Does anyone know who writes the language used on ballots?
No. 1 Declaration of Rights: Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to delete provisions authorizing the Legislature to regulate or prohibit the ownership, inheritance, disposition of real property by aliens ineligible for citizenship. If I vote "yes" does that mean I approve proposing the amendment?
No. 2 is worded very differently. Florida Marriage Protection Amendment: This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that on other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized. Then it adds (and this part made me wonder) The direct financial impact this amendment will have on state and local government revenues and expenditures cannot be determined, but is expected to be minor.
When I read it my thought was "someone wants a yes vote on this one - just by the way it's worded. Also, it's the only one that talks about "direct financial impact" on the state and local governments.

I'm not looking for an argument here, just enlightenment. In the last election I thought people may have been influenced to vote for an amendment to decrease their taxes not thinking about the impact it would have on fire and police protection as well as education. At the time I thought the wording was slanted to produce a yes vote. Who doesn't want to pay less in taxes?
I'm just wondering who writes these.

Originally Posted by cmj

Does anyone know who writes the language used on ballots?
No. 1 Declaration of Rights: Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to delete provisions authorizing the Legislature to regulate or prohibit the ownership, inheritance, disposition of real property by aliens ineligible for citizenship. If I vote "yes" does that mean I approve proposing the amendment?
No. 2 is worded very differently. Florida Marriage Protection Amendment: This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that on other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized. Then it adds (and this part made me wonder) The direct financial impact this amendment will have on state and local government revenues and expenditures cannot be determined, but is expected to be minor.
When I read it my thought was "someone wants a yes vote on this one - just by the way it's worded. Also, it's the only one that talks about "direct financial impact" on the state and local governments.

I'm not looking for an argument here, just enlightenment. In the last election I thought people may have been influenced to vote for an amendment to decrease their taxes not thinking about the impact it would have on fire and police protection as well as education. At the time I thought the wording was slanted to produce a yes vote. Who doesn't want to pay less in taxes?
I'm just wondering who writes these.

In general I am usually against anything that wants to amend the state or federal constitution....especially the federal.

My experience is only in Colorado...here they word things backwards, for some reason they now they like to hire firefighters as spokespeople. So what I do is try to go to their websites to check it out. Then usually just before the election the papers will have a section devoted to the ballot measures.

I check out the local paper, very conservative, and then the Independent paper, very liberal to try and make up my mind. I never listen to the ads.

There is another thread here about the marriage measure.

Quick research.....

Florida already has a same sex marriage ban but now they want to amend the state constitution. In the past few years this issue has been used as a wedge or values issue to try and get out the base.

Some companies, and mine is one, offer healthcare benefits to unmarried partners...however this does come with a price. The company employee has to pay taxes on that benefit both at the Federal and State level.

Here are some links regarding the issue.

http://www.fairnessforallfamilies.org/

http://www.sptimes.com/2008/02/02/St...on_ballo.shtml

http://floridamarriageamendment.org/

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/loc...,2718291.story

http://www.yes2marriage.org/

Originally Posted by cmj

Does anyone know who writes the language used on ballots?
No. 1 Declaration of Rights: Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to delete provisions authorizing the Legislature to regulate or prohibit the ownership, inheritance, disposition of real property by aliens ineligible for citizenship. If I vote "yes" does that mean I approve proposing the amendment?
No. 2 is worded very differently. Florida Marriage Protection Amendment: This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that on other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized. Then it adds (and this part made me wonder) The direct financial impact this amendment will have on state and local government revenues and expenditures cannot be determined, but is expected to be minor.
When I read it my thought was "someone wants a yes vote on this one - just by the way it's worded. Also, it's the only one that talks about "direct financial impact" on the state and local governments.

I'm not looking for an argument here, just enlightenment. In the last election I thought people may have been influenced to vote for an amendment to decrease their taxes not thinking about the impact it would have on fire and police protection as well as education. At the time I thought the wording was slanted to produce a yes vote. Who doesn't want to pay less in taxes?
I'm just wondering who writes these.

A YES on Amendment 1 effectively repeals the Alien Land Act of 1926 which was a very discriminatory land-ownership ban. FL is one of the last states to continue such a ban on the books.

A YES vote on Amendment 2 defines marriage as a union solely between a man and a woman, and provides the legal foundation for subsequent clarifications by legislation or regulation on same-sex unions in regards to employee benefits, intestacy or whatever else is a concern.

There has already been threads on both these issues on this board.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

A YES on Amendment 1 effectively repeals the Alien Land Act of 1926 which was a very discriminatory land-ownership ban. FL is one of the last states to continue such a ban on the books.

A YES vote on Amendment 2 defines marriage as a union solely between a man and a woman, and provides the legal foundation for subsequent clarifications by legislation or regulation on same-sex unions in regards to employee benefits, intestacy or whatever else is a concern.

There has already been threads on both these issues on this board.

Actually I think you are incorrect about Amendment 2. It does define marriage as between a man and a women however it also says that no other
type of legal union would be valid or recognized.

As I read it Civil Unions would not be recognized in Florida.

Here is the amendment..


"In as much as a marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized

Originally Posted by cologal

Actually I think you are incorrect about Amendment 2. It does define marriage as between a man and a women however it also says that no other
type of legal union would be valid or recognized.

As I read it Civil Unions would not be recognized in Florida.

Here is the amendment..


"In as much as a marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized

There was considerable discussion on this amendment earlier on this board. All of the points, including the ones I made above, are in there and why. The string was "FLORIDA Vote NO on #2!! Gay or Straight"

Thank you for the posts, but my original question remains... who writes the words/authors the actual words that appear on the ballot itself? Someone had to sit and type the question/proposal as it appears on the actual ballot. Who does it?

I've read the related threads and know how I feel about each amendment. I guess I didn't express myself clearly.

Originally Posted by cmj

Thank you for the posts, but my original question remains... who writes the words/authors the actual words that appear on the ballot itself? Someone had to sit and type the question/proposal as it appears on the actual ballot. Who does it?

I've read the related threads and know how I feel about each amendment. I guess I didn't express myself clearly.

Whoever was the proponent of the Amendment. That may sound abrupt, but before an amendment can appear on the ballot there had to have been a petition. The language contained in the petition is what must be used for the amendment, and that language normally (or should have) been reviewed by counsel for the proponent, and that counsel (hopefully) is well versed in state constitutional law.

...if I'm recalling correctly, the sponsor of a ballot proposition has the right to "auhor" the language. I believe that an election commission, or some such body, has the authority to review the language of propositions, but unless the proposed wording is clearly confusing to the voter, changes are typically not ordered.

Thanks. That's what I wanted to know. I realize you can formulate a question to elicit the response you desire. (Kids get back tests all the time and say a question was "unfair" and parents call to protest.) I thought the wording of the two I mentioned was interesting. Again, thank you.