amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot. (Emphasis supplied.) As noted by the majority, the ballot title of Amendment 9 provides: REQUIRING 65 PERCENT OF SCHOOL FUNDING FOR CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION; STATE’S DUTY FOR CHILDREN’S EDUCATION This limited, narrow title clearly implies that Amendment 9 solely addresses the percentage of school funding which must be allocated to classroom instruction. The title completely fails to mention that proposed Amendment 9 eliminates existing Florida law that a statutory “voucher program” is contrary to the constitutionally-required “uniform, efficient, safe, secure, and high quality system of free public schools.” Art. IX, § 1(a), Fla. Const.; see Bush v. Holmes, 919 So.2d 392, 412-13 (Fla.2006) (<HOLDING>). I recognize that the ballot summary mentions
holding that a superior court could not exercise its original jurisdiction under article iv section 6 over a challenge to a tax decision where the party failed to strictly or substantially comply with statutory procedural requirements holding plaintiffs failure to comply with section 2622 requires dismissal in federal court holding that statutorily created opportunity scholarship program failed to comply with article ix section 1a of the florida constitution holding that plan did not comply holding that although irs failed to comply with procedures of section 6335 tax sale was valid due to ratification by taxpayer