A reminder of that came recently when his office posted copies of what it calls "Driving Message" in response to a public records request by Tampa Bay Times reporter Steve Bousquet.
The information from October and November is essentially a rolling set of questions on topics/news of the day that includes the answer that Scott is supposed to be given when asked. The responses cover everything from campus carry gun legislation to what he thinks about GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump and why he's opposed to raising the minimum wage. ("Increasing the minimum wage will result in losing jobs.")
And the answers included in the documents are exactly what Scott has said about the various topics, whether it's a question about suspending school grades or the handling of Syrian refugees by federal government.
The talking points also give a small amount of insight about how Scott may handle issues in the near future.
The remarks, for instance, say he's not endorsing any GOP candidates for president "today" but they include praise for Trump despite the criticism aimed at the businessman from fellow GOP candidates such as former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.
"I think people in Washington are trying to figure out why Trump is doing so well, but the reality is he is saying what he thinks. He is not being politically correct. I think a lot of people find that refreshing," state Scott's talking points.
Coupled with other things he has said about Trump _ and the fact that some of his own key supporters/campaign people are now working for him _ it would be plausible for Scott to endorse him ahead of the March GOP primary in Florida. (Although Scott has generally avoided getting involved in primaries given his own bitter, divisive primary for governor back in 2010 when he ran against establishment-backed candidate Bill McCollum.)
The answers included in the document regarding a bill that would allow concealed weapon holders to bring their guns on university campuses suggests that the Scott administration may have some doubts about the legislation. ("I am not sure there is a silver bullet solution, but college should be a safe place students go to learn, not a place of violence.")
But the main question is whether Scott and his team will revise this script as they head into 2016 and a session that starts in less than two weeks.
His talking points on tax cuts, hospital transparency, the proposed deal with the Seminole Tribe of Florida, and Enterprise Florida reforms don't fully explain Scott's logic. In other words, how exactly will Scott sell this?
Despite a contentious 2015 session that saw the GOP-controlled Legislature pare back, or ignore completely, many of his recommendations, Scott actually is pushing ahead with a more detailed agenda this upcoming session than he has during the last few years. And that creates plenty of potential flashpoints in the weeks and months ahead.
There's no doubt that his $1 billion tax cut package and his request of $250 million for business incentives are his top priorities as Scott makes a case to diversify the state's economy. He will make the argument in January - during a tour to emphasize job growth under his watch - that the state's economic recovery will not hold if more isn't done.
The problem for Scott and his team is that there is a wide divide in the House and Senate (which has been unable to agree on many top issues in the past year) on the right approach of so many of the items on Scott's 2016 checklist.
Gambling? It's not clear that there's enough votes in the Senate for the $3 billion deal proposed by Scott that would give craps and roulette to the Seminoles. But the House may not go along with the deal unless it includes a constitutional amendment that bars any future expansion. Senate President Andy Gardiner has said he's not sure there's enough votes in the Senate to pass such an amendment.
Business incentives? While the House and Senate may be willing to endorse Scott's "reforms" in regards to process, the idea of placing such a large amount of money in the governor's hands is viewed suspiciously by some House conservatives who consider incentives an intrusion into the marketplace.
Tax cuts? The amount is a hard goal to reach without making cuts elsewhere in the budget - which is something that legislators about to hit the campaign trail don't want hanging over their head. Another complication is that there is growing resistance to the reliance on increased local property taxes to help pay for school funding. House and Senate leaders say they like "tax cuts," but there is also divergence on whether those cuts should be more directed at individuals, not companies as Scott has largely proposed.
Hospital transparency? Scott's ongoing efforts to go after Florida's hospitals - including a price cap - includes some proposals that may strike some conservatives as intrusive government regulation not a free-market solution. House leaders have been pushing policies that they say will open up health care to more competition, while top Senate Republicans seem to have little interest in any of the ideas.
Scott, of course, has his veto pen as the ultimate bargaining tool as he deals with recalcitrant legislators.
The decision of Jesse Panuccio to resign from his job as the head of the Department of Economic Opportunity rather than confront a messy confirmation battle removed one potential point of leverage for the Florida Senate. But there are other agency heads whose adherence to Scott's agenda and seeming resistance to legislative instructions may make it difficult for them to survive what could be a messy session.
If the Legislature were in fact able to put together a budget quickly and present it to Scott before the end of the 60-day session, it would create a conundrum for the governor. He would be forced to act on legislative budget priorities within 7 days which would give lawmakers the ability to decide whether to approve some of Scott's top priorities based on how he handled the budget.
Another problem for Scott is that the consuming lobbying frenzy over the compact with the Seminole Tribe may distract legislators as they try to cobble together enough votes to pass something. (One possible solution is to have lawmakers pass the main compact, with the promise they will pass bills in 2017 to deal with other parts of the gambling industry.)
As all of this unfolds during the next two months, the question is whether Scott and his team will provide new answers, new insights and new arguments to counter the pushback that the governor is going to likely encounter.
Or will Scott stick to his oft-repeated line that he used time and time again where he will say that he expects the Legislature to "do the right thing" and vote exactly how he wants them to without explaining how, or why legislators should do that.
Maybe that will be the "driving message" that needs to be answered later in 2016.