Attorney General Pam Bondi sent the Legislature’s redistricting plans to the Florida Supreme Court on Friday — a move that will start justices’ review of the maps.

Under state law, Bondi had 15 days to act. But she sent the proposals to the court about 24 hours after they earned final approval from the state Senate.

Justices will have 30 days to examine the plans.  The court is asked to determine if the plans for redrawing the state’s 40 Senate districts and 120 House seats complies with state law, including new constitutional standards requiring that boundaries be drawn without concern for incumbents or either political party.

The Florida Democratic Party has already filed suit in Leon County Circuit Court against the congressional map, also approved Thursday.

Gov. Rick Scott is expected to sign the plan into law next week. Scott’s action is expected to bring another lawsuit by the League of Women Voters, La Raza and Common Cause of Florida, which contend the Legislature’s ruling Republicans designed the plan to help the party maintain its majority in the congressional delegation.

Gov. Rick Scott acknowledged Tuesday that he’s been lobbied by Florida members of Congress on the redistricting plan expected to be sent his way soon.

But the Republican governor didn’t want to mention any names.

“Oh, I don’t think anybody wants me to talk about any of those conversations,” Scott said, when asked if U.S. Rep. Allen West, R-Plantation, was among those contacting him.

West last week announced that he would leave his battleground congressional district, straddling Palm Beach and Broward counties, to run this year in a proposed new district, which includes Martin and St. Lucie counties, and part of Palm Beach.

West’s decision emerged as part of a GOP three-step dance – touched off by U.S. Rep. Tom Rooney, R-Tequesta, who said he’d run in a newly drawn, mostly rural and interior Florida district.

Former House majority leader Adam Hasner of Boca Raton completed the moves by announcing he was abandoning his U.S. Senate run to run in the district that West was exiting.

House and Senate redistricting leaders say they have kept their distance from members of Congress, mostly in an effort to comply with constitutional amendments approved by voters in 2010, which ban new electoral boundaries from favoring incumbents or parties.

Scott, though, said at least some in Florida’s delegation have reached out directly to the executive office. While Scott isn’ authorized to act on legislative maps, he can veto the congressional plan.

“I’ll review it when I get it,” Scott said of the congressional proposal. “I’ve had a few phone calls from some people that have had questions about it. My response is, ‘send me what your proposal is, and I’ll review it at the time.’

Senate Reapportionment Chairman Don Gaetz, R-Niceville, said Scott’s contacts with unnamed members of Congress doesn’t strike him as out of line — or unconstitutional.

“Any citizen is entitled to petition their government for the redress of grievances,” Gaetz said.

Senate Democratic Leader Nan Rich said Friday that she will not propose alternative maps next week when the Republican-controlled chamber is expected to approve new boundaries for congressional and Senate districts.

Rich said outnumbered Democrats will take their chances that judges — who get to review the redistricting plans — will find the GOP-led effort unconstitutional.

“The court will have the last word,” Rich said.

Earlier this week, Rich said she planned to introduce a Senate Democratic plan modeled heavily on proposals already unveiled by the League of Women Voters, Democracia USA and Common Cause, which slightly reduce the minority voting populations in several districts now represented by black lawmakers.

Rich accused Republicans of “packing” Democrats into districts under the plans now before the Senate. She said the approach violates the voter-approved Amendments 5 and 6, measures, supported by most Democratic legislators and allied groups. The amendments bar district lines from being drawn that help a party or incumbents.

But Rich’s plan to unveil a map as a floor amendment was criticized by Republican senators, who said the move didn’t allow time for the revamped plan to be reviewed. More telling, though, may have been that Rich drew resistence from a few fellow Democrats — with Sen. Larcenia Bullard, D-Miami, critical of any effort that would reduce minority voting strength.

In explaining her decision to drop plans to propose maps, Rich said Friday that in debate before the Senate Reapportionment Committee earlier this week, ”there was so much vitriol, I didn’t want to see that happen on the Senate floor.”  

A measure doing away with a century-old prohibition on using state funds for religious purposes is back on the November 2012 ballot, for now, after Attorney General Pam Bondi rewrote the proposal using a Tallahassee judge’s guidance.

Circuit Judge Terry Lewis last week tossed the proposed “Religious Freedom” constitutional amendment, placed on next year’s November ballot by lawmakers, saying it was misleading because it left the impression that it would “make it a lot harder for the state to deny funding or program benefits to a sectarian institution.”

Under a new election law signed by Gov. Rick Scott this spring, Bondi had 10 days to rewrite the ballot summary. She crafted the revised measure as Lewis suggested in his Dec. 13 ruling by deleting the phrase “consistent with the United States Constitution” and inserting “except as required by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

Critics say the amendment makes it easier for the GOP-dominated legislature and executive branch to steer taxpayer money to religious entities, including schools. The amendment’s ballot summary would change Florida’s constitution to ensure that “no individual or entity may be denied, on the basis of religious identity or belief, governmental benefits, funding, or other support.” At least 60 percent of voters must approve the measure for it to pass.

The plaintiffs in the case, including religious leaders and the Florida teachers’ union, also tried but failed to get Lewis to strike down the law allowing the attorney general to revise the summary if a court strikes it down as misleading. Bondi’s rewrite Tuesday is the first time the new law giving her that ability has been used.

A Leon County judge Wednesday removed from the November ballot a proposed amendment that would have let state money flow to religious institutions, lifting a prohibition in place since 1885.

But Circuit Judge Terry Lewis’ decision won’t be the last word. Under a new law approved last spring, Attorney General Pam Bondi know gets 10 days to rewrite the ballot proposal — meaning it is still likely to go before voters in November.

The state’s largest teachers union as well as several religious clergy had urged that Lewis not only remove the proposed amendment, arguing that the ballot title and summary language of Amendment 7 will mislead voters, but also erase the new attorney general’s provision as unconstitutional.

Lewis agreed with opponents’ amendment argument. But he let the rewrite by the executive branch stand. But the teachers’ union was quick to declare victory.

“Amendment 7 would have required taxpayers to fund a broad array of religious programs and institutions,” said Andy Ford, president of the Florida Education Association. “The judge agreed that taxpayers and voters need to be told the truth and that the purpose and effect of the amendment was not clear in the ballot summary and was misleading to voters.”

Rep. Scott Plakon, R-Longwood, was among the sponsors of the measure (CS/HJR 1471), approved mostly along party lines in the Republican-controlled Legislature.

Plakon and other supporters said the measure was designed merely to remove discriminatory language from the state’s Constitution, which they say is rooted in 19th Century anti-Catholic fervor. Florida is among more than 35 states with such so-called Blaine amendments, named for a former Maine congressman who proposed such a restriction in the U.S. Constitution.

Despite the prohibition, the Legislature already directs millions of public dollars each year to religious-affiliated organizations in Florida to serve foster children, prison inmates, and low-income and elderly Floridians.

The Florida Supreme Court has never embraced a hard-line interpretation of the Blaine prohibition. Instead, earlier rulings allowed such spending if it promotes the general welfare, as opposed to advancing religious doctrine.

Maintaining the current number of districts electing black and Hispanic lawmakers to the House, Senate and Congress from Florida was named the top priority Tuesday of the Senate’s Reapportionment Committee, a potentially powerful political and legal stance which could blunt Democratic efforts to regain seats.

Backing a motion by Sen. John Thrasher, R-St. Augustine, a former Florida Republican Party chairman, the GOP-dominated panel agreed to set priorities, or “tiers” as some lawmakers described, as they begin redrawing the state’s political boundaries.

The once-a-decade process has become complicated after voters last fall approved a pair of constitutional amendments which require that lawmakers not work to protect incumbents or party influence when drawing the lines.

Safeguarding seats that have elected black or Hispanic lawmakers, however, has become another story.

The federal Voting Rights Act requires that lawmakers not take steps that could prevent minorities from electing a candidate of their choice. The Reapportionment Committee interpreted that provision Tuesday as urging they start map-drawing by reinstating districts currently held by minority lawmakers.

“Racial protection is clearly paramount,” Thrasher told the committee.

On the tiers outlined by the panel, creation of districts that are compact or respect geographic boudaries — such as city or county lines — are lesser priorities, although they were central parts of the voter-approved amendments.

“Compactness will probably be decided by the courts, because we have no standard definition,” said Committee Chairman Don Gaetz, R-Niceville.

Indeed, there are few definitions guiding redistricting — only past court opinions, beginning with those stemming from the U.S. Supreme Court. But Tuesday’s determination by the committee could prove an influential milepost as lawmakers engage in line-drawing, which is expected to dominate next spring’s legislative session.

The campaign resulting in voter approval of Amendments 5 and 6 last fall was financed by Democratic-leaning organizations, individuals and unions. The new standards are aimed at discouraging the formation of multi-county districts, including those with voting populations roughly 50 percent black, who usually vote Democratic.

Ruling Republicans have helped their own numbers with these minority-access districts, since concentrating Democratic voters often allows the GOP to  win neighboring districts. With the committee agreeing to use current minority districts as the starting-off point for map-building, Republican dominance could endure — even with Democrats holding a 600,000 statewide voter edge.

Democrats on the committee offered little resistence Tuesday. Only Rep. Oscar Braynon, D-Miami Gardens, challenged the committee’s theme, pointing out that voters in Jacksonville recently elected a black mayor, Alvin Brown, who had support from all corners of the community.

Braynon said voting performance — not just the raw numbers of voting population — is what the committee should consider.

The state House plans to join a pair of Florida members of Congress in appealing a federal judge’s ruling that upheld a new, voter-approved standard for lawmakers when they draw congressional and legislative boundaries next year, House Speaker Dean Cannon said Thursday.

The move extends a battle between the Republican-ruled Legislature and the Democratic-allied Fair Districts campaign, which spearheaded the effort leading to voter approval of Florida constitutional amendments 5 and 6 last fall. Cannon, R-Winter Park,  and U.S. Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Miami, and Corrine Brown, D-Jacksonville, argue that Amendment 6 violates the U.S. Constitution by attempting to make state law apply to a federal matter.

U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro rejected the lawsuit earlier this month. But Cannon said Thursday that Ungaro is wrong.

 He drew on a federal court’s two-decade old ruling that in Florida, voter-approved term limits could not apply to members of Congress, in making the case for appeal.

“The federal court said, ‘no it doesn’t apply to congressional seats because Article 1, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution says only Congress and the federal constitution can prescribe limits like that,” Cannon said. “And we think the exact same argument applies here.”

The Legislature must draw new districts in time for the 2012 elections to reflect 2010 census data. The process in Florida and other states has historically been dominated by partisanship and political considerations. But Amendments 5 and 6 state that districts cannot be drawn to favor incumbents or political parties and must be compact and adhere to existing city, county and geographical boundaries “where feasible.”

The amendment also states that districts must not deny minorities the opportunity to elect candidates of their choice.

Fair Districts and its supporters have called on Cannon to end the legal attack on the amendment — approved by 63 percent of voters. But Cannon said the thousands of dollars in taxpayer money spent challenging the measure is needed.

“This lawsuit is not about any specific map, or even this specific year,” Cannon said. “It’s about defining the responsibility of our state Legislature under the federal constitution.”

But Dan Gelber, a former Democratic legislator who now represents Fair Districts, said “it is offensive to spend taxpayer money to fight your own constituents.” He noted that Florida taxpayers are paying for legal costs on both sides — for the Secretary of State to defend the new state standards, and for the House seeking to overturn it.

“It shows are desperate the Republican-ruled Legislature is to retain their ability to draw district lines the way they want,” Gelber said.

Cannon, though, assured that lawmakers will abide by the Amendment 5 and 6 standards when they begin line-drawing as early as next month. Cannon acknowledged that it could prove months before a ruling emerges from 11th U.S. District Court of Appeals.

After months of promising action, the state’s largest teachers’ union looks ready to bring Gov. Rick Scott and the Republican-ruled Legislature to court in an attempt to overturn a measure that creates a new merit pay standard and ends teacher tenure.

The legislation (CS/SB 736) was the first bill signed into law this spring by Scott. But it also marked was the culmination of a increasingly bitter clash between Florida Republicans and the Democratic-allied Florida Education Association, a struggle whose roots are deep.

FEA President Andy Ford and other leaders of the teachers’ group plan to outline the lawsuit they plan to file during a news conference and media call tomorrow.

The merit pay legislation requires that 50 percent of a teacher’s evaluation be based on student achievement on tests — including the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) and other standardized exams, most of which must still be developed by state and local educators.

Under the bill, current teachers would retain existing pay schedules and contracts — even those spanning multi-years. They could lose their jobs, though, if they drew two subpar annual evaluations within three years.

Teachers hired after July 1, however, are limited to one-year contracts and would draw raises only if rated “effective” or “highly effective.”

Former Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed a similar bill last year. But during last fall’s governor’s race, Scott made ending teacher tenure and enacting merit pay a central portion of his campaign, with the FEA throwing in heavily behind Democrat Alex Sink.

The FEA is already squared off against the Legislature, having earlier this summer sued to overturn a proposed constitutional amendment put on next year’s ballot to lift the state’s more than century-old prohibition on tax dollars flowing to religious institutions.

Supporters of the so-called Fair Districts amendments guiding redistricting want the Legislature to meet a strict, early deadline next year for redrawing congressional and legislative boundaries.

The Legislature convenes early next year — Jan. 10 — to begin redistricting work. And Fair Districts wants lawmakers to move fast — with a demand that a vote on final plans for the new district maps to be set for Jan. 13.

“While the redistricting committees are traveling the state to get input on what maps should look like, the Florida League of Women Voters, Democracia U.S.A., and other backers of the Fair Districts standards wrote lawmakers Wednesday seeking faster action on the final plans — to give them time for more “public input,” presumably in court.

“We need to…ensure there will be no chaos and confusion for candidates and voters,” said Deidre Macnab, president of the Florida League of Women Voters. “We call upon (legislators) to adotp a timeline that makes sense for the people of Florida.”

The Fair Districts’ Amendments 5 and 6 require that district lines be contiguous and compact, shaped largely by city, county and geographic boundaries. The amendments, pushed by Democratic­-allied organizations, were aimed at blunting ruling Republicans’ ability to draw wide-ranging districts to help incumbents or the party’s candidates.

The legislature’s redistricting public hearings will renew Aug. 15, from 6 to 9 p.m., at Stuart’s Blake Library. The next day, lawmakers are scheduled to hear from voters at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. It’s the lone meeting planned for Palm Beach County.

Federal officials have signed off on the bulk of Florida’s elections overhaul but the most controversial portions remain in limbo.

The U.S. Department of Justice approved 76 measures included in the new law passed by the GOP-dominated legislature this spring and signed into law by Gov. Rick Scott.

But last month, Secretary of State Kurt Browning sidestepped President Obama’s administration and instead asked a federal court to approve the most controversial components of the new law.

“I am appreciative of the work the DOJ has done to approve Florida’s new election laws,” Browning said in statement today. “Their decision confirms what we already know, that Florida’s new election laws are fair and not discriminatory. I expect the federal district court will also agree that the new laws are fair when it reviews the remaining provisions.”

Five counties in Florida – Collier, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Hillsborough and Monroe – require federal “preclearance” before new election laws can go into effect to make sure the changes do are not discriminatory.

The ACLU and other groups are currently challenging the new law in federal court in Miami, saying it is designed to make registering to vote and casting ballots more difficult for minorities and low-income voters who typically vote Democratic. Scott, who re-appointed Browning, asked the judge in that case to remove him from the lawsuit. Jesse Jackson held rallies in Florida late last month protesting the new law.

The portions of the new law still awaiting approval from the federal three judge panel deal with third party voter registrations, changes of address, early voting hours and petition signature verification. Browning said he expects a court ruling before next year’s presidential primary.

Read more about the four provisions still hanging after the jump.
(more…)

Democratic Rep. Scott Randolph got his answer — sort of — from House Speaker Dean Cannon about how much the Republican-ruled chamber is spending in the challenge to Amendment 6, the voter-approved standard for congressional redistricting.

Randolph, an Orlando lawmaker, wrote Cannon last month, seeking information on how much was being spent on legal fees in the Amendment 6 case.

 But he was told Thursday by House attorney George Levesque that he couldn’t provide the public records the lawmaker was seeking because they might “undermine the significant interests of the House” in the legal matter.

But Levesque did say in his response that the House has spent about $114,000 in its role as an “intervenor” in the lawsuit brought by U.S. Reps. Corrine Brown, a Democrat, and Mario Diaz-Balart, a Republican, which looks to block the measure from being applied to next year’s redrawing of congressional district boundaries.

“Once the litigation surrounding redistricting and reapportionment is concluded, the detailed billing of the legal services provided to the House will be released, as required by law,” Levesque said.

All told, that means likely means sometime in 2012.

Gov. Rick Scott plans to showcase new restrictions on abortion approved this spring by the Legislature, huddling Saturday at the Governor’s Mansion with representatives of the Florida Catholic Conference, Florida Baptist Convention and Florida Family Policy Council.

Scott’s already signed the measures into law. But Saturday’s event is aimed at touting what those opposed to abortion rights say was a milestone year.

“I think it’s a great idea,” said John Stemberger, president of the Family Policy Council, who plans to attend Saturday’s ceremonial bill signings. “Over the past 15 years, we’ve taken small steps, passing different pieces of legislation. But to have five major reforms pass as we did this year, I’d say that’s pretty big.”

The legislation divided lawmakers, with most Democrats opposing the measures. Among the most disputed was, legislation requiring a woman seeking an abortion to undergo ultrasound and be given a chance to view the results.

The sweep of abortion legislation prompted Rep. Scott Randolph, D-Orlando, to quip at one point during session that since ruling Republicans were so opposed to government regulation for business, his wife should “incorporate her uterus” to be left alone.

Randolph was admonished by House Speaker Dean Cannon, R-Winter Park, for the remark, that later drew nationwide attention. 

 During the session, parental notice requirements were toughened for minors seeking abortions, while another measure barred insurance companies from covering abortions under the new federal health care overhaul. Changes also were approved that allow dollars from Choose Life license tags to be distributed statewide to Choose Life, Inc., which counsels against abortion.

A proposed constitutional amendment for the 2012 ballot bans public tax dollars from going to abortions — mirroring an already existing federal ban. But the measure also would exempt abortion from Florida’s strong constitutional privacy provision — a standard that has scuttled previous legislative attempts at abortion restrictions.

 Stemberger said he wasn’t sure if Scott would use Saturday’s event to call for more action by next year’s Legislature. Among the measures that failed to advance this year were those similar to a law approved by Nebraska in 2010 which restricted abortions after 20 weeks because opponents maintain a fetus can feel pain at that point.

A Central Florida Democrat wants House Speaker Dean Cannon to show how much the chamber is spending as an “intervenor” in the lawsuit filed by a pair of Florida members of Congress seeking to overturn the voter-approved Amendment 6.

Rep. Scott Randolph, D-Orlando, wrote Cannon, R-Winter Park, on Thursday.

“It is apparent that the Florida House—and thereby, the Florida taxpayers—are the ones shouldering the cost of this litigation,” Randolph wrote.  “As a member of the Florida House and a caretaker of Florida’s tax dollars, I find it imperative to be able to tell my constituents how their tax dollars are being used in this litigation.”

The Legislature reported spending $712,287 through June on legal expenses related to redistricting. But the total doesn’t itemize what has been spent on the Amendment 6 challenge, brought by U.S. Reps. Corrine Brown, D-Jacksonville, and Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Miami, who are seeking to have the measure thrown out as unconstitutional by a federal court.

A hearing scheduled for Friday in the matter has been postponed until Sept. 9 before U.S. District  Judge Ursula Ungaro in Miami.

Amendments 5 and 6, which will guide the redrawing of district boundaries for House, Senate and congressional districts, were approved by 63 percent of Florida voters last fall, after a campaign led primarily by Democratic-allied organizations.

Randolph, and most legislative Democrats, have been angered by Cannon’s decision to seek intervention in the challenge to Amendment 6. But the speaker has insisted the move was merely “due diligence” by the chamber, which will be charged with drawing district lines beginning in January.

The state’s largest teachers’ union filed a lawsuit Wednesday to strip from next year’s ballot a measure allowing state money to go to religious institutions, a proposal they warned would open the door to more private-school vouchers.

Joining the Florida Education Association in challenging the proposed Amendment 7 are a half-dozen religious clergy and the current chairman of the Florida School Boards Association.

“Those of us who work to make public schools a priority know this is designed to open the door to vouchers,” said Andy Ford, FEA president.

A lawyer for the association, Ron Meyer, also condemned state lawmakers for crafting a ballot measure that misleads voters. “Instead of trying to hide the ball and playing word games, they should tell people they will empower religious organizations to extract tax dollars,” Meyer said.

The proposed constitutional amendment would effectively lift a century-old provision, dubbed the “Blaine Amendment,” which prohibits tax dollars from directly or indirectly going to religious organizations.

Millions of state dollars are budgeted each year for programs serving foster children, inmates, and low-income and elderly Floridians that are run by religious-affiliated organizations. Supporters of the amendment say they are merely looking to clarify state law, to avoid putting these services at risk.

Florida’s Blaine amendment first gained prominence during the 2006 challenge to the state’s private school voucher program. The First District Court of Appeal ruled that then-Gov. Jeb Bush’s first-in-the-nation statewide program violated the no-aid provision.

But by the time the case got to the Florida Supreme Court, justices instead ruled vouchers unconstitutional because they violated another constitutional standard –one requiring that the sttte provide a “uniform system of public schools.”

The Blaine amendment came back into prominence in 2007, when the Council for Secular Humanism, a New York nonprofit which advocates a “non-religious lifestance,” sued the state’s Department of Corrections over substance abuse housing programs provided by a pair of faith-based organizations.

Supporters of the Fair Districts constitutional amendments guiding redistricting blasted Florida legislative leaders Tuesday for what some called a ”charade” of more than two-dozen public hearings scheduled to begin next week.

Former Sen. Dan Gelber, a Miami Beach Democrat and lawyer now representing Fair Districts, was joined by the Florida NAACP, the state’s League of Women Voters, and Democracia, an Hispanic voters’ organization, in denouncing the Legislature’s slow-developing time frame to redraw political boundaries for state House, Senate and congressional districts.

Twenty-six public hearings are scheduled through the summer, including an Aug. 16 session at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton. But the discussions are not intended to focus on line-drawing.

Instead, the Legislature won’t begin drawing maps in earnest until January. With legal challenges, Gelber and others said it was likely Floridians and candidates won’t know their districts until close to the beginning on candidate qualifying in June.

“That these are transparent hearings, that’s just a sham,” said Deirdre Macnab of the League of Women Voters.

The organizations have written House Speaker Dean Cannon, Senate President Mike Haridopolos, and House and Senate redistricting chairs criticizing the schedule and urging that they drop what critics call a gag order in which the letter said lawmakers have been warned they “should not make public statements about redistricting lest they betray intent to engage in political favoritism.”

The organizations also called on U.S. Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart, a Miami Republican, and Corrine Brown, a Jacksonville Democrat, to drop their lawsuit challenging the Fair Districts amendments, approved by voters last fall. The measures prohibit lawmakers from drawing district boundaries to help one party or individual incumbents.

Taxpayers are picking up the legal tab for both sides in the lawsuit, which is scheduled for oral arguments in Miami federal court in July.

“It’s time we stop spending taxpayer funds to defeat the purpose of the voters,” said Leon Russell of the NAACP.

UPDATE: Sen. Mike Haridopolos, R-Merritt Island, responded to the Fair Districts criticism, saying all Floridians’ “viewpoints are heard,” in the process. He also urged critics to draw their own versions of the maps, a challenge Haridopolos earlier issued.