The Fine Print

An obscure budget panel may be on the verge of tremendous power

This week the 1st District Court of Appeal rendered a really, really important decision. And in some ways the practical effect of the ruling may be not be as important as the court's opinion on the scope and power of the Florida Legislature.

The court overturned a circuit court decision that blocked the privatization of prison health care services in three regions of the state.

If the decision stands it will allow the Department of Corrections to proceed with plans to go ahead with a roughly $230 million five-year contract that had been put on hold by the lawsuit filed by several groups including the union that represents state workers. This means that as many as 2,600 state workers will lose their jobs unless they win them back with the company that holds the contract.

Both the lower court decision and the district court decision turned on a lot of arcane matters. For example - does the law allow the department to contract with private vendors? Was the money that the department wanted to use in fact a "specific appropriation" as required?

Let's set aside that for right now.

The decision could have also long-standing ramifications going forward that impacts the power of the Florida Legislature - and those in leadership positions.

Why? Because the court opinion could open the door for the governor and top legislative leaders to make serious budget decisions without ever taking it to the vote of the full Legislature.

That's because one part of the lawsuit dealt directly with whether or not the Legislative Budget Commission had the power to approve the initial transfer of funds that allowed the department to begin the privatization effort. (Some of the history of the LBC _ which is a 14-member panel of lawmakers _ I delved into previously here.)

In short, the commission was created in order to make adjustments to the annual state budget when the Legislature is not in session. The commission can take up budget changes given to them by either the governor or the chief justice of the state Supreme Court.

The union attorneys contended the LBC _ which is authorized under the constitution but whose duties are spelled out in law _ was never supposed to be able to make major kind of decisions that should be left up to the entire 160 members of the Legislature. It's no secret prison privatization has sharply divided the Legislature, especially in the Florida Senate where some Republicans have broken ranks and joined with Democrats in opposition. 

Judge John Cooper last December sided with the union.

Cooper in his ruling stated that the budget panel action did not meet a requirement that its vote to approve the privatization effort was "consistent with legislative policy and intent." Cooper's logic turned on the fact that the 2012-13 state budget had a provision that authorized the privatization of health care services for one region of the state. He said that meant that the LBC couldn't on its own expand that privatization effort beyond to the rest of the state.

"Whether to privatize some or all of this state's prison operations is a significant policy decision," Cooper wrote last December. "Under existing law the Legislature weighs in on this policy decision through its appropriations power."

This week the three judges of the appeals court disagreed with Cooper.

And just as significantly, they created a precedent for how the LBC can proceed in the future.

The ruling written by Judge Stephanie Ray _ who was appointed by Gov. Rick Scott _ said that in fact the LBC has a great deal of latitude in what it can do.

"The LBC has expertise as an entity composed exclusively of legislators that is charged with the inherently legislative function of appropriations," Ray wrote. "Given the LBC's expertise and unique role within the Legislature, the LBC is entitled to deference in administering its budget adjustment authority."

Ray in her decision made some other significant points. First she stated that just because the Legislature had expressed its intent to privatize in just one region of the state did not mean that privatization couldn't be expanded beyond there. She rapped Cooper for using the concept of expressio unius est exclusio alterius.

She also stated that because the LBC and Gov. Scott had agreed on the budget amendment the "circuit court should have accorded deference to this judgment."

One lawyer who has dealt with the LBC has stated this kind of means that the LBC can decide what it can do, and what it can't do in the future.

It remains to be seen if the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees and its partners in this lawsuit decide to appeal this up to the full Supreme Court.

But it can be argued that if the decision remains then legislative leaders with the consent of the governor could make significant changes to the budget absent a vote by the full Legislature.

The state law that covers the budget commission states that the budget panel cannot eliminate an existing program or initiate and commence a "new program." But under Ray's ruling it would appear that the commission itself must should be given "deference" in deciding what means.

Expenses already climbing in Scott re-election effort

A new installment of Inside the Tallahassee bubble news...

EXPENSES ALREADY CLIMBING IN SCOTT RE-ELECTION EFFORT

Here's an interesting couple of tidbits that jumped out in going through last week's campaign finance reports.

One could argue that the bid for Scott's re-election effort is already getting plenty expensive even though the Democratic field remains somewhat unsettled amid ongoing speculation about Charlie Crist and U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson.

Consider this:

The company run by Scott's main political consultant - Tony Fabrizio - has already been paid nearly $600,000 by the Republican Party of Florida since last August. This includes a $170,000 payment in December and another $277,000 payment in March for "polling" according to RPOF campaign finance reports filed with the state.

On top of that Scott's own electioneering communication organization _ Let's Get to Work _ also stroked a $32,150 check for Fabrizio's firm to pay for an "opinion survey."

Records also show that Let's Get to Work in just the last quarter paid Forward Strategies, the company run by well-known fundraiser Meredith O'Rourke, more than $110,000. O'Rourke of course was a prime fundraiser for Crist back when he was a Republican. She was pushed aside from her role as an RPOF fundraiser during the unpleasantness involving disgraced former chairman Jim Greer.

Of course one could argue that Scott is also piling up a large amount of cash in advance of what could be a bruising fight. It's just interesting to note the amount of money already going to the effort even before the Democrats have a nominee.

NON-EXISTENT PATRONIS-GAETZ FEUD?

Rep. Jimmy Patronis told his hometown newspaper late last week that as far as he knows there is no looming rivalry between himself and Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fort Walton Beach over the state Senate seat now held by Senate President Don Gaetz. Patronis has already filed for the seat _ which comes open in 2016 _ while Matt Gaetz has filed for re-election next year.

"There’s nowhere I’ve seen it documented — both publicly or through social media — that would give me anything to believe that he is intending on running for his dad’s Senate seat,” he told the Panama City News Herald.

Patronis made this comment in the wake of a stream of comments from Gaetz on his Twitter feed where he has questioned Patronis' votes and stances on a line of issues.

But Patronis himself helped fuel the fire of this rivalry on the House floor.

During a debate on a Gaetz-sponsored bill repealing the state law that requires that gas contain ethanol Patronis got up to tout how he had pushed a bill the previous year that removed penalties for gas stations that ignore the mandate.

He said he would support the Gaetz bill but then added this dig: "I don't know if it really makes a difference."

Another key moment on Friday: Gaetz and Patronis were two of the four no votes on the House bill that would allow U.S. born children of illegal immigrants to receive in-state tuition rates at state colleges and universities. One of the other no votes _ Rep. Dennis Baxley _ wound up changing his no vote to a yes after the fact and said he misunderstood what the bill did.

The bill was a top priority for House Speaker Will Weatherford, who urged its passage at the start of the year.

A no vote coming from two Republicans representing roughly the same part of the Panhandle might cause some to wonder whether there was a fear that the vote could wind up on mailer. Or maybe that's reading too much into it.

CAN'T BUY ME LOVE:

The Florida chapter of one of the main union for state workers contributed more than $21,000 to legislative candidates before the start of this year's session. This included a maximum $500 donation to 17 Republicans in the House and Senate.

But all nine GOP House members who received a contribution from the Amercian Federation of State, Council and Municipal Employees Council 79 voted in favor of an amendment sponsored by Rep. Seth McKeel, R-Lakeland, that cut the amount of a proposed state worker pay raise from $1,400 to $1,000. The amendment was approved over the sharp objections of Democrats.

The lone no vote on the amendment was Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fort Walton Beach.

Perhaps the most interesting vote in favor of the proposal came from Rep. Halsey Beshears, R-Monticello.

That's because Beshears ran a memorable campaign ad last fall entitled "Do What's Right" where Beshears said that as businessman he understood the value of treating employees right: "Here we rely on thousands of great men and women to contribute to our local economy. We need to grow it and make it stronger. That's why we need to be more supportive of our hard-working state employees."

 

 

 

The myths and mystery of Jeb Bush

The 2016 campaign for president appeared to begin in earnest in the wake of a recently New York Times article that suggested that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush was already beginning to weigh financial and family considerations of a potential bid for president.

The timing of the article drew immediate attention from the national media and a steady stream of "will he run?" stories.

And Bush has remained in the news since then due to his national education summit held in Washington D.C. and his decision to take the post of chairman of the board of trustees of the National Constitution Center. There was even a recent piece in Time where he talked about education and joked that he has breaking out in a rash each time someone calls him a "centrist."

For those of us who follow Bush _ and keep in touch with people still in his orbit _ it is not a surprise that the presidential buzz is already starting since it appeared that the governor made a calculated decision early on in the 2012 cycle that this was not the time to run.

In other words, one could argue that Jeb instinctively knew that President Barack Obama would be very difficult to beat. And it probably would have been even more of an uphill battle for Bush. One Bush ally told me that heading into this year's presidential election the former governor himself was cognizant that there could still be "Bush fatigue" from his brother's stint as president.

But the mystery of will Jeb run in 2016 is likely to be less about his brother and more about what makes sense for him and his family.

The plain fact is that some in the national media would likely delve deeply into Bush's family life if he ran. This would like lead to the re-airing, re-reporting of troubles with his daughter Noelle Bush and even Columba Bush's run-in with U.S. customs agents. Yes, one could argue that the neither have any bearing on whether Bush is qualified for president. But it would be naive to think that stories like this would not be played back up on a national level should Bush mount a serious campaign.

That means that Jeb Bush has to make a calculated decision on whether the presidency is worth the avalanche of coverage that would come with a run for the White House. Bush, who does display flashes of anger from time to time, made it clear to the press corps in Tallahassee that questions about his family were out-of-bounds (although Bush himself did talk about his daughter on national television.) Bush's ability to exert any level of control on the national media, however, would be non-existent.

But as the national media begin to ponder a Bush run it's interesting to see the coverage that includes the following:

Bush is no longer really a conservative. Bush should step aside for fresh faces like U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio. Bush has been too deferential to President Obama and by extension the Democrats.

This is a fascinating narrative since it conflicts with the reality of his record.

To begin with - Bush's record as governor eclipses anything that Rubio has accomplished so far. Rubio's stint as House speaker left very much a mixed record. It's true he clashed with then-Gov. Charlie Crist on things such as expanded gambling, but Rubio also did things like endorse an expansion of state intervention into property insurance that was decried by conservatives. Rubio has maintained a fairly consistent voting record in the Senate in the last two years and inspired Republicans with his soaring rhetoric and his defense of American exceptionalism. But the plain fact is that Bush stands right now as one of the most substantial governors in the history of Florida in the last 50 years.

The success of his achievements can be questioned _ such as in a recent piece by Reuters _ but it's worth looking back at what happened during his eight years in office.

For those who may have forgotten, consider this a Bush primer:

1. During his two terms as governor, Bush pursued a series of education reform policies that were constantly criticized and villified by some of the mainstays of the Democratic Party. He pursued a school voucher program for students in chronically-failing schools that was eventually struck down by the state Supreme Court. The state's teacher union was so dramatically opposed to Bush that it spent money on independent television ads that helped propel little-known Tampa lawyer Bill McBride past former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. One of the emerging narratives happening in Florida politics now is that current Gov. Rick Scott has slowly begun challenging the underpinnings of some of the reforms, such as high-stakes testing. While Scott remains a firm backer of vouchers, he advocated this week for requiring students who receive vouchers to take the same tests as public school students. This is a stark turn-around from the position that has been taken by Bush and his allies.

2. Bush was staunchly pro-life during his terms as governor and was at the heart of the Terri Schiavo controversy. Bush's role in trying to keep Schiavo alive could in fact harm him during a run for the presidency. Not only did he support the legislation that attempted to bypass court rulings dealing with Schiavo but there were stories at the time that Bush contemplated sending in law-enforcement to seize Ms. Schiavo. The governor's office officially denied the reports at the time, but it would very likely there would be a re-airing of the entire controversy.

3. Bush's fiscal bonafides. While he was governor, state spending continued to rise as the continued rise in the real estate market led to record heights in the amount of state taxes that were taken in. But Bush also pursued some of the largest tax cuts in the history of the state _ including pushing for $1 billion worth of tax cuts in his first year in office. His handling of state finances was rewarded with stellar triple AAA bond ratings.

4. Bush took on public sector employees and their unions. During his term in office, Bush tried to make major reforms in public employee pensions. He was unsuccessful in his bid to force all new state employees to choose a 401 (K) styled plan but he got it an optional version. Bush also successfully argued for _ and got approval from the Legislature _ to reclassify roughly 16,000 career service employees into positions where they no longer had the same job protections.

5. Bush took the charge in eliminating some of the affirmative action programs in place in the state. Bush signed an executive order that removed affirmative action policies in state purchasing and got the state panel that oversaw the state university system to revamp admission policies to remove race as factor for consideration. During his first run for office in 1994, Bush was asked by a woman what he would do for black people if he were elected. "Probably nothing,'' Bush said at the time. Bush's push against affirmative action sparked a backlash led by then State Sen. Kendrick Meek and resulted in one of the largest protests ever on the steps of the Capitol. Meek and others used their anger over Bush's actions to rally voters against Bush's brother in the 2000 presidential election (and we know how that turned out in Florida.)

And if that wasn't enough consider this: Bush overhauled the death penalty, pushed through a huge expansion in the use of economic incentives to try to jumpstart the biotech industry, rallied voters to repeal a high-speed rail mandate, went after trial lawyers by trying to limit medical malpractice lawsuits, tried to undo a constitutional amendment (pushed by his nemesis Kendrick Meek) that mandated smaller class sizes, strengthened the power of the governor over the judiciary, and responded forcefully and efficiently to eight hurricanes that hit the state in 2004 and 2005.

The one area where Bush has been at odds with his fellow conservatives is over the issue of immigration. While Rubio's position on immigration has evolved and shifted as his political career has advanced, the governor has taken some stances that could cost him votes. Bush has not only criticized the tone and rhetoric about the issue, but he himself has even taken stances that illegal immigrants should be given access to driver's licenses.

As the speculation about Bush's future continues to heat up, it will be interesting to see if there is a continued attempt to rebrand Bush into someone who doesn't resemble the man who led the Sunshine State for eight years.

The mythology of Rick Scott grows

Well, it turns out that the mythology of Rick Scott is getting larger.

Last month I pointed out that the Scott's press office was distributing a document among themselves that had "Five Myths about Florida Governor Rick Scott Dispelled."

Guess what? It's even longer now. There are now 7 myths. The two newcomers? Rick Scott doesn't care about state workers and Rick Scott is blindly cutting the state budget.

Here's the newly revised document:

 

Seven Myths About Florida Governor Rick Scott Dispelled

 

Myth: Rick Scott has always been wealthy.

Truth:

• Governor Scott started school in public housing in Urbane, Illinois.
• Governor Scott began working at a young age because his family struggled financially.
• He did every job from delivering newspapers and cleaning phone booths, to selling groceries and working on a ship in the United States Navy.
• These jobs taught him the value of working hard and the impact of every penny.
• His background is what inspires him every day to turn the state around.
• ·

Myth: Rick Scott hasn’t done anything to create jobs.

Truth:

• We are on the way to reaching 700,000 jobs in seven years.
• This is because of Governor Scott’s tax cuts, actions to streamline state government and initial steps to return state government to its core functions and grow private-sector jobs.
• Fla’s unemployment rate went from 12 to10.6 percent since Governor Scott took office.
• Fla. has gained 110,300 private sector jobs since January.
• 17,900 public sector jobs have been eliminated since January.
• That’s a net total of 92,400 jobs added since January.

 

Myth: Rick Scott is receiving a salary, special health care benefits and operating his plane all at the taxpayer’s expense.

Truth:

• Governor Scott receives 1 cent per month simply for administrative purposes and pays for parking even though he does not own a car.
• He is enrolled in the same healthcare plan as all state employees.
• Sold the state airplanes and covers the costs of his personal aircraft at no cost to taxpayers.
• No salary and no state plane results in taxpayer savings of more than $2.5 million per year.

 

Myth: Rick Scott doesn’t talk to the media or read newspapers

Truth:

• Governor Scott talks to media daily and at least one hour is reserved for interviews.
• Governor Scott has done several hundred radio interviews since he came into office and has participated in 10 editorial board meetings.
• The Governor reads statewide, national and international news daily.  He also looks at the front pages of Florida’s 21 largest daily newspapers each morning.

 

Myth: Rick Scott doesn’t believe in open government and doesn’t even have an email.

Truth:

• Governor Scott believes the public has a right to know what state government is doing with their hard-earned tax dollars.
• In the first nine months of the Scott administration the Governor’s Office had 1075 public records requests, of which 1024 (95%) have been fulfilled.
• During the entire four years of the previous administration, only 899 public records requests were fulfilled by the Governor’s Office of Open Government.
• Governor Scott has put up significant information on the website Floridahasarighttoknow.com about pension, salaries, etc.
• To date, the Governor has received more than 250,000 emails compared to approximately 160,000 Governor Crist received in his first year.

 

Myth: Rick Scott doesn’t care about state workers.

Truth:

• Governor Scott is impressed with the work ethic and dedication of state employees.
• He wants all state employees to have a reliable retirement plan.
• This is why one of his top priorities is making sure the pension is fully funded.
• Currently the pension is 87 percent funded and dropping.
• Governor Scott believes 100 percent is what the retirees should be able to count on.
• That’s why Governor Scott had state employees begin paying into their retirement plan.

 

Myth: Rick Scott is blindly cutting the budget.

Truth:

• Governor Scott is constitutionally required to balance the state budget every year.
• He has reduced the size, scope and cost of government while preserving critical safety nets. 
• He campaigned on reducing government spending and using accountability budgeting.
• He kept his promise by balancing the budget without tax increases.
• Also used outcome-based budgeting to create efficiency throughout government.
• Although the choices were tough, he did what was necessary to create private-sector jobs and balance the budget without increasing taxes.