Vote No on Amendments 7 and 9!

[Synnical]

http://www.noon7and9.org/

7 and 9 Explained
Amendment 7: Repealing the No-Aid Provision

Amendment 7, deceptively titled "Religious Freedom," would eliminate the Florida Constitution's no-aid provision (also known as the Blaine Amendment), which prevents public funds from being used "directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution." The proposed amendment would also add language to the Florida Constitution mandating that the state could not bar an organization from participating in a public program because of religion. This would create a state equivalent of the federal Faith-Based Initiative, allowing taxpayer dollars to fund religious groups that could discriminate on the basis of religion and sexual orientation.

Floridians have long understood the importance of keeping the state from using public tax dollars to aid religious groups and institutions. The current provision was incorporated in the state constitution in 1885 and was reenacted in 1968. And, Florida is not alone in recognizing the need for no-aid provisions. Thirty-seven other states have similar provisions in their constitutions. Indeed, Thomas Jefferson wrote the first no-aid provision that became part of Virginia's Constitution in 1786. Our founding fathers recognized that religious freedom - both the freedom to worship, or not, and prohibiting the state's involvement in religion - is a central tenet of a true democracy.

Today, Florida has vibrant religious communities, not in spite of these constitutional provisions, but because of them. In November, Floridians will have an opportunity to affirm their commitment to religious liberty by rejecting Initiative No. 7. The no-aid provision in the Florida Constitution has served Florida well for over a century and is not needed to allow partnerships between faith-based institutions and the government.
Amendment 9: Vouchers and the Sham "65% Solution"

Amendment 9 would overturn the 2006 decision in Bush v. Holmes, in which the Florida Supreme Court held that giving vouchers to students to attend private and religious schools violated the state constitution. The court concluded that the "uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools" clause in the constitution requires that public schools are the exclusive means of fulfilling the state's duty to provide education.

Amendment 9 would change how the state can fulfill its duty to provide education, allowing it to "be fulfilled, at a minimum and not exclusively" through public schools. This would allow tax dollars to be diverted from public schools and funneled through vouchers to private and religious schools.

This voucher provision is tied to a provision that would require schools to spend 65% of their funds on "classroom instruction." The 65% "solution" put forth by the TBRC is a sham because nearly all school districts in Florida already spend 65% or more of school funding on instruction. Nonetheless, voters will be required to accept or reject both provisions rather than voting on them separately.

[Synnical]

1. Justices Quash Voucher, Tax Swap Amendments

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/sep/03/032025/justices-quash-voucher-tax-swap-amendments/news-politics/

TALLAHASSEE - Florida's November ballot will be shorter by three proposals - one that would have traded a huge property tax cut for other tax increases and two others designed to expand school voucher programs.

The Florida Supreme Court unanimously removed them Wednesday. The seven justices did not immediately explain their decisions, but during oral argument earlier in the day, they fired tough questions at lawyers who supported the proposed amendments to the state constitution.

The state Taxation and Budget Reform Commission, which meets once every 20 years, had offered the proposals. The justices ruled quickly because Friday is the deadline for finalizing the Nov. 4 ballot. Six other proposed amendments have not been challenged.

The high court affirmed Circuit Judge John C. Cooper's decision to remove Amendment 5, the tax swap, after he found its title and ballot summary misleading.

The justices, though, reversed a separate decision by Cooper, of Tallahassee, to keep the two voucher amendments on the ballot.

Amendments 7 and 9 would have undone court rulings that struck down former Gov. Jeb Bush's voucher program, which had let students from failing public schools go to private schools at taxpayer expense.

YES!

-Cindy in Fort Lauderdale