Also, supporters contended the need for the amendment was made necessary by the numerous legal challenges across the coun- try to various states’ marriage laws. Judges were overturning laws passed by elected officials. It is highly unlikely that judges will overturn the state’s long-standing ban on oil exploration in Florida waters.

Additionally, any cost comparisons are specious, as the money spent on Amendment 2 was private dollars, not the taxpayer dol- lars being spent this week by calling the Legislature into special session to ban an activity that is already banned in Florida.

During the past 90 days residents of the Florida Panhandle and the Gulf Coast have been in crisis as a result of an oil well blow- out off the shore in Louisiana.  The Governor’s proposal to ban an industry already banned in Florida could not prevent oil from continuing to wash up on our state’s coastlines, wouldn’t put a single new skimmer off our shores, and won’t produce any new boom to protect our coasts.But this week we salvaged a politically motivated Special Session and took action to return the focus to where it needs to be, on creating jobs as well as economic assistance and development for the Panhandle. Speaker Cretul established 6 workgroups within the House to uncover problems and offer meaningful legislative solutions to the issues created by the oil spill. The goals and guiding principles for these workgroups are:

• Assist Florida’s citizens, businesses, and state and local governments in addressing the disaster and ensuring responsible par-ties are held accountable.
• Assure legislative actions bring meaningful relief while preserving fiscal responsibility and transparency.
• Assure legislative actions add value and make efficient use of resources.
• Enhance coordination, eliminate barriers, and streamline processes within legislative authority to influence.
• Avoid duplicating or distracting from other efforts to respond to and recover from the disaster.

The House and Senate have agreed to concentrate our efforts to identify legislation that may be passed in an appropriately-called Special Session this fall to assist citizens in Florida’s coastal counties. Our plan to work quickly, analyze data and create solutions and report back with a roadmap for action based on facts on the ground is a serious approach toward beginning the recovery ef- fort.  I encourage you to follow the activities and conclusions that emerge from these workgroups and to participate as we seek solutions.

During the 2010 Session the Florida House passed HM 1589 urging Congress to require the EPA to subject its proposed numeric nutrient criteria to a peer review by the Agency’s Science Advisory Board and to review by a third party such as the Government Accountability Office or the Congressional Budget Office. The EPA recently agreed to submit the methodology for some of the proposed standards to a scientific peer re-view. Accordingly, they will delay publishing standards for canals, downstream waters and estuaries until August 2012. The new regulations for coastal waters were to have been established by October of 2011.

The final EPA standards for lakes and flowing waters (streams and springs) will be published this October. The Florida Department of Environ-mental Protection and the EPA still have significant disagreements with how the EPA is calculating their standards. The EPA has been unwilling to submit the lakes and flowing water standards to a third party review.

In the interim, Department of Agriculture Commissioner Bronson and Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Sole sent a joint letter to Florida’s farmers and businesses encouraging them to sign up for the state’s Best Management Practice Program. Current law provides the pre-sumption of water quality compliance for those enrolled in the BMP program.