Bill Delaney: Vote No on Amendment. 1, FL's Solar Sham
(http://i.imgur.com/9oTC0fk.png)
Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2016-oct-bill-delaney-vote-no-on-amendment-1-fls-solar-sham
Well done. This is a story that needs to be repeated and shared.
What is the procedure for putting for putting an Amendemnt up for vote? Legislature? Petitons, Either? What method was used in this case?
Well, I did start a parallel thread on this very same website. Glad to see some traction on this.
VOTE NO ON AMENDMENT ONE!!
Quote from: vicupstate on October 27, 2016, 07:53:21 AM
What is the procedure for putting for putting an Amendemnt up for vote? Legislature? Petitons, Either? What method was used in this case?
I believe it was petitions - to do that you need to get a number of signatures equivalent to 8% of the voters from the last election. The wording also gets vetted by the court, who somehow gave this one a pass.
What's sad about this is that Amendment 1 was polling at 66% (http://www.flchamber.com/new-florida-chamber-of-commerce-statewide-poll-shows-presidential-race-too-close-to-call-in-florida/) as of the last polls in September, and internal polls were evidently as high as 70% according to Sal Nuzzo. People really need to come out against this thing or we're going to be stuck with it.
another misleading amendment. The judges never should have approved the language on this one, but they seem to let anything pass these days. You might as well call and an amendment my dog has fleas, when it relates to gun control of something else totally unrelated.
Here's another statement from Sal Nuzzo:
On October 18, 2016, an audio tape containing a speech delivered by Sal Nuzzo, vice president of the Florida-based policy think tank called the James Madison Institute (JMI), at the October 2 State Energy/Environment Leadership Summit was leaked. Nuzzo discussed how the Amendment 1 support group, Consumers for Smart Solar, asked JMI to help prepare for the amendment campaign and indicated that the measure was designed to appeal to pro-solar voters while it's purpose was to "completely negate anything they (pro-solar interests) would try to do either legislatively or constitutionally down the road." He referred to the group's move of qualifying Amendment 1 for the ballot as a "savvy maneuver," saying that the group could use "political jiu-jitsu" to harness the popularity of solar in their favor. Nuzzo then described the initiative as an intelligent strategy to combine pro-solar language with consumer protections that could be used to block the efforts of solar advocates to provide incentives for solar expansion.
https://soundcloud.com/cmd-sourcewatch/an-incredibly-savvy-maneuver
In addition to voting No on Amendment 1, consider voting No on retaining the 3 supreme court justices on the ballot. All three approved this amendment's language.
However, if they are voted out, Rick Scott gets to appoint a replacement. That could be worse.
Quote from: Tacachale on October 27, 2016, 11:13:56 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on October 27, 2016, 07:53:21 AM
What is the procedure for putting for putting an Amendemnt up for vote? Legislature? Petitons, Either? What method was used in this case?
I believe it was petitions - to do that you need to get a number of signatures equivalent to 8% of the voters from the last election. The wording also gets vetted by the court, who somehow gave this one a pass.
What's sad about this is that Amendment 1 was polling at 66% (http://www.flchamber.com/new-florida-chamber-of-commerce-statewide-poll-shows-presidential-race-too-close-to-call-in-florida/) as of the last polls in September, and internal polls were evidently as high as 70% according to Sal Nuzzo. People really need to come out against this thing or we're going to be stuck with it.
I cannot find the reference but I believe yes votes on referendums or amendments wins more often than No regardless of the topic. People who are unfamiliar with a topic are more likely to vote yes than no...
The radio advertising is just as bad.
"Vote Amendment 1, vote for solar, vote to remove subsidies, take decisions away from politicians".
Talk about a total sandbag. Where is Elon Musk? I would think his companies would be all over this.
QuoteWhere is Elon Musk? I would think his companies would be all over this.]Where is Elon Musk? I would think his companies would be all over this.
SolarCity (Elon Musk's company) is busy in the 40+ states where their business model is not already illegal. Amendment 1 would make the laws that already make their business model illegal in Florida part of the state's constitution. Florida is not open for businesses like his.
The FT-U advised its readers to vote no on Amendement 1 yesterday:
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/2016-10-27/florida-constitution-no-place-have-debate-solar (http://jacksonville.com/opinion/2016-10-27/florida-constitution-no-place-have-debate-solar)
Whoever those judges are or whoever approved that language should be held to account! They are not doing their job.
The latest poll shows Amendment 1 at 59.8%, below the 60% threshold to pass. Sounds like the bad press and social media is taking effect. But it's still *very* close, so it's imperitive for people to get out there.
http://polls.saintleo.edu/proposed-florida-constitutional-amendment-on-solar-power-facing-a-changed-landscape-among-voters-new-saint-leo-poll-finds/