Despite backlash, Florida county term limit bill advances in the House
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (WFLA) — Florida voters may have the chance to set term limits, not just for state lawmakers, but also for county commissioners and school board members.
The proposed maximum? Eight years in office. But the effort to put this issue on the 2026 ballot comes with a fiery debate.
St. Petersburg City Council votes to replace Tropicana Field's roof
'We know that Americans want term limits at all levels of government. We know Floridians want term limits at all levels of government,' said State Representative Michelle Salzman (R-Escambia County).
Term limits are a topic wildly debated on the national, state, and even local levels. The debate back and forth on the issue continues at the state capitol this year with updated legislation now moving through both chambers.
State Senator Blaise Ingoglia (R-Spring Hill) and Representative Salzman teamed up on term limits. Joint Resolution 679 and its Senate companion seek to set an eight-year term limit for all county commissioners and school board members. Voters would get to decide on the 2026 ballot whether or not they want them.
Representative Salzman shared with 8 On Your Side that this is her second attempt at getting the bill across the finish line.
'Last year, the bill was just putting it in statute, saying it's eight-year term limits. But the biggest argument we received, even from the members was, 'Can you just put this on the ballot? Can you make this a constitutional amendment so we can vote on it as Floridians?'' Salzman said.
This time around, folks against the move argue that this should be decided on the county level, not in a statewide vote. 'About 80% of the voters want term limits, and they want it set at eight years, and all we're asking is to put it on the ballot, let them answer the question,' said Sen. Ingoglia.
However, critics of the move argue that they want the decision to be made county-by-county.'Where do we campaign in our district? Who makes the decision to put us here? The people in our district, not the entire state. The entire state did not vote for me to sit here because they don't know me from an Adam,' said State Rep. Jose Alvarez (D-Kissimmee).
But even with those arguments, the bill sponsor says no matter how you dice up the votes, local communities will still get their say on the issue.'The same people that vote for the governor will be voting for this. Are we going to now say that the governor doesn't really represent the rural communities because a majority of the voters came from Miami,' said Rep. Salzman.
Salzman added that she is going to make some adjustments to the language, allowing folks to come back after they've taken a break. And says for commissioners who are currently seated, they will get to serve another eight years beyond implementation of the law if it makes it across the finish line and on the governor's desk.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What exactly does Donald Trump think the federal government is supposed to do?
A version of this story appeared in CNN's What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. There are some major contradictions in President Donald Trump's view of what government should do to help and protect Americans as expressed this week. He promised to 'wean' the country off federal disaster relief and wind down FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Cleaning up after hurricanes, wildfires and earthquakes should be a state function, he said. 'A governor should be able to handle it, and frankly, if they can't handle it, the aftermath, then maybe they shouldn't be governor,' Trump told reporters on Tuesday. Trump seized control of California's National Guard from Gov. Gavin Newsom, federalizing troops and putting them on the streets of Los Angeles over the objections of local and state leaders. He has threatened to send troops to other cities throughout the country. Critics, including Newsom, accused Trump of an illegal authoritarian overreach. California has sued the administration to end the callup of Marines and National Guard. Trump's actions had the effect of inciting more unrest instead of quieting it, according to the state's leaders. 'These are the acts of a dictator, not a president,' Newsom said on social media. He is primed to roll back California's looming ban on the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035, at least according to Rep. Kevin Kiley, a California Republican. Expect lawsuits. California's Environmental Protection agency has enacted its own climate change policy because the federal government, which has switched from Democrats to Republicans in recent elections, has been unable to stick to one. Trump is also trying to dismantle climate change efforts enacted by Democrats under President Joe Biden. Trump is trying to end the Department of Education in part because he says he wants to return more power over education to the states. At the same time, he's threatening state universities and school systems that want to prioritize a diverse environment. Trump has done all he can to strong-arm American institutions into ending diversity programs that are a reaction to the country's complicated racial past and is instead treating the inclusion of trans women in gendered sports as a major civil rights issue. The standoff between Trump and Newsom is in some ways the inverse of relationships between past Democratic presidents and Republican governors. While Trump is foisting troops onto Los Angeles over Newsom's objections, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, launched Operation Lone Star, which mobilized his state's National Guard to patrol the border and set up obstructions in spots when he felt federal authorities under Biden were not doing enough. Biden officials never threatened to arrest Abbott, however. Trump officials have warned mayors and Newsom against impeding federal immigration authorities. Abbott, for his part, took the initiative to put the Texas National Guard on standby as anti-deportation protests spread around the country. For instance, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders — who was Trump's first-term press secretary — was denied a request for tornado relief funds earlier this year. Sanders was ultimately able to obtain the funds by publicly lobbying and then calling Trump with a direct and personal appeal, as CNN's Gabe Cohen wrote. It would be interesting to see whether Newsom, a Democrat who has previously tangled with Trump, would be as successful. Trump has a history of denying assistance to California. He did it during his first term. In April, CNN reported that when billions of dollars in disaster funding were stalled, Republican governors had better luck at unfreezing them. The White House may already be cutting FEMA out of the equation, according to Cohen's report. He wrote that there have been multiple instances this year when FEMA has not been immediately notified that the White House had approved disaster relief packages, which led to delays in getting the funds out. Regardless, FEMA's normal way of doing business — approving aid based on nonpartisan formulas and the extent of damage — has been replaced by Trump's preferences. If a version of Trump's sweeping policy bill passes through Congress this year, it will also rewrite the social contract by which the federal government helps the lowest-income Americans. States would have to spend more to help provide health insurance through Medicaid programs, but they would also have to impose new work requirements, and millions of Americans would lose health insurance. Spending on food stamps, now called SNAP benefits, would be cut. Trump clearly wants the government to do less. Less foreign aid. Less scientific research. Less income taxes. Less responsibility to fund the social safety net. Except where he wants more. More defense spending. More tariffs (which are actually taxes). More military parades. More deportations.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Russia using peace talks to stall US sanctions, Zelensky says
Russia is attempting to delay peace negotiations to avoid tougher U.S. sanctions, President Volodymyr Zelensky said in an interview with German tabloid Bild on June 12. His comments come as Russia continues to reject a full ceasefire despite having initiated two rounds of peace talks in Istanbul — first on May 16 and on June 2. Both rounds resulted in agreements on prisoner exchanges, but failed to deliver progress toward ending hostilities. During the negotiations, Moscow ramped up ground offensives and launched massive attacks on Ukrainian cities. "It's important for them to show (U.S. President Donald) Trump that there is a diplomatic bridge between Ukraine and Russia," Zelensky told Bild. "So that sanctions aren't imposed against Russia" while talks are ongoing, Zelensky said, adding that Russian President Vladimir Putin's strategy is to maintain the illusion of dialogue and then argue: "We're talking to each other! If sanctions are imposed, there will be no more talks." Zelensky warned that Moscow's goal is not peace but buying time. "Putin feels that his economy is now suffering," he said. "But he wants to gain even more time until the strong sanctions are introduced, because he can still hold out for some time." Trump has previously warned he would impose new sanctions on Moscow, but has yet to take the step. On June 5, Trump said he was withholding the move in hopes of a potential peace deal but warned he could act if Russia continues to stall. "When I see the moment where it's not going to stop... we'll be very tough," Trump told reporters. Critics, as well as Zelensky, argue that the slow implementation of sanctions gave Russia time to adapt its economy and defense sector. "The main mistake of the sanctions was that they were introduced too slowly," Zelensky said. Trump has repeatedly said he is monitoring the situation and hinted sanctions could come soon if progress is not made. Meanwhile, a bipartisan bill in the U.S. Senate that would impose harsh tariffs on countries buying Russian oil remains on hold as lawmakers await Trump's signal. Read also: 'Deadline is in my brain' — Trump dismisses timeline to impose Russian sanctions We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The White House Wants the Megabill by July 4. For Real.
House and Senate Republicans spent Thursday at each other's throats over President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' The sparring between the two chambers reached a point where members were openly scoffing at the GOP's self-imposed July 4 deadline for passing the bill. Down Pennsylvania Avenue, meanwhile, the White House isn't sweating. In fact, Trump's aides are downright bullish about getting the megabill wrapped up in a bow for a presidential signature by Independence Day. 'We are targeting the week of July 4 for final passage,' said one of two Trump administration officials I spoke to Wednesday and granted anonymity to candidly describe the private talks. Let's be clear: The timeline is extraordinarily fast. Not only does Senate Majority Leader John Thune have to find a way to bridge competing demands inside his conference and weather a grueling amendment 'vote-a-rama,' but he also has to work with Speaker Mike Johnson, who is already groaning at every change being entertained for the bill that barely passed his chamber last month. Traditionally, getting the two chambers aligned on a single piece of complicated legislation means weeks of 'conferencing' — that's what happened in 2017, the last time Republicans pursued a party-line tax bill. This time, the legislation is even more complicated and the margins even thinner. But White House officials are adamant that GOP leaders skip that step. Nor do they want the House making more changes after the Senate, requiring another 'pingpong' back across the Rotunda. They expect the Senate to clear a bill that the House can simply plop on the floor, pass and send to Trump's desk. 'There's not going to be a pingpong or a conference,' the official told me yesterday. Can they really do that in just three weeks? Some Republicans are skeptical, to say the least. Sen. John Curtis of Utah said 'a lot of us would be surprised' if the July 4 deadline holds at the POLITICO Energy Summit Tuesday. And during a Punchbowl News event Wednesday, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas said that while the Senate might be able to finish on time, it could take another month to negotiate with the House. 'The Senate is going to do what it damn well wants to do,' he said. OK, senator: Go tell that to Donald Trump. Some of the president's allies on the Hill are already dreaming up a snazzy Rose Garden celebration to ring in both Independence Day and the enactment of the 'big, beautiful bill.' (At least that's what one well-placed GOP congressional aide predicted to me this week.) The recent history of the megabill is fueling the administration's confidence. Political prognosticators scoffed at Johnson's self-imposed Memorial Day target for House passage, predicting the warring factions in his conference would make that deadline an impossibility. But Trump swooped in and muscled the bill through by sheer force, strong-arming moderate holdouts and bringing conservatives to heel. And White House officials are sure he can do it again. Administration aides are well aware of the work left to be done. Senate Republicans are already moving to throw a major wrench in the negotiations by upending two key provisions that were essential to winning the support of rival blocs in the House. Senate Finance Chair Mike Crapo told his colleagues Wednesday he plans to deliver on a personal priority that's highly desired by members of his panel: making key business tax breaks permanent. To do it, he's ready to scale back the House's $40,000 cap on the state-and-local-tax deduction — a key factor in winning the support of blue-state GOP holdouts. And to manage desires elsewhere in the Senate GOP, Crapo also hinted he'll elongate the phase-out time for some clean-energy tax breaks enacted under former President Joe Biden — a huge no-no for House Freedom Caucus members, who made their quick repeal a must in exchange for their votes. That means Trump is about to find himself in a familiar spot — playing referee between the chambers — and his team knows it. He could start blowing the whistle as soon as Thursday, when he meets with Thune and Crapo at the White House. There's good reason to think that Trump will ultimately be able to impose his will on the unruly GOP lawmakers. There were signs he was already doing so this week, after rumblings emerged about some Senate Republicans wanting to scale back Trump's tax priorities in order to pay for the business tax provisions. Trump's campaign pledges to exempt tips, overtime pay and Social Security from income taxes made it into the House bill at a cost of $230 billion, according to a Joint Committee on Taxation score. Scrapping or scaling back any of those provisions could have been a huge boon to Senate tax writers. But the White House made clear behind the scenes that would be a no-go: 'We're not willing to entertain any scaling back of our signature promises,' a second Trump administration official said. 'You're not going to rock the president's commitments to the voters to pay for [business] expensing in the out years.' On Tuesday, Thune made it clear to reporters that Trump's priorities would stay — words the White House welcomed. So don't expect much stomach inside the GOP for bucking Trump's wishes over the coming weeks. It's telling that, as I was told, none of the Senate Finance Republicans who met with Trump last week raised the issue of shrinking his tax wish list during their White House skull session. That just underscores how no one — not even senators who get six-year terms and have historically relished their independence — wants to tell the most powerful man in the world: Please, Mr. President, we'd like to water down your campaign promises to substitute one of our own. 'I think ultimately a lot of members are wish-casting different structures to permit more of their own priorities, and certainly that's something that senators are welcome to do,' the first official said. But 'the president's priorities are not negotiable in this process.'
