objections over banning high school students who are 14 or 15 and whose parents might want to give their children access. “Parents need to have a role in this,” he said at a news conference. He added, “We can’t say 100% of the uses are bad.”

    “It’s still under negotiation,” DeSantis said. “We’re working.”

    The Senate voted 23-14 to pass the bill, a priority of House Speaker Paul Renner and one of the most consequential and far-reaching pieces of legislation considered this year by lawmakers. The House voted later in the day 108-7 to pass the Senate’s version of the measure and send it to DeSantis for signature.

    “We know that there are pedophiles and sexual predators on these platforms and children can be groomed in less than 45 minutes,” said Sen. Erin Grall, R-Fort Pierce, who championed the measure in the Senate. “The sale of human beings is happening with our most vulnerable children in these platforms.”

    Grall said Thursday that she hasn’t discussed concerns with the governor or his representatives.

    “I haven’t communicated with the governor’s office on the bill, at all,” Grall said.

    Under the bill – and an amendment by Grall that passed late Wednesday – adults in Florida would be required to submit proof-of-age documents or evidence to third-party, U.S.-based companies to prove to social media companies they are old enough to use their accounts on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X, Snapchat, Reddit and others.

    The bill would require that these companies immediately delete copies of any age-verification information at the end of the process and assure the anonymity of anyone who submitted it. It did not specify what documents or evidence would be acceptable to prove age, but legislative researchers said options include government-issued records such as drivers’ licenses, credit or banking records or even biometric tools that use facial recognition to estimate a person’s age.

    It would go into effect July 1.

    The Senate vote was largely along party lines, except that five Republicans voted against the bill and two Democrats supported it. Debate on the Senate floor was rancorous. In the House, the only lawmakers who opposed it were Reps. LaVon Bracy Davis of Orlando, Daryl Campbell of Fort Lauderdale, Anna Eskamani of Orlando, Ashley Viola Gantt of Miami, Angela Nixon of Jacksonville and Felicia Simone Robinson of Miami Gardens – all Democrats.

    Sen. Tina Polsky, D-Boca Raton, said the bill – if enacted – would almost certainly be blocked by legal challenges. Critics said it interferes with the First Amendment rights of social media users. A similar law in Arkansas was blocked after a judge ruled that it placed too high a burden on adults and children attempting to access protected content.

    “We are walking ourselves into a judicial defeat, and I’d like to know who’s paying for that,” Polsky said. “We’re cutting our budget, we’re cutting our programs. We’re going to spend another million dollars on defending a case that we all know is unconstitutional.”

    NetChoice LLC, a trade organization for major social media platforms, said the age-verification requirement for adults in Florida raised serious privacy concerns.

    “The terrifying component of this bill is a requirement that private businesses send and export sensitive personal information of users to another company,” said Carl Szabo, the group’s top lawyer. “That’s really scary that my most sensitive personal information would be required by Florida law to be sent to a third party to verify I am who I say I am.”

    The bill identifies social media services as having “addictive features,” which Grall compared to drug addiction. The bill wouldn’t apply to email providers, streaming services, photo-editing applications, news sites or other popular digital services.

    “This has been equated to digital fentanyl,” Grall said. “This is a different version of drug use than most of us have ever seen, but it is just as bad and it affects their brain development and it affects their ability to participate in society.”

    Polsky unsuccessfully offered an amendment late Wednesday that would exempt teens under 16 in Florida who could show a reasonable need to use social media, such as young entrepreneurs, dance or recording artists or prospective athletes who showcase their talent to college coaches online.

    On the Senate floor, Polsky read from a news story published earlier Wednesday by Fresh Take Florida, a news service operated by the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications, that included interviews with teens who ran businesses or advocacy groups before they turned 16.

    Sen. Jason Pizzo, D-Hollywood, said parents, not the government, should control what their children can do online.

    “If you need 40 people hanging out in Tallahassee for 60 days to be able to teach your kids, or restrict them from something, you need to seek help,” Pizzo said.

    Sen. Blaise Ingoglia, R-Spring Hill, who voted against the bill said it could prevent children from watching popular cartoons on YouTube Kids.

    Szabo, the lawyer for NetChoice, said his group or others would seek a preliminary injunction in court to block the bill from taking effect if signed by the governor.

    “We can do that on First Amendment grounds because when it comes to free speech, the chilling of free speech, the limiting of free speech, even the threat of losing the opportunity of free speech is a harm unto itself,” Szabo said.

    Grall said she believed Florida’s new law would hold up to court challenges because it targeted social media platforms with addictive features, not specific online companies. Such features include “autoplay,” when a website plays videos automatically in succession, or “infinite scroll,” when a website serves up content endlessly.

    “This language is very different from some of the other states,” she said. “Some of the other states have specific exclusions for specific platforms. Those make it look like we’re targeting one platform over another versus focusing on the addictive harms that our children are facing.”
    ___

    This story was produced by Fresh Take Florida, a news service of the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications. The reporter can be reached at [email protected]. You can donate to support our students here.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    Erina Anwar, Fresh Take Florida

    Source link

  • Controversial Florida bills to ban Pride flags and protect Confederate monuments could be dead

    Controversial Florida bills to ban Pride flags and protect Confederate monuments could be dead

    click to enlarge

    Controversial bills aimed at preventing local governments from removing historical monuments and restricting the types of flags flown at schools and other public buildings appear to be dead in the Florida Senate.

    Senate President Kathleen Passidomo, R-Naples, said she doesn’t expect the Senate to move forward on the monuments bill and that the flags bill is stuck in a committee that will not meet again.

    The monuments bill (SB 1122) seeks to prevent removal or destruction of historical monuments from public property and has been controversial because of debate about whether it is designed to prevent removal of memorials to the Confederacy.

    Passidomo last week raised questions about the future of the bill after several lawmakers voiced outrage about comments by speakers who supported the bill at a Feb. 6 committee meeting. Sen. Jennifer Bradley, R-Fleming Island, described some of the comments as “vile” and “bigoted.”

    Passidomo appeared to rule out the bill Wednesday when asked by a reporter if it was dead.

    “The bill itself is benign, if you read it. It’s benign,” she said. “But it has been weaponized by both sides, and that troubles me. That’s not how we run our chamber, that’s not how we pass our legislation, at least for me. And so, at this point, I don’t see that bill coming back.”

    During the Feb. 6 Community Affairs Committee meeting, bill sponsor Jonathan Martin, R-Fort Myers, argued that his proposal and intentions have been mischaracterized as racist when his goal is to protect “American monuments” he saw torn down in recent years.

    “The goal is to not remove monuments,” Martin said. “It has no effect on placing new monuments anywhere in the state.”

    Gov. Ron DeSantis has supported efforts to prevent removal of monuments. The bill does not mention the Confederacy, but it came amid disputes in places such as Jacksonville about removing monuments to the Confederacy. A House version (HB 395) cleared its initial committee last month.

    The flags bill, meanwhile, has drawn controversy as opponents contend it is designed, at least in part, to prevent display of LGBTQ pride flags. Under the bill, government agencies, public schools, colleges and universities would be prohibited from flying any flag that “represents a political viewpoint” including any “politically partisan, racial, sexual orientation and gender, or political ideology viewpoint.”

    The bill (SB 1120), also sponsored by Martin, stalled Feb. 6 in the Senate Governmental Oversight and Accountability Committee. Passidomo said the committee “ran out of time” and the meeting ended as Martin worked on the monuments bill in the Community Affairs Committee.

    Passidomo said Wednesday the Governmental Oversight and Accountability Committee will not meet again before the scheduled March 8 end of the legislative session.

    “Everybody knew that that was the last committee meeting,” she said. “So I’m not going to have another committee meeting for a bill, for any bill for that matter.”

    DeSantis also has supported the flags bill. A House version (HB 901) was approved by a subcommittee last month.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed

    Jim Saunders, News Service of Florida

    Source link

  • Florida bill making it illegal to hog the left lane clears committees

    Florida bill making it illegal to hog the left lane clears committees


    click to enlarge

    The Florida Senate and House could be poised to take up a proposed ban on drivers cruising in left lanes of highways.

    The Senate Rules Committee on Thursday approved the Senate version of the bill (SB 258), positioning it to go to the full Senate.

    The House version (HB 317) also has cleared committees and is ready for action by the full House.

    The bills would apply to drivers on highways with at least two lanes in the same direction and speed limits of 65 mph or higher. The bills would prevent drivers from using left lanes unless they are passing other motorists.

    Senate sponsor Keith Perry, R-Gainesville, said his goal is to prevent motorists from using right lanes to pass slower traffic in left lanes.

    “In 2023 alone, there were 4,027 violations as a direct violation of passing on the right,” Perry said.

    The bills would set fines up to $158.

    Subscribe to Orlando Weekly newsletters.

    Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed





    News Service of Florida

    Source link