The Fine Print

"Rick Scott could be at zero percent approval...."

It's no secret that Gov. Rick Scott's poll numbers have steadily gone downhill since he was first sworn in as governor.

There is some debate as to whether or not Scott's numbers are as bad as the latest poll from Quinnipiac University showed. Some newer GOP-leaning polls have suggested that the 29 percent number given to Scott by Quinnipiac may be too low.

Still Scott's poll numbers have triggered some debate and speculation on whether his unpopularity could aid President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Florida come next year.

There are some who obviously think mentioning Scott could help them.

U.S. Rep. Ted Deutch on Tuesday, for example, sent out a fundraising pitch for this quarter that asked his supporters to "send Rick Scott" a message as state lawmakers get ready to redraw districts.

But others say that the fate of Obama is tied to the national economy, not anything that Scott does.

"Rick Scott could be at zero percent approval, and if unemployment is at 10.5 percent or 11 percent, then Barack Obama is not getting re-elected,” Rick Wilson, a Republican strategist working for Adam Hasner in the United States Senate race in Florida, was quoted in a story that ran Tuesday in the New York Times.

To read the whole story, go here.

 

 

Haridopolos and session fundraising part 2

Senate President Mike Haridopolos is expected to announce a significant fundraising haul since he jumped into the race for U.S. Senate.

The 2011 first quarter numbers for federal candidates is due by the end of the week.

Haridopolos held a series of fundraisers before session, but said recently that he stopped holding them once session started in March. An earlier post relayed an exchange about his fundraising activities and his contention that he follows the law when it comes to fundraising.

That post discussed a federal court ruling from Georgia that has been cited in the past by candidates - both Republican and Democrat - to justify raising money for federal races during session. It was also pointed out that an attorney for the Florida House raised questions about the ruling, but said it was ok for House members to raise money for federal races because House rules specifically exempt federal candidates.

After asking about it several weeks earlier, the Senate on Friday produced its own legal opinion regarding the matter that is dated from 2008.

So to be fair here's the basic premise of that opinion.

Jason Vail, then the general counsel for the Florida Senate, wrote a letter to then-Sen. Bill Posey who had asked about raising money for his Congressional bid during session.

Vail's essential opinion is that Congress own federal campaign laws supersede any state laws and he cites both a 1993 opinion and the 1996 ruling from the federal appeals court in Atlanta previously mentioned.

Vail acknowledges that the 1996 ruling, known as Teper v. Miller, may have "possible weaknesses" but he goes on to say that people are entitled to rely on advisory opinions from the Federal Election Commission and that the commission has concluded that federal law preempted the Georgia law that prohibited state legislators from soliciting or accepting campaign contributions during legislative session.

Vail acknowledges that the Georgia case involved a law and that "the main difference is that in our case, a Senate rule is involved rather than a state statute." Vail then cites a 1979 case that says federal preemption can operate against state rules "therefore I do not consider the distinction to be meaningful."

Bottom line by Vail: The federal government trumps Senate rules and that candidates for federal office are under no obligation to follow them.

Haridopolos, "the law," and fundraising during session

Senate President Mike Haridopolos has had a series of evolving answers when he keeps getting asked about fundraising for his U.S. Senate race.

When he first jumped into the race, Haridopolos said he had not yet made up his mind on whether he would raise money during the 2011 session.

Then in February he added a new answer: Ask incumbent U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson if he planned to stop raising money while the U.S. Senate was in session.

The Merritt Island Republican brushed aside any suggestion at the time that his situation was different from Nelson even though the Florida Legislature meets for just 60 days and even though Haridopolos has considerable more power as leader of the state Senate.

So I asked about it this week at his press availability and here's what he had to say:

"I’m not doing any fundraising events," Haridopolos said.

That led to this followup: "You're not doing any fundraising events. You're not making any phone calls, not talking to anybody?"

Haridopolos: "I’m running against someone who is raising money during their session right now. And as you know I follow the law, that’s exactly what I’m doing."

A short while later, I asked a follow-up question which prompted this exchange:

"You said follow the law, I’m confused here because your rules ban fundraising during the session."

Haridopolos: "Gary, you need to read the rules."

"No, I have read the rules sir."

"Let me just finish," Haridopolos said.

"No, the interpretation is based on a federal court ruling. It’s not in your rules."

Haridopolos then said that previous Democratic members of the Florida Legislature had raised money during session:

"We have now Congresswoman (Debbie) Wasserman Schultz, we have Congressman (Ted) Deutch, we have Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, we had former Congressman Ron Klein. They all chose to raise money during session. Al Lawson chose to. That is an opportunity if they choose to do it. All I said, and I said it in this room, is that my opponent Bill Nelson is raising money and has never stopped. And I’m doing the same thing. I’m choosing not to have events as you see me up here every day. You’ve seen our agenda be followed. That’s what people are concerned about and that’s what I’m focused on. I think given the pace that we are going through no one is questioning where my focus is. My focus is how do we turn around this state, how do we turn around this economy, how do we tighten our own belts and that’s exactly what I’m doing."

So let's dissect this just a bit.

In regards to the rules of the Florida Senate, you can read them for yourself:

1.361—Solicitation or acceptance of contributions; registration
and disclosure requirements
(1) During any regular legislative session, extended session, or
special session, a Senator may not directly or indirectly solicit, cause to
be solicited, or accept any contribution on behalf of either the Senator’s
own campaign, any organization described under section 527 or section
501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code, any political committee, any
committee of continuous existence, any political party, or the campaign of
any candidate for the Senate; however, a Senator may contribute to his or
her own campaign.

So how candidates raise money during session? Because there have been series of legal opinions from the attorneys who work for the Legislature on whether the rules apply to those seeking federal office.

Most of those opinions have cited a 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling from 1996 that struck down a Georgia law that barred legislators in that state from raising money during session if they were a federal candidate. The court concluded that the state could not pass laws that preempted federal campaign finance laws.

Interestingly enough, then-House general counsel Jeremiah Hawkes in 2007 issued a formal opinion where he cast doubt on the use of the federal ruling. Hawkes agreed that a 11th Circuit ruling was binding on Florida, but he added no other court had dealt with the issue and that ruling was not unanimous.

Hawkes also noted that "there does not seem to be any case that invalidates a legislative rule of procedure because of the preemption doctrine. Parliamentary bodies are given a wide range of discretion when it comes to governing the behavior of their members that can go beyond what can be regulated in statute."

Hawkes said in his opinion that House candidates were not barred from accepting contributions from federal races because the House rule was tied to a state law that did not cover federal candidates. Hawkes, however, cautioned that House members still had to follow another rule that says members should not take anything that could be construed to influence their vote.

"The fact that a solicitation was made during session could increase the likelihood that it would be perceived as influencing the member's vote,'' he wrote.

Just to note the Florida Senate does have a similar rule as well:

1.36—Improper influence
A Senator shall not accept anything that will improperly influence his
or her official act, decision, or vote.

But unlike the House rule the current Senate rule on solicitation is not linked to the state law that is limited to just state and local candidates.

 

 

 

Did harsh campaign for governor turn off voters? Report says maybe.

The highly charged and negative campaign for governor might have turned off a higher number of voters this past year.

Or so suggests a new state report drawn up by the Florida Division of Elections.

The report - which is sent to the Florida Legislature after every major election - shows that the number of voters who did not cast a "valid" vote in November nearly doubled from four years ago, surging from .97 percent in 2006 to 1.83 percent overall. This number includes people who wrote down the wrong name on the ballot, left the ballot blank, or cast a vote for more than one candidate.

The biggest reason for the jump was because voters skipped the race between Rick Scott and Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink and left the ballot blank.

You can read more about it here at the Florida Tribune.

Here's a copy of the report: Download Overvote Undervote report

Florida's wild expensive election could have big stakes

Florida's bitter, expensive and wild election season will finally lurch to a close on Tuesday.

Voters, besieged by a barrage of political ads, could be forgiven for thinking that the main issues are Medicare fraud, lockstep devotion to President Barack Obama and reckless plans to raise taxes.

But the election's impact on a state with a million residents out of work and hundreds of thousands of homes in foreclosure looms far more prominently than all that campaign vitriol filling airwaves and mailboxes.

"I think that Florida is at a crossroads and so is our country, and the Florida election can make a determination of the future of America," said Gov. Charlie Crist, running as an independent for U.S. Senate.

Crist's decision to leave office after just one term to run for a Senate seat helped spark a frenzied run for governor and marked the first time in more than 100 years that both the governor and all the seats on the Cabinet were open at the same time.

Democrats hope to win back the governor's mansion after 12 years of Republican control and begin to chip away at GOP dominance of the Florida Legislature.

"There's an opportunity here in this election to bring some balance back," said Karen Thurman, chairman of the Florida Democratic Party.

Florida voters could help decide the direction of the country and the state. They could help Republicans seize the U.S. House, give the Legislature a veto-proof majority, or pass amendments that could alter the state's political makeup.

A longer look at Florida's high-stakes election can be found here.

Crist's demise leaves an uncertain legacy

With polls showing that he continues to lag behind rival Marco Rubio, the hour that Gov. Charlie Crist spent with David Gregory at Tuesday night’s U.S. Senate debate might be his final time in the national spotlight.

Crist, who had successfully climbed from the ranks of the state senate into the governor’s mansion, is now confronted with the prospect that his political career for now is over. His decision to bolt the Republican Party and run as an independent means that he will have few options after this year.

His political ascent was marked by several twists and turns and it is hard to imagine that the man now preaching about independence and moderation once accused Democrats of dirty tricks in getting then-Gov. Lawton Chiles elected over Jeb Bush back in 1994.

But as Crist exits the stage, he leaves behind an uncertain – and largely incomplete – legacy as Florida’s governor. Crist became the first governor to voluntarily give up the post after one term in the 40-plus years that governors have been allowed to seek re-election.

Lance deHaven-Smith, a professor of public administration and policy at Florida State University, said Crist’s legacy actually depends on how the election turns out next week.

“Crist tried to move his party and the state back toward the middle after eight rather polarizing years under Jeb Bush,'' notes deHaven-Smith said in an e-mail. “He did not accomplish much policy-wise compared to many other governors, but he contributed to significant improvements in the state’s civic culture.  If he is elected to the Senate, Florida is likely to see a continuation of this moderation in public office for both parties.  If he loses, well, his legacy of compromise and pragmatism may be short-lived."

David Colburn, a professor of history at the University of Florida and a long-time scholar of state politics, said that Crist clearly tried to work with both political parties and was not ideological in how he approached problems. An example of this, of course, was Crist's decision to embrace the federal stimulus in order to help ease Florida's budget woes.

“I think it is easy to dismiss Crist as a politician who is only interested in getting and holding office and that there really is not much to him,’’ Colburn said in an e-mail.  “Clearly he is not ideological and he made clear to more than one state political leader that "he was not Jeb Bush." By that he meant that he was willing to work with both parties to find solutions to critical issues facing Florida and that he did not dismiss government's role in improving the quality of life for Floridians.”

But Colburn also made it clear that Crist is unlikely to leave the same kind of impact that other governors left.

A full look at Crist's uncertain legacy can be found here at the Florida Tribune.

Charlie Crist's defection from GOP could still leave a mark

If you believe the multitude of polls out there right now, the consensus is that Gov. Charlie Crist's bid to become Florida's next U.S. Senator is doomed.

Crist bolted the GOP last April to run as an independent candidate after it was clear that Marco Rubio would defeat him in a Republican primary. At first he surged ahead in the polls but now all of them having him trail Rubio by double-digits.

Yet Crist's decision to leave his party could still have a ripple effect after he's gone.

That's because a new report released this week by the Senate Ethics and Elections Committee recommends making it harder for candidates to switch parties and avoid primaries. While there is no guarantee that a bill will be filed, committee reports are often seen as a precursor to future legislation.

The report suggests that Florida lawmakers should change the law so that candidates cannot change their parties less than a year before qualifying begins. It notes that "requiring a candidate to make an ultimate decision on party membership or NPA status 16-18 months before the general election would effectively eliminate or drastically reduce last-minute, self-serving decisions regarding candidacy."

The same report also suggests that Florida needs a “sore loser” law that would ensure that no future candidate could lose a primary and then still show up on the general election ballot. The Senate report says that a close look at the existing law shows that there is no actual “prohibition” on a candidate running as someone with no party affiliation following a primary defeat. U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman in Connecticut ran as a third-party candidate in 2006 after he was defeated in the Democratic primary.

You can read more about the report here at the Florida Tribune.

 

 

The not-so-clear cut Republican Party of Florida audit.

The Republican Party of Florida earlier this month released a much anticipated audit that was supposed to finally reveal the depths of the financial scandal that has occurred under the watch of former chairman Jim Greer.

The independent audit also suggested that Gov. Charlie Crist may have benefited as well from improper spending during the reign of his hand-picked party chief who finally forced to resign back in January.

But it now appears that the situation may be a bit more complicated than initially reported.

It turns out, for example, that even party officials now concede that they aren't sure if any of the money spent on a trip to Walt Disney World was spent directly on Crist.

"We're not asserting that it was for him," said Dan Conston, a spokesman for the party. "We're asserting he was there."

Meanwhile, it turns out that the party reimbursed Jim Greer for expenses associated with a New York City trip that the party now says was improper.

So is the audit wrong? Depends on who you ask and what you believe.

Read the entire Herald-Tribune article here.

Rubio: I am not under investigation nor will I ever be

The furor over the still unreleased Republican Party of Florida audit this past weekend prompted the campaign of U.S. Senate candidate Charlie Crist to take several shots at rival Marco Rubio. After a closed door session on Saturday, the party said it may sue to recover hundreds of thousands of dollars that Crist and former chairman Jim Greer spent on non-party related travel expenses.

Danny Kanner, a spokesman for Crist, said the party should worry about whether or not Rubio is under investigation for the way he used his Republican Party of Florida issued credit card instead of inferring that Crist may need to pay back thousands of money to the party. The Crist campaign says the move by the party is a political payback aimed at Crist, who bolted the party to run as an independent.

Rubio, however, flatly insisted on Friday that he is not under investigation by either the FBI and IRS - and he boldly predicted that he never will be.

"It's just not true,'' said Rubio following his well-received speech at the 2010 Victory Dinner at Walt Disney World. "I have never been contacted by anyone. I'm not going to because it's not true."

Rubio continued to insist that he used his RPOF credit card for “political purposes” and that the “few instances” that it wasn’t that it was “paid back at the time.”

It's clear, however, that there is some type of investigation into party finances that has been underway for some time now. And Al Hoffman, a former U.S. ambassador and top fundraiser for the party, said at the Saturday RPOF meeting that he has been questioned by both the FBI and IRS about party spending matters.

It's just another reminder that despite RPOF chairman John Thrasher's bold statement before donors and party faithful on Friday night that the "dark period" of the party is over there is still plenty of fallout that could come from Jim Greer-credit cards-Ray Sansom series of scandals.

Now it's unclear how much of this will unfold before Election Day. The trial of Sansom - the former House speaker charged with using his power as budget chairman to steer money to a political donor and developer - has now been scheduled for early next year.

Greer's trial on charges that he steered party money to a shell company that he set up with former executive director Delmar Johnson was initially scheduled for October. But Damon Chase, an attorney for Greer, said the case will not move forward until the defense team has had a chance to put under oath Thrasher, incoming Senate President Mike Haridopolos, and incoming House Speaker Dean Cannon. They all signed a proposed severance package back in January that says that what Greer did as chairman was "proper, lawful and appropriate."

"I can't wait for the depositions where you sit them down and ask them questions," Chase said this past week. "We're going to walk into court, and go, boom, boom, boom, with the testimony."

Haridopolos, Cannon and Thrasher said they aren't bothered by the prospect of giving a deposition.

"I look forward to justice being done in that case and look forward to cooperating anyway I can,'' Cannon said.

The LeMieux-Rubio lovefest

Something worth noting:

When George LeMieux was appointed to the U.S. Senate last August, this was how he articulated his political philosophy:

 "I describe myself as a Charlie Crist Republican," LeMieux said at the time.

When asked what that meant, LeMieux said he planned to back the principles of his party, including lower spending, but that he would "work with anyone" who wanted to solve problems. He also said last year that "my view is that we are all Americans first and Floridians first and then comes party."

Flash forward to this year.

Crist bolted the Republican Party after it became apparent that he could not win the GOP primary for U.S. Senate against Marco Rubio. Despite LeMieux's deep ties with Crist - campaign manager, chief of staff and architect of some of Crist's policy initiatives - he opted against backing Crist in the race.

When LeMieux appeared at the quarterly meeting of the Republican Party of Florida earlier this month, he went even further and urged GOP leaders to "work hard" to elect Rubio and praised him for the "courage of his convictions."

LeMieux said he wouldn't "say anything bad about my friend the governor," but he then proceeded to explain that Rubio was needed in the U.S. Senate because he is a "principled conservative."

"Marco is a principled conservative and I have been there and I have seen what it takes, we cannot have people who are going to just go along and get along,'' LeMieux said. (This of course echoes one of the constant criticisms of Crist, which is that he changes his policy positions based on the prevailing mood of the moment.)

LeMieux then added this about Rubio: "He will be a great senator and he will not only be a solid conservative vote but he will be a solid conservative idea person."

LeMieux's statements are even more interesting given what Rubio said about him some 10 months ago:

"This is a disappointing appointment for Florida,'' Rubio said in a statement. "George LeMieux is a talented political operative and the governor’s best friend, but that doesn’t make him the right choice to represent Florida in the Senate."

So then what did Rubio say about LeMieux at a Tampa breakfast earlier this month with the GOP faithful?

"He has done more in the last 9 months in the U.S. Senate that some people do in six years,'' Rubio told the GOP faithful.

Rubio added that he was "grateful for his service."