Domestic Partner Benefits For State Employees (Continued)
We are opening another section on the topic of Domestic Partner Benefits for anyone who wants to participate in the “next phase” of discussion. If you would like to review previous comments, go to the thread below: “Domestic Partner Benefits For State Employees: Your Opinion? (Dated December 1)”.
State Rep. Larry Cretul recently introduced legislation to clarify existing legislation and to prevent a DPB policy approved by the University of Florida from being expanded to other parts of the university/college system and state government.
posted by Blog Master @ 11:28 AM
57 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Deleted a "splog".
OCALA - Last week, as promised, state Rep. Larry Cretul, R-Ocala, rolled out legislation that would prevent public universities and community colleges from paying for domestic partner benefits with state funds.
During a brief news conference - the first at his State Road 200 district office - Cretul said that House Bill 581 clarifies existing Florida law and is not intended to "denounce or discriminate against anyone."
Cretul, vice chairman of the House Colleges and Universities Committee and a member of the Education Appropriations Committee, said that while he's personally opposed to recognizing unmarried and same-sex couples, the bill does not prohibit state universities and colleges from offering domestic partner benefits if not paid for by tax dollars.
Last month, the University of Florida became the state's only public university to do so.
The bill is co-sponsored by Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, head of the House Education Council and a vocal opponent of unmarried and gay couples.
University officials have said the benefits are a valuable recruiting tool and are now common among the nation's top schools as well as increasingly popular in the private sector. The university plans to pay for the benefits using a combination of alternate and private resources, including UF's foundation, but not with state dollars.
Tamara Cohen, UF's director of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Affairs, said the bill is an unfortunate effort to push a political agenda, given that Cretul was well aware of the university's plan not to use state funding.
Cretul said the situation could change and that, while he wants the state's universities and colleges to succeed, he also has a responsibility to ensure that tax dollars are spent responsibly and efficiently.
_________
Laura Byrnes covers the State Road 200 Corridor for The Leader. She can be reached at 732-7159 or laura.byrnes@starbanner.com
So what's wrong with clarifying the law on this? It looks like other universities are following the UF pattern for funding and that's a good thing. Taxpayers should not have to pay for the domestic partner health coverage.
I think Gator 4 Life has it pegged right about why UF is still exercised about Mr. Cretul’s bill. He has thrown a monkey wrench in their plan to eventually have the state pay for the benefits. Hate to say it, but have to agree with a Gator!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Removed a duplicate comment already posted in section #1 of the thread on this subject.
A letter in the Gainesville Sun points out what’s wrong with today’s education system: domination by liberal administrators and professors who are focused much more on their own issues and agenda than teaching students the skills and knowledge they need. The domestic partner benefits policy at UF is a good example. George Will recently wrote that teachers are expected to have the correct “disposition”, proof of which is espousing “liberal” political beliefs. How about some conservative/moderate political beliefs?
Article published Jan 18, 2006
Are there any conservative faculty?
Is there a single tenured Republican on the faculty at UF? The Gainesville Sun's editorial pages, under the direction of Ron Cunningham, certainly can't find one. Given that UF is a taxpayer-funded institution, perhaps it's time to revisit the question of de facto vs. de jure discrimination. Civil rights, anyone?
Steve Baldwin,
Keystone Heights
Not all UF professors are liberal. There are two conservative Republican professors at UF!!!
Why is the media critical of Cretul’s bill? Yet, they were AWOL when he was being beaten up by the far fight of his own Party for his “liberal” organ transplant bill a couple of years ago. The answer is easy---liberal media bias against Republicans.
I doubt Cretul pays too much attention to the media. Sometimes negative articles can actually be positive for a politician. Cretul is sensitive to the people in his District and knows what they think on issues. Liberals in south Florida and parts of UF probably aren't on his radar screen. He knows what he is doing and why.
From my favorite liberal Gainesville newspaper:
“UF Requirement for Partner Benefits: You Must Have Sex.
University of Florida employees have to pledge that they're having sex with their domestic partners before qualifying for benefits under a new health care plan at the university.”
Immorality encouraged by policy edict! Tells you something about the intelligence of the administration we have running UF. Perhaps the UF Board of Trustees should take a close look at the taxpayer money being spent on administrators who come up with ideas like this one.
Article published Jan 19, 2006
Cretul is behind the times
Each of us as to any major issue of fairness falls into one of three categories. We are either ahead of the times, with the times, or behind the times. As one reflects on some of these major issues - right of women to vote, child labor laws, civil rights for minorities, etc. - one can readily recall elected officials, family members and friends who placed themselves in one of those categories.
Ideally all of our leaders should be ahead of the times on these issues. After all, that is the very essence of the definition of leadership. Unfortunately, state Rep. Larry Cretul has chosen the "behind the times" position on the question of fair and equal treatment for the gay community.
I can understand that an individual would choose to be behind the times, but I can't understand why we would elect such persons. Fortunately we, the people, eventually get it right on these major issues of fairness, with or without leadership. Thus, just as surely as women can now serve on juries, gays will become full partners in the human family during the early part of this new century and the Larry Cretuls will be left standing with the George Wallaces of history.
Ralph T. Bowden,
Micanopy
Article published Jan 17, 2006
Cretul's conundrum
Tallahassee
After a transfusion he underwent for an ulcer last year, state Rep. Larry Cretul may actually have some liberal blood running in his veins.
But you wouldn't know it from the statewide headlines he's garnered in recent weeks.
Cretul, R-Ocala, is emerging as somewhat of a champion of his party's right wing, in large part because he's raised questions about the University of Florida's extension of health care benefits to the gay and lesbian partners of UF employees.
He filed a bill this month that would bar the use of public money for programs like the one UF trustees approved in December. He's also endorsed a group that seeks to ban gay marriage through a constitutional amendment.
"I am in fact a Christian," Cretul said, sitting in his legislative office here last week. "I am a Southern Baptist. . . . That information has always been out there. It's no big surprise that I have core values."
But to some, Cretul's latest moves are a surprise.
In the past, he hasn't always followed Republican colleagues pushing conservative causes. Last year, for instance, Cretul laid low as fellow Ocala lawmaker, Rep. Dennis Baxley, led a public battle to protect conservative college students from persecution for their beliefs.
"I said, 'Dennis, this is one I've got a little concern over,' " Cretul recalls.
Even in defense of his domestic partnership bill, Cretul typically talks more in legalese than in the bellicose language often associated with the extreme ends of both parties. He speaks of "clarifying the law" with his bill, only addressing his "personal convictions" about homosexuality when pressed.
Some say 57-year-old Cretul is just deliberative, and seldom prone to hard-line rhetoric. Others, however, believe Cretul is engaged in a careful balancing act - trying to appease his conservative base without alienating the rest of his constituents.
Redrawn lines
Cretul's district, 22, presents a "schizophrenic" problem, Baxley said. Unlike Baxley's district, which is confined to Republican-leaning Marion County, Cretul's district is spread across three counties, one of which favors Democrats.
"Larry, he would probably love to get rid of Alachua County," said Perry McGriff, a Democrat and former state representative who lost his seat to Cretul by 35 votes in 2002.
McGriff comfortably carried Alachua County by nearly 6,000 votes, but Marion and Levy counties were enough to secure the election for Cretul. McGriff is now running to replace Democratic lawmaker Rod Smith in the state Senate.
About 43 percent of the Alachua County voters in Cretul's district are Democrats, compared to 33 percent who are registered Republicans. The remainder are independents, Libertarians, Green Party or other. Cretul's portion of Gainesville, which covers most of UF, is a Democratic stronghold. Registered Democrats outnumber Republicans in every single Gainesville voting precinct assigned to District 22, except for one partial precinct where only four registered voters live in the district and the parties tie 2 to 2.
Before the Republican-controlled Legislature redrew District 22 in 2002, the district was confined to Alachua County, giving Democrats a virtual lock on the seat.
"That's something we have controlled for eons," said McGriff, who attributes his 2002 loss to redistricting. "They basically just flipped this sucker."
Conservative views
Because UF accounts for such a large portion of his Gainesville constituency, Cretul is particularly sensitive to the suggestion that he's picked a fight with the university. Though his domestic partnership bill was born out of UF's new policy, Cretul says he bears no ill will toward the institution.
"It appears that this is a battle between me and UF," he said "It's not."
Cretul is making some waves with his new bill, but his overall conservative views may not ruffle the feathers of UF trustees, all of whom owe their appointments to Republican Gov. Jeb Bush. As for the specifics of the bill - disallowing the use of state money - UF has always maintained no state funds would be used for its health care program.
"If (Cretul), as an elected official, feels like that's what he needs to do, he should (push the bill)," said Carlos Alfonso, a UF trustee. "I don't think any less of Larry for what he's doing, and he's one of our champions."
Cretul is quick to point out that he's helped lure major funding to UF. In 2004-2005, for instance, Cretul says he helped steer more than $45 million in program appropriations to UF, as well as nearly $17.5 million for Shands and millions more in grants. Even his old rival, McGriff, concedes that Cretul has been good for UF on balance.
But Cretul's latest moves puzzle McGriff.
"I've had a number of people ask me, 'What is this guy up to?' And I say, 'I don't know,' " McGriff said.
Opposing gay health care benefits may be red meat for Cretul's conservative base, but McGriff says it may also lure opposition into the 2006 House race.
"It will make Alachua County want to run against him," he said.
Cretul scoffs at critics who say he's shifted farther right just in time for an election year, and Baxley dismisses the notion as well. The domestic partner bill, Baxley said, speaks to Cretul's value system.
"I think this specific issue is one that's been festering with him for some time," Baxley said.
Cretul says he's merely reacting to events, not initiating a culture war or transforming for political purposes.
"I don't think I'm any different than in 1992 running for a (Marion) County Commission seat," he said. "Other than being older, grayer and fatter."
Jack Stripling can be reached at 374-5064 or Jack.Stripling@gvillesun.com.
So maybe there is something to the liberal media bias argument:
Article published Jan 20, 2006
How about the Sun's agenda?
This is in response to your Jan. 11 editorial titled, "Cretul's grand stand." It would have been better titled, "Grand slam of (Republican) Cretul."
It is laughable that the Sun concludes state Rep. Larry Cretul's bill to prohibit state taxpayers' money to fund benefits for domestic partners is purely for political purposes because it is obvious that the Sun's editorial was purely for carrying out its political agenda: "Anything Republican is bad."
The editorial raised several questions. All easily answered.
Cretul's bill has nothing to do with his trust of or his relationship with the University of Florida. Anyone following Rep. Cretul's three-year tenure should know that he believes in holding a tight fist on the state's resources, not just in his district, but for the whole state.
He knows what everybody else should know. When the University of Florida sneezes, all other state educational institutions blow their noses.
While Rep. Cretul says he has no legal objection to UF's using private money to fund domestic partner benefits, he recognizes that soon many other state colleges and universities - including community colleges in Ocala and Gainesville - will likely follow suit and desire to use taxpayer money for funding. None has the supply of private support dollars UF has.
Best example: UF uses no taxpayer money for its athletic programs, but that's not true of others.
Like the University of Florida Board of Trustees and apparently its administration, Cretul does not believe taxpayer funds should be used for domestic partner benefits. His belief is based on the very clear fact that the state does not provide the legal means to do so; thus, that needs clarifying through legislation.
As for Cretul's continuing relationship with UF and the university's with him, the answer is obvious. Rep. Cretul has served UF extremely well as vice-chairman of the House subcommittee on Higher Education and member of the subcommittee on Education Appropriations and as the area's only Republican in a Republican-controlled Legislature.
For example, this past legislative year PECO (utilities tax) funding of $55 million plus for building projects and $11 million for maintenance, repairs and renovations was the highest level received by UF in 15 years. UF lagged far behind in PECO funding for years in the Democrat-controlled Legislature dominated by Democrats from South Florida getting everything they could for their institutions, at the expense of UF.
Also during Rep. Cretul's tenure, the Legislature has given more autonomy to individual universities and their boards than ever before in history. UF has been clamoring for this for years and years.
The Sun's editorial brands as "unfortunate" that Cretul "presumes to establish fiscal policy...in contempt of a state constitutional amendment which clearly delegates that to the Board of Governors." Surely the Sun knows the Board of Governors does not appropriate state taxpayer money. That's the Legislature's responsibility.
Another good example of the UF-Cretul excellent relationship is revealed in a Sun newspaper article dated April 21, 2004. It reads, "The University of Florida is poised to emerge from this year's legislative session in better budgetary shape than it has been in years."
Those are the words of the Sun's reporter, not Rep. Cretul, who the subject editorial snidely states, "...and he likes to paint himself as the university's champion in the House."
Rep. Cretul is in Gainesville two to three times a week when he's not in Tallahassee, according to his Gainesville office spokesperson.
Why else would he spend this much time in Gainesville if he were not looking out for the best interests of UF and not maintaining an excellent relationship with the University?
The Sun's editorial also raises a question about Cretul's accepting campaign funds from companies offering domestic partner benefits. A partial answer is in the Sun's Jan. 5 news article detailing Cretul's announcement of his bill.
He is quoted as saying, "The bill is not intended to denounce or discriminate against anyone...Colleges and universities are in position if they wish to use alternate funding for employee benefits."
He is further quoted as saying, "Local government, local control, they only have to answer to their own constituency." It certainly is no stretch to believe he feels the same way about private companies.
Speaking of the Sun's Jan. 5 news article concerning the bill, it is apparent the newspaper uses its news pages to project its political agenda.
The second paragraph noted that Cretul's new district office (in Ocala) is located on a "stretch dotted with large churches." No further mention is made of those parenthetical words of the Sun's reporter.
Does anybody have to guess why the words were there?
Politics? Whose?
Hugh Cunningham is a UF Professor Emeritus and for 12 years was assistant to the president for university information.
I disagree with Ralph Bowden's article copied above.
Equating women and minority rights to gay rights is a real stretch. I will stick with being "behind the times". I know many people agree with me.
Article published Jan 21, 2006
Enlightened liberalism
In the Jan. 18 Sun Steve Baldwin asks, "Is there a single tenured Republican on the faculty at UF?"
Yes, there are several. However, please note that a quick survey of intellectuals of any profession will show that learned people are, on the average, rather more liberal than the population as a whole. Therefore, as is the case in nearly all public universities in our nation, there are far more liberals than conservatives.
On a related note, I recall that John Stuart Mill famously noted, "I have found that not all conservatives are stupid people, but most stupid people are conservative."
Ain't this the truth. Those stupid conservatives are too busy making big bucks doing other things.
Article published Jan 21, 2006
When teaching pays, they'll come to campus
Steve Baldwin (Jan. 18) wonders if there is a single Republican tenured faculty member at UF. My guess is that when they start paying the English faculty (or any faculty in Liberal Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences etc.) in the six-figures, the Republicans will be breaking down the doors of UF looking for jobs. Until then, I guess we'll just have to get along with those tiresome liberals who think teaching is reward in itself.
Flora MacColl,
Gainesville
Someone please tell me this sex affidavit requirement to get domeestic partner benefits is a joke.
It's no joke! However, UF administration is now attempting to spin this and it can't be spun.
The spin started today in the Gainesville Sun.
I was a bit surprised the Gainesville paper actually let Hugh Cunningham's article about Larry Cretul be published. Maybe they are not as anti-Cretul as I thought.
The Wizard of Oz is at it again.
The article below is indicative of what a laughingstock UF is becoming. They are also getting unfavorable national attention for the “affidavit”. Didn’t someone say, “I told you so”.
Article published Jan 26, 2006
Certified platonic at UF
Regarding the University of Florida's requirement that same-sex couples sign an affidavit attesting that they are in a "non-platonic" relationship, several married heterosexual friends of mine who work at the university have expressed disappointment.
They had hoped that the program would be expanded to compel their spouses to sign similar affidavits - as often as necessary - attesting that they, too, are involved in a non-platonic relationship.
Jeff Peterson,
Gainesville
Elton… you probably won’t get the two commissioners you named on the bandwagon for Domestic Partner benefits for county employees. However, don’t worry. The local Democrats who run against them will have it as a main issue in their campaign to unseat these two gentlemen. They will get the benefit for you.
THE FINAL LEGAL DEADLINE AND THE ABSOLUTE LAST DAY TO SUBMIT PETITIONS FOR THE FLORIDA MARRIAGE
PROTECTION AMENDMENT TO LOCAL COUNTY SUPERVISORS OF ELECTIONS PURSUANT TO FLORIDA LAW IS:
WED. FEBRUARY 1, 2006
YOUR HELP IS NEEDED TO HELP PLACE THE FLORIDA MARRIAGE PROTECTION AMENDMENT ON THE NOVEMBER 2006 BALLOT. VISIT:
WWW.FLORIDA4MARRIAGE.ORG
FOR ALL THE DETAILS AND INFORMATION ABOUT THE AMENDMENT
YOU SHOULD DO 1 OF 2 THINGS TO SUBMIT YOUR PETITIONS:
OPTION # 1:
Send by Overnight or Express Mail your petition/s to:
Florida4Marriage.org
4853 South Orange Avenue
Orlando, FL 32806
(DO NOT mail them to the Longwood, FL PO Box address listed on the petition) (Also note, after Saturday January 29, 2006 you must use option number 2 explained below)
OR
OPTION #2:
Mail or (if after Friday Jan, 28, 2006) hand deliver the petition/s directly to the office of your local county Supervisor of Elections: Please do not wait till the last minute. Hand deliver petitions to the county supervisor of elections immediately as it will take them time to count and process thousands and thousands of petitions.
I have read that the petition movement may not get enough signatures by the due date. Is that correct?
It is true that we do not currently have the amount of signatures necessary to place the Marriage Amendment on the ballot. However, we are within striking distance.
I encourage all of you who support the protection of marriage to please take action. Spend some extra time this weekend checking with your friends and family members to see if they have signed the petition. When you collect these petitions please take them directly to the Supervisor of Elections in your county just as “gator 4 life” said.
Let’s take a stand for marriage.
people may not be signing the petitions because they know there is already a state law defining marriage. there is but it could easily be overturned by a liberal court decision. a constitutional amendment would provide a stronger statement of marriage in these times.
Many people were correct; the UF domestic partner benefits program is starting to spread to other State Universities. The University of South Florida has agreed with its union to pursue a program similar to that at UF. There has been “overwhelming” demand for this benefit at USF (20 employees)! Funding will not come from the State, at least not for now. Although, the union wants to keep the State funding option open for negotiation. Let it spread, just don’t ask the taxpayers to pay for it. Will my university be next?
Things will get very interesting when one or more of the public community colleges or universities without a strong foundation complains they cannot compete. Look out taxpayer here comes the court decision.
If taxpayer dollars are paying for females to have multiple children by a variety of different sex partners - and we support them forever --
People who get up every day, go to work, pay taxes, own property can't get benefits because of what goes on in their bedroom??
It appears promiscuity collects benefits and homosexuality pays for it.
What a system.
If homosexuals have illegitimate children their children will also receive taxpayer support. You missed the point; children are the ones taxpayers are helping. I guess you would just let the children suffer. Seems typical of some of the self and promiscuous promoting arguments we hear from the gay community.
It does appear promiscuity collects benefits and EVERYONE, not just homosexuals, pays for it. Promiscuity, including that among unmarried hetero/homosexuals, is wrong,
and is being addressed by federal and several state governments (including Florida). Perhaps no government health benefits should be given to homosexuals who get aids through sexual relations—if you want to objectively use the promiscuity argument.
UF’s domestic partner policy is a good example of promiscuity being encouraged and rewarded. Fortunately, at least for now, state taxpayers don’t have to pay for it.
"Marriage Amendment Won't Be On The Ballot"
Organizers mounted a last-day push to get petitions turned in, but fell short turning in only about 455,000 signatures of the 611,009 needed, said John Stemberger the leader of the petition effort.
"It was an amazingly strong showing considering the resources we had," Stemberger said. "If it takes another two years it's worth the wait."
Gov. Jeb Bush said earlier this week that if the measure didn't succeed, he may talk to lawmakers about whether the state law that already defines marriage needs strengthening, or constitutional protection. He noted that there's no current challenge to the law, but said it would be hard to respond after the fact if someone did successfully challenge it.
So do it again in 2008. Would not trust the current law to the courts.
According to census data, about 1.2 million of Florida's estimated 10 million voters consider themselves to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. About 70 percent of those voters are Democrats.
Think there might be some partisanship on the issue of domestic partner benefits? I do.
Where did you get the statistics?
Statistics quoted by Stephen Gaskill, Communications Director for the Florida Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transsexual Democratic Caucus at a Democratic gubernatorial candidate forum. He should know!
25 out of 4000 University of Florida employees signed up for the Domestic Partners Health Care Benefit. Far below the hundreds that had been expected. Someone really sold the Board of Trustees a “story” on this one. What a farce!
We do know one thing (via affidavits signed), there are 25 UF employees who are having sex.
What a name for an exclusive gay Democratic caucus group!
It seems only heterosexual males of European ancestry are NOT allowed to form exclusive associations.
Can you imagine the outcry if someone formed a group called “Anglo-American Heterosexual Males Republican Caucus”?
Outcry is an understatement.
There’s rumor of a new benefit being asked for at UF. To improve the University’s position among top schools, a sex change operation benefit is needed to attract outstanding faculty and staff. This would help make UF more competitive with California. I’m not kidding!
This can't be true. If so, I'm giving back my diploma.
Better get ready to give it back.
Florida Legislators Challenge University's Domestic Partner Benefits Plan
By Jim Brown
February 14, 2006
(AgapePress) - A Florida lawmaker is calling on the University of Florida to cease offering same-sex domestic partner health-care benefits. Recently, UF became the only university in the state to approve a health benefits plan for the partners of both unmarried heterosexual and homosexual couples.
State Representative Dennis Baxley, a Republican from Ocala, feels the school's policy assaults traditional marriage and needs to be amended. He says state tax dollars should not be used to support a deadly lifestyle; nor should state-funded institutions enact policies that encourage it.
"Without a doubt," Baxley asserts, "our universities have become a key stronghold in the battle for the culture, where there are those who are wanting to do everything they can to normalize these kind of relationships in the eyes of others." These proponents of homosexual culture, he contends, "are actively recruiting people of that lifestyle and wanting to make them welcome."
The Florida lawmaker feels some members of the State Legislature are not voicing enough outrage over the UF domestic partner benefits policy. "The problem is that we're losing this discussion," he says, "particularly with younger people in urban areas."
And the reason pro-family voices are losing the "homosexual rights" debate, Baxley contends, is because young people and others in the mainstream public "really don't understand what's at risk when you redefine a basic social institution such as marriage and the family." He hopes to rally other conservative leaders to speak out and make the risks of such redefinition clear.
Baxley and ten other co-sponsors have filed a bill in the Florida legislature that would prohibit UF from offering benefits for the domestic partners of unmarried homosexual employees.
Who pays is not the issue with Baxley---he wants to stop the policy specifically at UF.
Bad idea Mr Baxley. If an outside group is paying for this and not state funds, leave it alone.
Larry Cretul is gong to look pretty moderate when Baxley gets finished with UF and other universities on their gay benefits policies.
Interesting that Baxley is into this, but not surprising. As someone said, UF is going to get a heap of attention. Not good to have the head of the educaation council upset with you.
(Article published Feb 19, 2006 in the Gainesville Sun.)
"UF Should Offer Health Coverage To Others"
So, only 25 employees of the University of Florida have come forward to apply (out of 120 anticipated) for health care benefits for their partners? Now, it's time for the university to use this committed private money for what it claimed was the reason to offer it in the first place: To make UF competitive in attracting outstanding employees it might not otherwise attract.
The Sun also reported on Feb. 5, "UF Officials said the plan was designed to serve employees whose partners have no health care or substandard care." Now the university can consider some of the following:
A promising young faculty member whose father or mother is not old enough for Medicare, but has such severe health care needs he or she cannot work and depends on the son or daughter for livelihood, living in the home with the faculty member.
Another promising faculty member with an adult handicapped son or daughter whose sole livelihood is a small Social Security benefit plus that supplied by the parent(s). Of course, the handicapped person cannot afford health care insurance.
Still another promising faculty member with a live-in ailing sibling totally dependent on the faculty member's financial care.
Certainly all of the above are partners under the university's reported definition of non-platonic relationship as a committed one for at least a year. The university's vice-president for human relations blamed The Sun's "misinterpreted reporting" that non-platonic meant a sexual relationship, and denied this is what it meant.
When some of the cases cited above are taken care of, I can feel good about the interest the private money supplier UF Foundation earned from contributions I have made.
Hopefully, the university's reason for the benefit was not simply to support some other cause(s).
Hugh Cunningham,
Newberry
Mr. Cunningham is on target--again.
I’m glad we have Elton to keep us posted on gay isues at UF.
Any news on Cretul's bill now that legislature is back working?
Cretul’s bill is making its way through various committees. Early this week it was reviewed by the bi-partisan Governmental Operations Committee. The bill was passed unanimously (7-0).
That's progress.
The Florida Marriage Protection Amendment language has been approved by the State Supreme Court for placement on the ballot in 2008.
We are back in the game again!
155,000 petition signers are still needed by mid-July.
The Naples News has just started a poll on the Marriage Amendment.
The question:
“The Florida Supreme Court approved for the 2008 ballot an initiative to put a ban on same-sex marriages in the Florida Constitution. If it makes it to the ballot, how will you vote?”
Here is the current voting (about 2000 voters):
I’ll support it. 57%
I won’t support it. 38%
Don’t know. 4%
Post a Comment
<< Home