Yeah, these force majeure clauses are so normal that you usually don't even have to say it. The law already holds that performance is excused by "acts of god." However, when dealing with the Chinese it's often better to be super-explicit, just so they can't say we guaranteed to do something "come hell or high water."
If this passes, the state legislators will have no reason to make hard decisions. They'll push everything off on the voters. Why cut spending when we can vote to have the voters decide whether we'll cut spending? Naturally the voters will all want gibs... Need taxes to pay for the gibs? Pass a legislative referendum to let the voters decide! Naturally the voters will all want more gibs and no taxes.
Guns?! Let the voters decide!
Yeah, just like last go-around, they're mixing a good idea with a bad one to get the bad idea through. It also requires that voters approve amendments that the Florida legislature votes on. Instead of making the hard calls, state legislators will just kick anything politically-dangerous to a constitutional amendment and let the voters decide. So we'll end up with a million "legislative" referendums.
There's a reason all these proposed amendments are proposed to the people. About 99% of them are bad and can't get past the legislators, who are paid to wade through the details.
Currently you can sell your house and move to a new one and keep your homestead cap. The cap stops property taxes from going up more than 3%/year. This was passed so that families / elderly on fixed income / retirement don't lose their homes.
To do that you've got to move into the new house by the end of the next calendar year. If you sell your house and wait longer, then you go back to paying based on the real value.
There was a prominent story a year or so ago. The couple wanted to build themselves a brand new mansion, so they sold their house, designed something new, started having it built, and due to poor planning and construction delays it took more than 2 years to move in.
Then they cried foul, because they didn't want to pay the property taxes on a ~$2 Million dollar house. They wanted to keep their exemption and avoid taxes on $500k of value. Of course, someone has to pay the taxes... so that means higher taxes for the rest of us... higher sales taxes, etc.
This amendment gives everyone an extra year, up to 3 years, so they can abandon their homestead for longer and still keep the homestead exemption... which was never really meant to apply to them in the first place.
As a general rule, we should always vote no on every constitutional amendment. Direct democracy is a high proof liquor and, when given to the public, makes for terrible amendments. That's why every single one passed last year. If you give idiots a chance to make their own rules, they'll fuck it up.
With that said:
Amendment 1: Citizenship Requirement to Vote in Florida Elections. - Yes / Maybe.
Amendment 2: Raising Florida’s Minimum Wage. - NO. If you would allow your own teenager to work for $12/hr, then you have no right to tell others that they shouldn't be allowed to work for $12/hr.
Amendment 3, All Voters Vote in Primary Elections for State Legislature, Governor, and Cabinet. - NO.
Amendment 4, Voter Approval of Constitutional Amendments. - NO. Direct democracy is bad. Revotes allow for cheating and big-money to have 2nd bite at the apple.
Amendment 5, Limitation on Homestead Assessments. - NO. Homestead cap is supposed to help keep them in their homes, not build new ones.This extends it to 3 years for the purpose of allowing new home purchasers to build / construct new houses, but also allows people to leave Florida / sell and rent / etc for a year or two and magically "resume" their homestead exemption when they come back. If you abandon your homestead for more than 2 years, then you abandoned it. Just forces the government to raise taxes on the rest of us.
Amendment 6, Ad Valorem Tax Discount for Spouses of Certain Deceased Veterans Who Had Permanent, Combat-Related Disabilities. NO. Just forces the government to raise taxes on everyone else.
As a general rule, you should always vote to retain every judge. The founding fathers made the federal judiciary independent - with lifetime terms - for a reason. Being concerned about "how a ruling will play politically" makes for terrible outcomes, undercuts the good judges and empowers the activist.]
With that said, Lewis is good. I don't have any experience with the others.
Could provide a source on that? I hadn't heard about it and can't find any info.
Edit: Found some stuff:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-phase-1-idUSKBN2000HL
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/05/chinas_pandemic_escape_clause.html
Sounds like he’s referring to their rules of engagement.
Literally an offer of prostitution / solicitation.
Literally acceptance.