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.

A Democratic casualty of the court and redistricting remains upbeat about her future

With the final days of the Florida Legislature's special session on redistricting winding down it's becoming clear that it is kind of, sort of, following the expected script.

There have been few unexpected moments _ such as U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown's tussle with reporters about the planned revamp of her district and the sight of U.S. Rep. Dan Webster returning to his old stomping grounds to ask GOP legislators to vote down a proposed map prepared by legislative staff and legislative lawyers.

But as the session reaches its conclusion _ with the anticipation that a final deal on a map will be reached in the next day and a half _ a  big parlor game for those in Florida politics is what's going to happen to U.S. Rep. Gwen Graham.

The daughter of former Gov. Bob Graham has widely been seen as a rising star for the beleaguered Florida Democratic Party. Her win last year over GOP incumbent Steve Southerland was one of the few bright spots for the party.

But that could all change.

In order to comply with a court ruling that required Brown's district to be changed the Legislature has settled on a proposal that would split Graham's home base of Leon County in half and shift Democrats in Gadsden County to the district now represented by Brown. The irony is that this proposal was taken from filings made by the groups that sued the Legislature and which was drawn up by Democratic operatives.

While last year was a mid-term year it's important to note that Graham won her current district by less than 3,000 votes.

One analysis points out that President Barack Obama only got 34 percent of the vote in the newly revamped 2nd congressional district as designed by the Legislature. Even though Graham has broken with Democrats in some places _ such as the vote for House Speaker  _ it would be hard to fathom her beating a Republican.

Some have speculated that maybe Graham could jump into another contest, maybe even the crowded scramble for U.S. Senate like U.S. Rep. David Jolly did when it became clear that his district would tilt Democratic.

Or maybe Graham bides her time and runs for governor in 2018. Graham noted Wednesday that even House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy has recently inquired about her future plans.

But Graham says she isn't thinking like that.

She said she plans to "wait and see" what happens before making a final decision about seeking a second term in office.

And when she talks further Graham sounds like someone who isn't planning to make that decision in the near future. And instead she is a bit optimistic that she may be running for the seat she has now.

"I want to continue to serve," Graham said Wednesday in a phone interview shortly after she completed a workday at Southern Craft Creamery in Marianna. "I'm running under the assumption that I'm running for the seat in which I now serve. I truly love that I have the opportunity to represent North Florida."

Without going into detail, Graham is acknowledging that maybe the battle over redistricting won't be wrapped up anytime soon.

While the Florida Supreme Court gave the Legislature 100 days to draw a new map there is a chance that more litigation could derail everything again. Chief of course among the lawsuits is one filed by recently by Brown that contends the court ruling is leading to changes in the 5th congressional district that would violate federal voting laws. If a judge were to side with Brown it could require the drawing of a fourth congressional map since 2012.

"You never know what is going to happen,'' Graham said. "There's a good chance that everything remains intact for 2016."

Graham, who has avoided the Capitol even though she lives just a few miles east of it, said she believes in the Fair District amendments that created the legal challenge that forced the Legislature to act. Those amendments mandated legislators could not draw districts to favor or disfavor incumbents or a member of a political party.

But she did add, however, that no matter her political future she is opposed to the current Leon County split proposed by legislators.

"It is really a shame for Leon County,'' Graham said. "The whole point of Fair Districts was to keep districts from being gerrymandered. We're taking a district (CD2) that wasn't gerrymandered and turned it into two gerrymandered districts."

That almost sounds like it could be a passage in an amicus brief. And maybe, just maybe, it's premature to write Graham's political obituary.

Lawsuits, politics, and the House-Senate cold war: Why the real fight over redistricting may be yet to come

There's no doubt when the Florida Legislature kicks off its second special session of the year on Monday that lawmakers have the potential to bring a tsunami of changes to the state's political landscape.

Legislative staff and lawyers drew up a "base map" that has already riled some because of the way it divides Sarasota and Leon counties. U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown responded by going to federal court and asking a judge to block the state from changing her district from one that stretches from Jacksonville to Orlando to one that runs across the northern end of the state to west of Gadsden County. Brown asserts that changes would adversely impact minority voting rights and run afoul of federal law.

If adopted the plan could alter and end the Congressional careers of U.S. Reps. Gwen Graham and Dan Webster while resurrecting Charlie Crist yet again.

But there are a lot of signs that any efforts to make serious changes to this map may be quickly rebuffed by the GOP leaders in charge of the Legislature.

Take for example the rules rolled out for the session.

No lawmaker can propose just altering part of the map - they must introduce a entire new plan.

Additionally, in an effort to deal with any potential charges of partisan influence Senate President Andy Gardiner and House Speaker Steve Crisafulli will require that anyone who offers an amendment to be prepared to identify anyone who had a hand in it as well as "be able to provide a non-partisan and incumbent-neutral justification for the proposed configuration of each district, to explain in detail the results of any functional analysis performed to ensure that the ability of minorities to elect the candidates of their choice is not diminished, and to explain how the proposal satisfies all of the constitutional and statutory criteria applicable to a Congressional redistricting plan."

In other words not an easy task.

"We don’t have the know-how in terms of creating maps, we’re not map experts," said House Democratic Leader Mark Pafford. "And I don’t know if anybody really knows where to begin."

Sen. Jeff Clemons added that he expects most senators to move with caution because of the proscriptive nature of the July ruling from the Florida Supreme Court. It was that ruling, which not only threw out the current congressional map, but included specific suggestions such as reconfiguring Brown's district from a North-South configuration to one that runs East to West.

Sen. Bill Galvano, the top Republican guiding the redistricting efforts in the Senate, contends that the rules were not intended to dissuade anyone from offering up changes.

"We want to make sure we have a full record and that the reasons for amendments or proposals within the map are clear, delineated and on the record,'' Galvano said.

He also said it would be wrong to assume that the "base map" won't be fully discussed and vetted. Galvano added that he expects legislators to need all 12-days that have been set aside for the session.

But the political reality is that many legislators don't have a vested interest in what happens to these congressional districts.

Yes, it's true that the new map could lead to a shrinking of the GOP advantage in the Florida delegation.

But the real showdown in the Legislature isn't during this upcoming session - it's the special session planned for late October

That session _ when lawmakers will be forced to redraw the Senate districts _ will much more wide open. To begin with: While the state Supreme Court gives great insight to how the high court thinks about some of the logic used by the Legislature for congressional districts there's still wiggle room left for the state Senate seats.

"These congressional maps are going to be a good opportunity to learn what's important in relation to drawing the Senate maps,'' Clemons said.

And as had been reported elsewhere putting all 40 seats in play during a presidential year could tip the balance of what happens in the unresolved battle between Sen. Jack Latvala and Sen. Joe Negron for the 2017-18 Senate presidency.

That could prompt the Florida House to use its leverage especially since there are rumblings that there is still a divide between the leaders of the two chambers.

It wasn't by accident that the settlement over the lawsuit against the Senate included wording that absolved the House of any wrongdoing and placed all blame on the Senate GOP leaders. There's probably no way that the House leaders would have accepted the settlement without that crucial acknowledgement.

Of course the "Fair Districts" amendment prevents drawing lines to aid incumbents or people of a particular political party. But that won't stop all 160 legislators from being able to look at the maps themselves and reach their own private conclusions about what the political fallout will mean if certain configurations are adopted.

But this ongoing federal litigation may also come into play prior to that special session.

The lawsuit filed in Pensacola aims to wipe out the amendment as it has been interpreted by the state Supreme Court because it violates free speech rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.  It won't impact this special session, but if a judge issues an injunction by October that blocks state officials from relying on the Fair Districts amendment, it could really shake up that special session. (Worth noting: The lawyer who is working on this case used to be the general counsel for the Florida House.)

Justin Levitt, a Loyola University professor who tracks redistricting cases, says federal judges are usually "skeptical" about free speech claims but he also said he expects the lawsuit to be taken seriously.

And what about Brown's legal argument?

He's not sure how that will proceed. First all, he notes that Brown is asking the court to block a new congressional district that has yet to be adopted. But he adds that while the federal Voting Rights Act does aim to protect the rights of local populations to choose a representative of their choosing there can still be multiple ways to meet the goal. Right now the "base map" keeps Brown's district with a black voting age population of 45 percent - down slightly from the existing 48 percent in the district.

"The Voting Rights Act does not force Florida to choose one over the other,'' Levitt said.

So where does that mean? It means that the next 12 days are just the pre-season to the real contest - and political infighting - that may lay ahead in the fall.

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.

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.

 

 

 

"Rick Scott could be at zero percent approval...."

It's no secret that Gov. Rick Scott's poll numbers have steadily gone downhill since he was first sworn in as governor.

There is some debate as to whether or not Scott's numbers are as bad as the latest poll from Quinnipiac University showed. Some newer GOP-leaning polls have suggested that the 29 percent number given to Scott by Quinnipiac may be too low.

Still Scott's poll numbers have triggered some debate and speculation on whether his unpopularity could aid President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Florida come next year.

There are some who obviously think mentioning Scott could help them.

U.S. Rep. Ted Deutch on Tuesday, for example, sent out a fundraising pitch for this quarter that asked his supporters to "send Rick Scott" a message as state lawmakers get ready to redraw districts.

But others say that the fate of Obama is tied to the national economy, not anything that Scott does.

"Rick Scott could be at zero percent approval, and if unemployment is at 10.5 percent or 11 percent, then Barack Obama is not getting re-elected,” Rick Wilson, a Republican strategist working for Adam Hasner in the United States Senate race in Florida, was quoted in a story that ran Tuesday in the New York Times.

To read the whole story, go here.

 

 

New showdown between Crist and Republican-led Legislature

A battle over proposed redistricting amendments is turning into an extraordinary legal fight between members fo Congress, the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature, Gov. Charlie Crist and even a former governor.

Last month U.S. Reps. Corrine Brown and Mario Diaz-Balart filed a lawsuit in Leon County to get one of two redistricting amendments sponsored by FairDistrictsFlorida.org thrown off the 2010 ballot. Brown, D-Jacksonville and Diaz-Balart, R-Miami contend the measure is misleading and would reduce the number of minorities elected.

But since then both the Florida House and Florida Senate have gotten permission to join the lawsuit and now are fighting to get Amendment 6 removed from the ballot. Amendment 6 would impose new standards for congressional redistricting. But the Legislature also wants the court to throw out another ballot measure - Amendment 5- that would apply to legislative districts only.

Crist this week has jumped into the legal fray as well, but he wants the court to throw out the lawsuit. Crist’s general counsel argues that both amendments was previously reviewed by the state Supreme Court before they went on the ballot and that the lawsuit is “prolonging a legal imbroglio at the expense of healthy political debate.”

The governor's legal filing slams the Legislature for launching "an attempt to block the people's opportunity to weigh in on the way their congressional and legislative districts are drawn."

Keep reading here.

New study says GOP - not Democrats - would benefit from redistricting change

There are two constitutional amendments that could be on the 2010 ballot that may do more to shake up state government than whomever is elected to the governor's mansion.

They are so potentially threatening to the status quo that there is already talk of lawsuits, disenfranchised minority voters and fears of a Democratic takeover of the GOP-controlled government. Read all about it here at the Sarasota Herald-Tribune.

The two amendments sponsored by FairDistrictsFlorida.org would impose new standards on the Legislature when it comes to the drawing of both legislative and Congressional districts. The standards would require that districts could not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or a member of a political party and be compact if possible. While the group says it is bipartisan - and includes Republicans such as Thom Rumberger and Bob Milligan - some GOP operatives remain skeptical about the effort because it is getting bankrolled by a lot of groups with ties to Democrats.

Right now Democrats hold an edge in overall voter registration. But Republicans control the Florida Senate by a 26-14 margin and the House by a 76-44 split. Republicans will presumably be in control in 2012 when redistricting will take center stage again, but there are those who insist the new amendments would push the entire process into the courts and give Democrats an opening.

But here's an interesting twist: As part of the reporting of this story, I talked to Professor Jowei Chen of the University of Michigan. Chen and Professor Jonathan Rodden at Stanford University did a study that comes up with a fascinating premise.

The two professors concluded that Republicans would win 59 percent of the seats without any intentional gerrymandering.

In other words, Chen and Rodden conclude that Democrats are concentrated in urban areas, while suburban and rural districts tend to be "moderately Republican." The paper states that "the seemingly apolitical practice of requiring compact, contiguous districts will produce systematic pro-Republican bias."

Chen said they relied on the 2000 election because it is in essence a "tied" election. 

The paper then states "Our simulations indicate that as long as Florida is divided into any reasonable number of districts, Republicans will hold an electoral majority in 58-61 % of these districts. Furthermore, we show that as Florida is hypothetically divided into larger numbers of smaller districts, the size of this bias decreases. But in order for the pro-Republican electoral bias to disappear, Florida would be need to be divided into an impracticably large number of legislative districts."

Additionally "The relationship uncovered in our simulations is clearly reflected in observed electoral bias in Florida. Analysis of data from actual district-level election returns in both chambers of the Florida Legislature as well as the Florida delegation to the U.S. Congress indicates that Republicans can indeed expect at least a ten percent seat advantage with 50 percent of the vote. In short, a substantial share of Florida's observed electoral bias can be accounted for without any intentional manipulation on the part of mischievous Republican cartographers."