The Fine Print

Mystery appeals and campaign finance dilemmas

Time for another round of inside the bubble news....

Who's ad is it anyway?....Republican frontrunner for governor Adam Putnam hit the airwaves this month with a biographical ad that is meant to highlight his agricultural roots and his belief in faith and family.

But campaign records available so far show that the ad isn't being bankrolled by Putnam's campaign.

Instead Florida Grown, a political committee organized and controlled by the agriculture commissioner, has already paid nearly $1 million to Smart Media Group to purchase television time for the ad. That has been backed by FCC filings on file that show that the ad is being paid for by Florida Grown.

Ads on television have carried a disclaimer saying it was a paid political advertisement from Florida Grown.

Yet on Sunday, the Putnam campaign put out a fundraising pitch that says it's their ad and asked people to give them money to keep it on the air. There's a link to the ad on the Putnam for governor website. That version _ which is a full minute in length and not 30 seconds like the version shown on television _ has a disclaimer saying it was paid by the Adam Putnam for governor campaign.

So why is this important?

Well, the first is that Florida Grown can accept unlimited amounts from anyone, including corporate donors, while Putnam's actual campaign can only accept donations worth up to $3,000. So that means that it's harder to raise money for the actual campaign versus the political committee. And that's why there would be a desire to pay for television ads through the committee since those dollars are much easier to replace.

But while Florida law regarding political committees has loosened up in recent years there remain some restrictions on how those committees can spend money.

Florida does not have the same kind of federal restrictions that are supposed to limit contact and coordination between campaigns and other groups. Campaigns are allowed to work in tandem with committees regarding ads.

But the state's Division of Elections put out a very interesting opinion in 2016 that could have ramifications for the Putnam campaign.

Well-known attorney Ron Meyer, who does work on behalf of entities aligned with the Florida Education Association, asked that year about what kind of ads a political committee could undertake - including running television ads that refer or depict "a clearly identified candidate for office" that do not "expressly advocate" for that candidate but have no other reasonable interpretation "than an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate."

In that opinion, the division stated that there are a type of ads that fall outside the normal definition of what constitutes a regulated ad. These are ads that are run outside a period of 30 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election. These ads are also coordinated with a campaign but do not expressly advocate someone's election. But here's the important part: Since these ads don't fall under the normal definition then a committee that does such ad could be contributing to a campaign.

If this opinion were applied to the Florida Grown ad, then it could be a problem especially since $1 million is way beyond the $3,000 contribution limit.

Under Florida law, campaigns that accept contributions above the legal limit can be susceptible to fines twice the amount of the contribution.

It is important to stress that this is an interpretation of existing law by the Division of Elections. But this speaks to the nature of Florida's complicated campaign finance laws and how they function - and just as important - what is the actual purpose of the law.

MYSTERY APPEAL...There was quite a bit of drama last week as it relates to Florida's automatic ban on civil rights for felons.

A federal appeals court late Wednesday agreed to place a stay on U.S. District Judge Mark Walker's ruling that maintained that Florida's current system for deciding who should have their rights restored is unconstitutional. Florida currently requires former prisoners to wait anywhere from five to seven years after they leave prison before they can ask to have their rights restored. Walker sided with former prisoners who had their applications denied. And as part of that ruling, Walker ordered the state to overhaul its rules by April 26.

Fearful that the appeals court would not act in time Gov. Rick Scott scheduled an emergency meeting of the state's clemency board (which consists of the governor and the three other elected Cabinet officials) with a potential new set of rules. The meeting was scrapped, however, when the court came down with its last-minute decision.

So here's the mystery then: Who gave the order for the clemency board to file the appeal and request the stay in the first place?

Here's the reason for that question: The lawsuit wasn't just against Scott or Attorney General Pam Bondi but it was a lawsuit against the clemency board itself. Florida's Sunshine Law does in general apply to meetings of the governor and Cabinet. (Clemency records are confidential, but there has not been an assertion that the board can meet in private.)

The state's solicitor general _ who works for Bondi _ filed the appeal and the stay request even though there was never a meeting of the clemency board to discuss or vote on what to do in the wake of the initial ruling.

And the state officials who sit on the clemency board have not given a lot of information on how this happened.

When first asked, Whitney Ray, a spokesman for Bondi said that "given the gravity of this issue, a decision to appeal was never in question."

Ok, but again - the solicitor general is an attorney who was working on behalf of the clemency board. Usually attorneys must confer with their clients before proceeding with major action such an an appeal.

During a public availability, Bondi herself refused to answer a question on the decision to appeal. She said that "we're not going to talk about pending litigation."

The press offices for both Chief Financial Officer Jimmy Patronis and Putnam also did not yield much information on the decision to appeal. Putnam's spokeswoman, Jennifer Meale, said that their office was "notified of the decision to appeal." Patronis's office said the CFO was "kept informed" by communication between the solicitor general and the general counsel for Patronis.

So in both instances neither official said they made an affirmative decision to appeal.

The only office to finally bring some light to the situation was Scott's office. John Tupps, a spokesman for Scott, said that the general counsel for the governor conferred with the solicitor general about the need for appeal.

And the governor's office maintains that such a move was legal even though it was done behind closed doors. They point to a 1978 case that is still cited in the Sunshine Manual that said it was ok for an attorney to confer with members of a board in reaching a decision to appeal.

But even if Scott and Bondi agreed to an appeal that's still just two out of four clemency board members.

Worth pointing out as well: Scott and the Cabinet were sued in 2015 for sidestepping the Sunshine Law because of the way then Florida Department of Law Enforcement Commissioner Gerald Bailey was dismissed since he worked for all four officials not just the governor. In the end the case was settled, but only after the state agreed to pay attorney fees in the case and that senior staff and aides participate in mandatory Sunshine Law training.

Barbara Petersen of the First Amendment Foundation said that whole situation "doesn't pass the sniff test" and questions if the other members of the board have yielded all legal decisions to Scott's office.

One Democratic candidate for governor opposed to Florida's current system of handing rights restoration is also asking questions.

Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum last week filed a public records request that asked for any records related to the decision to appeal and file other legal motions in the case. In his letter seeking the records Gillum states "it is unclear the legality of whether the Solicitor General, at the discretion of the Governor, can decide to file a motion, or a series of motions, on behalf of all the Cabinet officers. Floridians deserve to know how their Cabinet officers agreed to a legal decision on behalf of the state of Florida." 

Out of the house and into a mansion?...And other Tallahassee bubble news

Inside the Tallahassee bubble news....

Richard Corcoran's out of the house and into a mansion?....Make of this what you will, but during the middle of this year's session House Speaker Richard Corcoran sold his Tallahassee house.

Property records show that Corcoran and his wife Anne Corcoran sold their 2,400 square house near Capital City Country Club on March 15 of this year. One of the buyers, Scott Shamp, was recently named interim dean for the Florida State College of Fine Arts.

The Corcorans sold their home for $363,800 after having bought it September 2014 for $325,000. They bought the home at the time from John Sebree, who had been a senior vice president for the Florida Association of Realtors and a lobbyist, but Sebree had left the state to become CEO for the Missouri Realtors.

Sebree first bought the house in 2003 and paid $329,900 - which was before the Great Recession and a downturn in property values.

When asked about it, Corcoran said he spent the rest of session renting a house near downtown that is also near homes occupied by other high-ranking House Republicans including Rep. Jose Oliva. He said he has a lease that will get him through the next year and a half.

Worth pondering: By selling his house now, Corcoran doesn't have to worry about it after the 2018 session when he may - or may not - be pursuing a bid for governor. Corcoran is being forced to leave the Florida Legislature next year due to term limits so he would have needed to do something with the house anyway. Of course one of the perks of becoming governor is that the winner gets to move into a mansion located just up the road from the state Capitol.

Bill watching and the governor's options...In most years, Memorial Day weekend is sort of the end of the legislative season. By this time school is about to end around the state, and the governor has usually acted on a new state budget.

But as we have seen this isn't an ordinary year as Gov. Rick Scott and Republicans continue their all out public feud over spending and legislative priorities (or as Corcoran puts it - a fight for the soul of the party.)

This leaves things in a bit of dizzying state that may be a bit hard to follow, but this is an attempt to walk through it all...

Even though the new fiscal year starts July 1, the Legislature has yet to deliver the $82.4 billion appropriations act to Scott. Or many of the other significant bills (including HB 7069) that actually boost state spending to more than $83 billion for the coming year. (The list does not include the Lake Okeechobee bill which Scott has already signed.)

Florida's Constitution requires that once a bill is officially presented (which means it's been enrolled and the bill jacket has been signed by the two presiding officers, the House clerk and the Senate secretary and then delivered) the governor has 15 days to veto the bill, sign the bill or allow the bill to become law without his signature.

Since Scott became governor in 2011 the longest the Legislature waited to deliver the budget after passing it was in 2012 when it took 28 days. But that was a redistricting year so legislators went into session early. They actually delivered it in early April. So far this year it's been 16 days.

An important thing to remember: There is nothing in law that dictates when the Legislature must deliver a bill to the governor.

Usually there is some level of coordination where legislative staff check with the governor's office to find out if  his staff is ready to act. Sometimes this is also done to accommodate public bill signings to drum up publicity.

Normally there isn't a lot of intrigue here, but legislators passed a budget that ripped to shreds Scott's legislative agenda and ignored his requests. Scott has continued after session to tongue-lash his fellow Republicans for taking actions _ including their refusal to set aside money for business incentives and their decision to slash funding for the state's tourism marketing agency _that the governor says will cost jobs. He has also chided the GOP-controlled Legislature for crafting a budget largely in secret.

Scott has publicly thrown out the possibility he may veto the entire budget to register his displeasure. He could also just use his veto pen to wipe out individual spending items in the state budget.

Meanwhile, school district officials, citing the relative low per-pupil increase contained in this year's budget, have called on Scott to veto the main appropriation that goes to public schools.

If Scott vetoes the budget - or limits it to just the schools line item (known officially as the Florida Education Finance Program, or FEFP and which totals nearly $8 billion in state money) it would trigger the need for a special session.

That's why there's a level of anxiety building about the timeline and the governor's possible actions because time is running out as summer bears down. There's also a threat of a government shutdown if things are unresolved by July 1, although it would be likely that Scott would declare an emergency and use his emergency powers to authorize state spending.

Another layer of complexity: Legislators could give Scott the budget very soon - but they could hold back on other key bills including HB 7069 - the education train that has drawn fierce criticism and support across the education spectrum. That's important because that bill includes more than $400 million - including money for the contentious Schools of Hope charter school proposal and money for teacher bonuses. (Another important thing to remember - nothing requires legislators to place all spending in one bill.)

So you have a scenario where legislators could give the main budget today - but then wait until later to give the education bill.

Legislators could argue they can't spend any of the money tied to other bills if Scott ordered them into a special session. Legislators could also play their own waiting game and hold back the budget altogether in an effort to run out the clock. Some legal experts have argued that lawmakers must deliver bills by the effective date (the date a bill becomes law if signed by governor), but again this is uncharted legal territory and hasn't really been tested in a court.

Of course nothing stops the governor from saying now - I will veto the budget, or I will veto the schools portion - and issuing a order that tells legislators when they are returning to Tallahassee.

The risk is that the governor could suffer a veto override - which could be an embarrassment for Scott and a sign that he is lame duck with more than a year left in his term.

But Scott has a tad more leverage than usual because as noted legislators broke up some key items into several bills. He's already signed the Lake O bill - which is a top priority for Senate President Joe Negron.

Scott could also sign Negron's higher education overhaul, the separate bill that authorized state worker pay raises (a top priority for Sen. Jack Latvala) and then rally Democrats to his side by vetoing HB 7069, which is a top priority for Corcoran but which has been roundly criticized by Democrats, the state's teacher union and school superintendents. (One last scenario is that Scott could just veto the money included in HB 7069 and leave the bill intact.)

A hidden veto-proof budget item?...Much has been made this year by legislative leaders about how transparent the budget process was - and how they would take steps to make sure individual spending items were listed in the main appropriations act so that everyone would know that they were there and that the governor would have the opportunity to veto them.

Well....

That's not what happened with one of the top priorities of Negron.

The Legislature passed a sweeping higher education bill (SB 374) that calls for the creation of a new programs designed to help universities hire more top-flight faculty in an effort to boost their national reputations. There's also an effort to boost the graduate and professional schools at Florida's public universities as well.

In all legislators agreed to put aside more than $120 million for these two programs.

But despite it being a new program the funding isn't broken out anywhere - nor is there a separate listing spelling out how much each university will receive. Instead all that money got included in the giant $4.06 billion main line item for universities.

If you want to find out how much each school got, it's included in a spreadsheet drawn by Senate staff.

When asked if this violated new transparency budget rules, Katie Betta, a spokeswoman for Negron said: "These are statewide programs for the university system, not local funding initiatives."

Of course by doing it this way the only way Scott is left with limited options: He could veto the entire university budget line item, which would also trigger the need for a special session. Or he could veto the stand-alone bill, meaning there is no authorization for the increased spending. Or lastly - Scott could challenge the spending on the two programs by arguing there's nothing that legally allows the universities to access the money.

Even though the Senate staff has prepared a worksheet that details how it works - so-called budget "work papers" are not legally binding according to the Florida Supreme Court.

Just add this to ongoing intrigue at the state Capitol at the weeks ahead.

 

The power and the swagger: Richard Corcoran and his fight for "soul of the party."

Separated by a couple of hundred yards, a scene played out on Friday night that in a brief few moments captured the essence of the entire 2017 session of the Florida Legislature.

At one end Senate President Joe Negron made his case for why Republican Gov. Rick Scott should look favorably on the new state budget crafted by the GOP-controlled Legislature (and which will be voted on this Monday.)

Negron's logic was even though Scott didn't get what he want the Senate was always on his side. Senators backed Scott's request for money for business incentives and to fully fund Visit Florida, the state's tourism marketing agency. They just couldn't get the House to go along.

"On the Senate side the track record speaks for itself ,'' Negron told reporters. 'We've been a strong ally in the Senate of the governor and his priorities.'

Contrast that to  House Speaker Richard Corcoran who took a much more confrontational position toward the governor. (A governor by the way who has criss-crossed the state blasting GOP legislators and even running ads critical of legislators.)

'There's a war going on for the soul of the party,'' Corcoran said. "Are we going to be who we say we are?"

To Corcoran this "war" means opposing business incentives, or "corporate welfare' as he called them in the past. And in his brief session with reporters he also mentioned politicians who campaign saying they want to crack down on illegal immigration and are opposed to "the liberal socialistic health care policy called Obamacare" but then change their position when they get into office.

Without using his name directly, it was clear that Corcoran was taking aim at Scott, who flipped on Medicaid expansion (part of Obamacare) in his run-up to his re-election campaign and who ran in 2010 promising to take a hard line against immigration but then in 2014 signed a bill that extended in-tuition to the children of undocumented immigrants. (Corcoran voted against the bill even though it was strongly supported by then-House Speaker Will Weatherford.)

"I think what we need to do is elect leaders who say what they mean and mean what they say,'' said Corcoran, who maintains he has yet to make up his mind on whether he plans to run for governor next year.

Corcoran also predicted to reporters that he thought the House and Senate had the votes to hand Scott his first veto override if the governor does indeed veto the entire budget. (This requires a two-thirds vote of both chambers, which means Democrats will have to go along.)

His exchange with reporters showed that Corcoran - who talked before session of turning on the lights and finding the "cockroaches" that the Scott administration had allowed to flourish during six years in office - finishing the 60-day session with the same provocative, confrontational stance he had before it started.

Given everything that has happened over the last two months of the session it's not really surprising.

Along the way he pushed back against anyone - whether they were in media, his own party, or whomever - who challenged his statements or positions. Sometimes he did it in a lawyerly fashion (such as complaints about transparency weren't valid because the media focused on just one part and not the totality of the changes he pushed.)

But other times it was through sheer force.

He used the budget negotiations (largely behind closed doors) and Negron's own top priority to create a reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee to get the Senate to take up a proposed constitutional amendment that would expand Florida's homestead exemption. Corcoran was able to get the Senate to move quickly on this proposal even though it languished most of the session and was opposed by Sen. Jack Latvala, the Senate budget chief.

Corcoran also used his power in less visible, but still effective fashion (like shutting down session for long stretches in the final days when the pressure builds to act.)  It has been argued that his crackdown on lobbyists before session and the requirements about increased disclosure were more about giving him the speaker a clearer idea of where lobbyists may be taking aim at his agenda.

And on Day 60 Corcoran got the Senate to sign off on a nearly 300-page overhaul of education policy (some of it never seen in public before) that will also be taken up Monday on the final day of session. Corcoran used the budget conference process to place all this policy into two "conforming" bills (bills that change state law to conform to the budget) even though some elements of the legislation weren't ever included in the budget conference. He also got policy changes for Visit Florida included in a bill that initially just dealt with a "displaced homemakers" program.

Corcoran wasn't apologetic for the move, saying instead that the bill (HB 7069) and which includes his "Schools of Hope" proposal to shift students in low-performing schools over to charter schools was some of the "boldest most transformational" change ever and would even rival former Gov. Jeb Bush's A+ plan that put in place the state's entire school grading system.

The setbacks for Corcoran were few: His push for major ethics reform and judicial term limits were never taken seriously in the Senate. There's an argument that despite his pre-session warnings to avoid them that there were plenty of special interest fights . Witness the drawn-out battle over the so-called "Whiskey and Wheaties bill" - which would allow grocery stores to eventually sell hard liquor - as one example. (Corcoran, who appeared to take a strong interest in the measure, maintains his backing of that bill was about free-market principles.)

But of course the question is whether Corcoran's victory dance is premature.

Because at this point it's unclear what Scott will do and whether he will use his own considerable power against the House speaker.

This past week Corcoran and his top allies let it be known that they had offered Scott a deal where they would have relented in a couple of places and funded a couple of his priorities: Visit Florida as well as money for repairs to the Herbert Hoover dike surrounding Lake Okeechobee.

That Scott's people rejected the deal isn't that hard to explain. As explained by those close to Scott, the governor didn't deliver a long list of demands to state legislators this year so it shouldn't be too hard to get the handful of things he asked for.

Of course there remains the chance there will be a few more chess moves before ultimately the Corcoran vs. Scott drama plays itself out.

Corcoran and Negron could refuse to immediately deliver the budget to Scott, meaning that the governor - and the Legislature - would have less time to act as the state moves closer to the end of the fiscal year on June 30. There's nothing in state law that mandates when the Legislature has to deliver the budget to Scott's desk. So theoretically the Legislature could hand it over a week ahead of time.

Yet in one way the two legislative leaders have given Scott an easier path to a budget veto.

The main general appropriations act is $82.4 billion, but it doesn't include many key elements. Legislators have placed more than $700 million worth of spending for Negron's Lake Okeechobee plan, Schools of Hope, Visit Florida and the state employee pay raise OUTSIDE the main budget bill.

This means Scott can sign some of the bills important to the Senate (where it may be easier to sustain a veto) while at the same time vetoing the budget and any other bills important to the House.

Of course if Scott does veto the entire budget (a rare occurrence in recent Florida history) then we get to watch Round 2 between the speaker and the governor.

And the war for the "soul of the party" will rage on.

Dispatches from the Capitol: Will Richard Corcoran dislike this message from Florida's past?

On Saturday a reminder of Florida's terrible past and evolution will finally open its doors to the public.

After spending nearly $6 million on renovations, The Grove is scheduled to open on March 11 - or one day after the anniversary of the birth of Gov. LeRoy Collins.

The mansion holds a significant role in the state's history. Built with slave labor by territorial Gov. Richard Keith Call,  it would eventually become home to Collins, who tried to shepherd the state through the civil rights era by taking a more moderate stance than other Southern governors. Collins married Mary Call Darby Collins, the great-granddaughter of Call.

The exhibits catalog the changes in the state and those who lived there - featuring for example - an audio description of Call's denunciation of Florida's secession from the Union where he told a group of secessionists that they had "opened the gates of hell."

The museum includes exhibits that detail how Collins initially came into office defending segregation but then came to view it as morally wrong. And it features illuminating information on other members of the Call family who lived in the mansion during the Civil War and throughout the decades before Collins and his wife moved into it.

But up on the 2nd floor of the mansion is an exhibit that actually touches on some of the main legislative battles that are raging a mile or so southward of The Grove in the halls of the state Capitol.

Museum caretakers have placed a short film that talks about Collins legacy in attempting to "modernize" his home state.

What does it touch on? Higher education, promotion of tourism, and efforts to attract businesses to the Sunshine State.

Collins is lauded as someone who pushed for the creation of junior colleges and the creation of the University of South Florida because he felt it was important to have higher education institutions closer to where people lived. (The Senate this week passed a bill designed to boost the state's higher education system into the ranks of the nation's elite.)

The film also points out that Collins worked constantly to try to lure businesses from outside the state to come to Florida. It quotes Howard Hughes, the industrialist (and pilot and film director...) as calling Collins "the greatest salesman" that Florida ever had. (The House is scheduled on Friday to approve a bill that would shutter the state's economic development agency Enterprise Florida.)

And then there's the part of the film that appears to have bearing on one of the key talking points being made by House Speaker Richard Corcoran and House supporters about Visit Florida, the state's tourism marketing corporation.

They have noted that Visit Florida was officially created back in the '90s and have argued that people visited Florida before then without the need of any state resources promoting tourism. The House is considering a bill to overhaul Visit Florida and appear on track to cut a large chunk of its funding.

But the exhibit at The Grove seems to contradict that.

"He foresaw the need for greater state funding to promote tourism and helped lay the groundwork" for the organization that eventually become Visit Florida,'' states the exhibit.

State officials from the Department of State - who work for Gov. Rick Scott - say this is a bit of coincidence, noting that work on The Grove exhibits predate the incendiary debate over Visit Florida and Enterprise Florida by probably a year or more. Scott is fiercely opposed to the House efforts and has criticized House members for considering "job-killing legislation." Public records appear to back that up as emails and discussions about the script go back to early 2016.

For what it's worth, Scott does not plan to attend the grand opening of The Grove, so it may be a while before he sees the exhibit himself. At last word, it didn't sound as if any House leaders, including the speaker, planned to be there either.

The 5 biggest questions of the 2017 session

The 2017 session kicked off on Tuesday amid the usual pomp and circumstance and rows of desks overflowing with flowers, but this time around - there is a sense of apprehension about whether or not the schism between Republicans Gov. Rick Scott and House Speaker Richard Corcoran as well as the building tension between the House and Senate will result in a dysfunctional session that spirals out of control.

So realizing that any predictions this session is a risky business, here in no particular order are the 5 biggest questions of the session:

1. How hard will be it to pass a new state budget? The one job for Tallahassee legislators is of course the passage of a new spending plan. A lot of time and energy has already been spent on the fate of Visit Florida, the state's tourism marketing arm, and Enterprise Florida, the entity set up to recruit businesses to the state. The latest House plan calls for the elimination of Enterprise Florida and the imposition of stringent new rules on Visit Florida.

But in reality that's just a small part of the work that lies ahead.

Scott, the House and Senate are on a collision course. Scott says the state has plenty of money to do what he wants including a $618 million tax cut. Senate leaders say they can pass a budget that boosts spending on school financial aid and pays for Senate President Joe Negron's plan to acquire land south of Lake Okeechobee. The House meanwhile is planning to move ahead with a budget that includes a substantial boost in funding for low-income charter schools, while slashing other spending more than $1 billion and holding the line on local property taxes. (Scott uses this rise in local property taxes to help pay for a boost in school spending.)

The argument coming from the House - and reinforced in Corcoran's opening day speech - is that the state is spending too much (while at the same time contending that past years of tax cuts did not play a role) and that drastic action must be taken to make sure the budget will not be massively out of balance in the next two or three years.

There are some observers who contend that last week's agreement between Negron and Corcoran on a new budget rule regarding new projects is a good sign that shows Corcoran is capable of compromise.

But that new rule doesn't solve the math problem.

And this tug-of-war over spending could easily grind the session to a halt, or worse, force legislators into overtime.

It wouldn't be a surprise if the House goal is put together a budget that forces Scott to make difficult decisions - including the elimination of Enterprise Florida. Will the Senate keep its budding alliance with Scott and resist? Or will Scott be forced to actually consider vetoing the budget and in a moment sure to command plenty of press attention - order legislators back to Tallahassee to pass a budget that he says doesn't crash the economy?

Another pivotal budget item: The $300 million that the state received from the Deepwater Horizon settlement that is supposed to go to eight North Florida counties. The money was received last year but it still hasn't gone out the door. It's gotten a bit lost in the mix, but this item could prove crucial in the final mix. Negron, during his opening day press conferences, started out his remarks by warning that the Senate will not go along with a House proposal to place limits on how the money is spent. That bill initially placed firm legislative controls on the spending, but then it was amended. It's now parked in a committee that cancelled its meeting this week.

And without going into great detail - the longer the budget impasse is unresolved the more control actually shifts to Scott. He has several administrative tools in his hands that he can use to keep state government open - and control state spending - if legislators are actually unable to reach a final deal by July 1.

2. What does Richard Corcoran really want? Say this for Mr. Speaker - he has befuddled a lot of people.

Part of it is that Corcoran is a skilled political operative who knows all about leverage and negotiations. Corcoran's showdown with Scott over economic development and contracts as well as his crackdown on lobbyists has led to speculation about his true motives and true intentions and a looming bid for higher office.

A bid for governorship may be ultimately where he winds up.

But those who know him closely contend that Corcoran's wish list - which includes term limits for Supreme Court justices and appeals court judges as well as help for low-income charter schools - is not just window dressing.

And understand this: Corcoran not only has supporters in the House, but he also has quietly built up backing in the Senate as illustrated by his appointment this week of Sen. Tom Lee to the Florida Constitution Revision Commission. Lee has made it clear that he is a "free agent" during the upcoming session.

If you look closely it appears that Corcoran may have sway with a handful of Senate Republicans, which means he may have some leverage in the "deliberative Senate." And it also creates one side-item of speculation (consider it question 2A) - Will Negron have to rely on Democrats in order to get his agenda passed?

Corcoran also appears willing to try another legislative tactic and that's to put a lot of things into motion. He outlined many of his top priorities in his opening day remarks (or call to arms) but the House keeps pumping out new issues, whether it's an overhaul of the Public Service Commission, limits on local government taxes. There are promises to keep pressure on the judiciary and who knows there may be more lawsuits in play.

It makes harder, however, to keep a tally on what's really important to him. And maybe that's the goal.

3. Will the sugar industry win again? Negron's Lake O plan has already drawn a wide share of detractors - including from those in Florida's powerful sugar industry. As anyone who follows Florida politics knows, the state's sugar companies have strong political connections and wield a great deal of influence. Many leaders - including Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam - have already said they are opposed to Negron's plan as costly and unnecessary.

There is also a full-on public relations battle going on with public relations firms cranking out press releases that are then reinforced through coverage in various online outlets. Much of it may not reach into other parts of the state but it will increase pressure inside the beltway and inside the Capitol building.

The battle over the Lake O plan has already forced Negron to step down from the Gunster law firm because U.S. Sugar is a client of the firm.

But Corcoran said during a recent appearance at a Tallahassee private school that he was actually open to considering the plan, although he warned that legislators could get bogged down discussing the actual details of the proposal that calls for borrowing money in order to finance the acquisition. Corcoran's receptiveness to Negron's proposal caused a bit of a ripple through the Capitol.

Negron and Senate Republicans are already tinkering with the plan so that may be seen as a sign that it's still an uphill battle. Still it's safe to assume this issue will remain in play until the very end.

4. How relevant will Gov. Scott be in this year's session? Since he arrived in 2011 Scott has had an up-and-down relationship with his fellow Republicans in the Legislature. It's complicated his ability to get his agenda carried out. (Case in point -some may not remember he wanted nearly $2 billion in cuts to education his first year, a two-year budget and giant tax cuts.)

But there's no doubt this year is different as Corcoran and Scott have traded videos and barbs over the House's push to scuttle Enterprise Florida and trim back Visit Florida. Scott has vigorously defended the programs and has called out by name House members opposed to his agenda and launched robo-calls in their districts.

Among the items in the governor's favor is Scott's bond with President Donald Trump, which of course gives him a really important ally. (Will it count? Who knows, but it's worth noting.)

Scott has also taken time to try to strengthen his relationship with the Senate, as evidenced by his visit on Monday night to a private reception hosted by Sen. Jack Latvala, the Senate budget chief. And so far the Senate has been more supportive of the governor, although Scott's tax cut package may be a tough sell due to budget constraints.

The governor also gained a bit of additional leverage with the announcement that Chief Financial Officer Jeff Atwater was stepping down after session. Now Scott has an important appointment to make and there are some legislators who would like that plum assignment so they may be more receptive to aiding him.

Scott also of course has veto power over appropriations and bills which can convince recalcitrant legislators to play nice with him. But in the end will the desire of Senate and House Republicans to reach a deal - and knowing Scott's time in office is coming to an end soon - trump all of the governor's leverage points?

5. How many gun bills will pass? Much has already been written about the long line of gun rights bills up for consideration during this year's session. They of course include open carry, campus carry, and a rewrite of the state's "stand your ground" law.

Recent tragedies such as the Pulse Nightclub shooting and the killings at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport have added to a debate about "gun free zones" and whether or not people should be allowed to bring their guns into areas they are not allowed to now.

In the past few years, some of the more contentious gun bills have gotten bogged down and failed to pass. Polls have shown that many of the proposals aren't backed by a majority of Floridians. But gun rights supporters - including the National Rifle Association - have been unrelenting in their push to get these measures passed.

On the first day of session Sen. Anitere Flores, a Miami Republican, made it clear that she has trouble with some of the proposals - a move that means that several bills would not be able to move out of a key committee in the Senate.

But there's still a lot of time left in session so it may be a tad premature to declare everything dead for now. And the change proposed to the stand your ground law has strong support, including from Negron, so that appears to be on track to pass.

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.

New era brings some reshuffling inside the governor's office

It's a new era officially in the administration of Gov. Rick Scott.

With Kim McDougal in as the new chief of staff, there has been a shuffling of responsibilities inside the governor's office. McDougal recently took over for Melissa Sellers and this post highlighted how things could change now that Scott has switched over to his fifth chief of staff. As noted previously McDougal, who has a long background on education policy, is maintaining her oversight in that arena even though she has been promoted from her previous position as legislative affairs director and deputy chief of staff.

Why is this chart important?

Because it shows the names of the people inside the governor's office who have direct responsibility over various functions in state government. These are the people who work day to day with agency heads and serve as the liaison between them and the governor. And they are the ones that lobbyists generally turn to when they have a problem or issue with a particular agency head.

So you can note that as part of the reorganization Kristin Olson, Scott's cabinet aide is now titled a deputy chief of staff and has added some of those agencies under her guidance including the Department of Management Services. DMS is a very important agency to Tallahassee lobbyists and insiders because it controls many important contracts and is involved in everything from the recent bat guano dustup at a state office complex to the state's health insurance program.

Frank Collins, who has held a couple of different positions in the executive office, is no longer dealing with the Department of Corrections, another agency that has been in the news a lot in the last couple of years. That department has now shifted over to Jeff Woodburn, the director of policy. Brad Piepenbrink, meanwhile, has picked up the Department of Transportation from Collins.

Another interesting detail on the new chart: The head of Enterprise Florida no longer reports directly to Scott in this new chart.

When he ran for governor back in 2010, Scott talked about how he would have the head of the economic development agency, who is also known as the Secretary of Commerce, report directly to him and would be just a few doors down.

Bill Johnson, the current head, is departing at some point this year from the post although it remains unclear when that will be. (On a conference call today, it was noted Johnson is heading out on some trade trips in the next few weeks on behalf of Enterprise Florida.) Johnson had clashes with legislators as he pushed the governor's agenda of more incentive funding for the agency. Johnson announced his departure shortly after this year's session ended when the Republican-controlled Legislature refused to grant Scott's request for $250 million. Since that time Scott has also said he wants to look at a restructuring of the agency.

Here's the way the executive office looked when Sellers first took over.