The Fine Print

5 biggest questions for the 2016 session

After one of the most tumultuous years since Republicans assumed control of the Florida Legislature - the GOP-controlled House and Senate return this week for a 60-day jaunt that many legislative leaders hope/predict is relatively calm and uneventful heading into what could be a highly unpredictable election year.

Most insiders of course can recount the score: The budget meltdown, the abrupt ending of the 2015 regular session, two failed redistricting special sessions, a budget finally passed with days to go before a state government shutdown.

Legislators are returning early this year as part of an experiment to move up the date so that lawmakers can be back home in time to spend spring break with their families. (It would take a change in the constitution to move up session start for every year.)

Here then are the 5 biggest questions of session:

Can everybody just get along?

The expectation is that the resolution of the long-simmering Senate presidency battle (which was won by Sen. Joe Negron) and the Senate's tabling of Medicaid expansion should make it easier to reach a consensus on the state budget and other issues. Throw in the fact that it's an election year and there is an anticipation that there will be a willingness to compromise. But that may not capture the complicated situation at hand.

First all, there's Gov. Rick Scott who enters the session with a longer wish list than normal. And it's not just the $1 billion tax cut package and Enterprise Florida reforms that the governor wants (although that appears to be a big ask). Scott put together a $3 billion gambling deal with the Seminoles and he's also pursuing his health care transparency package.

Last year Scott showed that there is a price to pay (through his substantial budget vetoes) if you don't go his way. So you can be assured that remains on the minds of many legislators.

But let's not forget there are some Scott agency heads whose fates remained unresolved, or that there remains a split in fundraising/political activities that has resulted in the Senate and Scott raising money separately from the party. You can also throw in the whole unsettled situation in the Senate due to a redrawn state Senate map that could theoretically force some senators to moderate their positions.

Lastly, a key question is how supporters of former Gov. Jeb Bush and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio in the Legislature will view Scott's decision to nudge ever so closely to endorsing GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Say what you will about the sausage-making in the state Capitol a lot of it still depends on connections and relationships and many of the items cited could play a role. And if Scott is viewed as isolated from members of his party then there is even less willingness to work with him.

Is it possible to ever reach an agreement on gambling?

Well, you certainly wouldn't want to bet on it given the competing forces (including dog and horse tracks from outside of South Florida) who don't like some of the fine print on the deal that Scott reached with the Seminole Tribe. In the past few years attempts to pass major gambling bills have floundered amid the Scylla and Charybdis that exists in the Legislature on this issue.

But Scott remains a wild card on this. The governor, who began his business career as a deal maker, put together a proposed compact with tribal officials that was guaranteed to get big headlines and promised a big payout.

Throughout his time as governor Scott has remained, for lack of a better word, agnostic about gambling in the state. In other words, the governor isn't going to back the tribe, the dog tracks, the anti-gambling factions including Disney, Las Vegas casino owner Sheldon Adelson, or even Trump at all cost.

It would not be surprising if Scott's approach is basically: 'Hey, I helped put together a deal. Tribe, it's up to you and your lobbyists to get it passed.' And more importantly, is Scott amenable to changes as long as the overarching achievement - the money in the state's bank account is unchanged? Signs point to yes.

Tribal officials - who are still locked in a court battle over whether they can keep blackjack tables in their casinos under the 2010 deal that expired last summer - may have to decide if they need to cobble together something that makes everyone happy. Or decide if they could take their chances and just wait until next year.

Scott has been very deferential so far in his public pronouncements and has made it clear that it's up to the Legislature to work something out. If it doesn't happen the governor can maintain it wasn't his fault.

How many gun bills will reach their target?

Apart from the budget and gambling battles, you can expect a fair amount of attention in the media to be focused on the gun bills already moving through the Legislature. These include bills allowing open carry of firearms, guns on college campuses and changes to the Stand Your Ground law.

The decision by legislative leaders to already allow these bills to move through legislative committees even before the start of the 60-day session is a sign that there is considerable support for them.

And President Barack Obama's decision to pursue actions on guns on the federal level will likely add momentum as GOP legislators will be able to contrast their actions at the state level with what's happening with D.C.

Plus long-time National Rifle Association lobbyist Marion Hammer has made it abundantly clear that she and her supporters have no plans to modify their stances on these bills. Hammer has told everyone that she will be keep pushing the legislation for as long as it takes.

Put that together and it would reasonable to assume that most, if not all, of the bills stand a good chance of reaching Scott's desk later this year. Yes, there is opposition to the various bills, including Florida State University President John Thrasher and university police chiefs on campus carry to some of Florida's sheriff's on open carry.

But the gun bills give Republicans a chance to do something that will fire up their own political base heading into what could be a chaotic election season.

There is a caveat with all of this though and that's the unresolved question of whether the new Senate districts (which appear to tilt toward Democrats) will persuade some senators that contentious issues of this sort need to be put on hold until 2017.

How will the growing power of Joe Negron and Richard Corcoran affect the process?

The general theory about the Legislature is that the influence/power of the outgoing legislative leaders begins to ebb during their second session while the clout of their successors begins to grow.

There have been exceptions to that rule over the years i.e. Dean Cannon as House speaker and John McKay as Senate president.

There will be those who will make snide comments that Corcoran, a former top aide to Rubio and current House budget chief, already has considerable sway in the House. Yes there are many signs that he does wield a good deal of influence, but expect it to get even larger.

Among some insiders who follow the process the operating theory right now is that House Speaker Steve Crisafulli and Senate President Andy Gardiner will get to watch their top priorities pass in the opening days of the session. (For Crisafulli, a potential Agriculture Commissioner candidate, that's a comprehensive water bill, while for Gardiner it's bills to aid families with children who have developmental disabilities.)

After that moment of comity, the rest of the session will be conducted in Corcoran and Negron's shadow. That could affect plenty of important bills, whether it's Negron's support of a measure to legalize/regulate fantasy sports to the judiciary reforms that Corcoran has already promised to push through.

Other considerations: Negron, an attorney, has clashed in the past with the insurance industry so that may make it hard for them to push through changes opposed by trial attorneys such as the revamp of assignment of benefits. Corcoran - along with his successor Rep. Jose Oliva - have expressed skepticism about for targeted business incentives like those championed by Scott or for items such as film incentives or subsidies to sports teams and operations.

Will this really be a do-nothing year for the Florida Legislature?

Talk to most lobbyists and they will quietly concur: This may be a really tough year to get anything substantial passed.

The reasons are many, starting with the epic battles of last year (see No. 1) to what appears to be an unpredictable election year (see Trump, Donald.)

There is a feeling right now that any attempt to move major changes/reforms in key areas will be difficult. It's not just the gambling deal with the tribe. This could flow to everything else including the types of tax cuts, health care changes pursued by the House to some of the environmental bills being pursued to alimony reform and major education bills. If Republican leaders are intent on putting aside any public disagreements then the easiest way may be to just deep-six many of the more contentious proposals.

As of this past weekend, 1,644 bills have been filed which does appear to put the Legislature on pace to meet last year's totals so maybe legislators themselves remain somewhat optimistic that they can things done. There is always a natural tendency for the Legislature to try to fix/improve/change things and have something to campaign about in the fall.

But the most substantial year for legislation in recent years was 2011 when you had a new governor and a supermajority in the Legislature following the 2010 wave year for the GOP. That track record suggests that 2016 will be relatively quiet.

Pam Bondi, the reporter and the money

Some more inside the Tallahassee bubble news...

Remember the lawsuit that disgraced former House Speaker Ray Sansom filed against the state to recover more than $800,000 in legal fees?

Sansom, if you recall, was charged with manipulating the state budget process in order to obtain $6 million in state money to pay for a hangar at the Destin airport that was really intended to be used by a businessman and major Republican donor.

His trial in 2011 ended when State Attorney Willie Meggs dropped the charges after a judge refused to let a key witness testify.

Sansom filed a civil lawsuit asking for payment of his legal fees. He asserts that his legal fees should be paid by taxpayers because it was connected to his legal duties.

The state, however, has fought this request, saying that despite the charges being dropped that Sansom's action were still "tainted" because he was seeking to do something on behalf of private interests not the public.

Well the trial is coming up soon and the office of Attorney General Pam Bondi has subpoenaed Tampa Tribune reporter James Rosica to testify in the case.

Rosica covered the trial for The Associated Press at the time.

Why is Bondi's office seeking to compel a reporter to appear at the trial? That's not really clear.

A spokesman for the attorney general refused to comment citing the pending litigation.

The subpoena given to Rosica last Friday does instruct him to bring a copy of the March 25, 2011 article he did on the criminal case. That story does note that both Sansom and businessman Jay Odom had agreed to pay restitution to Northwest Florida State College for costs related to the hangar.

During a court hearing in 2013 it was pointed out that Odom wound up paying Sansom's share of the restitution. Sansom's lawyer argued that Sansom never really consented to the payment and that it should not have been viewed as an admission of guilt.

Speaking of the Sansom civil trial....

One interesting tidbit from the legal battle. According to one court filing, Sansom in a deposition has defended his actions as House budget chairman by comparing himself to....John Thrasher.

Sansom noted that while he was speaker Thrasher helped obtain funding for a Florida State University medical school.

For their part attorneys for Bondi's office don't agree with the comparison.

"The difference in the two situations is stark,'' states the filing from last fall. "Mr. Thrasher put an appropriation in for a medical school building, and a medical school building was built. Mr. Sansom placed into the appropriations bill an appropriation for the 'Okaloose Jt Use Emergency Response Workforce Center" for building a hanger at the Destin airport for his campaign contributor, Jay Odom. A finding that this act was within the public interest essentially condones political corruption."

Odom by the way also appears to be a key person for the upcoming trial.

He has been fighting attempts to get him to answer questions related to the entire Sansom incident and the payment he made to the college. The state has also wanted to delve into his friendship with Sansom as well as ask him questions about his businesses.

Filings show that Odom, who was sentenced in 2013 to six months in jail and ordered to pay fines in connection with money he donated to the presidential campaign of Mike Huckabee, has been citing his Fifth Amendment privilege in order to rebuff these questions from the state. His attorneys say the threat of continued prosecution _ including potential racketeering charges_remain real.

From one of the court filings:

"The scope of the federal investigation is broad.

The federal authorities have gone to extreme efforts to seize virtually all of Mr. Odom's business and personal records and interview, or compel testimony, from a vast number of his friends, family members, employees and associates. Search warrants have been served on him, his businesses and his properties. With those search warrants, the federal authorities seized over 18 boxes (and other containers) of documents, copied the hard drives of eleven computers, and seized financial records relating to virtually every receipt and expenditure by Mr. Odom, or his companies."

The court filing adds that federal investigators have not only focused on the appropriation but the relationship between Odom and Sansom as well as "campaign contributions made by Mr. Odom's businesses to political candidates and causes."

In November, Judge Angela Dempsey ruled that Odom does have a right to assert his Fifth Amendment privilege, but she did say he needed to order two questions related to his decision to pay the restitution on behalf of Sansom.

John Thrasher's secret lobbying dilemma

There's no question that the decision by powerful State Sen. John Thrasher to seek the presidency of Florida State University has created a bit of a controversy especially among some members of the faculty and students.

A lot of the debate has centered on Thrasher's political career where he has been a loyal Republican who has also been willing to cross swords with unions and public school teachers.

Thrasher has also had a dramatic role in the reshaping of higher education in Florida.

At a restaurant meeting in Orlando with then-Gov. Jeb Bush it was then-House Speaker Thrasher who drew up on a napkin the plan to dissolve the statewide Board of Regents and replace it with local boards of trustees at each state university. It was the regents who at the time had thwarted at least initially plans to bring a medical school to FSU. (The plan was carried out, only to have part of it rolled back by a constitutional amendment creating the current Board of Governors.)

The big argument that supporters of Thrasher - including local political heavyweights such as former Sen. Al Lawson - is that Thrasher's presidency will help FSU in its quest to attain additional financial support in the halls of the state Capitol.

There is an overriding belief that FSU's bid to push itself into the top ranks of American research universities cannot be achieved without an increase in state money. One FSU professor speaking last week to the the presidential search committee lauded FSU alumnus Thrasher as a "successful and passionate" advocate for the school who could help bring in the added money to bolster faculty salaries and build the school's infrastructure.

There's an argument that can be made that the fractious nature of the Legislature - combined with a chief executive now in power who has made it clear that he wants universities to spend less not more - means that even someone with tremendous political capital could have difficulty achieving some sort of major windfall from the state.

But there's a more simple dilemma to deal with: John Thrasher can't really lobby the Legislature.

At least not for the next two years.

Florida's ethics laws, as they have been interpreted by the state's Ethics Commission, make it clear that Thrasher can only have a limited engagement with state legislators.

The commission has dealt with the issue several times, but most recently in 2009 with the hiring of former State Rep. Joe Pickens as a college president.

The commission has taken the position that Florida's Constitution does not allow a former legislator to lobby the Legislature even if it is viewed in the capacity of a public service position. The argument is that the prohibition applies to a higher education position because the goal of the two-year ban is to make sure that legislators do not take actions designed to help them attain the future job. (Just this past session as Thrasher was considering whether to apply for the job he pushed to split up FSU's joint engineering college with Florida A&M University.)

From that opinion:

While we have no doubt that the former member here, like the members at issue in CEO 00-7 and CEO 00-18, is merely furthering a career of service to the public, it is clear to us that neither "opportunities for personal profit through lobbying after leaving the Legislature" nor the potential for influence peddling or the appearance thereof, are exclusive to situations where the employment held after legislative service involves lobbying for private entities.

In the context of conflicts of interests we have often said that the prohibition does not hinge on the personal integrity of the individual, but is rather is prophylactic in nature. CEO 81-76, CEO 97-15. The same is true here; the prohibitions of Article II, Section 8(e) and Section 112.313(9) are clearly and directly stated, and are designed as preventive measures. As we said in CEO 81-57, "the provision seeks to preserve the integrity of the legislative process by ensuring that decisions of members of the Legislature will not be made out of regard for possible employment as lobbyists.

Since legislative decisions affect those in the public sector as well as those in the private sector, it would seem to be equally important that legislative decisions not be colored by regard for future lobbying opportunities in behalf of public entities." For these reasons we recede from our opinions in CEO 00-7 and CEO 00-18, and return to our position, stated in CEO 81-57 and CEO 90-4, that former members are prohibited from representing, for compensation, another person or entity, be it public or private, before the Legislature for a period of two years following their leaving office."

To be clear - this doesn't mean that a university president can't talk to the Legislature.

A legislative committee chairman could indeed "invite" Thrasher to appear before them to discuss issues, including funding issues. But it does mean that there are limits on Thrasher's ability to independently seek out and ask legislators for help during the frenzied 60-day period when legislators work late into the night hammering out a state budget.

Now in case you are wondering.

Thrasher, who between stints as a House and Senate member worked at a prominent lobbying firm in town, is aware of the commission decision. As is FSU'S general counsel. As is FSU Board of Trustees chairman Allan Bense.

It's just something that so far has not received a lot of public discussion so far.

When asked about it last week, Thrasher insisted it would not be an issue, especially since he is not the main lobbyist for the university.

"I don't think it's a real problem for us given the staff we have, given the few times presidents actually go over to the Capitol,'' Thrasher said. "They are going to know what we want. Trust me."

But what's also interesting is that it was Thrasher himself who wanted to go even further than what is in existing law. Two years ago it was Thrasher who sponsored a bill (SB 1560) that would have barred him from even seeking the presidency in the first place. The ethics bill stated that legislators could not work for state universities or colleges while in the Legislature or go to work for them for up to two years following their departure. The bill wound up dying in a Senate committee.

Thrasher is a "non traditional" candidate. Even the search consultant assisting FSU acknowledged that Thrasher would not be considered for a top post like this outside of the state of Florida. It's Thrasher's connections and clout in Tallahassee that make him a candidate worth considering, the consultant said.

The question, however, is whether the presidential search committee and FSU's board has a full discussion on what the 70-year-old Thrasher can achieve during the first two years that the lobbying ban is in effect.

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."

Surprised? With lobbyists and politicians involved FSU's search turns political

The search for a new Florida State University president has turned into one of the prime political stories this summer in Florida that has nothing directly to do with the governor's race.

The intrigue surrounds whether or not state Sen. John Thrasher, a former House speaker and current chairman of Gov. Rick Scott's re-election campaign, is going to wind up with the job. Thrasher initially had the inside track for the position after a contentious narrow vote to make him the main frontrunner. But then Supreme Court Chief Justice Ricky Polston jumped into the fray and that triggered a whole series of events leading up a decision this week to revamp the entire search process. More on that here.

The idea that a Florida university would consider a politician is certainly not new. It reflects the reality that Florida's university system is built on a financial structure that is highly dependent on the good will of the Florida Legislature and the governor. Additionally, the job of president pays relatively well, can boost one's pension plan tremendously, and has a level of prestige and responsibility that is better than many political posts.

There's a long line of political figures who have led universities - whether it was former Lt. Gov. Frank Brogan at Florida Atlantic University, former House Speaker T.K. Wetherell at FSU and Education Commissioner Betty Castor at the University of South Florida. And it's true that some of those picks drew criticism over whether the candidates had the academic credentials for the post.

But the lingering question for FSU's search is whether the entire process so far is stacked in such a way that Thrasher is inevitably the person who gets the job.

Students and faculty who have protested the search have been critical of their level of participation in the search.

Allan Bense, the former House speaker and father-in-law of current House speaker Will Weatherford , nominated a 27-member committee (which was approved by the FSU Board of Trustees) that has four faculty members, three students and four people who work for the university. Contrast that with the University of Florida presidential search which on its 17-member panel has a majority with direct ties to the school: Three faculty members, two deans, three university vice presidents, one athletics administrator and one student.

Many of the other members on the FSU search committee have substantial ties to Tallahassee's politically-charged environment. That's not to say they came in with the sole purpose of picking Thrasher, but they are people who are acutely aware of the heavy role that the Legislature plays and may consider that important to FSU's future success.

That list includes Bense himself, as well as Kathryn Ballard, a trustee and husband to powerhouse lobbyist and GOP fundraiser Brian Ballard. There's also former Senate President John McKay, current state Rep. Jimmy Patronis, Delores Spearman, the wife of another big-time lobbyist Guy Spearman, Drew Weatherford, former FSU quarterback turned lobbyist and brother of the current House speaker, and Al Lawson, a former state legislator turned lobbyist.

It's worth noting that two of those members present at this week's meeting _ Weatherford and Lawson _ said they had not asked to serve on the search committee ahead of time.

"I read it in the newspaper just like everybody else,'' said Lawson, who this spring had a lobbying contract worth at least $20,000 with the FSU Board of Trustees headed by Bense. (Lawson for his part doesn't believe this constitutes a conflict on his part to serve on the search committee.)

Weatherford, who works at Strategos Public Affairs with former Rep. Trey Traviesa and former legislator and Education Commissioner Jim Horne, also said he did not ask anyone ahead of time to appoint him.

"Having been a student athlete here I think they appreciated my perspective,'' said Weatherford who added that he is also recent graduate who is not "too far removed" from campus life.

Bense defended the people he recommended for the search committee to the full FSU board saying he tried to a "cross section of folks" who had various ties to the university including alumni and athletic boosters and professors.

"I'm sure I made a lot of people unhappy,'' Bense said following this week's search committee meeting.

Bense, who has said several times that politics are a reality for university presidents to deal with, continues to insist that the search is wide open and that no one nominee has the job locked down.

"I'm doing all I can to do away with that myth,'' Bense said.

Bense also contends the decision to hire a new search consultant and to revisit the timeline now in place shows that he and other search committee members are listening.

"I do hope that the faculty recognizes that today we clearly listened to them,'' Bense said. "We're going to reset the clock and hopefully we can find a great new president."

But Lawson, who spent three decades in the Florida Legislature, said that in his mind Thrasher remains firmly "in the mix" of people that the university should consider.

"If you are not very astute to the legislative process, the university may not flourish,'' he said.

Budget sleuthing, smoke and mirrors (Part 1)

In what may seem like a completely different era the Florida Legislature was required to put some things in the public domain about how things wound up in the budget.

For many years legislators were required to at least document some evidence of a request for an earmark, or what was known as the "Community Budget Issue Request System." Legislators were required to fill out forms explaining a request a funding. One example: In 2008 Rep. Will Weatherford requested $3 million for a domestic violence center along with requests for nine other projects.

When the Great Recession caused a massive downturn in the economy there was a decision made by legislative leaders to shut down this effort.

"With the further decline in state revenues, it is my desire to avoid creating unrealistic funding expecations,'' wrote Senate President Jeff Atwater in a 2009 memo.

But even though the Florida Legislature has a budget surplus to work with this year there has been no move to return to this type of tracking system. Back in 2010 Democratic candidate for Chief Financial Officer Loranne Ausley suggested requiring the reinstatement of the system so that "politicians must own their pork spending."

As this story notes - there's no shortage of hometown projects in the roughly $75 billion budget that legislators are working on right now.

The question is how the project got there and whether members of the public and press can deduce the origins of something.

Let's take just one project: $10 million for the "FSU College of Engineering" that has been in the Senate budget a couple of weeks now.

This project - along with $3 million in operational money pushed by Sen. John Thrasher - caused a firestorm on the Senate floor on Thursday. Thrasher acknowledged that the $10 million was for a separate building on the Florida State University campus to help transition to a new engineering school apart from the current joint school operated with Florida A&M University.

FAMU officials strongly oppose any move to separate the two schools and several legislators said it hearkened back to a time when FAMU's law school was shuttered in the '60s and the funding was shifted to a new law school at FSU. Thrasher defended the move by noting the declining enrollment in the FAMU part of the program.

Traditionally it is up to the Senate and House appropriations chairman to be responsible for placing construction items that are part of what is known as the Public Education Capital Outlay (PECO) list in the budget.

When asked Sen. Joe Negron, the Senate budget chief, initially said that the money for the school was on the PECO list given to the Florida Legislature by the Board of Governors, the appointed panel that oversees the state university system.

"I believe the Board of Governors had okayed consideration of that request,'' Negron said.

Then when asked if the board had put in for a stand-alone FSU facility Negron said: "It came from us having a certain amount of fixed capital to spend and looking at all the potential places" and deciding to put it toward the stand-alone facility.

"I think it's good policy," Negron continued. "I think we are going to take a good engineering school and turn it into two great schools."

So the question remains: Did the Board of Governors suggest funding for this project?

No.

The Board of Governors submitted a PECO list that calls for spending $30 million over the next two years for the construction of a new building to sit next to the two existing buildings that now make up the college. The House budget includes $15 million for the joint facility.

Furthermore a committee of the board last October was given a presentation on why a new $36 million building at the joint campus is needed.

The presentation prepared by FAMU & FSU officials contended that if funding were delayed there would be a "loss of propsective talented engineering students due to inadequate and outdated educational facilities including the current use of several temporary and dilapidated trailers/portables."

That's right - they are using portables at the current joint school.

Additionally the presentation states this: "The College has far outgrown its existing facilities. The College relies on outdated modular units to temporarily meet its space needs. Since the College is isolated from both main campuses it is difficult to share the resources of the libraries, auditorium, information and other student centered facilities."

State legislators changing the PECO list for universities is nothing new. It's how FSU got money to help build the University Center that now surrounds its football stadium. Legislative leaders have often used their clout to help universities in their own backyard.

But it also has led to some problems.

Atwater himself at the time defended the shutting down of the community budget system because he said it did not prevent the situation that happened when then-House budget chief Ray Sansom placed $6 million funding in the budget for his own hometown college for a project that turned out to be a hangar. 

Sansom wound up being investigated over the deal although charges were eventually dropped after the judge in the case ruled that testimony from a key witness could not be used.

In the immediate aftermath, however, Atwater helped institute a policy that required college and university officials to publicly testify before the Legislature about what projects they actually needed and wanted on the PECO list.

Budget staff called it the "PECO Parade."

And guess what? The Legislature didn't do it last year. It would be a fair guess to suggest they won't do it this year either.

Republican Party chairman calls incident with major donor "unfortunate"

As the swirl of punches - and counter-punches - have surrounded the re-election campaign of Gov. Rick Scott in the last 10 days there's one person who hasn't said much up to now.

That's Lenny Curry, the chairman of the Republican Party of Florida.

Curry says he got the emails from billionaire donor Mike Fernandez, who abruptly stepped down in March from his post as finance chairman amid disagreements with the Scott re-election team. Those emails - which have been detailed in Politico as well as The Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times - dwell on everything from an alleged incident where staffers mimicked a Mexican accent to complaints about paranoia among top campaign staff and problems with Scott's chief of staff Adam Hollingsworth.

The response from Scott's team - including Lt. Gov. Carlos Lopez-Cantera - has been to deny the incident. One of Scott's political consultants in Politico called Fernandez a "renegade donor" who had sent a "bizarre email."

Fernandez himself was on Miami television this week, however, and WPLG quoted Fernandez as telling them that he believed the incident happened. When asked whether he left the campaign because of concerns about reaching out to Hispanic voters, you can see Fernandez pause and then say that he exceeded the goals of the campaign to raise $30 million without really answering the question.

Curry for his part has a slightly different take from some others in "Scott world" on the entire episode.

He spoke in glowing terms about Fernandez, saying he was an integral part in helping both the campaign and the Republican Party raise money this past quarter. (The party on Monday said it raised more than $10 million in the first quarter although this figure has not yet been verified.)

"He and I have shared the same goal and that's to re-elect Rick Scott," Curry said.

Curry called Fernandez's emails expressing concern about the campaign part of an "internal" discussion and dialogue.

"He was saying to the campaign where he thought we could be doing things differently," Curry said.

Curry said he remained "grateful" for the work Fernandez did and said "it's unfortunate he felt frustrated" about how the campaign was running.

As for the incident that Fernandez said showed cultural insensitivity, Curry said that if he had evidence that it took place those responsible would be fired.

"I don't see any evidence of Republican Party of Florida employees saying those kind of things," Curry said. "I won't tolerate that."

There are differing opinions about how important these entire events have been the last few days.

It's self-evident that the campaign and the party have tried hard to steer news away from this narrative. They have launched web ads and the party even this week disclosed its fundraising numbers 10 days early (when in the past it used to be the party discuss any of this until the actual filing deadline with the state.)

When asked about the decision to release the fundraising numbers early, Curry said it was a very successful quarter and then added "Mke had a lot to do with that."

And that's the real issue going forward. The news of Fernandez's departure will fade as the session ends and the campaign veers into hyperdrive. But will all of this affect fundraising going forward?

Scott has been described as one insider as a "machine" when it comes to raising money.

But one has to wonder as the dog days of summer are upon us - and the session is over - whether or not the money will continue to flow like it has been.  Maybe some Florida donors will decide that amid all this that they need evidence that Scott is convinced enough of re-election effort that he will reach into his own pocket again.

Scott has publicly stated he has no plans to spend his own money like he did in 2010 when he spent more than $70 million.

But if his goal - as he once said - is to raise $100 million to go after his opponent - then he and others still have work to do.

5 biggest questions of the 2014 session

The annual 2014 legislative session kicked off on Tuesday amid the usual ceremony, speeches and even a brief round of protests.

But it appears so far that this year's 60-day march will be relatively low-key, and perhaps, much less contentious than the last three years since Gov. Rick Scott took office. (Example: The 2011 session may remain one of the most substantive sessions in the last decade.)

Still there may be a few flashpoints between now and early May when legislators wrap up their work and hit the campaign trail.

Here are the 5 biggest questions that should be answered between now and then:

1. Is this year's gambling legislation the real deal, or is it all for show?

Here at the start of the session we now have dueling versions of gambling bills that have been rolled out by House and Senate leaders. One of the substantial differences between the two bills is that the Senate version would allow the establishment of two major casinos in South Florida, while the House bill is more of an overhaul of existing gambling regulations. The Senate bill also has wording right now that appears to allow slot machines at some pari-mutuels outside Broward and Miami-Dade although that has been explained as inadvertent.

House Speakr Will Weatherford has maintained that the House will not move forward on any gaming legislation without a constitutional amendment that subjects gambling expansion to voter approval and a new compact negotiated between the governor and the Seminole Tribe of Florida. The rationale for waiting on a new compact is that any new gaming bill could affect the agreement that brings in more than $200 million a year to the state. A key portion of that agreement expires in 2015. The Tampa Bay Times/Miami Herald reported on Tuesday that Scott has opened negotiations with the tribe.

So that could put the entire deck of cards in play if Scott does produce a new compact with the tribe in the new few weeks.

But what's significantly different about the gambling debate from other high profile issues is that it pits some of the biggest political heavyweights in Florida in direct competition with each other, whether it's Disney and the Florida Chamber of Commerce (which oppose expansion), the tribe (which is fighting to keep its existing monopoly that lets it make money off its Tampa casino), or the pari-mutuels (which are fighting to remain viable) or the Las Vegas casino owners who want to build in South Florida.

Now maybe Disney and Central Florida business owners come to the grudging realization that the best deal is to accept one in which they accept casinos in South Florida, but with the understanding that nothing happens north of the Broward county line. Some cynics, however, have suggested this entire process may continue to get dragged out, especially since it has produced hundreds of thousands in political contributions for both parties.

Still there are some legislators who have suggested that the Legislature remains too fractured over the issue and unable to come up with a deal. Right now there isn't even a plan to bring any bills up for a vote for at least another two weeks. Sen. John Thrasher, the veteran North Florida Republican and former head of the party, on opening day called the entire debate a "distraction" and said he hoped they would just quickly kill off the discussion for another year.

2. Will the Republican-controlled Legislature really approve in-state tuition rates for the children of illegal immigrants?

Weatherford on opening day made an impassioned plea for legislators to approve legislation that would allow children of illegal immigrants who had been brought to this country, but had graduated from a Florida high school, to be eligible for the same tuition rate that is charged to other Florida residents. He said it was wrong to "punish" children who had done nothing wrong.

Last year the House considered a similar bill but the key difference here is last year's bill applied only to U.S. born-children of illegal immigrants and it largely codified an existing federal court ruling.

This issue of in-state tuition for the children of illegal immigrants, sometimes referred to as "Dreamers," is not new. There have been numerous instances in which one chamber or the other has pushed this proposal and other high-profile Republicans such as U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio backed the idea.

But as Rubio showed as he weighed into the debate over immigration, this can trigger some intense debate among the conservatives that make up the base of the Republican Party. It could be argued it also was one of the things that wounded the presidential campaign of Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

Senate President Don Gaetz has already said he is opposed to the legislation and that he could not explain to his constituents why he could support, in his words, give benefits to someone ahead of someone else who played by the rules.

The question, however, remains whether or not the Legislature wants to put this bill on the desk of Gov. Rick Scott during a critical re-election year.

There's no doubt that Scott's signing of the bill could potentially help him with some Hispanic voters in Florida. Hispanic Republican legislators have been among the steadfast supporters of this legislation for many years.

But would Scott be tempted to veto the bill in an effort to show loyalty to the conservatives who help propel him into office? Would signing the bill risk keeping them at home in a year when he needs every vote?

Scott for his part keeps saying he is "considering" the bill because he remains concerned about the high cost of tuition for all families. Still it's worth wondering whether or not Scott's team quietly asks legislators to push this off in order to avoid the publicity and contentious debate that it could trigger.

3. Testing vs. vouchers

Since entering the Florida Legislature one of the most ardent champions of vouchers, or "school choice" as he and supporters term it, has been Weatherford.

Both Weatherford and Gaetz have said that one of their priorities remains yet another expansion of the state program that offers tax credits to companies that steer money to organizations that hand out vouchers. This year's proposal is significant because it would offer a tax credit for sales taxes, which is the biggest chunk of the state budget and which is paid by lots of companies. The bill would also widen who could qualify for vouchers.

Yet Gaetz has thrown in his own requirement that could ultimately doom the effort.

In his opening day speech, Gaetz told his fellow senators that children who go to private schools courtesy of these vouchers "should be assessed just like the performance of any other child. Why? Because testing is not just about score-carding. It is about measuring academic progress so schools and teachers can customize instruction to meet individual student needs, so parents will know how their children are really doing, so taxpayers can be sure how their money is used."

Let's be clear - it is not unusual for private schools to require standardized tests of students. Jon East, who works for one of the organizations that back vouchers, even points out this out in a recent blog item that students who receive the scholarships have been required to take a norm-referenced test since 2006.

But those tests are not the state-sanctioned tests such as the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test and private schools may not use these standardized tests in a way that comes even close to how the public schools use them (such as ranking schools and evaluating teacher performance).

And there's where the debate, and resistance lies. Private schools operators would argue that it would be unfair to mandate a particular type of standardized test. You can go even further. Some private schools in recent years have touted the fact from a marketing standpoint that their schools DO NOT require FCAT testing.

East himself nails the point: "It's which test, not whether to test."

So how will private schools respond if the state says, ok, in the future, students who accept vouchers must take the same test that all students will start taking in 2015 (which is when a new test tied to Common Core.) Some may have no problem since some are in fact tying their curriculum to Common Core just like the public schools. But this debate could cause enough division that it complicates the voucher expansion effort.

4. Could Rick Scott still have a tough session?

Both Weatherford and Gaetz have in many ways cleared the way for Scott to have one of the smoothest sessions he has had since he took office in 2011. They quickly embraced his call for $500 million in tax cuts - and they have already pledged to keep college tuition flat this year as the governor asked.

So does that mean Scott will get everything he wants?

That's not entirely clear.

One early flashpoint has to do with Scott's call to completely eliminate the differential tuition that universities are now allowed to charge.

The universities got the Florida Legislature to give them some limited amount of discretion to raise tuition a maximum of 15 percent a year regardless of the tuition rate set by legislators. The argument at the time was that Florida tuition is low compared to the national average and that students should pay their fair share. This change in law was championed initially by the University of Florida and Florida State University, both of whom have a sizable number of alumni in the Legislature.

The two legislative leaders have initially said that they are willing to lower the differential tuition rate from a maximum of 15 percent to 6 percent.

But Scott wants it entirely eliminated. So far, Weatherford has said he understands the governor's position but he has not endorsed doing that. This could be an interesting and evolving debate for most of the next 60 day session.

Another potential area of discord: Will Scott's appointments - particularly his agency heads such as Department of Economic Opportunity director Jesse Panuccio - get confirmed? There are rumblings that Panuccio may have a tough time. One recent article pointed out that Gaetz himself would not say for sure if he would be confirmed.

Part of this could be the constant dance between legislators and the governor as each side tries to have some small bit of leverage. There was another small bit of evidence of behind-the-scenes intrigue when Rep. Seth McKeel gave the Department of Management Services a dressing down and floated an amendment to take away Scott's control of DMS and instead place it under the governor and Cabinet.

5. Will there be a libertarian wave during this year's session?

Republicans in the Florida Legislature have long wrestled with questions of deregulation, government intrustion versus the need for stability and order.

For example, one big battle early in Gov. Jeb Bush's first term was whether he would sign a bill that eliminated the helmet requirement for motorcyclists. Bush eventually signed the bill into law despite a heavy veto push, including from those in the insurance industry.

This year we have bills to loosen up speed limits, get rid of red light cameras, authorize certain sizes of beer bottles, let grocery stores sell liquor, and even a measure that would permit a certain strain of marijuana to be legal in the state.

For many regular Floridians these arguments over pot, booze and speeding may wind up being the most important things that legislators wind up doing.  But some of these bills have also sparked a fair amount of lobbying in opposition from various interest groups whether it's law enforcement authorities, liquor store owners, and driver safety groups.

The signs that John Thrasher won't be Florida's next LG

For weeks there have been on-again, off-again rumors that State Sen. John Thrasher was the heir apparent to the spot of lieutenant governor.

Thrasher's name, which first bubbled up last spring, has consistently been thrown out as Gov. Rick Scott's search for a replacement to Jennifer Carroll has stretched on now for eight months.

The rationale behind Thrasher has been that he would give Scott a steady veteran to help with the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature. His other positive is that as a former chairman of the Republican Party of Florida he has a good relationship with party leaders and major donors that help the party carry out its mission.

The down-side on Thrasher is that his past as a lobbyist could be used to attack the governor. Additionally Thrasher would not create a lot of attention or buzz for a re-election campaign that is expected to be close. (Although after the forced resignation of Carroll there are those who want a running mate that does not attract a lot of attention.)

Well, it may be pointless to weigh the pros and cons because the signs are that Thrasher is now focusing on getting re-elected to the state Senate in 2014 and not joining Scott as his running-mate.

Look no further than to tonight's major fundraiser that Thrasher _ who still has no announced opponent _ has planned at the TPC Sawgrass Clubhouse in Ponte Vedra Beach.

The host committee includes a lengthy list of well-known northeast Florida figures including former Jacksonville mayor John Delaney, current State Board of Education chairman Gary Chartrand, Michael Hightower, Tom Petway and former U.S. Ambassador John Rood. Another member of the host committee is Southern Strategy Group, the big-time Tallahassee lobbying powerhouse that Thrasher worked at between his stint as House speaker and his election to the state Senate.

When asked about the fundraiser, a spokeswoman for Thrasher sounded firm that he is not planning on switching from the legislative branch of government to the executive.

"John Thrasher is committed to running for re-election for the Florida Senate, as evidenced by this evening's scheduled fundraiser,'' said Sarah Bascom.

With Thrasher out of the running for LG this means speculation will return again to other political figures.

Of course Scott remains under no real legal obligation to find a LG anytime soon.

State law requires a lieutenant governor, but there is no enforceable deadline on how quickly a governor must act to replace an LG. (With the holidays coming up fast it would seem unlikely Scott would act before the end of the year.)

Asked about it earlier this week Scott would only say he was still reviewing possible candidates.

"Look, there's a lot of great people around the state that could be great lieutenant governors, so we're still going through the process,'' Scott said.

 

 

Former top Scott aide pushes Thrasher for LG

Consider this part of a new ongoing series that I refer to as news from Inside the Tallahassee bubble. These will just be short interesting tidbits.

THRASHER FOR LG?

While there has been a fair amount of radio silence regarding a successor to Lieutenant Gov. Jennifer Carroll one former top aide to Gov. Rick Scott has someone he thinks deserves consideration.

Steve MacNamara, former chief of staff to Scott, in March sent an email to his former boss touting State Sen. John Thrasher, R-St. Augustine as a potential candidate.

In the email MacNamara says at the very least it could help generate some good will for Scott if Thrasher at least made the short list. MacNamara was chief of staff for Thrasher back when he was House speaker. He also jokes that he's not interested in the job.

From: Stephen MacNamara
Date: March 13, 2013, 10:30:48 AM EDT
To: Rick Scott
Subject: LG

Hope you pick Thrasher. Given all he has done, I hope you at least put
him on the short list, have Adam tell him he's not it so he can
gracefully withdraw saying he needs to keep his commitment to his
constituents and fill out his term. He understands you need to make
the right political choice with this appointment but it would buy you
tons of good will to include him in the list being considered. This is
a great opportunity to make a couple of key people feel important by
saying they are being contemplated as a replacement. As Rahm Emanuel
would say "Never let a good crisis go to waste". BTW...I'm not
interested but thanks!

The email from MacNamara came the same day that news about Carroll's departure became public.

It was sent to a personal email account maiintained by the governor. Scott forwarded the email on to his public email account that is maintained on a public website. (It is worth noting that one of the emails sent to his private account Scott did not forward to his public account until two months after it was sent.)

Since Carroll's resignation Scott has said little about the next LG even as speculation has come from all quarters about potential candidates. The governor has insisted that he won't even think about a LG until after the session is over.

ARDUIN IS BACK

Tweeted this last week but it's interesting that the Florida Senate in March hired Donna Arduin. Arduin is former budget director for former Gov. Jeb Bush as well as prime architect of Scott's 7-7-7 plan. (That was Scott's seven step plan to create nearly 700,000 jobs over a seven-year period.)

According to Senate documents Arduin will receive $10,000 for two months worth of work.

Arduin has been hired to provide consulting related to "economic planning for funds received by Florida" from either government or private sources in connection to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.