The Fine Print

J.D.'s revenge or Jeb Bush's fault? The insurance staredown explained

Florida may have a new insurance commissioner on Friday, then again it might not.

But Gov. Rick Scott and members of the Florida Cabinet will hold their third meeting in the last few weeks in a yet-another effort to reach a consensus on who should replace the outgoing Kevin McCarty (pictured left with Scott). As has been well-reported, Scott and Chief Financial Officer Jeff Atwater have been unable to reach agreement on who should replace McCarty. That's created a stalemate because Florida law requires both officials to agree on a replacement.

There are so many ways to view this ongoing drama, which has played out in public largely because of the rushed secretive way that Scott pushed out Florida Department of Law Enforcement Commissioner Gerald Bailey at the end of 2014. In the end the governor and Cabinet were sued over the entire affair which resulted in new policies that were designed to end behind closed doors decisions regarding the hiring and firing of agency officials who report to the Cabinet.

Atwater has painted the standoff as a byproduct of a process that he says was created to make sure that top officials were deliberative in such an important hire.

Ok.

But perhaps it would be good to take a brief history lesson in how we got here, and why in reality, the process now being used has never really been tested before. And along the way, maybe ask the architect of all this what he thinks about his handiwork (he actually kind of blames Jeb Bush.)

It would be tempting to trace all of this back to the Civil War (yes, really) but let's just say that it became recognized that in the '90s that Florida's governor was considered one of the weaker chief executives in the country.That's because the governor shared power with other elected officials - and in some instances had little control over important areas such as education.

Voters in 1998 were asked to approve a sweeping overhaul of Florida government. This proposal by the Florida Constitution Revision Commission  did a number of things that has generated a lot of debate since then. The education commissioner was changed from an elected to an appointed position. A new State Board of Education (appointed by the governor) became responsible for hiring the commissioner. The governor and Cabinet, which used to be the state education board, no longer had that responsibility. The Secretary of State went from an elected position to an appointed position. And the elected positions of Treasurer and Comptroller would be merged into one new one: the chief financial officer.

As the commission was crafting this proposal, the plan was to also remove the agriculture commissioner from the Cabinet but an uproar from agricultural interests nixed this idea. That eventually created flareups because that leaves four voting members when the governor and Cabinet meet - and leading to discussions on how to weight certain votes so a decision can be made.

Flash forward to 2002: State legislators were under the gun to come up with new laws to put all of these above reforms into action (The amendment did not go into effect immediately). The changes in education, particularly in higher education, sparked an enormous firestorm.

When it came to creating the chief financial officer position, a key argument began to quickly emerge: Should the CFO have complete sway over the regulation of both the insurance and banking sectors - and invariably the large amount of campaign donations that would come from those seeking influence over such important parts of the state economy? In the past, the two jobs were split between the comptroller and treasurer. The treasurer was in essence the insurance commissioner. This led to a public tug-of-war between Comptroller Bob Milligan and Tom Gallagher, who was treasurer and planned to run for CFO.

It was state legislators, including a powerful Republican from Polk County, Rep. J.D. Alexander that came up with the compromise: The jobs of insurance commissioner and banking commissioner would be picked by the governor and the new shrunken Cabinet. And furthermore, there was this addition: The job of insurance commissioner would require BOTH the governor and CFO to agree on who they wanted for the job. The law also states that both elected officials must also agree to fire someone from the position.

Since this was created in 2002 there's been only person to hold the job of appointed insurance commissioner: McCarty. And he's been an ultimate survivor - thanks in no part to the bifurcated law that Alexander helped draw up. CFO Alex Sink wanted to fire him, but then-Gov. Charlie Crist refused to go along. Then during the storm over Bailey's departure it came out that Scott wanted him gone. But Atwater at the time refused to concur and McCarty remained in place until he submitted his resignation earlier this year.

Alexander himself tried to change the law that allowed McCarty to remain in place, saying he was wrong in how they crafted it. He pushed a bill to require that the commissioner be subject to a confirmation vote every two years. It failed to pass.

Now here we are - in a situation that has really not happened since the law took effect.

McCarty was supposed to resign effective May 2 - but then he offered to stay on until 45 days after a successor is chosen - to ensure that Florida has someone in place during hurricane season that starts June 1. Scott's own general counsel, however, maintained that McCarty couldn't do this because the governor and Cabinet had accepted his resignation and could not alter that date without - t'dah - a vote where both the governor and CFO agree. Not so fast, maintained Atwater's team: All the governor and Cabinet did was set a schedule to appoint a replacement. They never "formally" accepted it.

So how does Alexander view all this and how his creation has fared? Well, you could say he waxed a bit poetic about it all, but it sounds as if he is calling on Attorney General Pam Bondi and Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam to assert themselves more. (So far Bondi and Putnam have called on Atwater and Scott work out their differences.)

"The genius of the American system of government isn't just democracy but of divided government,'' he said in a message. "Consequently, I wanted the CFO to have the lead over mgt of financial services and insurance. We were forced by the governor of the day to give more authority to his office. An unfortunate outcome of a four member Cabinet. At this point, hopefully the other Cabinet officers will weigh with a choice and consensus will prevail."

Alexander explained that "the governor in my opinion has plenty of power, the constitution seems to give principle authority to the CFO in these matters." He added that the decision all those years ago to keep the agriculture commissioner on the Cabinet "complicated" matters and required them that the governor be given a supervote on certain decision.

"The answer is to lose or gain one Cabinet member," he added. "In the order to pass a bill the governor required a larger role. It was part of the compromise, which we knew had this potential. My guess is the pressure will build and this will be resolved."

Guess we will know if that's true by mid-day Friday.

More than 82,000 votes didn't get counted in governor's race, but did it really matter?

 

Consider this the last word on the 2014 governor's race between Charlie Crist and Rick Scott.

Back before the election it was pointed out that the one takeaway from the tough 2010 race between Scott and Alex Sink is that a lot of voters just skipped the race all together. 

So what happened this time around?

The state Division of Elections has just released its required report that looks at overvotes and undervotes from the 2014 race. In essence, it's a report that looks at how many voters cast ballots that weren't counted in the governor's race.

(Overvotes are when a ballot wasn't counted because more than one candidate was chosen. An undervote is when the ballot left the spot for governor blank or the machine did not record any choice.)

Here's the main things the new report shows:

A total of 82,402 voters cast ballots, but for a multitude of reasons they did not cast a valid vote for governor. To put that in context that about 1.36 percent of all ballots cast.

Now of course Scott defeated Crist by 64,145 votes.

But a closer look at these numbers show that it is unlikely that these ballots would have changed the outcome.

For example, 14,362 voters did not have their votes counted for governor because they had an invalid write-in vote. Think someone writing say Mickey Mouse or Jeb Bush in the write-in space as one of the reasons these weren't counted.

Another 4,751 votes rejected were provisional ballots.

The report doesn't exactly say why these ballots were rejected. So it could have been because of overvotes or undervotes but it also could mean that the voter for whatever reason wasn't qualified to vote. The law regarding provisional ballots is very strict. Someone can have their provisional ballot rejected for just voting in the wrong precinct.

But the report hints there was a much more clear reason why Scott pulled it off. And that's this time around voters were much more sure about who they wanted for governor.

When comparing the 2014 election to the 2010 election the numbers suggest that the Scott campaign goal to provide voters a deep contrast between the incumbent and Crist _ and reinforced by tens of millions of negative campaign ads _ was in fact truly successful.

That's because the percentage of undervotes _ which is where a person left their ballot blank _ fell between 2010 and 2014.

Back in 2010 the amount of ballots left blank was 1.49 percent versus .93 percent this time around.

So in other words, 81,250 voters skipped the governor's race for whatever reason in the 2010 election. That number fell to 56,037 in 2014.

That's even more notable when you consider that the number of people who voted in the race overall went from 5.35 million to 5.95 million. So the electorate grew, but the number of people turned off by the governor's race still dropped.

One last takeaway from the report is that the push to get more people to use absentee ballots has a downside.

While the amount of undervotes declined, the percentage of people who voted for more than one candidate increased. It went from .07 percent in 2010 to .20 percent in 2014.

Of the 12k overvotes more than 7,000 showed up on absentee ballots.

That's not a complete surprise since a voter doesn't get a chance to re-do their ballot if they vote absentee. If a voter overvotes while using an optical scan machine at a polling place, the voter has a chance to re-do the ballot. (In fact, the state's own report gives a technical explanation that states that the percentage of overvotes may be underrepresented.)

Still despite all of that the Department of State concludes it found no evidence that ballot design or ballot instructions contributed to any voter confusion during the 2014 election.

Guess that is something the Scott campaign can agree with.

What's in your wallet? GOP edition

(After a bit of a hiatus, Inside the Tally Bubble news is returning for 2015)

VICTORY BRINGS BIG CHECKS TO SCOTT CAMPAIGN AND PARTY STAFF

Campaign reports filed this week from the Republican Party of Florida show that Gov. Rick Scott's campaign manager Melissa Sellers and other top staffers with the RPOF got some hefty paychecks after a hard fought campaign season.

Campaign reports show that for most of the year Sellers was pulling in bi-weekly payments equivalent to just under $152,000 a year.

But on Nov. 18 - the day after it was announced Sellers would take over as chief of staff for Scott starting on Dec. 1 - the party stroked her a check for $17,500 which would equal about 6 weeks salary.

Back on the state payroll Sellers is earning $150,000 a year - or $1,000 less than her predecessor Adam Hollingsworth.

Sellers wasn't the only person who received a sizable check after the elections were over according to new RPOF filings.

Just some of the others include:

Frank Terraferma, director of House campaigns for the party who helped the GOP get a supermajority in the state House, got a check for more than $55,000 in the middle of November. Terraferma, who was among those who testified at the redistricting trial, appeared to be earning the equivalent of about $162,000 a year.

Tim Saler, deputy campaign manager for Scott, received a check for $16,250 on Nov. 18. or about the equivalent of six weeks pay based on what the campaign was paying him over the length of the campaign.

Matt Moon, communications director for the Scott campaign who departed Florida soon after Scott's victory, got the equivalent of 6 weeks pay on Nov. 18 when he received a check for $16,250.

Chris Finkbeiner, a deputy chief of staff for Scott who became policy director for the re-election campaign, also got a check for $16,250 on Nov.18. A week later it was announced he was going to work for well-known (and Scott friend) lobbyist Bill Rubin.

Pablo Diaz, the campaign manager for Attorney General Pam Bondi, received a $25,000 check on Dec. 31.

Others who got bonus checks include Jackie Schutz, now the governor's communications director, Joel Springer, head of Senate campaigns for the party, Ashley Ross, Senate finance director for the party and Kristin Seidel Lamb, House campaigns finance director.

J.D.'s ROLE IN CABINET INTRIGUE (A HISTORY LESSON)

This past week thrust the Florida Cabinet into the limelight amid the revelations that none of the 3 current members - Adam Putnam, Bondi and Chief Financial Officer Jeff Atwater - apparently knew ahead of time that Florida Department of Law Enforcement Commissioner Gerald Bailey was forced to resign by the Scott administration. One of the allegations is that Bailey was told he did not have support of Cabinet members but the three Cabinet members have said that just isn't true.

Immediately after that story came out there were rumblings that Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty was also under pressure to resign. When asked about it a spokeswoman for Scott said no announcements were forthcoming, but then said it was good to get "fresh ideas and new leadership." A spokeswoman for Atwater maintained there was "no deal" to get rid of McCarty.

But forcing out the insurance commissioner is a bit tricky thanks to former Sen. J.D. Alexander.

Alexander was in the Florida House at the time legislators were required to craft a way to deal with the new CFO position. (Voters approved a change in 1998 that collapsed the comptroller and treasurer posts on the Cabinet into one job.)

There was much concern that Tom Gallagher, who planned to run for the CFO post in 2002, would have too much power, including the ability to hire and fire the insurance commissioner.

So a compromise was born. The insurance commissioner would report to the governor and Cabinet, but furthermore it would take more than just a majority to hire or fire that person. It would require agreement between the CFO and the governor.

McCarty was hired for the post and approved by then-Gov. Jeb Bush and the Cabinet.

And he's been there ever since.

One key reason is that there hasn't been agreement among top officials on whether to force him out.

While she was in office as CFO Alex Sink made no secret of her displeasure in several instances with McCarty. But McCarty had a strong supporter with Gov. Charlie Crist.

When Scott came into office in 2011 word is he wanted a change. But it was newly-elected Atwater who backed McCarty.

Part of what's been lost in all this is that McCarty has been seen by those who follow the insurance industry as someone who has been good at carrying out the agenda of his bosses - whether it was Crist or Scott.

For his part Alexander, who got upset with McCarty over how the state dealt with State Farm and other insurance issues, later came to regret his role in how the insurance commissioner was picked.

He tried to change law to require the commissioner to be subject to a confirmation vote every 2 years, but the proposal did not pass.

"I am big enough to admit I was wrong,'' Alexander said in 2010.

 

 

Whirring fans, enemies scattered: The sound and fury of a governor's race

As a voter rally for Gov. Rick Scott in Hialeah a few days before Election Day came to a thunderous close Sen. Anitere Flores welcomed Pastor Mario Bramnick to the stage to give a closing prayer.

Bramnick, the senior pastor of New Wine Ministries Church in Cooper City, wasted little time in praising the Republican incumbent and indirectly attacking Democratic rival Charlie Crist, citing James 5:12 "let your yes be yes, your no be no" and James 1:8 that a "double minded man is unstable."

"We do not need an unstable man, we need a man of leadership,'' Bramnick said.

That was the intro the prayer and during the prayer Bramnick made his thoughts on the upcoming election even more clearer.

"Father we decree and declare that you have anointed and appointed Gov. Rick Scott for this hour to lead this great state of Florida,'' Bramnick said. "Father we pray that you expose the schemes and lies and deceptions of the enemy. Let God arise and our enemies be scattered. Let your kingdom come and your will be done Nov. 4."

In just a few short words Bramnick may have summed up - at least to those directly involved - what the race between Crist and Scott had become. Schemes, lies, deceptions and yes, enemies.

This was not a governor's race, say like in 2002 between Gov. Jeb Bush and Bill McBride, that revolved around such mundane discussions as school funding and reducing class size. Or even the previous 2006 general election between Crist and Democrat Jim Davis that was consumed by property taxes, insurance and whether or not Davis spent enough time in Washington D.C. (the subject of negative ads run by Crist.)

And yes, with Scott's past as the CEO of a company embroiled in Medicare fraud the 2010 elections were heated in both the GOP primary and the general election.

But that race almost seems quaint compared to this one. (Well, although that race featured Scott calling primary opponent Bill McCollum the "Tonya Harding of Florida politics" duing a press conference where Scott got served with a subpoena.)

But despite Democrat Alex Sink's repeated attempts to question Scott's character due to his role with HCA/Columbia much of the race four years ago was in Scott's own words about "jobs, jobs, jobs."

Scott had a bold plan - the 7-7-7 plan - that spelled out how he would return Florida's economy to good health by a mix of tax cuts, regulatory rollbacks and sizable cuts in government spending. In return, he predicted jobs would be forthcoming. Sink did have her own economic plan, but it was Scott's plan - and how it would work - that became one of the centerpieces of that campaign.

This time around there was no bold plans announced to anchor the campaigns.

Scott rolled out policy initiatives largely tied to next year's budget and he promised to bolster funding of the environment and schools. Crist's plans were even less intricate and centered on restoring education funding, equal pay for women and raising the minimum wage.

The main questions in 2014 aren't centered not around ideas, but basically, around character and trust:

Does Florida give Crist another chance even though he left in 2010 when the economy was souring? Or does Florida stick with Scott due to his handling of the economy even though a majority of the electorate doesn't really like him? Can you trust Crist because he supports President Barack Obama and Obamacare? Can you trust Rick Scott to not cut education funding again? And on and on on.

And maybe that's why the race has never broken wide for either candidate because they each spent months arguing about their pasts.

Through the debates and television ads and rallies the race turned bitter, personal and expensive. Crist is corrupt and surrounds himself with corrupt pals was the narrative of several GOP ads. Scott by contrast is "shady" and deceptive from his days with HCA/Columbia to his stint as governor. Fact-checks by many news organizations, including The Associated Press and Politifact, have roundly questioned the assertions made in many of the ads.

The debates probably didn't help that much because the defining moment wound up being Scott's absence from the start of the second one, a incident immortalized in the words of "fangate." Scott maintained he didn't come on stage because he thought Crist was going to boycott the debate because he wasn't supposed to have his fan. If Scott loses the race, there will be those tempted to point to that moment as when he lost the race.

Polls of course show that the steady barrage produced a predictable result: Neither candidate is liked by a majority of voters.

The last Quinnipiac University poll on the eve of the election found just 43 percent had a favorable rating of Crist and only 42 percent gave a favorable rating to Scott.

On the eve of the election, Scott boldly predicted that his campaign would "kick Charlie's rear" because he is providing a "clear choice" to voters about whether they want to pick someone who will help their families.

But unscientific Interviews with voters over the last few days have shown that many of them are voting for the person they find least objectionable.

They want the person who can help the economy. Or they want the person they think is more likely to help them. Some of these voters appear ready to look past Crist's shift from Republican to Democrat, or Scott's decision to jettison some of the tea party elements of his 2010 agenda.

During raucous events held during the final at The Villages and at a Harley Davidson dealership in Orlando, Texas Gov. Rick Perry asserted that Florida's election was really a "national election" that will answer questions about which direction that country moves in the next few years.

"Over the course of the next 24 hours I would suggest the future of America is in balance and Florida is the epicenter of that,'' Perry said.

Well, it's clear that national political figures with potential presidential aspirations such as Perry, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Vice President Joe Biden have come to Florida and have pitched in.

And outside groups such as NextGen Climate, with its links to a California billionaire environmentalist, have made a significant impact in the race as well.

But what's interesting is that despite having what has been billed as the most expensive race in the country the clash between Crist and Scott in such a key swing state has not attracted quite the national media firestorm that one could have expected months ago.

Instead much of the focus in the closing days appears to have been concentrated on the prospect of the Republicans seizing the U.S. Senate.

So where does that leave us?

Is this a battle between good and evil as even some associates of Scott have maintained?

Or is this merely an election between two damaged and flawed candidates?

Will either candidate emerge from this race with much of a mandate in which to govern? Or will it be as previously predicted the prelude to a period when power shifts over to the Florida Legislature?

There will be of course much hand-wringing no matter what happens.

If Crist wins, there will be finger-pointing at how the Scott campaign was run. Did Scott abandon the narrative that helped him in 2010?

If Scott wins, the Crist people will say they couldn't defeat a candidate withs uch a distinct cash advantage including the nearly $13 million Scott put in at the close. And there will be Democrats who will say 'I told you so' and complain that they should have pushed U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson harder to jump into the contest.

Recriminations. Enemies scattered. Amen.

Who might be the real winner on Election Day? The Florida Legislature

Charlie Crist and Rick Scott will head into their second debate on Wednesday night, hoping to create some momentum in what appears to be an ever so tight race for governor.

What might get lost in the back-and-forth and barbs about fraud, Scott Rothstein, and HCA/Columbia is how each governor is prepared to deal with the political future and reality that will exist no matter which one of them wins.

And that reality is that the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature will have a lot to say on how the next four years go...for both candidates.

The fault lines will be obvious for Crist.

He has already said he's ready to issue an executive order to try to carry out Medicaid expansion if the Legislature remains recalcitrant to the idea as it has the last two years.

This is actually not a new tactic for Crist. He has done this before, on issues like voting, where he has dared the Legislature to sue him on issues he knows enjoy some level of popularity. In the past, state legislators were hesitant to do this (save then-House Speaker Marco Rubio's challenge to a gaming compact with the Seminole Tribe of Florida.)

But you can rest assured that on Medicaid expansion the legal challenge - at least from the House (where one of the chief expansion opponents is Speaker-in-waiting Richard Corcoran) - will come quickly.

Crist has already said several times that he thinks he can work with the Legislature because he will "have a pen." That threat, however, would be rendered useless if Republicans gain a veto-proof majority as some polls are suggesting. You can bet a Legislature chagrined by the prospect of a Crist governorship will not hesitate to challenge Crist at every opportunity.

A Crist governorship could be a bonanza for political and policy reporters who would get to witness an endless game of brinkmanship as it happened at times under Florida's last Democratic governor Lawton Chiles. Just think of the joys of a possible mid-summer session to craft a final budget deal in order to keep state government running. (And a wonderful side debate of who constitutes a "essential" or "non-essential" state employee.)

Except Crist might not be the only one who could be at odds with legislative leaders.

The plain fact is that when talked to privately many GOP legislators continue to have discomfort with Scott four years after he knocked off GOP establishment favorite BIll McCollum and contended on primary night that the Tallahassee insiders would be "crying in their cocktails." Scott has an uneasy alliance with many Republican heavy-weights in the state who have remained quiet as he brought in outsiders - many of them connected to Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal - to run the Republican Party of Florida.

Let's look at the facts of his four years in office. It really wasn't until this year - when he was down in the polls against Crist - that the Legislature pivoted from three years of a respectful, yet standoffish at times relationship, to giving way to help carry out Scott's top priorities.

There's an argument that part of this was due to Scott's realization after months without a lieutenant governor that maybe he needed someone like Carlos Lopez-Cantera, a former state legislator from Miami, to broker deals. But lawmakers, including House Speaker Will Weatherford, made a conscious decision to help Scott out on such issues as a tuition break for Dreamers, or eliminating the tuition law that was passed at the insistence of the Legislature (and signed into law by a reluctant Crist.)

Many of Scott's top priorities from his 2010 election - such as a massive cut in the state's corporate income tax - were politely rejected by the Legislature.

Want a more recent example? Just look at the decision by Scott to have Lopez-Cantera and Chief of Staff Adam Hollingsworth gauge support for a potential new deal with the Seminoles. As reported recently by The Associated Press, the goal of this deal was come up with one that outshined the one that Crist approved and get more money for the state. But the deal was a tough sell especially since it would require yes votes from Democrats in order to pass and was opposed by the state's pari-mutuels and those supporting Las Vegas-styled casinos. The entire effort quickly collapsed.

That's not to say there won't be a lot more common ground between Scott and members of his own party than between them and Crist.

But many of the Tallahassee insiders who Scott predicted would be crying now fully expect the Legislature to be the place where the real action - and real power - will lie during the next four years. That's more likely since Scott's power over legislators will wane as his second term goes on. Even as powerful as he was then-Gov. Jeb Bush got into a lot more rows with the Legislature after his re-election.

And how much currency with Scott bring with him if he barely defeats Crist in the same fashion where he barely defeated Alex Sink in 2010?

Scott's platform this time around has been a lot less bolder than it was in 2010. He has mostly crafted it around ideas like increasing spending on environment and education. Scott has promised to continue to grow the economy, but there's no 7-7-7 plan this time around with a sweeping promise to create 700,000 (or 1.7 million jobs) by cutting billions in taxes and spending.

What ultimately might be more important are the platforms of Corcoran, soon to be House Speaker Rep. Steve Crisafulli, Incoming Senate President Andy Gardiner, Sen. Bill Galvano (and the yet to be crowned Senate president for the 2017-18 time period.) Or it could even be the platforms of the NEXT potential Republican governor - Adam Putnam or Jeff Atwater.

In Florida, it's "all about the base." Or is it?

State senator and former Republican Party of Florida chairman John Thrasher repeated the same mantra when Jeb Bush started his quest to become the first GOP governor to win a second term: "It's all about the base."

Translation: Motivate your core supporters in big enough numbers to negate any advantage the other person and other party may have.

That was 2002 but it might as well have been an eternity ago in Florida politics.

Back then motivating the base was a key reason for Bush's victory (especially coming just two years after the 2000 presidential election chaos showed how divided the state could be in an election.) The late Bill McBride, a first-time candidate, squeezed out a Democratic primary victory over former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. The thinking at the time was that McBride could appeal to the middle and independents more than Reno.

But Bush - buoyed by a strong GOP turnout as well as strong support in his adopted hometown of Miami (which was also Reno's hometown) -took 56 percent of the vote. McBride's showing was so bad that Democrat Buddy Dyer, running down ballot against Charlie Crist in the attorney general's race, received nearly 98,000 more votes.

It's no secret that the demographics and dynamics of Florida and its political makeup has shifted since then as much as sand dunes do following a big storm.

So we know that the electorate is not like it was even a decade ago.

When Bush won a second term there were 9.3 million voters. Now there's 11.7 million. While the numbers of Republicans and Democrats has gone up, the number of independent voters not affiliated with any party has gone up dramatically, soaring from 1.5 million in 2002 to nearly 2.67 million by April of this year.

But in this year's governor's race we have two, or if you like, three candidates who are testing the premise that it requires a motivated base in order to ultimately win an election.

And the strategy comes during a year in which elections in Virginia and Mississippi have led to all sorts of speculation and analysis about the strength of the tea party elements in the GOP and what politicians have do to win these days.

Let's start, however, with Rick Scott and his campaign machine that includes the Republican Party of Florida.

It's been hinted at again and again - but let's repeat it anyway: Charlie Crist is the candidate that Scott world wanted from the get-go. There were people in Scott world as it's known who knew that Crist's record as a governor along with his ongoing political transformation would make him an inviting target to contrast with against Scott.

But just as importantly the hope is that animus against Crist - i.e. the turncoat, the "back stabber" who now supports the hated Obamacare - will motivate Republicans to get out in force come election time in 2014.

Because at the same time Scott and his campaign have taken a variety of policy turns in the last two years that in essence go against the wishes of the tea party folks and those in the base that helped Scott four years ago. In other words, Scott's campaign strategy is - Republicans hate Crist so they will get out in force - but at the same time we will court moderates and the middle.

Consider that since the start of 2013 Scott has done the following:

* Backed expansion for Medicaid a key component of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

* Supported and signed legislation that extend in-state tuition rates to undocumented students living in Florida despite criticism from members of his own party that it was "pandering" to certain types of voters.

* Signed a limited medical marijuana bill.

* Refused to go along with calls to outright repeal Common Core State Standards in Florida. Instead Scott has gone along with a series of steps intended to try to address some of the concerns expressed by activists and grassroots groups angered by Common Core. These included jettisoning the words Common Core from state law even though Florida standards remain based primarily on Common Core. He also signed bills that ban schools from collecting data and give parents more of a say over local textbook choices.

* Has come out in support of All Aboard Florida _ a proposed rail line linking Orlando to Miami _ despite a growing backlash in certain GOP-leaning communities. Scott has had the state support funding for projects that will ultimately help the rail line achieve its goals even if the money isn't going directly to the rail line. it seems an eternity ago when Scott had the state reject billions from the federal government for a high speed rail line between Orlando and Tampa.

If you look at this list you can see that Scott is taking a calculated risk that Common Core or immigration issues won't come back to haunt him like they have other Republican candidates. In other words, he's counting on Republicans to work hard for him despite taking positions that may antithetical to the base.

It was just a few days ago U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz get a good reception from Miami-Dade Republicans when he went after Common Core. There's a wave that has been cresting across the country that has prompted governors in Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Indiana to re-think their education policy in response to the growing chorus of opposition to Common Core which has been at its loudest among GOP activists.

Scott has reportedly told some activists that "Common Core is out" in Florida which is an artful, yet one could say misleading, way to phrase it. He's right that Common Core isn't on the books anymore. But the ghost is still in the machine and it's still guiding what the state is doing.

Scott's re-thinking of his immigration positions are also potentially perilous as well.

Polling has shown that the issue of in-state tuition resonates big with Hispanic voters who are a growing force in Florida and could help decide the race. Yet at the same time it's an issue that has hurt Florida politicians at times. (U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez's decision to forgo a 2010 re-election may have been a personal one, but there's no doubt his embrace of immigration reform had made him a likely target for a challenge from the right.)

So while you have Scott trying to pivot to the middle if he can, you have Crist and Democratic challenger Nan Rich battling over the Democratic base.

And in that instance there is an effort to damage Crist so he will be seen in a less favorable light among Democratic activists and grassroots.

Crist of course has reinvented himself and had changed his positions on such issues as same-sex marriage. Despite his "evolution" or flip-flops, however you wish to term it, he has picked up support from key Democratic-leaning organizations such as the AFL-CIO and the Florida Education Association.

But there are groups _ whose funding is shrouded in mystery _ who are trying to remind Democratic voters that Crist was once a solid Republican.

As reported by the Orlando Sentinel the group Progressive Choice _ which has also sent out mailers attacking Crist _ is now running radio ads that attack him for his efforts to bring back chain gangs to the state. Another radio ad took Crist to task for creating a "lost generation" of African-Americans.

It is not known who is bankrolling the effort and of course Crist's operatives speculate that is a front for Republicans.

Regardless of the origin it would appear the strategy could either A)Diminish enthusiasm in the Democratic base for Crist and/or B)Drive up Rich's numbers in the August primary to emphasize Crist's vulnerability. There are some who are hoping that Rich tops 40 percent so that Crist will look like damaged goods heading into the general election.

So in other words this could create a dream scenario for Scott where Republicans upset about Crist show up in force (say somewhere less than the 2010 anti-Obama wave year but still strong enough) and Democrats don't because they are lackluster in their love of Crist once he secures the nomination.

Ok. It could work.

But what if Democrats motivate their base by emphasizing this is a chance to defeat Scott. Despite Scott's attempt to recalibrate his image, he remains for lack of a better word, a villian to the left. Scott and his campaign have made an effort to soften and rebrand him (Constant reminders of his grandchildren, constant mentions that his father lost his job often, that he lived in public housing etc. etc.)

And everyone in the GOP side has taken comfort that Crist's numbers have fallen. Yes, but Crist really hasn't taken to the airwaves yet. What happens then? What if the ads - and the reminders about Scott's record - resonate? You can see it coming: Scott cut education, Scott turned down high speed rail, Scott' lacks integrity because of his time at Columbia/HCA.

Yes, I know some will say, well it didn't work back in 2010. Um, yes. But Scott wasn't a known commodity back then. He presented himself as a business guy who would turn around the economy. Yes, he has the positive that the economy is slowly recovering and the unemployment rate has dropped. (But even that narrative will be tested in the months ahead because the signs are that the rate will likely stay the same, or only dip slightly. That's the curse of an improving economy. As more people reenter the work force, it's harder to move the needle.)

The bottom line remains - what happens if the make Crist a bad guy strategy doesn't really work?

Back in 2002 despite a smaller voting base Bush received 2.85 million votes.

Eight years later Scott got 2.6 million in a big year for Republicans. Marco Rubio got more votes for U.S. Senate than Scott and he was in a three-way race with both Crist and U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek.

This time around there's no Rubio on the ballot to help drive Republicans to the polls. There's just Scott.

And we will see whether it's still "all about the base."

Guess who's missing in the big Congressional showdown in Florida?

Today's election between Republican David Jolly and Democrat Alex Sink over who will replace the late Bill Young in Florida's 13th Congressional District has gotten a whole lot of attention from across the country.

The main characterization is that it will it "test voter moods" and will show whether or not voters will take out their dissatisfaction with the health care overhaul against Democrats.

But just as telling is how Republicans (and yes I know there is a divide between the national and local folks running the Jolly campaign) have made one crucial calculation in the run-up to today.

Keep Rick Scott as far away as possible from the election.

Think about that for a second. Scott is arguably the leading Republican in the state of Florida. He has his people in charge of the Republican Party of Florida.

Furthermore, he was the one who defeated Sink in the 2010 goveror's race. You would think the last thing that he would want is the resuscitation of her political brand.

Yet it's abundantly clear that the Jolly camp and his supporters are keeping their distance.

Those who have lent their help to push Jolly include Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and on the eve of election, Rand Paul.

But no Scott.

What makes it even more interesting is that Jolly has taken a page out of the Scott 2010 playbook: Using Sink's status as a Democrat to tie to her President Barack Obama and to his health care overhaul. Let's not forget that Sink blamed Obama for her narrow defeat to Scott.

Scott has even resurrected his staunch opposition to the health care overhaul as a key part of his own talking points in recent weeks. But Scott's main help to Jolly was in the form of a Tallahassee fundraiser.

The Miami Herald reported earlier this week that a series of internal poll numbers had made Republicans uneasy at Scott's prospects in the fall.

There can be no surer proof in these numbers than Scott's continued absence from helping Jolly.

And if Sink wins it will spark some interesting questions about what the Scott campaign will do moving forward as they deal with a much more accomplished and better campaigner than Alex Sink in the 2014 governor's race.

 

 

Charlie's November surprise

Charlie Crist's grand entrance into the governor's race occured Monday morning and there's sure to be a lot of analysis and speculation about how Crist will fare against incumbent GOP Gov. Rick Scott.

But lost in the flurry of analysis - and the constant public relations barrage from the Republican Party of Florida dissecting Crist's lengthy political career - is that there is one big change that has happened that could impact Crist's campaign for governor.

And that of course is that this year the Republican-led Legislature - instigated primarily by House Speaker Will Weatherford - did a major overhaul of the state's campaign finance laws.

This past Friday key portions of that overhaul - higher campaign limits - kicked in.

From now on, candidates in statewide races can collect up to $3,000 from each individual contributor _ or six times more than the previous limit of $500.

But what legislators did not alter was Florida's public campaign financing system. That's the system that allows candidates for statewide office to get matching funds from taxpayers for contributions they receive.

Crist has relied on public matching money in the past, collecting $3.3 million in his successful 2006 run for governor.

One could argue that what legislators did, however, was sharply dilute the impact of public financing in such a way that might make it meaningless going forward.

Under the law candidates get contributions that either double - or matched equally - the amount of money they received from certain contributors (The prime qualifications being that the contributor is a Florida resident and a real person as opposed to a Florida-based corporation.)

But when legislators changed the law they left the current amount candidates receive in matching money unchanged.

That means the most that Crist could get from the state is $500 in matching funds for each eligible contributor who donates money.

The way it works is that candidates get a two-for-one match for every contribution up to $250 that is part of what is called the "threshold" to be eligible for public financing. The threshold for candidates for governor is $150,000. Then candidates get a one to one match _ with a maximum of $250 _ on the remaining eligible contributions.

Yet there's another catch here: Candidates who wish to receive public campaign funding must agree to abide by campaign expenditure limits. During the 2014 campaign the limit according to the Division of Elections is $25 million.

Scott, who did not collect public financing last time because he used more than $70 million of his own money, is of course not going to abide by these limits. He's already publicly proclaimed his intention to spend collect and spend tens of millions on his re-election effort. (Note: Scott also successfully sued to strike a key portion of the law that gives extra money to a candidate opposed by someone who exceeds the spending cap.)

Under the wording of the law Crist can also exceed the $25 million cap but only after the non-participating candidate "exceeds" the expenditure limit.

Note the word there - once the "candidate" - exceeds the limit. That means the official campaign account of Gov. Scott. It does not mean Let's Get to Work, his 527 that has already collected $18 million since the summer of 2011 and is going up with its first ad buy this week.

There are also ways the Republican Party of Florida can assist Scott as well that would not count toward the total.

It's therefore conceivable _ although slightly improbable _ that Scott's official campaign could never hit the cap because of all the heavy lifting done elsewhere.

Now, was this all done by design?

Sen. Jack Latvala, the Pinellas County Republican and chairman of the Senate Ethics and Elections Committee, said no. He said that the potential impact of public financing didn't even come up during the work on the overhaul.

"You tend to forget it's even on the books,''  Latvala said.

The question, however, for Crist is whether or not the strings and limitations associated with the law will be worth it.

Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink during her closely contested race against Scott opted not to accept public financing out of concern that Scott would attack her for using taxpayer money for her campaign. After losing by roughly 60,000 votes there was a lot of after-the-fact speculation that the $4 million she was eligible for could have helped close the gap with Scott.

Today of course none of this matters. But it could matter next year when Crist will be scrambling for every dollar in an effort to keep up the large amounts of money Scott and the Republicans will spend to keep the governor's mansion.

 

 

 

 

Everything you know about Florida politics is wrong, right?

Three years ago when then-candidate Rick Scott was hopping around the state in the frantic days before the GOP primary he acknowledged that he thought this was his moment to seize.

Giving a nod to the Tea Party energy and overall dissatisfaction with politicians that year Scott said it would have been hard for someone like him to get elected at any other time.

It would come out later, much later, that before jumping into the race for governor Scott had contemplated running for U.S. Senate but concluded it would be hard to go up against Marco Rubio.

But what that should reinforce to anyone is that Scott can be very methodical, very calculating in the way he approaches everything.

And there were people in Scott's campaign who knew even then that the economy would likely rebound by 2014 - giving Scott the perfect way to frame his re-election campaign.

In other words, Scott isn't someone who just leaves things up to sheer chance and he didn't spend more than $70 million out of his own wealth by whim.

But of course between that moment when Scott shocked the GOP establishment and now there have been a series of moves, turns, twists, recalibration and reconsiderations as Scott has struggled to win favor with a majority of Floridians.

This had led many political pundits and many leading Democrats to conclude that Jeb Bush will remain the only Republican governor since reconstruction to win a second term in office.

And right now everyone expects that sometime this fall former Gov. Charlie Crist will make official what everyone has suspected for some time: He will jump into the race for governor and will likely become the Democratic nominee despite the best efforts of former State Sen. Nan Rich to win the nomination.

If the Crist-Scott race materializes as expected then those who follow conventional political wisdom will have to jettison some of their expectations over the next year. That's because this race will not follow any usual script.

Right now what's interesting is how both sides - Democratic and Republican - have a quiet confidence.

Yes, they say - 'oh, it will be tough race, it will be a close race' - but here's why we will win.

This is followed by explanations, on say, how one side will microtarget supporters to motivate them, or how they use a fusillade of television advertising that will bury Charlie Crist. Or how the voting demographic keeps profoundly changing, or how Crist has likability and name-recognition and that GOP disdain for Crist will cause Scott's backers to misfire.

As the date of conflict grows every nearer, here's a partial list of things that have to be overcome for either Crist or Scott to win. In short, it's why this election could be the most interesting governor's race in Florida in nearly a generation. No matter who wins it will be historic because it will upend conventional thinking.

1. Rick Scott's poll numbers are just too low to ignore.

Most polls have shown Scott's number below 50 percent since shortly after he was inaugurated. It has bounced around somewhat - and while polls are just a moment in time and sometimes measure different sets of voters - what can't be denied is that if you can't get over 42 percent in a series of polls over a 3-year period that's a pretty solid trend line.

For Scott supporters they have to remain hopeful that these numbers haven't calcified.

In other words, will $100 million spent on advertising change minds and perceptions?

The plan is to "reintroduce" Scott to voters in the next year and combat the image that has been presented (by the earned media) since January 2011.

This reintroduction will focus on Scott's background as a poor kid who rose to riches and then led Florida's economy back to recovery after the collapse that happened under Crist's watch. Pollsters have already noted that the last governor to maintain such low poll numbers over such a lengthy time during their stint in office in Florida was Bob Martinez - a one term governor who lost to Lawton Chiles in 1990.

2. Charlie Crist has never had tens of millions spent against him in negative ads.

This is completely true.

When Crist ran for governor as a Republican in 2006 he had a sizable money advantage over Democrat Jim Davis and was able to pound him on television. While there were some negative ads run against Crist in the U.S. Senate race, frontrunner and eventual winner Marco Rubio focused his television ads more on his own story and his vision for America.

Presumably these ads against Crist will reinforce the message that Florida's unemployment rate jumped up during Crist's time in office. There could be ads that also focus on Crist's turnabout on key issues, although it's unclear what advantage would be gained with independent voters, for example, to point out that his position has changed on gay marriage or even abortion.

The hope from Democrats is that Crist can weather this kind of storm because A) He has built-in name recognition that will make it hard for the Scott campaign to define him B) He will have the support of President Barack Obama, bringing with him national recognition and money that will allow him to punch back C) Crist will get plenty of earned media because this will quickly become one of the marquee races around the country.

This could be somewhat wishful thinking.

While there has been discussions that the Obama campaign may be willing to share its vaunted voter lists with outside candidates next year it will be interesting to see if that happens in Florida.

Another disadvantage for Crist: Given the Florida Democratic Party performance in the recent past he may be forced to build his own campaign infrastructure instead of putting his trust in that organization. That will also take time and money that can't be used to push back against the onslaught that awaits.

3. Democratic voters will stay home in a non-presidential year.

This is the trend that is supposed to comfort Scott supporters.

Despite Barack Obama winning the Sunshine State in both 2008 and 2012 the conventional wisdom is that this will not translate into Florida remaining in the Democratic column next year. The 2010 elections are seen as proof of that when Scott was elected, the GOP-controlled Legislature got a super-majority and Democratic incumbents in Congress were knocked off.

Even Democratic consultant Steve Schale has noted that demographically Democrats are changing and he lays out how that could work for Democrats but also could require more effort for turnout in off years.

There's no disputing that in 2010 there was a Republican wave.

But it's important to go back and look at the numbers from the 2010 election. Scott nudged Democrat Alex Sink by roughly 61,000 votes. In this close race Scott didn't even break 49 percent since several other minor party candidates managed to collectively snag 182,000 votes.

One of the things that happened that year is there is evidence that Rubio may have helped drive some of the turnout.

More people_5.45 million_ voted in the 2010 election than in 2006 election when 4.88 million cast ballots.

But that didn't translate into votes for Scott.

One important reason - people skipped the governor's race. Here's the report from January 2011 from the state that showed the undervote _ which is where people left the ballot blank _ nearly doubled between the 2006 election and the 2010 election.

For Republicans, however, here's another scary number to consider: Rubio would have not have been elected to the U.S. Senate if independent candidate Crist and Democrat Kendrick Meek had not split the vote in 2010.

Meek and Crist combined took in 2.7 million votes to Rubio's 2.64 million. (Yes, I know someone will point out that not all Crist voters would have voted for Meek - but the point is they didn't gravitate toward Rubio either.)

Now it can be argued that 2010 was different and that Republicans will be able to rally the base this time around Scott. He won't have to go through a nasty divisive primary and they no longer have to worry that every campaign ad will mention that Scott's former company paid the largest fine ever for Medicaid fraud.

But it's worth noting _ as plenty of others have _ that the number of voters not affiliated with either party _ has grown at a larger rate than registration rates for either party since the last governor's race.

It's yet another sign that Florida's election landscape continues to shift.

That probably explains why Scott's campaign team wants to focus on the economy and jobs. The thinking may be that independent voters don't have to like Scott, but they can vote for him because they think he's competent and that he's doing what he promised to do to turn the state around.

Hmm.

The one element that hasn't been closely examined, however, is that both Scott and Republicans have done things in the last three years that could motivate chunks of voters to turn against them.

One key example: How many teachers, cops, firefighters and prison guards plan to vote for the guy who pushed through a new law that took three percent of their pay in order to pay for their retirement?

And consider this - what if some of these voters, say prison guards working in North Florida - are part of the voting base that Scott needs to offset Democratic gains in other parts of the state?

Now Scott's actions over the last 18 months could be seen as an effort to deal with potential gaps in his support.

In other words, he has ventured forth on a series of policy initiatives - whether it's pushing pay raises for teachers or even smaller steps such as vowing a lawsuit against Georgia over water - that could be seen as helping him in certain weak areas - and just as importantly help calm fears among independent voters.

In the end it appears that whatever happens in the next 14 or so months it may change what we think we know about Florida politics and where it's going in the 21st Century.

Maybe a high-profile governor's race where tens of millions is spent bashing the candidates sparks turnout and turns the contest into a barn-burner that isn't decided until those votes from Miami-Dade County and Broward County get counted late on election night.

Or the alternative scenario: The money and the negativity and bashing of both candidates results in depressed turnout that makes it hard to predict easily. The governor's race is the top race on the 2014 ballot. There is no U.S Senate race on the same ballot so there's no other contest that will overshadow the Scott-Crist matchup.

Here's the one thing that maybe all political reporters should acknowledge right now: They don't really know how this is going to all turn out.

 

Will Rick Scott and lobbyists be among today's primary losers?

While today's primary election in Florida lacks the drama of a high-stakes statewide race like two years ago there will be much to ponder once the smoke clears by Wednesday morning.

Most of the true intrique will of course surround the numerous proxy battles - and their role in the future leadership of the Florida Senate. Here's a previous overview on that.

But there are also a whole slew of other trends/stories worth paying attention to that could have ramifications in this year's general election, next year's legislative session and the 2014 elections when Gov. Rick Scott will seek a second term.

1. Will the "toxic" brand that Democrats seem to attach to Scott really play out? Several Democratic primaries - include at least two state Senate seats and a North Florida congressional seat - have included various allegations that one of the Democrats in the race is too cozy or too comfortable with Scott and his agenda. Former Sen. Al Lawson - who is running for Congress against Rep. Leonard Bembry - went so far as to ask people to give him money to help fight "lies" that he voted for Scott over Alex Sink.

If this strategy of trashing your opponent as a ally of Scott doesn't work in a primary election then how big a factor is it in the general election or heading into 2014?

2. What happens if Rachel Burgin defeats Tom Lee in the state Senate GOP primary in Hillsborough County?

Senate leaders backed former president Lee, but that didn't stop some lobbyists from helping out Burgin against their old foe. Lee's trangressions are many to some lobbyists, including his push to force them to disclose how much they were getting paid to lobby the Legislature. One of the attacks against Lee dredged up an old divorce and questioned his character.

One could be tempted to conclude it's just one race and the outcome shouldn't have an outsized impact in the halls of the Capitol.

But when asked recently if there would be any consequences, incoming Senate President Don Gaetz said this: "I don’t think that any vengeance has to be planned for these Democratic lobbyists. I think the stink of dirty personal attacks will hang on them and they are making their own problems."

And Gaetz added that he thought that some of those who did help Burgin went "way, way over the line."

3. Will today's election effectively end the Senate presidency battles? No one knows for sure what the pledge cards look like, but if Mike Weinstein and Jim Frishe and some other Republican state senate candidates go down then there will be much speculation that Jack Latvala's bid to become Senate president in 2016 is doomed.

Latvala is an old-hand at political intrique so it would probably be a bit premature to write his obituary. He may hope that his alliance with Andy Gardiner may help him in the long run. The problem, of course, is whether or not he has to deal with people who change their minds on backing him if he has a bad day today.

4. Will Alex Diaz de la Portilla become the ultimate shadow warrior in the Legislature?

The former state senator's political skills should never be underestimated. But it could be quite fascinating if he gets elected to the House along with his brother Renier. (Miquel Diaz de la Portilla is already in the Senate.) It would not be far-fetched to envision scenarios where Alex DLP quickly begins forming alliances in leadership fights and special interest lobbying battles.

5. Which interest group emerges from the primary stronger, or weaker? A backstory in several primaries is the money that groups engaged in ongoing public policy fights, whether it's gambling or private school vouchers for low-income families, wound up putting into play.

A win by Mack Bernard over Jeff Clemens, for example, in a Palm Beach County state senate seat would continue to dilute the influence that the state's teacher union has when it comes to fighting back against vouchers.

Additionally, it will be worth noting if certain attacks regarding key legislative issues - like property insurance, for example in the Frishe-Jeff Brandes state senate race  - prove harmful at all.