The Fine Print

Should the GOP be afraid of Rick Scott?

Shortly after Rick Scott jumped into the race for governor this past spring, Republican Party Chairman John Thrasher met with the Naples businessman.

Thrasher vowed to stay neutral in the GOP primary for governor and even offered Scott the same deal that the party offered Attorney General Bill McCollum: You can have the party pay some of your campaign expenses if you raise money for the party.

Scott said no.

Since that cordial first meeting, a lot has changed.

And it is becoming clear that with less than a month to go before Election Day that a Scott victory could do more than shake up the governor’s race. It could bring substantial upheaval for Republicans hoping to take advantage of voter anger at Democrats and the White House.

If Scott wins, it would be the second time in less than a year that the de facto leader of the party had either left or got pushed aside.  Republicans would now have to turn to a largely self-funded candidate to help raise money for the party during the crucial fall elections. Plus, Scott has his own team of people who have little reason for allegiance to the existing party leaders.

Scott insisted during a campaign swing through Northwest Florida on Monday that there’s no reason for Republican leaders to fear him winning the primary.

“I am not going to make my decisions based on emotion,’’ said Scott.

Read the full story here.

Next Senate President not bothered by a no vote on all amendments

Florida voters were supposed to get a crammed ballot this November that would ask them to weigh in on everything from school class sizes to federal health care reform and property taxes.

But a flurry of lawsuits coming from opponents of the amendments -- most of which were placed on the ballot by the Republican-controlled Legislature -- could block many of those proposals from being voted on this fall.

Six of nine proposed constitutional amendments on the 2010 ballot are tied up in court fights. And two measures have already been tossed from the ballot by lower court judges, although each of the cases probably will not be resolved until the state Supreme Court rules.

The latest to fall came Friday when a Leon County judge threw out a proposed amendment that advocates said would have been a boost to Florida's ailing real estate industry.

One lawyer involved in the fights is putting the blame on state lawmakers for crafting amendments that he says are intended to "deceive" the public. But Sen. Mike Haridopolos, R-Merritt Island, asserted that lawmakers have done all their work in the "sunshine."

But Haridopolos said with all the confusion surrounding the amendments voters could wind up rejecting all of them. And he says he has no problem with that.

"I would be fine if everyone voted no on all the amendments."

Here's the full story at the Sarasota Herald Tribune.

Sink refuses to take matching money for now

Several candidates running for statewide offices will be getting checks on Friday from taxpayers. But Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink won’t be one of them.

Sink, the Democratic nominee for governor, said this week that is she still hasn’t decided whether she will ask for public campaign financing money.

“I’m delaying my decision,’’ said Sink.

Sink suggested she may not make up her mind on whether to accept taxpayer help until after the Aug. 24 primary between Naples businessman Rick Scott and Attorney General McCollum.

“I’m waiting to see how the race comes out,’’ said Sink.

Sink reported on Thursday that her campaign raised $1.1 million in donations during the last quarter and that she had $5.7 million in cash on hand for her campaign at the end of the quarter, which was July 16 and not June 30.

Sink did agree last month to the campaign spending limit of $24.9 million, which made her eligible for matching funds in her race for governor. But she has not turned in the final paperwork that would allow her to receive the money.

Under the law, the first round of matching money is for contributions that candidates received from Florida residents between Sept. 1, 2009 and March 31, 2010. In order to receive this money, candidates must submit a list of contributions that they wish to have matched.

Sink’s campaign, however, has the right to claim matching money for these initial contributions later.

Sink's decision to wait comes at the same time that Scott is trying to get a federal court to throw out the part of Florida's public financing system that gives a dollar-for-dollar match if a rival exceeds campaign spending limits. Scott lost his first bid last week, but his attorneys appealed the ruling to a federal appeals court in Atlanta. McCollum intervened in the lawsuit, and his own attorneys have said that if McCollum does not get matching money it could "tip" the outcome of the GOP primary, since Scott is spending millions of his own money.

Sink, however, has not asked to intervene in the case.

Alex Sink: Will she or won't she?

It turns out that Rick Scott, the Naples businessman running against Attorney General Bill McCollum in the GOP primary for governor, may not be the only candidate this year who turns down "welfare for politicians."

With just days left before the state hands out its first round of public campaign financing, Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink has yet to turn in the paperwork that would make her eligible for matching money.

Last month the Democratic candidate for governor did agree to abide by the campaign spending limit of $24.9 million - and she made the initial request for matching funds in her race for governor.

But even back then her campaign made it clear that no final decision had been made about whether to actually accept the money.

And that appears to still be the case as of now.

Under the law, the first round of matching money is for contributions that candidates received from Florida residents between Sept. 1, 2009 and March 31, 2010. In order to receive this money, candidates must submit a list of contributions that they wish to have matched.

A spokeswoman for the Secretary of State's office on Monday confirmed that Sink has not done this. If Sink's campaign fails to turn in documentation by noon on Friday, then the campaign will not receive any money this week although the campaign has the right to claim matching money for these initial contributions later.

Sink's campaign has not responded to questions as to whether or not the CFO plans to officially ask for matching money.

Sink's decision, of course, comes as Scott is trying to get a federal court to throw out the part of Florida's public financing system that gives a dollar for dollar match if a rival exceeds campaign spending limits. Scott lost his first bid last week, but his attorneys appealed the ruling to a federal appeals court in Atlanta. McCollum intervened in the lawsuit and his own attorneys have said that if McCollum does not get the matching money it could "tip" the outcome of the GOP primary since Scott is spending millions of his own money.

Sink, by contrast, has not asked to intervene in the case. But that didn't stop U.S. Judge Robert Hinkle from asking a pivotal question during last week's hearing. Hinkle wanted to know what happens if Scott does as expected and blows through the spending cap before the primary. Hinkle asked lawyers representing the Secretary of State's office whether other candidates - and he mentioned Sink by name - would be eligible for the dollar for dollar match now as well. Or Hinkle inquired further, would Sink and others have to wait after the primary? Hinkle said it appeared to him that the law regarding this matter was vague.

The lawyers for the Secretary of State couldn't answer the question. They noted that there was only one other time the spending limits been exceeded and that no one had really contemplated the limit being breached during the primary. (That one previous time, of course, was the 1994 election between Jeb Bush and Gov. Lawton Chiles. It was Bush, who is endorsing McCollum, who repeatedly called the state's public financing system "welfare for politicians.")

But while the lawsuit rages on this remains a key question for Sink's campaign to consider especially since everyone agrees the spending limit applies to the entire election and not just the primary.

Is it fair for McCollum to get money now, use it to beat Scott and deny Sink the same amount of matching money for the general election? Or if Scott wins the primary, does Sink only get a match of what he spends after he defeats McCollum?

What Sink does in the days ahead could be one of the most important of her entire campaign.

Scott files lawsuit that could blow up the election

Rick Scott, the maverick candidate for governor challenging Attorney General Bill McCollum in the GOP primary for governor, filed a federal lawsuit on Wednesday that could cause serious problems for his opponent - and help his campaign at the same time.

Scott wants a court to strike down Florida's public campaign financing system, which gives taxpayer money to statewide candidates who agree to abide by spending limits. (Background here.)

Scott - whose lawyers cite a recent case from Arizona as a reason for the court should act - just as importantly is also asking that the federal court put in an injunction that prevents the state from handing out any money to candidates who plan to participate in the system. This would not just affect McCollum, but Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink and other candidates as well. Candidates are supposed to get their first checks from the state later this month.

Scott, who is using his own money to bankroll his campaign and is opposed to public financing, contends that the current system violates his First Amendment rights because it allows for candidates to get a dollar for dollar match of taxpayer money if Scott exceeds the $24.9 million spending limit.

Scott is coming close to that cap and has even set up a third-party organization or 527 in order to find a way to get around it. But while a 527 can pay for television ads it can't pay for other items that pay for the day to day operations of a campaign. Scott says in his lawsuit he has already spent $21 million and will "likely " exceed the $24.9 million cap. But he also says he has scaled back his television and radio advertising and other expenses because he is coming close to it.

The law "penalizes individuals who exercise their well-established First Amendment right to spend funds for campaign speech by directly providing opponents with state money to counteract and diminish that speech," reads the lawsuit.

It further reads that "Mr. Scott, a political newcomer, has expended substantial amounts of his personal resources to introduce himself to voters, articulate his policy positions, and engage in other voter education efforts. These efforts have so far proven successful as Florida voters have responded positively to Mr. Scott's message of change." But the lawsuit states giving state money to his opponents will "counteract and diminish Mr. Scott's own campaign speech."

McCollum's campaign immediately put out a statement denouncing Scott's actions: 

"It should come as no surprise to anyone that Rick Scott, a man who oversaw the most massive Medicare fraud scheme in history, just can’t seem to play by the rules,'' said campaign manager Matt Williams.

“He’s spending the millions he ripped off of taxpayers to fund a self image repair campaign that has stopped at nothing to cover his past misdeeds and distort Bill McCollum’s record of conservative leadership. Rick Scott will have his day in court, but all this legal wrangling just proves what we already know. No amount of money – not even the more than 20 million Rick Scott has spent to date – will cover his record of fraud, hypocrisy and doublespeak"