The Fine Print

Secrets, power, and the law: A quick guide to Florida's redistricting trial

More than two years after lawsuits were first filed a trial is scheduled to open up this week in Tallahassee that challenges the constitutionality of Florida's current congressional map. The trial could last up to 11 days.

Here's a quick run-down to explain what it's about and what's at stake.

WHAT'S HAPPENING: Two different sets of plaintiffs, including a coalition led by the League of Women Voters, have challenged the legality of maps drawn up and passed by the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature. The lawsuit asks Circuit Court Judge Terry Lewis to declare the congressional maps invalid because they violate a constitutional amendment that requires districts to be drawn in a way so they do not favor any one political party or protect incumbents. The "Fair Districts" amendment was passed by voters in 2010. This lawsuit will answer questions on whether legislators complied with these new standards _ after opposing them initially _ or instead gave them lip service and engaged in a "shadow" process as the plaintiffs allege to draw up districts that favored Republicans.

WHAT'S AT STAKE: Ultimately the makeup of the Florida delegation of the U.S. Congress.

Right now there is a 16-10 GOP edge (although one vacant seat is expected to be won in June by Republican Curt Clawson). The judge could decide that the current map is in fact unconstitutional and require that the map be redrawn. The plaintiffs behind the lawsuit argue that no less than 10 existing seats violate the standards: CD 5 held by U.S. Rep. Corinne Brown, CD 10 held by U.S. Rep. Dan Webster, CD 13 held by U.S. Rep. David Jolly, CD 14 held by U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor, CD 21 held by U.S. Rep. Ted Deutch, CD 22 held by U.S. Rep. Lois Frankel, CD 26 held by U.S. Rep. Joe Garcia, CD 27 held by U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, CD 15 held by U.S. Rep. Dennis Ross and CD 25 held by U.S. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart.

It's Brown's district, which winds its way all the way from Jacksonville to Orlando, that may be the one that is most impacted by the litigation.

That's because in the middle of the 2012 session two legislators in charge of redistricting - now Senate President Don Gaetz and House Speaker Will Weatherford met privately with staff and decided at that time to boost the number of African-Americans in Brown's district so that it was a so-called "majority minority" seat instead of having roughly 48 percent African-American voters in the district.

When asked about this in a deposition Weatherford contended that the Senate had made a "compelling" argument to do this because it would help any legal challenges to the maps. The plaintiffs allege that this action wound up taking Democrats from other Central Florida districts and was done to make two other GOP seats safer.

KEY MOMENTS TO WATCH FOR DURING TRIAL: It is expected that during the trial both of Florida's legislative leaders Gaetz and Weatherford will be asked to take the stand. The two men were in charge of the redistricting process in 2012 before they ascended to their current positions. The two men are being forced to testify because the state Supreme Court in a 5-2 decision ruled that legislators and legislative staff are not covered by legislative privilege when it comes to deciding whether or not they violated the "Fair Districts" amendment. Other people who could testify include former House Speaker Dean Cannon as well as legislative staffers, lobbyists and consultants.

THE ALLEN WEST DEFENSE: Another thing to watch for is how many times former U.S. Rep. Allen West's name is mentioned during the trial. It's no secret that some conservatives howled at how the changes proposed by the Florida Legislature wound up affecting West who wound up losing his re-election bid after shifting to a new district. In the past Weatherford and other legislative leaders have insisted they were following the law and that they did not intentionally target West.

But West is already being used by attorneys representing the Legislature as defense exhibit No. 1. House attorney George Meros cited the loss of West - as well as the losses of several other Republicans - as evidence that everything legislators did was on the up and up. The question is how this defense will be viewed by the conservatives and tea party groups that like West.

WHY TALLAHASSEE INSIDERS CARE SO MUCH: While the lawsuit could have reverberations for members of Congress, the litigation also threatens to expose the behind-the-scenes relationships that exist between consultants, lobbyists and Florida politicians. The plaintiffs allege that GOP consultants played a role in helping craft the maps. One of Cannon's top aides - and now working with him at a lobbying firm - sent draft maps to a Republican political consultant. Meros publicly told Judge Lewis in a recent hearing that Kirk Pepper had "breached" his duty to Cannon and that Cannon was furious at him over it.

But there's more than just that: Documents and emails produced in connection with the case have highlighted meetings between legislative staff and GOP consultants and even national GOP officials right after the amendments were passed. What has surfaced so far has also raised questions as to the relationships between legislative leaders such as Cannon and Gaetz and well-known Tallahassee consultants Rich Heffley and Marc Reichelderfer. The Naples Daily News pointed out that Heffley for example was paid $10,000 a month as a redistricting consultant while Gaetz was drawing maps for the Senate.

Meanwhile, for those pushing the lawsuits they have had to answer questions about their own motivations since documents have shown that it was Democratic consultants who helped produce a map that was initially submitted to the judge as an alternative to the map now being challenged. In one colorful passage, a consultant talked about wanting "to scoop as many Jews" out of particular neighborhood in order to bolster the district of U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and who is also the chair of the Democratic National Committee.

CONFIDENTIAL AND HUSH-HUSH: One of the other big storylines for the trial is why Republican consultant Pat Bainter and his firm Data Targeting are fighting so hard to keep out of public view hundreds of pages of documents taken from the firm. The groups pushing the lawsuit want to use slightly less than 100 pages as exhibits in the trial. But Bainter's attorneys _ who are being bankrolled by the Republican Party of Florida _ have now gone to an appeals court to fight from making the documents public. The court last Friday said it would keep the material secret while it considers the appeal.

On the very least this means the trial will have to start without these secrets from spilling out, and in the end it's possible that the judge can still use the evidence even if the public never knows what it is.

The battle, however, points out that the attorneys pursuing the case are relying a great deal on material they got from consultants because they were less successful in obtaining a lot of behind-the-scenes material from the Legislature itself.

Let's not forget that it was just winter that legislators acknowledged that some records related to redistricting had been destroyed although they contended was not to thwart the lawsuit.

COST TO TAXPAYERS: And while this drags on taxpayers keep footing the bill.

In the build-up to the trial, the state's taxpayers have spent a lot of money to defend the GOP-controlled Legislature's actions. The Florida Senate has spent at least $2 million, while the House had spent more than $600,000 by last fall. (Still awaiting a more to up to date figure from the House.) You can expect that cost to rise significantly after a trial - and possible appeals depending on which side loses.

WHEN WILL THIS BE DECIDED: Very soon. The trial is not being decided by a jury but the verdict instead will handed down by Lewis. He said at a recent hearing that he plans to make his decision between now and the end of June. That's because Lewis is being switched over to criminal proceedings in July. He said he wants to have this wrapped up before he makes that move.

Don Gaetz's $4200 close-up

Another round of Inside the Tallahassee bubble news:

The tradition in Tallahassee is that the second year of legislative leadership inevitably brings the unveiling on an oil portrait for the House speaker or Senate president about to depart.

As anyone who's been in the Capitol knows each time a new portrait is brought in the ones already in the chambers are rotated to make room for the newest arrival (and one portrait is taken down and placed in storage.)

The Senate recently signed a contract with Alabama-based artist Leon Loard to pay for Gaetz's oil portrait. The cost is a total of $4,258.

The cost of the portrait _ which falls in line with previous purchases _ is not the most expensive one done in recent years.

The portraits of Senate President Toni Jennings and John McKay cost $7,000 while Jim Scott's was $6,800 according to information compiled by the Senate. The portraits of Jim King, Tom Lee, Ken Pruitt, Jeff Atwater and Mike Haridopolos ranged from nearly $3,200 (King) to close to $4,000 (Haridopolos).

But the most expensive legislative leader portraits of late have been of two House speakers: Johnnie Byrd and Marco Rubio.

House records show that Byrd's portrait cost $10,500 and included the cost of the frame.

Rubio's portrait was initially $9,500 but the cost was lowered by $500 after the artist asked to not be responsible for the frame.

By contrast the portraits of both House Speaker Larry Cretul and Dean Cannon have been considerably less: $3,380 for Cretul and $4,052 for Cannon.

The House has not yet signed a contract for House Speaker Will Weatherford's oil portrait. But it may be worth noting that the cost for Allan Bense (Weatherford's father-in-law) was $6,000.

Oil portraits, some may recall, played a small but interesting role in the saga of the Republican Party of Florida under the direction of former chairman Jim Greer.

According to reports at the time the party agreed to spend $7,500 on oil portraits of both Greer and then-Gov. Charlie Crist.

5 biggest questions of 2012 session answered

There's one week to go and most signs (absent some meltdown ala the 2011 session) are that Florida lawmakers will have everything wrapped up by March 9.

Now if legislators fail to approve a bill on auto insurance there remains a possibility that Gov. Rick Scott could call them back into special session to handle that. Scott himself this past week downplayed any talk of special session, but changing personal injury protection auto insurance was on Scott's to-do list heading into session. PIP of course remains one of the most highly lobbied issues of the entire session and there remains the possibility that it could all fall apart in the next few days.

But even with that it is still possible to answer the 5 biggest questions that I had entering into the session:

Will redistricting keep moving smoothly and quickly? For the most part yes. The maps are done and now it's up to the courts to decide what the next move will be. Many observers speculate that the Florida Senate map will be kicked back but even if that happens it will be taken care of during a subsequent special session.

Does the casino bill really have a chance of passing? No, no and no. At the start of the session the mega-casino bill sponsored by Sen. Ellyn Bogdanoff and Rep. Eric Fresen consumed a fair amount of oxygen in the legislative process. But while it got through one committee in the Senate it floundered in the House (which is sort of what everyone expected.)

The next question is what happens next.

The casino idea is not going away, but at this point it's a matter of what form it takes next. Right now the buzz is there could be a push for a constitutional amendment in 2014.

Right after the House torpedoed the bill Bogdanoff said she had no desire to sponsor the bill next year. She said she had doubts that the legislation would get much further in 2013 than it did this year. Given that scenario then a constitutional amendment drive makes sense.

What does Dean Cannon really want? I'm not sure we really know. But if you were to guess it might have been the higher education bills including the one that will allow both University of Florida (Cannon's alma mater) and Florida State University to have wide latitude over setting tuition. Cannon in his speech on opening day warned that Florida's higher education system was "racing toward mediocrity" and he charged lawmakers to consider reforms.

The House has responded with the tuition bill - and a second bill - that not only change the finances of college but also change what it takes for college students to graduate. More on that here.

How serious is Gov. Rick Scott's budget veto threat? It must have been very serious. Scott said he wanted a "significant" increase in funding for education and wanted at least $1 billion more to go to public schools. Without too much grousing House and Senate leaders quickly complied with his request. It may not be enough to appease critics who point out that the increase doesn't match last year's cuts.

But Republican legislators have guaranteed that Scott will likely end his second session with a fairly good track record (and give themselves some cover heading into election season).

If lawmakers enact PIP reform then Scott will have gotten just about everything he asked for in his State of the State speech. His main defeat this session was his push to revamp the funding formula for hospitals. That proposal never really gained traction in either the House and Senate.

What issue not on everyone's radar screen now will blow up? Take your pick on this one. The knockdown battle over prison privatization that led to a defeat for a sitting Senate president. The behind-the-scenes skulduggery in the fight to become Senate president two years and four years from now. Or of course Sen. J.D. Alexander's push to create a stand-alone 12th university in Lakeland and his tug-of-war with Tampa Bay legislators over funding for the University of South Florida.

 

 

Halftime of the 2012 session: Bills are dying

House Speaker Dean Cannon warned prior to the 2012 session that there was "limited bandwidth" to take up a lot of contentious issues during this critical election year.

If there's any observation to be made at the halfway point, Cannon wasn't kidding.

Cannon made his comment to emphasize that his focus was largely on the once-a-decade chore of redistricting and the annual job of passing a new state budget.

In reality, what that has meant is that in the usually-much more disciplined House there hasn't been a lot of direction from leadership about lots of other bills. (The clear exception appears to be bills that are a top priority of Gov. Rick Scott.)

But that has meant it's been a much more wide open process in the House - and it has resulted in many bills and proposals quickly falling to the wayside.

The Senate, which is always trickier to figure out, has been equally difficult to predict this year.

In that chamber you have the power shifting from Senate President Mike Haridopolos to incoming Senate President Don Gaetz, an ongoing leadership battle between potential future Senate presidents Sen. Jack Latvala and Sen. Andy Gardiner, and the tug-of-war over prison privatization that led Haridopolos to dump Sen. Mike Fasano as a committee chairman.

In short, if you believe the chit-chat of some lobbyists - and some House members - no one is really sure who's in charge over in the Senate.

Whatever the reasons the result is this: Regardless of party affiliation bills have had a rough time and have been shot down.

The Florida Legislature hit its halfway point this week and its worth noting the major pieces of legislation that appear dead - or close to dead:

Legislation to bring mega-casinos to Florida

A bill sought by the insurance industry to limit bad faith lawsuits

A measure pushed by the Department of Health to block doctors from prescribing drugs if they have been arrested

Any major constitutional amendments dealing with property taxes

A mandate that businesses use E-verify to check the legal status of newly-hired employees

Legislation that would subject drivers to a ticket if they are caught texting while driving

Several contentious environmental measures, including one meant to block local ordinances on fertilizer

There are a whole host of other bills whose future is very murky to predict and that includes legislation to collect sales taxes from online retailers, a bill to ban Internet cafes, and a push by the business community to lower unemployment compensation tax bills.

And to reinforce this message even further, consider this, as of Friday the total number of bills passed this session by both the House and Senate is five.

Yep, you read that right.

Out of nearly 2,000 bills and resolutions that have been filed so far this session, only five have passed both chambers.

There are 28 days left.

5 biggest questions of the 2012 session

Florida's GOP-controlled Legislature kicks off its annual session on Tuesday amid the backdrop of the looming Jan. 31 presidential primary, a governor still battling low poll numbers, and legislative leaders who so far have shown a desire to keep the agenda limited during a critical election year.

The two main jobs are redistricting and passing a budget, but even that's not guaranteed at this point.

Senate President Mike Haridopolos has talked about waiting until later in the year to pass a budget. And while there appears to be a push to pass redistricting plans quickly there remains a chance that legal challenges to the final product could force legislators into a special session at some later date to adopt different maps.

Here at this point are the 5 biggest questions of the session:

Will redistricting keep moving smoothly and quickly? In anticipation of potential legal challenges, the GOP-controlled Legislature has already begun to accelerate to a possible final vote on changes for both Congressional and legislative districts. The Senate is poised to vote out its maps within the first few days of the annual session.

So far the political rancor has been fairly minimal although that could change quickly. Some South Florida Republicans have already been complaining about the treatment of U.S. Rep. Allen West due to a proposed shift that could make his seat more competitive. The question is whether state legislators will heed the complaints and push onward - or will they engage in more tinkering which could spark even more infighting.

There hasn't been a loud chorus of threats of lawsuits or recriminations yet. But it's hard to believe that debate and arguments over redistricting won't heat up and bog down the process at some point.

Does the casino bill really have a chance of passing? There's no doubt that one of the more enticing storylines of the 2012 session is the fate of the mega-casino bill sponsored by Sen. Ellyn Bogdanoff and Rep. Eric Fresen.

In the last few weeks, the list of proponents and opponents has been growing (although Gov. Rick Scott has deliberately chosen to remain rather quiet about whether he would sign the bill).

After a series of workshops, Bogdanoff late last week filed a massive rewrite of the bill intended to try to win over critics and votes. The measure now includes a voter referendum option, including giving voters in local counties the option of deciding whether or not to let local dog and horse tracks add slot machines.

Usually high-profile legislative fights pitting deep-pocketed groups against each other result in nothing getting passed. One of the main axioms of the Florida Legislature is that it's 10 times easier to kill a bill than to pass a bill.

Right now many Capitol observers are anxious to see if the bill can actually make it out of its first committee and then actually get passed by the full Senate. The fact that the Florida House has shown no signs of seriously considering the bill has fed speculation that the legislation is doomed for this year.

Of course, sometimes major initiatives take more than one year (and when leadership changes). So part of the battle for this year may be just demonstrating to doubters that a fair number of legislators are willing to support the bill this time around. That could set the stage for its return in 2013.

What does Dean Cannon really want? The session is starting with a bit of uncertainty because Cannon has been reticent to discuss what he would like to see happen during his last session as House Speaker.

Cannon last year waited until the eve of session to let everyone know he wanted to pursue far-reaching changes to the judicial branch, including a proposal to break up the state Supreme Court into two separate branches. (In the end Cannon got a watered-down constitutional amendment that makes some changes but none as dramatic as he initially proposed.)

Heading into this session Cannon has basically insisted his main priorities are the budget and redistricting, or the two things that the state constitution requires the Legislature to do this year.

That gives Senate Republicans less leverage to use against Cannon in trying to get some of their priorities passed and makes it harder for dealmaking to occur. (And it's worth noting that Rep. Will Weatherford, R-Wesley Chapel and the incoming House Speaker has sponsored zero bills so far this year as well. So there's limited leverage against him as well.)

How serious is Gov. Rick Scott's budget veto threat? Last month Scott did a turnabout on school funding. In less than one year he has gone from advocating a 10 percent cut in funding for schools to pushing a $1 billion increase and threatening to veto the entire budget unless there is a "significant" increase.

Initially Scott would not say what a "significant" increase is. But in later interviews, he said he likes $1 billion.

Scott has said his push for more school funding came after spending months listening to Florida voters who have told him education is a top priority. It may have also something to do with that fact that some in Scott's inner circle think that education cuts may have contributed a big part to his lagging poll numbers. Some public polls have backed this up, pointing out that some of other Scott's initiatives, including drug testing welfare recipients is popular.

The governor, however, relied on deep budget cuts in hospitals and health care spending in order to free up the money needed to increase funding for schools while also filling a nearly $2 billion budget gap. Such deep cuts may prove to be a hard sell to GOP legislators who are getting lobbied heavily by hospital officials who warn that the cuts will lead to layoffs.

So legislators must decide to either find other cuts to meet Scott's school funding goals - or they must pare back the increase sought by the governor to something more manageable. A much less likely scenario is that legislative leaders could shrug off Scott's threat since Republicans hold a supermajority in both the House and Senate and override a veto.

One other solution, of course, is to hope for extra revenue. And that's one advantage of potentially waiting for voting on a budget. If the economy continues to slowly recover, there's a chance that it will be easier to meet Scott's goal and avoid a confrontation.

What issue not on everyone's radar screen now will blow up? This is a reoccuring question because nearly every year there is a legislative initiative that seemingly comes out of nowhere and dominates debate and headlines in the final days of the session.

Part of it is due to the fact that the rules allow legislators to change bills at a moment's notice. Past examples include controversial bills dealing with abortion and elections. There are also some bills lurking out there that could quickly dominate part of this year's narrative. Drug-testing for state employees and another stab at mandating E-Verify for employers are just two such measures.

With so much attention concentrated on redistricting, it's easy to imagine a scenario where attention quickly shifts to something else if redistricting passes as easily as legislative leaders expect. 

It seems that each session of the Florida Legislature is like a hurricane, with its path and intensity quite unlike the storm that preceded it.

 

 

 

Could this become an issue in Mack vs. Hasner vs. LeMieux race?

Put this in "Will this become an issue in the U.S. Senate race?" file.

Sometime next year motorists across Florida will begin paying higher tolls to use nearly 600 miles of highway according to information recently released by the Florida Department of Transportation.

The average toll increase will be about $.25 and it will affect major roads such as the Florida Turnpike, Alligator Alley, Sunshine Skyway bridge, the Veterans Expressway and the Beachline Expressway in Central Florida.

This toll hike was authorized by HB 985, a major transportation bill that was approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature during the 2007 session. It mandates that the tolls be raised at least once every five years to keep pace with inflation.

The bill since then has become known as the legislation that authorized the millions used to construct the controversial First District Court of Appeal or the "Tallahassee Taj Mahal."

But while that provision was slipped into the legislation in the waning days of the session the toll provisions were hotly debated on the floor of the Florida House.

The House ultimately approved the bill by a 68-49 margin with Rep. Adam Hasner, R-Boca Raton and current U.S. Senate candidate voting for it. Other Republicans who voted yes include House Speaker Marco Rubio and Sen. Mike Haridopolos.

But the legislation did not draw in universal support from GOP lawmakers. Legislators such as Rep. Dennis Ross (who is now in Congress) and current Senate Majority Leader Andy Gardiner were among those who voted no on the bill.

So why could this bill become an issue?

Because U.S. Rep. Connie Mack - and who is expected to jump to join the list of GOP contenders in the U.S. Senate - is among those who has spoken out loudly about raising tolls on Florida roads. Mack, for example, staunchly opposed a proposal to add tolls to Interstate 75 in southwest Florida to help finance a widening of the road.

"Tolls never go away," Mack told Lee County Commissioners back in 2008 according to the Naples Daily News. "They're an added tax. The easy thing to do is say 'Let's toll.'"

Former U.S. Sen. George LeMieux had nothing directly to do with the tolling bill. But LeMieux was chief of staff when then-Gov. Charlie Crist signed the legislation into law.

The toll increases are expected to generate $1.8 billion and while some of the money will be used to expand existing toll roads it will also be used to build the Wekiva Parkway in Central Florida.

It may be the toll increases will not become a campaign issue but the hikes will likely take effect shortly before the August Republican primary - meaning it could be fresh upon voters minds when it comes time to vote. And that means some campaign consultant could find it an issue to jump onto.

 

Angry Republicans lash out at Florida GOP leaders over primary move

Top Republicans in Florida late last month pushed to have the state move up its presidential primary to Jan. 31.

The argument this year - as it was in 2008 - is that this would ensure that presidential candidates would pay attention to Florida.

The latest news is that the Republican National Committee has signed off on a plan to allow the primary to be a winner-take-all contest. This means even though Florida is still losing half of its delegates to the 2012 Republican National Convention the 50 delegates up for grabs remains a valuable prize to the GOP presidential contenders.

More on that here.

But it is also clear that many of the "grassroots" Republicans aren't happy about the decision by top Republicans to buck RNC rules.

It has already been reported that National Committeeman Paul Senft loudly protested the move shortly before the vote.

But emails obtained on behalf of the Associated Press show that Senate President Mike Haridopolos was hit up with lots of angry messages about the potential primary move, which some saw as a way to help some of the candidates, including former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, although House Speaker Dean Cannon is backing Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

Take this email from Lakeland Tea Party leader Mark LaMons and his wife Alison:

"We do not appreciate living in a state, that on more than one occasion, has become a laughing stock as it pertains to elections," their email says. "But that is minor compared to the outright subversion of the will of the people. It is one thing to have the Democrats try to steal an election but to have our own party manipulate the system to advantage a particular candidate is unconscionable."

Here's some of the other sentiments:

Rebecca Walker of Fernandina Beach wrote Haridopolos and ticked off many reasons, including that it was "plain rude" to break RNC rules after the convention was awarded to the state.

"It is breaking the rules and that is just wrong,'' Walker wrote. "I feel like doing this will give the RPOF a black eye in the eyes of the nation. It is wrong, and if the RPOF does this, I for one will be embarrassed and ashamed of our party."

Cindy Kucharski of North Fort Myers wrote a lengthy email to Haridopolos where she says that "whoever came up with this lame idea of moving the primary up is not working for the best interest of the party or the current and future candidates....It's almost as though our party has been infiltrated by an element who wishes to destroy the democratic process."

She also wrote this: "I am a political activist. It is a rare day that I do not send a letter to a legislator - not only elected officials from Florida, but from all over the country. I pay attention. I watch CSPAN. I listen to talk radio. I research candidates on the Internet. I go to hear them speak when making my mind who to vote for. However half the people I meet are ignorant of the issues, too lazy to go out to a candidate forum, many too lazy to even request an absentee ballot and send it in.

You know the electorate is alarmingly apathetic and it takes a lot of motivation to get out the vote. By moving the primary date you decrease the time possible the motivate the unwashed masses."

Later she continues: "My disappointment in the Republican Party continues. I basically refuse to financially support RPOF or RNC. However, I work tirelessly for a candidate I support and have been very pleased at the victories of Marco Rubio and Rick Scott - in spite of their initial lack of support from their own parties. I was so disgusted with the Republican Party that I was ready to change my voter registration from Republican - and only stayed in the party because I realized candidates like Marco need the support of conservative primary voters."

Rick Hartley a Republican State Committeeman from Duval County wrote to Haridopolos and said: "Do not hijack the primary for Romney! This stinks."

Bill Landes from Polk County wrote Cannon, Haridopolos and members of the panel that was voting on the primary date: "I personally feel this sounds as a personal political move for self personal gain."

Carole Reid, a state committeewoman from Putnam County, wrote: "The Republican Party and its legislative leaders remind me of children who don't play by the rules but whine when they are penalized. It is time for these leaders to understand that, as adults, we do not pick and choose rules and laws we wish to adhere to, but rather work to change those with disagree with."

 

 

Who didn't raise money during the session?

This past week Roll Call did a story about the Republican Party of Florida and Gov. Rick Scott.

Down in the story was the following information: Scott did not raise money for the party during the 60-day legislative session as a "matter of policy."

When asked about it this week, top aides to Scott acknowledged that the information was accurate and that Scott did in fact refrain from raising money while lawmakers were in session and crafting new laws and policies for the state.

(There's no legal obligation for Scott to refrain from raising money. It is worth noting that Scott, however, still attended Lincoln Day dinners held by county GOP executive committees around the state. These events usually serve as fundraisers for local organizations.)

Scott's decision regarding fundraising is a contrast from other elected officials.

State legislators seeking federal office - and this includes both Democrats and Republicans during the last decade - have raised money for their campaigns during session.

This year that list included Senate President Mike Haridopolos, who is seeking to knock off incumbent U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson.

Haridopolos raised $2.6 million during the first three months of the year and an analysis done by the St. Petersburg Times/Miami Herald Tallahassee bureau concluded that Haridopolos "received his biggest chunks of money from the special interests who wanted something out of the 60-day legislative session."

Haridopolos, it should be noted, said that he did not hold fundraisers once lawmakers began their session in early March. He also has continually noted that Nelson continues to raise money while Congress in session.

When asked about Scott's decision, a spokesman for the governor was quick to say that Scott's decision is not a "judgement" on anyone else.

"While the governor thinks it was appropriate for him he makes no judgement on the strategic circumstances other elected officials face,'' said Brian Hughes.

 

 

 

 

Budget speak for dummies

The House and Senate have passed rival versions of the state budget and the negotiations between Republican leaders have already begun, although out of sight and quietly right now.

When you are talking about spending close to $70 billion there is a lot of moving parts. And with talk of deficits, shortfalls, budget cuts, trust funds, allocations it can be a bit overwhelming.

Consider this a quick and easy guide to the main concepts in play with the promise that more may come later:

IT'S A BUDGET SHORTFALL, NOT A DEFICIT: Sometimes there is a temptation to use the terms shortfall and deficit interchangeably. But it's not accurate. Florida has a projected $3.75 budget shortfall not a deficit. In other words, it's not that revenue is dropping. It's that the revenue is not rising fast enough to meet all the projected budgetary needs.

Part of those budgetary needs have been caused by the loss of federal stimulus dollars at the end of June. Lawmakers used the stimulus to cushion the state budget when state tax collections were in fact dropping due to the recession and implosion of the state's real estate market. But the stimulus money is going away - and the places where that has a big impact is in the Medicaid program and in public school funding. The biggest reason for Gov. Rick Scott's 10 percent proposed cut in school funding was that Scott said he had no intention of replacing federal stimulus dollars with state dollars.

Legislative leaders have made it clear that they do not intend to raise revenue (with a few caveats) to deal with this shortfall. So they are looking at cutting the budget and forcing state workers to pay part of their pension costs to make up the difference.

IT'S ALL ABOUT ALLOCATIONS, ALLOCATIONS, ALLOCATIONS...While many lawmakers have a say in many of the line-items included in the budget, the starting point is really concentrated in the hands of a few people. Both Senate President Mike Haridopolos and House Speaker Dean Cannon must agree on how money to "allocate" to each of the separate areas of the budget. There's only so much money that can go around. And if you give more money from one area, you have to take it from someplace else.

And part of the allocation process is not just deciding how much money goes to schools or health care. It's how much money that can be used to offset tax cuts. Gov. Rick Scott asked for nearly $2 billion worth tax cuts and he said he's "comfortable" that lawmakers will give it to him, especially his corporate income tax proposal. The bottom line, however, is that state lawmakers can't come up with a final budget until the two legislative leaders sign off on the allocations. And that means it's largely up to the legislative leaders to decide whether they want to give Scott what he wants.

WHO IS THIS GENERAL REVENUE?...The money that is part of the important allocation process is known as "general revenue." This is Capitol shorthand for the state's main checking account. This is the money that comes primarily from the state's 6 percent sales tax, but a handful of other taxes as well such as the corporate income tax, the insurance premium tax and documentary stamp taxes on real estate transactions.

When the amount of general revenue goes down - or doesn't go up as fast as expected - it causes a big problem for state lawmakers since it's their main source of income. But it's important to point out that general revenue is expected to generate $23.8 billion in the coming year. So no, the final amount of spending and the budget is not completely dependent on just general revenue. The final budget amount is also dependent on federal aid and how much money the state takes in what are known as "trust funds."

WHO DOES MONEY FROM A TRUST FUND BELONG TO?...Copious amounts of debate has already been held this session about "trust funds." So what are they? Trust funds are accounts that are set up in state law with a dedicated source of revenue and a dedicated place where the money is spent. And therein lies the big argument. Many groups that pay fees or taxes that wind up in these trust funds view these accounts as special. And they get upset when state lawmakers tinker with them.

Supporters of trust funds argue that a promise was made and that the money should continue to be spent on that program regardless of the ongoing financial realities of the state. There is a fear that a fund dedicated say to affordable housing will vanish and never come back if it is mixed in with money that also goes to schools, health care and prisons. But the counter argument is this: Is it really fair to cut funding to schools and health care while another state program remains intact? Yet groups - whether they are gun owners who pay a concealed weapons fee or those who pay a tax on real-estate transactions - argue that it is a defacto tax increase if money isn't spent the way they want.

HOW MUCH IS THE STATE REALLY SPENDING?...Most people are aware of the ongoing Washington D.C. debate about budgets and what's covered and what's not. Well there is the same kind of debate going on this year in Tallahassee. How big is the state budget really? That's not an easy question to answer. One of the biggest differences right now between the House and Senate budgets is that the Senate budget is much larger because it includes items in the budget that the House doesn't include.

Is this a big deal? Yes and no. If an item is in the budget that means that state lawmakers ultimately control the overall amount spent. That's the logic behind including the budgets from water management districts in the Senate version. But there's also a political dynamic at work here. The more stuff you put in the budget the larger it gets. And at the end of the day, how you explain to voters that the budget you approved was actually larger on paper than the one approved a year ago?

But in reality lawmakers have routinely put stuff in and then yanked stuff out of the budget. It can make it hard to get a read on the complete level of state spending because sometimes they appropriate money in other bills unrelated directly to the budget. Plus, there are lot of other things controlled by state government that aren't annually budgeted such as money shared with city and county governments.

RECURRING OR NON-RECURRING?..You could say money is money. But in the world of the Capitol there's two kinds. There's the kind of money that everyone thinks will keep coming in year after year or "recurring." Then there's "non-recurring," or a supposed one-time windfall that may not be there next year.

The reason that lawmakers separate the two is that there is a thought that it's a bad idea to tie an ongoing expense to non-recurring money. The theory is that this is like wiping out your savings account in order to pay your mortgage. You will get another bill in a month so you have only delayed your financial problems. Now that's not to say that lawmakers haven't done the same thing in the past.

But the state constitution actually places a limit on how much non-recurring money can be placed in the state budget. Anything above 3 percent requires a three-fifths vote of the entire Legislature. So why is this a bit of a problem this year? Because one of the key problems with Gov. Rick Scott's push with phasing out the corporate income tax is that once you do that it starts converting so-called recurring money to non-recurring money. Even if lawmakers passed a bill this year that phases it out over the next seven years the economists will start counting it differently because now the money is "non-recurring."

THOSE PESKY CONFORMING BILLS...It used to be that state lawmakers would pass a 500-page budget and it included all sorts of directions and instructions on how to carry out the budget. Over the years - and thanks to some lawsuits along the way - the Legislature has started passing dozens of so-called "conforming" bills to accompany the budget. 

Sen. Don Gaetz last week asserted that these bills aren't usually substantive. Hmm. That may be true for many of them. But in reality these bills are measures that change state law in order to carry out spending reductions or changes. These measures can be just as sweeping as the budget. For example, how about a "conforming" bill that says money from a cigarette tax hike passed two years ago will no longer go to cancer research.

But it's more than just that. Lawmakers have placed all these conforming bills into the actual budget conference process. So what does that mean? That means they can't be amended once they reach the House and Senate floor. Last week, for example, the House and Senate included their pension reform bills into the budget conference. That means once top leaders negotiate what's in the bill it will be subject to an up or down vote. This has been a problem in the past because until last year the wording of conforming bills was decided behind closed doors.

In response to the scandal involving former House Speaker Ray Sansom, legislators vowed to go over each and every conforming bill in a public meeting. They have promised to do the same this year and a new clause in legislative rules requires a 24-hour waiting period before a final vote can be taken on conforming bills. The bottom line is this that t's not just the budget that you need to watch.

TURKEY AND PORK...No, this is not a Thanksgiving Day menu. In most places when a powerful politician puts something in the budget it's called "pork." In Tallahassee, the parlance is a budget "turkey." Of course, what gets defined as a turkey or pork is a matter of great debate each and every year.

The way the budget process usually work is this: First state agencies put in what's called a "legislative budget request." This is supposed to be an independent assessment by the agency of its financial needs in the coming year. Of course, surprise, surprise, some agencies have not followed that edict especially when agency heads report to a governor who has made it clear that he doesn't want his agencies asking for any additional money. After the "LBR's" are released, the governor takes that information and presents his official budget recommendations to the Legislature.

Lawmakers take the governor's recommendations and build upon it - adding or deleting things that they don't agree with. Many people say that anything not recommended by the governor or by a state agency is a budget turkey. In a lot of instances this is state money set aside for some type of local project or service. Over the years legislators have argued that their opinion on spending items is just as legitimate as that of an agency head in Tallahassee.

LINE-ITEM VETO POWER...One of the most important things to remember about how the state handles its budget is that the governor has line-item veto power. This means that the governor can completely eliminate any spending item without eliminating the entire budget.

Now, theoretically there are limits to this power. A governor is not legally allowed to veto what is called  "provisos" or instructions that accompany certain spending items without wiping out the spending item as well. The governor is also not allowed to veto part of an appropriation. So guess what happened under former Gov. Charlie Crist? Yep. Crist pretty much ignored these restrictions in law.

Did lawmakers complain? Sure they did. But they didn't sue to stop him either. Why is this so important? Because there is ample evidence that the current Legislature will not take the same stance with Gov. Rick Scott. Scott has already ruffled feathers with several steps he has taken that some legislators contend exceed his constitutional limits. If Scott uses the precedent set by Crist it could spark a full-fledged legal battle in front of the Supreme Court later this year.

 

 

 

 

Haridopolos and session fundraising part 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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