Florida’s Constitution is in the crosshairs.
A little more than two years ago, voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment that broadly legalized medical marijuana. In November, nearly two-thirds of Floridians signed off on an amendment to restore the right to vote to certain felons who’ve completed their sentences.
Backers of both proposals maintain that the constitutional changes don’t require action from the Legislature.
But Republican lawmakers are pushing a pot proposal and a voting-restoration measure that have sparked intense debate and, in one case, focused a national spotlight on Florida.
In the voting-rights skirmish, proponents of what appeared as Amendment 4 on the November ballot are likening House and Senate bills to Jim Crow-era policies designed to keep black voters from participating in elections.
State Rep. James Grant, the House bill sponsor, is accusing Amendment 4 backers of pulling a bait-and-switch on voters.
In an “I’m rubber, you’re glue” vein, both sides accuse each other of politicizing the issue.
Caught up in the clash are about 700,000 felons who --- depending on how legislators handle the issue --- might be able to vote in next year’s presidential election. Republicans and Democrats consider the Sunshine State critical for a White House victory.
Senate President Bill Galvano rejected arguments of critics who accuse Republican lawmakers of trying to use the legislation to protect President Donald Trump in 2020.
“I would say that they’re wrong. I would say that we’re trying our best to genuinely implement policy and enact policy … that meets the intent of the voters,” he said.
FORAY OVER FELONS’ FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS
Whether felons who’ve completed their time behind bars or on probation should have voting rights restored if they haven’t paid off all of their financial obligations has become a flashpoint as lawmakers grapple with carrying out Amendment 4.
Grant, a Tampa Republican who is a lawyer, has crafted a bill that’s shot him into the national spotlight, infuriated advocates of the amendment and spawned hundreds of phone calls and emails to legislators urging them to kill the proposal.
The constitutional amendment granted restoration of voting rights to felons “who have completed all terms of their sentence, including parole or probation.” It excluded people “convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense.”
Grant’s definition of what it means to have completed sentences has created the firestorm.
Under the House proposal (HB 7089), felons would have to pay all court fees, fines and restitution to be eligible for the automatic vote restoration.
The House proposal defines “term of sentence” as including “any cost of supervision or other monetary obligation,” a sticking point for proponents of the amendment.
“If it is in the four corners of the sentence, it is the sentence,” Grant told the House State Affairs Committee prior to a party-line, 15-6 vote Thursday on the bill.
The House measure would also require full payment of restitution or other financial obligations that have been converted to civil judgments, another point of contention for proponents of the amendment.
Cecile Scoon, a lawyer and an officer with the League of Women Voters of Florida, argued that the House measure would also allow state agencies, such as the Department of Corrections, to levy fines against felons, which they would have to pay to be eligible for the automatic vote restoration. That’s not what voters who supported the amendment envisioned, she said.
“This is why people are offended. This is redefining what is Amendment 4 and going well outside what was said when the people voted,” Scoon said.
Lance Wissinger, a convicted felon, said the House plan creates two classes of felons.
“What we are doing right now with the bill seems like it is targeting a certain demographic. It seems like it is going after people with low income, and it’s not giving everyone the opportunity to have their ability to vote back,” Wissinger said.
PATIENTS NOT SO HIGH ON HOUSE POT PLAN
Veterans, parents and medical cannabis operators are pushing back against a House plan that would limit how high Floridians can get when they smoke medical marijuana, saying proposed THC levels would drive patients to the black market.
The House plan would cap THC levels in smokable medical marijuana at 10 percent, a level the sponsor of the legislation maintains is based on science, but which patients and advocates contend is too low. Tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, is the intoxicating ingredient in marijuana that produces a euphoric effect.
The House Health & Human Services Committee on Wednesday approved the measure (PCB HHS 19-02), with Chairman Ray Rodrigues saying the cap is grounded in studies that found high levels of the euphoria-inducing cannabinoid were not effective in treating pain. Other studies linked smoking high-THC marijuana with psychosis, Rodrigues said.
“We believe that there’s science that shows greater than 10 percent THC has been linked to harmful effects, so that’s why we’ve chosen the 10 percent limit. There’s also science out there that has shown that less than 10 percent is effective for medical purposes, and so we have used that as the delineation,” Rodrigues, R-Estero, said.
The committee vote came about three weeks after lawmakers --- many of them, like Rodrigues, reluctantly --- succumbed to pressure from Gov. Ron DeSantis and overwhelmingly voted to repeal the state’s ban on smokable medical marijuana.
The bill also includes a provision that would allow veterans to get free medical-marijuana patient identification cards, which currently cost patients and caregivers $75 each year.
Waiving the fee for vets, however, drew the wrath of some patients who accused Rodrigues of using veterans as “scapegoats” for the controversial THC levels included in the bill.
“This is going to harm us,” Tanya Bailey, a veteran with the group “Vets for Buds,” told the panel.
“We need our medicine. We don’t know what to do,” Bailey said. “I have to oppose any amendment that’s going to ride on our backs to lower to 10 percent.”
ALL ABOUT THE BENJAMINS
Both legislative chambers this week passed versions of a state spending plan, with the House’s $89.9 billion budget about $400 million shy of the Senate’s version, which falls about $1 billion short of what DeSantis proposed.
The variance might seem relatively small, but it incorporates myriad differences that House and Senate leaders will have to resolve if the legislative session is going to end on time May 3.
The biggest schisms include education, health care and the state’s tourism agency, Visit Florida.
When asked by a reporter Thursday about the biggest challenge going into negotiations, House Speaker Jose Oliva, R-Miami Lakes, replied with a laugh that “the Legislature is made up of people.”
“The biggest issue is that we’re dealing with people, so people have different priorities about different things and different concerns,” Oliva said. “This is a process of building coalitions. You have to bring people together to come to a general agreement and hopefully to get most of what everyone wants, but it’s impossible to get everything that everyone wants.”
STORY OF THE WEEK: The House and Senate passed their versions of a state spending plan, coming in about $400 million apart.
QUOTE OF THE WEEK: “If you go to Panama City, which I did this past weekend, it looks more like a neighborhood in Panama City, Panama, than it looks like Panama City, Florida.” Sen. Doug Broxson, R-Gulf Breeze, referring to the Panhandle community ravaged last year by Hurricane Michael.
