We're pro-choice Floridians — and we trust David Jolly to defend our rights
He strongly believes: 'Reproductive health care decisions should be made between women and their doctors, not politicians.' He wants to bring back the protections of Roe v. Wade, as do the over 57% of Florida voters who voted for Amendment 4 last November.
David Jolly told us: 'I voted for Amendment 4. As governor, I would work to enact Amendment 4 into law. I support Roe. I am pro-choice. And as your governor I would veto any legislation that would restrict reproductive healthcare in the state of Florida.'
Roe is the United States Supreme Court case that originally established the right to an abortion and was overruled by a 2023 Supreme Court decision. Jolly was not always a supporter of abortion rights. When he was in Congress many years ago, he did support anti-abortion positions. But since then, he has changed his mind.
After all, he was raised in a culture that deplored abortion. However, when faced with the tangible and tragic harms resulting from restrictive abortion policies, his view changed. Informed by empathy, ethical considerations and his views on the appropriate role of government, he is now solidly pro-choice.
What? A politician who changes his mind to do the right thing? Is that not what we all want? Well, it certainly is what we want.
Jolly's positions track exactly the language of Amendment 4: 'No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient's health, as determined by the patient's healthcare provider.' That language is the same codification of Roe v. Wade that Jolly supports.
We find it admirable that Jolly is someone who was willing to change his mind after being confronted with the realities of the anti-abortion movement and its devastating impact on those who need abortions but cannot get them. None of us would be supporting him today unless he had realized his past stance on reproductive choice was wrong.
Jolly pledges that he will govern according to his values, which are based on 'love, kindness, respect and dignity.' He says that there are three basic principles that govern his decisions:
▪ Florida's economy should work for everyone in the state.
▪ Florida's laws and policies should apply equally to all.
▪ The personal freedoms of all Floridians must be protected.
Those values and principles point only to support for reproductive rights.
We trust David Jolly on reproductive rights. But this is not a one-issue race. We also support his positions on other issues that he and we consider critical to Florida: addressing the affordability of housing, property insurance and health care, strengthening and improving public education and allowing our public universities to thrive without government interference.
If we cannot accept that politicians can change their minds when they realize they were wrong, we are in for governance that none of us want. Jolly is a person who will live and govern by the same values and principles we all support.
That's why dedicated pro-choice women leaders across Miami-Dade like Maribel Balbin, Cindy Lerner and Jennifer Stearns Buttrick are joining reproductive freedom champions throughout our state like Mona Reis, Susan Windmiller, former member of Congress Gwen Graham and former Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Barbara Pariente in saying: We trust David Jolly on reproductive rights.
Ellen Freidin is a lawyer and sponsor of Florida's Constitutional Equal Protection Clause and leader of the Fair Districts Florida movement. Jane Moscowitz is a former federal prosecutor. Donna Shalala is a former member of Congress and former president of the University of Miami. Barbara Zdravecky is the retired CEO of Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
a few seconds ago
- Los Angeles Times
Summer school for migrant students takes a double hit from Trump. Fewer kids go to the zoo
The 8-year-old girl is a migrant student whose family moves frequently in search of seasonal work. But for five weeks this summer, she found stability, fun and academic nurturing in a program for children like her that included visits to the L.A. Zoo twice a week. But like the axolotl, the salamander she studied, this program is critically endangered. Because migrant students may have family members who are living in the country illegally — or may themselves lack legal status — the Trump administration wants to end federal funding for it, saying the program wastes money and violates his policy directives. And in a more immediate blow to the program, amid fears over immigration-enforcement raids, fewer children went to the zoo and virtually no parents attended concurrent education workshops on how to support their children's learning. Although the federally funded zoo experience is a tiny program within the Los Angeles Unified School District — and a small part of a summer school that reaches tens of thousands of students, it offers a window into how Trump administration policies filter down to the classroom affecting California's complex education mission and some of the state's most vulnerable children. There are 1,700 students defined as migrants in the nation's second-largest school system, which has about 400,000 students ranging from transitional kindergarten through high school. Parents of these students typically work in agriculture or the dairy industry and they move with the seasons. The children sometimes move with the parents; sometimes they stay behind with relatives in the Los Angeles area or a different home base. Their parents typically have limited education and often limited English-language skills. The federal government provides L.A. Unified about $1.4 million for extra help for migrant students throughout the school year, part of some $400 million in federal migrant education grants available nationwide. The annual distribution of this funding was supposed to begin July 1, but the Trump administration held it back, even though it was approved by Congress earlier this year. Nationwide, this withheld funding for various education programs surpassed an estimated $6 billion, although some was released last week. Last week California joined other states in suing the Trump administration for holding back the money, much of which the administration wants to eliminate entirely in future years, including the migrant education funding. Those who applaud the federal cutbacks say that state and local governments should pay for these programs if they are valuable. Others believe the federal government retains an important role in helping children with special needs. Without federal involvement, 'some students are going to lose, and historically, it had been students of color, it had been migrant students, it had been low-income students,' said Mayra Lara, director of Southern California partnerships and engagement for the advocacy group EdTrust-West. RR — a rising third-grader whom the The Times agreed to identify by her initials to protect her and her family's privacy — has attended the zoo program for two consecutive years. 'I was kind of excited because I had the same teacher, because I really wanted the same teacher because she was nice and kind,' said RR, who wears glasses and has a dark ponytail. The number of participants who study at the zoo program is relatively small — because many families leave the area for summer work. In a typical year, 45 students, mostly in elementary school, take part. This summer, however, the number plummeted to 25, even though L.A. Unified provided buses to take students to the zoo and to Malabar Elementary in Boyle Heights, the home base for classroom work. What happened is no mystery to Ruth Navarro, the program's lead teacher for L.A. Unified. Concerned about immigration raids, four families asked if the district could pick their kids up from home. The district figured out a way to do this, but the families eventually declined to participate regardless, Navarro said. 'Even though we were willing to go to their home to pick them up, they didn't want to let their child out the door because of fear of what might happen to them,' Navarro said. Normally, the school system needs three buses to pick up participating students. This year, one of the buses was canceled. In addition, virtually no parents took advantage of a program for them that coincided with the hours their children were in class, Navarro said. This effort included workshops on such topics as social emotional learning and how to help children improve their reading skills. There also was advice on how to access help with immigration issues, Navarro said. In response to fears, parents were provided with an online simulcast for the workshops — in which about 15 parents participated, Navarro said. Los Angeles Unified also expanded an online version of the Malabar elementary classes, in which about 40 students participated to varying degrees — far more than usual. But the online students missed out on the heart of the program — seven trips to the zoo and in-person classroom interaction. RR took full advantage of summer learning — and became expert on the axolotl. At first, 'I thought it was just like a normal fish, but until I noticed the legs. I was like, 'Wait, a fish doesn't have legs,' ' she recounted. RR, like other students, created art projects of her animal and also served as a docent for parents and visitors. 'They have gills that help them breathe underwater,' she explained, holding a microphone next to the tank, adding that the axolotl can change colors to hide. 'There's one camouflaging over there,' she said, pointing. RR thinks it would be fun to be an axolotl and breathe underwater. She's never been to a pool or an ocean. The students are typically extremely shy at the start of the summer, said Coral Barreiro, community programs manager for the L.A. Zoo. 'They learn interpretation skills, which is amazing for building up confidence and public speaking in the future,' Barreiro said. 'They meet with the zookeepers, and they basically, at the end, mimic everything that we've done and make it their own.' L.A. Unified is continuing its migrant student program for now by using reserves that were designated for other purposes. During the school year, the migrant program pays for services such as tutoring and an extended instructional time after school and on Saturdays. Some argue that migrant programs — and many other examples of federal education spending — are not the responsibility of the federal government, including Neal P. McCluskey, director of the Center for Educational Freedom at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute. 'The federal government doesn't have constitutional authority to fund programs like that, not to mention we have a $37-trillion national debt,' said McCluskey, who was not taking a position on the value of the effort. 'If government is going to provide such a program, it should be state or locally funded.' The Trump administration, in its budget proposal for next year, echoes this argument, but also classifies the migrant effort as an outright negative. 'This program is extremely expensive' per student, according to budget documents. 'This program has not been proven effective and encourages ineligible noncitizens to access taxpayer dollars stripping resources from American students.' Critics of the administration's approach say that the federal government has long stepped in to support the students who need it most — when a state is unwilling or unable to do so. Without federal regulation and funding, state and local governments have not 'done right by all students,' said Lara, of EdTrust-West. The pending cuts and withheld funds, she said, will result in 'denying opportunity to students. State and local governments are going to have to make really tough decisions.'
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Epstein saga hangs over Congress's sprint to summer recess
The controversy surrounding the Trump administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files is poised to dominate the conversation on Capitol Hill this week, as Congress sprints to August recess — and prepares to dive into government funding conversations. The House returns to Washington on Monday for its last week before breaking for the long summer recess, while the Senate is in session for its penultimate week, a final stretch that will be inundated by conversations surrounding Epstein, whether the documents related to him should be released and how the Justice Department has dealt with the current uproar. The situation has been a difficult one for Congressional Republicans, who are weighing listening to the MAGA base and calling for the release of the documents against President Trump, who has urged his party to drop the matter. Aside from Epstein, Congress this week will spend some time focusing on government funding, as the Sept. 30 shutdown deadline inches closer. The Senate is expected to consider its first of 12 full-year funding bills, though that effort could be complicated after Republicans passed a bill to claw back $9 billion in federal funding. Also this week, the Senate is scheduled to vote on a number of Trump nominees as the president urges the upper chamber to cancel its August recess. And House Republicans are slated to select a new chair of the Homeland Security Committee following former Chair Mark Green's (R-Tenn.) departure from Congress. Lawmakers confront lingering Epstein scandal The outcry over the Trump administration's handling of the Epstein files is likely to continue this week, as Republicans await the grand jury testimony Trump directed for release and some continue to call for the release of all the documents in the case. Adding to the controversy is a potential — though unlikely — vote in the House on a non-binding resolution, prepared by Republicans, that calls for the release of some materials from the case but gives Attorney General Pam Bondi the ability to exempt some parts. The House Rules Committee advanced the resolution after hours of deliberations last week, delaying a vote on a package to claw back $9 billion in federal funding. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), however, has not committed to holding a vote on the measure, a posture that will likely spark criticism from Democrats and even some Republicans who want the documents to see the light of day. 'We'll determine what happens with all that,' Johnson said when asked if he will put the Epstein resolution on the floor. 'There's a lot developing. The president made his statements this afternoon, he's asked the attorney general to release the information, I'm certain that she will, and everybody can make their own decisions about that.' Pressed on if he would commit to staging a vote on the legislation, Johnson again stopped short, telling reporters: 'We will see how all this develops.' 'We're in line with the White House, there's no daylight between us,' he added. 'We want transparency, and I think that will be delivered for the people.' Johnson suggested that the vote was a way to give Republicans on the Rules Committee cover after they voted against a different measure last week calling for the release of the documents. In the meantime, reaction is likely to continue rolling in about The Wall Street Journal's reporting that Trump, in 2003, allegedly sent Epstein a 'bawdy' letter for his birthday. Republicans have slammed the report, and Trump sued the outlet and Rupert Murdoch, an owner of the outlet. And lawmakers are awaiting the grand jury transcripts that Trump directed Bondi to release. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), who has called for the release of the Epstein files, said, 'I believe that will pretty much cover everything,' referring to the transcripts, but he noted that he still wants all the files to be released. Democrats, meanwhile, are downplaying the importance of the transcripts, arguing that they will only pertain to Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, a convicted sex offender who is serving time for wrongdoing in connection to Epstein. Hanging over the entire controversy is a bipartisan effort, led by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), to force a vote on a resolution that calls for the disclosure of Epstein files. The pair is vowing to file a discharge petition for the measure, which already has 10 other GOP supporters. Government shutdown deadline inches closer This week marks the final one that both the House and Senate are in session at the same time before August recess — and before Congress returns to a government funding sprint in September. With less than 10 weeks to go until the shutdown deadline — and less than 20 legislative days until the cliff — Congress is behind the eight ball, staring down a mountain of work that has to be done before funding runs out in Washington. The House has only passed two out of 12 full-year appropriations bills, while the Senate has approved none of the dozen. The upper chamber will try to chip away at their to-do list this week, with an initial procedural vote expected on Tuesday on the bill to fund military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs and related agencies. Votes on the measures in each chamber, however, are unable to bring Congress closer to averting a government shutdown, since the full-year measures are written at different levels. Adding to the dilemma is the bill Republicans approved this month to claw back $9 billion in federal funding, targeting foreign aid and public broadcasting. Democrats warned that passage of that package would tarnish the appropriations process, setting the stage for a high-stakes stretch to Sept. 30. Earlier this month, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said clearing the legislation — known as a rescissions bill — 'would be an affront to the bipartisan appropriations process.' 'That's why a number of Senate Republicans know it is absurd for them to expect Democrats to act as business as usual and engage in a bipartisan appropriations process to fund the government, while they concurrently plot to pass a purely partisan rescissions bill to defund those same programs negotiated on a bipartisan basis behind the scenes,' he wrote in a letter to colleagues, later adding: 'This is beyond a bait and switch — it is a bait and poison-to-kill.' The current dynamics are making the possibility of a continuing resolution in September more-and-more likely. Senate to vote on nominees as Trump calls for canceling recess The Senate this week is slated to continue churning through Trump's nominees, as the president puts pressure on the upper chamber to confirm more of his picks — and urges Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to cancel recess for that reason. The focus on nominations comes after the Senate spent considerable floor time on the 'big, beautiful bill' and legislation to lock in cuts made by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which monopolized recent weeks. The Senate will vote on Joshua M. Divine's nomination to be U.S. district judge for the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri, Cristian M. Stevens's nomination to be U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, Aaron Lukas's nomination to be principal deputy director of national intelligence, Bradley Hansell's nomination to be undersecretary of defense for intelligence and security, Arielle Roth's nomination to be assistant secretary of commerce for communications and information, and John Hurley's nomination to be undersecretary for terrorism and financial crimes. The focus on confirming Trump's picks comes after the president over the weekend encouraged Thune to nix the chamber's August recess, which is set to begin at the end of next week and run through the month. 'Hopefully the very talented John Thune, fresh off our many victories over the past two weeks and, indeed, 6 months, will cancel August recess (and long weekends!), in order to get my incredible nominees confirmed. We need them badly!!! DJT' Trump wrote on Truth Social. It remains unclear if Thune will heed the president's advice and cancel recess. While Republicans want to continue confirming Trump's nominees, they are also eager to head home for the month to sell the 'big, beautiful bill' to constituents, which they see as vital as the midterm elections inch closer. House GOP to select new Homeland Security Committee chair House Republicans will vote on a new chairman for the Homeland Security Committee this week, after Green officially resigned from Congress. Republican Reps. Michael Guest (Miss.), Andrew Garbarino (N.Y.), Carlos Gimenez (Fla.) and Clay Higgins (La.) are all vying for the leadership position. The Republican Steering Committee — a group of Republican leaders and regional representatives — is scheduled to meet Monday and recommend a candidate for the job, who will likely be rubber-stamped by the conference later in the week. The four candidates each bring different qualities to the table. Guest, currently serving as chairman of the House Ethics Committee, is a former prosecutor who has held stints as vice chair and a subcommittee chair on the Homeland Security panel. The Mississippi Republican has also underscored that he was an impeachment manager when the House penalized then-Homland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Garbarino has pointed to his New York roots, arguing that the panel should turn back to its focus on counterterrorism, which was the focal point after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack. Gimenez, a former mayor and firefighter, has said that his background dealing with emergency planning in Florida, a state prone to hurricanes, has uniquely prepared him for the role. He has also said there should be 'nuance' in some of Trump's immigration policies. And Higgins, a former police officer, is the most senior of the candidates running, giving him a leg up in an environment where seniority is taken into consideration. A number of Louisiana Republicans, however, are already in leadership — Johnson and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), for example — which could work against him. Johnson said the candidates have created 'quite a horse race.'
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Republicans fear Washington headed for shutdown after bruising spending fights
Republican lawmakers fear Washington may be headed for a government shutdown later this year after two bruising fights over President Trump's One Big, Beautiful Bill Act and a $9 billion rescissions package has created bad blood on Capitol Hill. White House budget director Russell Vought says the administration plans to send up another wave of spending rescissions to Congress and GOP leaders are already waving the caution flag on that as some Republicans privately warn it may not have the votes to pass. After six months of bitter partisan fighting since Trump's inauguration, Republicans will now need cooperation from Democrats to keep the government funded and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) is warning GOP colleagues not to expect 'business as usual.' One senior Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee put the chances of a shutdown in the fall at 'a real square 50-50.' The lawmaker warned that if the White House sends up another rescissions package, 'it will be met with mixed results.' 'I agree with John Thune that we need to get to a regular appropriations process and I think it gets in the way of that. So the timing, if they do another one, is going to have to be better timed and [have] much more detail,' the senator said, referring to Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.). The senator acknowledged that Democrats are furious after getting steamrolled on the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act and the rescissions package. 'Who gets blamed for it?' the lawmaker mused. A second Republican senator who requested anonymity said the odds of a shutdown are significantly higher after scorched-earth battles with Democrats on the Trump's megabill, which cut nearly $1 trillion in federal Medicaid spending, and the rescissions package, which defunded PBS and NPR and clawed back money from global aide programs. 'I think the Democrats are very unhappy,' the senator said. 'You got some of them that are running for president, you got some of them that are running for majority or minority leader over there. So, I think they're going to fight for us no matter what and I think they see government funding as one of those places they want to fight. 'We're already thinking and talking about what we do there,' added the lawmaker, who has participated in conversations with GOP leaders. 'We know that no matter what we do they're ready to have that fight already,' the lawmaker added, referring to Democratic colleagues. 'They're going to want to fight. 'We're talking about how we're going to fund the government,' the source added. Schumer came under scathing criticism from the left flank of his party in March when he made the controversial decision to vote for a partisan government funding package drafted by the House to avoid a government shutdown. Schumer argued at the time that a shutdown would be worse than swallowing what Democrats saw as a highly partisan funding bill because he said it would 'give Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and DOGE and Russell Vought the keys to the city, state and country.' He said a shutdown would give Trump and his allies 'carte blanche to destroy vital government services' as the president would have 'full authority to deem whole agencies, programs and personnel 'non-essential.'' Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) suggested Democrats in Washington need to show more fight against Trump's agenda. 'Frankly, a lot of our approval rating problems are from Democrats dissatisfied with our level of fight,' he said in reference to a recent Harvard-Harris poll of more than 2,000 registered voters nationwide that gave the Democratic Party a 40 percent job approval rating. 'I think that's probably because we have not been showing the fight they expect,' he said. That sets the stage for a bruising fight over government funding legislation this fall and the heightened possibility of a shutdown, lawmakers warn. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) called the government funding bill that passed in March a 'disaster.' 'We need a bipartisan process and Republicans were not committed to that in the spring,' he said. After two knockdown, drag-out fights with Democrats over the tax and spending bill and the rescissions package, during which angry Democrats dragged out the proceedings into the night with delay tactics, Thune is ready to shift to the regular appropriations process, which depends on bipartisan cooperation. Thune has hedged when asked how many additional rescissions packages he expects to take up from Vought, Trump's controversial head of the Office of Management and Budget. 'It's going to take 60 [votes] to fund the government,' Thune said. 'My expectation is, at least I hope, we plan to move [appropriations] bills that will have cooperation from the Democrats.' Asked whether there's support in his conference to take up another rescissions package, Thune said: 'We'll see what the future holds, but I think right now the goal is to get into the appropriations process.' 'Let's start marking up bills, trying to get them on the floor, and have a regular order appropriations process,' he added. Senate Republicans familiar with Thune's plans say he hopes to bring a package of appropriations bills to the Senate floor the week before the August recess. That package would likely consist of the agriculture appropriations bill, the military construction and veterans affairs appropriations bill and possibly the legislative branch appropriations bill and the commerce, justice, science appropriations measure. The senior member of the Appropriations Committee said the goal is to get that package and possibly another one or two passed before government funding expires at the end of September. GOP senators are warning that if the White House budget office sends up another rescissions package to Congress this summer, it would likely throw a wrench into passing regular spending bills and avoiding a government shutdown. 'I really would like to have the rescissions being part of the appropriations package in the future,' said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Appropriations Committee. 'I'm going to counsel hard that they consider running them through the appropriations process,' he said of cuts the White House wants to make to certain government programs. 'Strategically, if you want to do appropriations, you got to have 60 votes in the Senate and Democrats have to play a part in that.'
