Register your vote: Should a registrant be allowed to run for political office?
There’s an important public conversation taking place right now about who should be eligible to run for public office, and we believe our community’s voice deserves to be part of it. A local news outlet is conducting a public poll asking whether someone who is a registered sex offender should be allowed to run for public office. Regardless of where you stand, this is exactly the kind of issue where public perception shapes policy — and silence allows others to define the narrative.
At FAC, we believe informed citizens should participate in civic discussions, especially when the subject directly affects our community and the principles of constitutional rights, proportional justice, and equal access to the political process. If we want balanced conversations and thoughtful decision-making, we have to show up and be counted. Polls like this influence how media frames the issue and how lawmakers interpret public sentiment.
We encourage you to take a moment to cast your vote and then share the link so others can do the same. Let’s make sure our perspective is represented.
You can register your vote here: https://kmph.com/news/fox26-news-poll/vote-should-someone-who-is-a-registered-sex-offender-be-allowed-to-run-for-public-office
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The obvious is once their debt is paid, of course. But the other thing is this will not pass constitutional scrutiny if challenged. You need to ban all convicted persons of crimes from running (or being elected) because if you are picking on one, then you will not pass muster, IMO.
I voted yes (of course) primarily because I want to see how his opponent would campaign against him.
I anticipate it would be something along the lines of “he wants to remove the protections so he and his kind can more easily assault our children.” Then they could be cornered into explaining the effectiveness of those supposed protections and how winning the seat would enable him to bypass them. I don’t see how that would be possible without sounding incredibly foolish.
Then again, foolishness runs rampant in politics these days, in both parties.
Yes of course if he or she is not longer on supervision.
If you are brave and strong enough to endure the hate, go for it. Scrutiny, bashing, name calling and more heads that person’s way, but if that is what they strive for, more power to them.
Once a person has completed their court ordered sanctions prison, probation.. they should be entitled to all privileges afforded all other citizens.
Accountability paid! Restoration rights! Remember “NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION “ how do we represent the voices of all citizens if not all are able to return to society and maintain equal rights even for those who have offended?
Hello Ms. Colletta,
Made me giggle with “NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION“ People been saying that since 1994.
Until it’s proven a punishment nothing will change other then harsher laws here in Florida. If this Ex Post Facto case doesn’t prove it, they wasted the best opportunity to follow Alaska after Smith v Doe for Florida. Look at the hell I’ve had to go through here to get people to understand. I didn’t come forward for my health, I came forward as proof, evidence exposing what they did that FAC nor Florida can see. It’s been hidden for 30 years. I’ve been held on the public registry with threats no one is aware of. This will explode Nationally because of my AKA. That is who I am. I am the foundation of the public notification of the registry known as “Megan’s Law”. I’ve been in Double Jeopardy here is Florida for 27 years. Someone in Law Enforcement has now lied thinking they could cover it up. I get turned away from LEGAL REPRESENTATION because of this Ex Post Facto case.
If no one can see what you’re exposing, and no one will offer you legal representation, why do you suppose that is?
Also, I think you may be misconstruing the origin and meaning of the slogan, “no taxation without representation.”
Respectfully, I think you get turned away from legal representation because you’ve not been able to clearly articulate what you are talking about. You keep suggesting that your case is the smoking gun that can take down the registry, that you have an order from NJ that says your registration status should be non-public, and that Florida refuses acknowledge the validity of the foreign order.
But your belief is incorrect for a number of reasons, which several people have tried to explain to you. First, every state has their own registry with it’s own rules and restrictions. That’s why Florida’s is lifetime and another state’s might be 10 years. It’s why Florida’s contains residency restrictions and another state’s does not. Some states have tiers and only publish higher tiers, whereas Florida publishes everyone. If you become subject to registration in Florida, you are put on the public registry. Period. In NJ all qualifying offenders must register with law enforcement, but only certain offenders are placed on the public internet registry. Tier 1 is not listed on the public internet registry in NJ. But that has nothing to do with Florida.
Second, you think that the FDLE is obligated to abide by the order from a New Jersey Court. The Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution (Article IV, Section 1) has an important exception that you are ignoring. The Full Faith and Credit Clause only applies if the original court (New Jersey) had proper jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter (your placement on the Florida registry). Since a New Jersey Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the Florida registry (or personal jurisdiction over the FDLE), the order you have is toilet paper in this state. I’m sorry, but this is Constitutional Law 101 stuff.
You’ve criticized attorneys and organization by name and implication many times and we continue to give you the respect of publishing your comments and trying to provide you with reasons you get turned away from legal representation. Believe me, I so wish you had something valid to “explode this nationally” or your AKA (Megans Law John Doe Ex Post Facto) commanded more authority than a name you decide to post as online, but many legal professionals have considered everything you’ve posted and submitted and the consensus is that you don’t seem to get it.
Everyone let your voice be heard, vote on this
Wish we could get a survey like this in FL about being allowed to vote.