Voice of the people: Florida legislators 'bought and paid for'

Florida legislators 'bought and paid for'

Florida clearly no longer has a government that is "Of the People, By the People, For the People." (Homeowners face higher costs as legislators address crisis, 12/14/2022.) The Florida Republican-dominated legislature, bought, paid for and commanded by the likes of Big Insurance, Florida Power and Light, Duke Energy and others, like good little children are doing what they are told and literally stripping Florida homeowners of the benefits of insuring their homes.

Yes, the insurance companies will still collect premiums from us, but when there are claims to be made, it will be virtually impossible to press the claim. Why? Because those on the insurance companies' payroll, i.e., the Florida Republican legislators, have virtually written the ability for a homeowner to use an attorney to press a claim and then, on top of that, we are forced to arbitration, a system that highly favors the insurance companies.

Will we Florida voters learn as we continue to be hammered by the wealthy and the big corporations with their propaganda against women, minorities, abortion and immigrants? Sadly, not likely. Why? Lack of critical thinking skills among our voters. We don't know what we don't know, and we're paying a high price for it.

Richard Sutherland, Winter Haven

Why is a right to free speech justification for violating another's right to 'quiet enjoyment?'

Somehow, we have come to believe that the Right of Free Speech is without restriction. The intent of this Right is correctly defined as the right to speak out against governmental dictates that citizens believe to be wrong. The "thefreedictionary.com" Freedom of Speech: The right, guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to express beliefs and ideas without unwarranted government restriction. With a right of quiet enjoyment law on the books, then acts (by others) restricting a citizen's legal right to quiet enjoyment would not be legal or warranted.

Perhaps Lakeland could begin by adding the right to quiet enjoyment of citizens personal and private property. Properly worded, this would not impinge on the Right of Free Speech,

Constitutional right to Free Speech should not override the right to Quiet Enjoyment.

Earl J. Lang, Lakeland