Floridians turned out in record numbers last month to decide one of the nation’s longest lists of ballot items. What did voters say they wanted? In most cases – with some notable exceptions – the status quo. And that’s good news and bad news for Floridians, particularly in the health care industry. Some specifics:Amendment 1: Health Care Services: This amendment sought to allow Florida to repeal the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, inserting in the Florida Constitution a permanent ban on laws that compel a person or employer to purchase or provide health care coverage. With 48.5 percent of voters in favor and 51.5 against, it was defeated.
Supporters say Obamacare will expand access to affordable health care and, with provisions like those barring insurers from skipping out on coverage for pre-existing conditions, make for a fairer system. But many health care providers worry at what cost this reform comes for their businesses. For them, Obamacare has created a scary and uncertain climate, with expectations that the cost of doing business will rise and many practitioners will be forced to quit practicing medicine.
Bottom line: If Amendment 1 passed, legal scholars agree it would have had no legal standing in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that the Affordable Care Act was constitutional. But it would have allowed Florida to send an important message about the dangers of mandated coverage.
Amendment 5: State Courts: This amendment would have given the Legislature increased control over the judicial branch and require that all appointments to the Florida Supreme Court be subject to Senate confirmation. It also would have divided the court into civil and criminal divisions, each with five appointed justices. The senior-most justices would have gone to the criminal division. With 36.95 percent of voters in favor and 63.05 percent against, it was defeated.
Proponents say the measure would have made Florida’s Supreme Court nomination process more like the federal system, offering more oversight of who gets selected. But critics were effective in convincing voters of the risks at hand: namely, that legislators would be afforded more power than the other branches of government and that in stacking the criminal side with the most experienced judges, it stood to create a polarized and politicized Supreme Court.
Bottom line: Voters’ rebuke of this amendment protects Floridians’ access to an independent judiciary. For medical providers, that is more critical now than ever, with litigation over PIP-related cases expected to grow in the coming months.
Merit retention: Florida Supreme Court: Since 1976, Floridians have been asked to vote yes or no as to whether to keep, or “retain,” the judges who sit on the state appellate courts and the Supreme Court. This year, Supreme Court Justices R. Fred Lewis, Barbara J. Pariente and Peggy A. Quince were up for merit retention, and in each case, voters overwhelmingly approved keeping them on the bench with more than 67 percent support.
Typically, these are mundane questions without controversy. But this year, an ambitious campaign was launched urging voters to reject all three justices, saying they were “activist judges” with a liberal agenda. But many others sought to expose this campaign, pointing out that it would give Gov. Rick Scott the ability to replace the justices with his own picks – at a time when a number of signature laws passed by the Republican leadership in the Legislature is coming under constitutional scrutiny in the courts.
Bottom line: One of the measures being challenged on a constitutional basis is the 2012 Legislature’s sweeping PIP reform law. It is unclear how it will be decided, but Floridians must have confidence in an independent, nonpolitical court system to rule on the merits of all challenges. In supporting merit retention, voters protected the court’s integrity.
Florida Senate: Even after Democrats picked up a couple seats, Florida remains a haven for Republicans in both chambers of the Legislature. But no matter your political party, medical providers can take comfort in knowing that voters sent at least two candidates to Tallahassee with strong records of fighting on behalf of consumers, especially in the area of Personal Injury Protection reform. Sen. Joe Negron, a Republican from Stuart, took 60.4 percent of the vote, and Sen. Maria Sachs, a Democrat from Boca Raton, took 52.83 percent.
During the 2012 session, Negron was a critical voice for everyday Floridians and, as a leader on the PIP reform effort, helped prevent some of the more onerous provisions for medical providers from being included. Sachs has a strong record of championing consumer causes and, like Negron, has pledged to hold insurers accountable to promises to reduce premiums.
Bottom line: At a time when the insurance industry has promised to go back to Tallahassee for more reform efforts, even before reducing rates as promised, medical providers and average Floridians have at least two effective senators in Negron and Sachs fighting on their behalf.
