SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Floridians for Solar Choice reports
[November 8,] Florida voters rejected Amendment 1--the utility-backed proposal that sought to limit the growth of customer-owned solar power in the Sunshine State.
In a true David and Goliath battle, a diverse grassroots coalition of more than 200 organizations, solar companies, elected officials, and thousands of concerned citizens worked to defeat the deceptive utility-backed amendment. Amendment 1 opponents feel that a significant percentage of the "yes" voters felt they were tricked once they understood the true nature of the ballot measure. Constitutional amendments in Florida require 60 percent support to pass.
The millions of dollars in slick ad buys and glossy mailers did not win the day as opponents of Amendment 1 successfully harnessed social and earned media to educate Floridians about the true intent of this deceptive proposal while tapping a vast network of organizations, solar businesses and supporters who remain committed to growing--not restricting--Florida's solar industry.
[...] "In all my years of public service, I had never seen such a thinly-veiled attempt to intentionally mislead Florida voters" [...] said Mike Fasano (R), a former state Senator and current tax collector of Pasco County Tax.
Previously, PhilSalkie pointed out how easy it was to be confused by the competing proposals and other Soylentils weighed in on the disgusting state of electric infrastructure in Florida.
Florida Voters [Overwhelmingly] Approve Solar Energy Tax Break Constitutional Amendment
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Friday November 18 2016, @05:25PM
Another possibility is to periodically test judges over 65 for cognitive impairment, and fire any judge that turns out to be clearly impaired in a manner that isn't reversible with diet or the like. It'd be like the eye test to renew a driver's license.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Friday November 18 2016, @05:35PM
That addresses the senility issue. It doesn't address the problem with lifetime appointments, where the politicians try to appoint younger less-experienced judges so that their pick will have a longer appointment term than a more experienced and thus older judge would have.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 18 2016, @07:06PM
There is value in youth, just as there is value in age.
It isn't like they've been putting people fresh out of law-school on the bench.
Elena Kagan is the current youngest and she was appointed at 50 years of age.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 18 2016, @07:36PM
you didn't address the concern.
the concern was "politicians will choose younger judges not based on merit, but because they will stay there longer".
if the appointment time is limited, then age will no longer matter, only competence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2016, @02:42PM
He hasn't presented any evidence of that being a problem.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Arik on Friday November 18 2016, @05:42PM
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday November 18 2016, @05:50PM
Term limits rather than age restrictions. And no lifetime appointments. There will always be another worthy judge, or even a better one.
The age of decline will be a moving target once anti-aging treatments hit the streets. And judges will be rubbing shoulders with the people getting early access to those.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]