Beach Peanuts

ALEC On The Ballot: ALEC's Influence In Florida Amendments

How About ALEC, The Koch Brothers, The Florida Legislature And More?

Eleven constitutional amendments appear on Florida's ballot in the upcoming election, and many groups including Progress Florida and the League of Women Voters of Florida, along with several newspapers, are urging voters to "just say no" to all of them, and for good reason.

Now there may be more reason for voter skepticism. Many of those amendments placed on the ballot by the Florida Legislature appear to have come directly from ALEC. (The American Legislative Exchange Council.)

From The Tampa Tribune:

Critics suggest several of the high-profile amendments Floridians will consider may have come directly from the American Legislative Exchange Council, or at least from its playbook.

May have come? One thing the Tribune article doesn't mention is a well publicized incident involving Florida Republican Rep. Rachel Burgin. Burgin introduced a bill in 2011 that would reduce taxes for corporations which she got from ALEC. Normally legislators will rewrite parts of the bills, but not Burgin. Nope. She cut and pasted her bill, written by the Tax Foundation, exactly as it was given to her by the ALEC Tax and Fiscal Policy task force.

Burgin wasn't nearly as clever as she thought she was, because she pasted the boilerplate ALEC language right into the bill. You can see a copy of that brilliant piece of "editing" by Burgin here. Realizing her mistake the next day, she quickly withdrew the bill and re-introduced it a day later without the language. Sadly for Burgin, not quickly enough.

More from The Tribune:

The council, known as ALEC, bills itself as a nonpartisan membership association for state lawmakers who share a common belief in limited government, free markets, federalism and individual liberty.

"I hate to be cynical, but when you start looking into these things, you start to see who's pulling the strings behind the scenes," said Susan Smith, head of the Democratic Progressive Caucus of Florida. "I don't think voters are going to like this."

The American Legislative Exchange Council, the corporate funded group who work with lobbyists and conservative politicians to write "model legislation" that legislators then bring home to their states and pass into law, are partially funded by the Koch brothers.

The article goes on to quote Lisa Graves, executive director of Center for Media Democracy, the watchdog group which has followed ALEC for years. Graves says that Amendment 1 and Amendment 3 in particular "are spawn of the corporate bill mill known as ALEC." Amendment 1 would block parts of the Affordable Care Act, and 3 imposes a state spending cap on the Legislature. Smith agrees, and says additionally that Amendments 5, 6, and 8 also appear to have come from ALEC model legislation:

Amendment 5, which would give the Legislature more power over the courts; Amendment 6, which would prohibit public funding of abortions and erase privacy rights that courts have used to overturn abortion restrictions; and Amendment 8, which would repeal a ban on public funding of religious groups.

"We just don't think it's fair for outside corporate interests to come in and have so much power in our state government," Smith said.

The Tribune article quotes Kaitlyn Buss, a spokeswoman for ALEC, saying if the legislation resembles ALEC model bills, they merely provide "policy suggestions" and says if lawmakers introduced any of those bills, they have done so on their own initiative and they're in the best interest of their constituents.

Really? Not so fast. When the resolution for Amendment 1 was passed in 2011, ALEC boasted about it in a press release, claiming that it was a triumph over the Affordable Care Act's federal mandate.

In the Tribune article, some lawmakers claim they merely have "discussions" with ALEC, that this is just a conspiracy theory, and one claims he's never spoken to ALEC about this legislation. On that 2011 press release above:

That doesn't mean Florida's amendment is an ALEC product, said Mike Haridopolos, the outgoing state Senate president from Melbourne and a sponsor of Amendment 1.

"I've never spoken to anybody from ALEC about this," said Haridopolos, a Republican. "I don't know where people pull in stuff like this."

As to ALEC's boasts, he said, "I don't play he-said-she-said types of games. I'm just glad they support what we do. I don't think ALEC is a pariah, either," he said, adding that groups such as the National Conference of State Legislatures and Southern Republican Leadership Conference provide valuable exposure to other states' issues and solutions.

Dig a little deeper and there's plenty of evidence out there that there's a great deal more ALEC influence on them than they let on.

Haridopolos says ALEC is no "pariah," and that he doesn't "know where people pull stuff like this?" Really?

How about here, for starters, when Haridopolos voiced his support of the Repeal Amendment at a press conference at the ALEC conference in Washington DC on Nov. 30 2010, when they  announced the support of 10 States who were currently filing for the Repeal Amendment in their state legislatures? You can see the video of Haridopolos' ALEC press conference here, put out by the Repeal Amendment movement themselves.

The Repeal Amendment group's website lists Haridopolos as a supporter along with others like Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, members of Tea Party like Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA), and FOX News contributors like Judge Andrew P. Napolitano. Also a sponsor, Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform. Americans For Tax Reform is the group that have been carpet-bombing the state of Florida the past few weeks with campaign fliers and ads targeting Obamacare, Medicare, and those containing misleading information on government spending in China, green jobs, high unemployment and outsourced jobs.

But Haridopolos has no idea where "people pull this stuff?"

As for Haridopolos' claim that ALEC is little more than a group that "supports what Florida legislators do," it's much more than that. The group Common Cause even asked Pam Bondi to investigate ALEC back in May of 2012. Still waiting on that investigation.

The Tribune article quotes another Florida lawmaker, Rep. Dennis Baxley, who sponsored Amendment 6 on abortion. Baxley agrees with Haridopolos' views, saying:

"The conspiracy theory goes on," said Rep. Dennis Baxley, an Ocala Republican.....

......"This whole concept of some kind of clandestine entity spreading these things throughout state legislatures …" he said, his voice trailing off. "These are membership-driven organizations, and we do have discussions. It makes sense for people to come together and share ideas. That's a good thing. ALEC isn't some bogeyman monster entity. It's 2,000 legislators coming together to talk about issues."

Conspiracy theory, Rep. Baxley? Bogeyman? It's neither of those, but it's a great deal more than just "legislators coming together to talk about issues" as Baxley claims. In addition to the abortion amendment, Baxley was recently featured in a CNN report on the Florida voter suppression and Rick Scott's voter purge. ALEC has been tied to election law legislation, influencing purges in both Florida and Texas, and voter ID legislation in other states.

Of course, Baxley is most famous for his legislation of the Florida Stand Your Ground gun law. The Ocala funeral home owner not only wrote the Stand Your Ground legislation, but he was also appointed to Governor Rick Scott's task force to investigate that law in the aftermath of the Trayvon Martin shooting. ALEC, along with the National Rifle Association, were behind the push for SYG legislation all across the country. After coming under pressure from civil rights groups, watchdog groups and media coverage, ALEC announced in April of 2012 that they were disbanding their own task force on the gun laws as well as the voter ID laws, but that was too little too late. The damage was already done.

As I wrote in August of 2011, during the ALEC annual meeting in New Orleans that year, Baxley admitted that that was his fourth or fifth time attending an ALEC event to Wisconsin State Rep. Mark Pocan, who attended the meeting and wrote about it for The Progressive. At the time, ALEC was still operating largely in the shadows, but in talking to Pocan, Baxley bragged about his gun law and working together with ALEC:

"It's a great place to share model legislation and a great place to learn what's going on in other parts of the country," said Baxley, who sponsored a major rewrite of Florida's election laws that's under challenge in court.

Baxley said his so-called 2005 castle doctrine bill, which allows people in Florida to use deadly force to defend themselves in their homes or cars, became a model for other states.

"A lot of ideas get shared and aired there," Baxley said. "It's a very collaborative process."

This hardly suggests a "conspiracy theory" as Baxley claims in the Tribune article.

But it's not just Baxley. During that same ALEC meeting in 2011, several other Florida lawmakers freely admitted collaborating with ALEC and more:

Rep. Dana Young, R-Tampa, said she will use district office money and possibly ALEC scholarship money to pay her registration fee. She's paying for her travel and hotel personally.

Rep. Jeanette Nunez, R-Miami, is covering conference expenses with campaign money, and will hold a campaign fundraiser today in New Orleans.

"Obviously there are going to be lobbyists there, and I figure it would be an easy place, if they have checks, to come by," Nunez said.

Rep. Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg, is at his first ALEC conference.

"I don't buy any legislation off the shelf," Brandes said. "We like to tweak it here and there and make it our own. But it's a good starting point to have legislation that's already been somewhat vetted."

Yet Haridopolos and Baxley would have you believe heavy influence from ALEC is nonsense?

The Amendments on the Florida ballot have ALEC footprints all over them, and voters need to take heed when they vote on them. With an unpopular governor who puts big corporations needs over those of Floridians at every turn, and a legislature that has been giving in to nearly everything he wants, it's no wonder they wrote the Amendments in a deceptive way.

The amendments include allowing religious organizations to use tax dollars to fund their own religious schools, allow politicians to interfere in women’s personal medical decisions, allow Tallahassee politicians to protect an unfair system that benefits large corporations at the expense of public schools, small businesses and working families, and one that gives politicians more power over our courts and is opposed by the people who know what works and doesn’t in our justice system - judges and the people that work in courthouses all across Florida.

Also on the ballot: "merit retention" for three Florida Supreme Court justices, in an attempt to politicize the courts by Republicans for not making decisions favorable to their agenda, and could allow Florida Governor Rick Scott to hand pick their replacements.

With all the corporate influence Florida is under as it is, the last thing we need is a partisan Supreme Court beholden to the man who acts as if he's the CEO of Florida, Inc.

Voters who aren't paying close attention this election may well be giving up rights they won't get back anytime soon in a state already controlled by an extreme group of Republicans.

Florida 2012 Informed Voters' Ballot Guides

Let This Image Sink In For A Moment

The deadline for voter registration in Florida ended yesterday, and now that absentee and vote by mail ballots are already arriving, it's a good time to remind ourselves how important our votes in this election are. Not just in the Presidential election, but locally as well.

In Florida, there are 11 Constitutional Amendments placed on the ballot by the Florida Legislature this election. (A 12th amendment was removed.)

It isn't just the amendments that are of importance to Floridians either. Several Florida Supreme Court Justices have come under attack from Republicans and outside special interests, like the Koch brothers political action committee, Americans For Prosperity. Their targets? Justices R. Fred Lewis, Barbara Pariente and Peggy Quince, who struck down a 2010 amendment written to nullify the Affordable Care Act. If they're successful, Florida Governor Rick Scott will be free to hand pick new judges as their replacements.

Let that sink in for a moment, Florida:

Rick Scott would hand pick the judges that will make his ideological decisions, for you, for years to come.

These judges are up for merit retention votes on the ballot as well.

The League of Women Voters of Florida is urging voters to say "no" to all 11, along with Progress Florida and many other groups, as are most Florida newspapers, and for good reason. The Amendments were written deceptively in the hopes that voters would perhaps skip reading all the details, or have the time to do their own research.

Don't be fooled. Be informed.

Progress Florida has put together their 2012 Informed Voters' Ballot Guide, which highlights some of the Amendments, and the merit retention votes. You can find it here, and here.

A few points on some of those amendments from Progress Florida, for example:

Amendment 3 makes an unfair tax system even more unfair for families and small businesses. Everyone wants their tax dollars used effectively and to cut wasteful spending, but Amendment 3 is a wolf in sheep's clothing that allows Tallahassee politicians to protect an unfair system that benefits large corporations at the expense of public schools, small businesses and working families.

Amendment 5 is a power grab by Tallahassee politicians and lobbyists to take over our courts. Amendment 5 gives politicians more power over our courts and is opposed by the people who know what works and doesn’t in our justice system – judges and the people that work in our courthouses all across Florida.

Amendment 6 lets politicians interfere in women’s personal medical decisions. Every woman deserves to make her own personal health care decisions based on her values and her doctor’s advice – without politicians interfering.

Amendment 8 isn't really about “religious freedom” at all. Amendment 8 actually allows any religious group or sect to use our tax dollars to fund their own religious schools. Worse, it includes no oversight to safeguard the tax dollars our government will be “giving away,” leaving the door open to massive fraud and abuse.

Here is a guide to why the League of Women Voters is opposed to the Amendments.

Again, don't be fooled, be informed.

That advice may be more important this election than ever before.

Standing On Shaky Ground: Rick Scott's Defense Of Selective Constitutional Rights

On the very same day that Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn sent a request to Gov. Rick Scott to restrict carrying firearms during the Republican Convention this summer, the governor responded:

No.

Not exactly a shocking response from the gun owner, NRA member, and the man who stacked the new Stand Your Ground Task Force with gun friendly lawmakers, some who actually wrote the law and have already defended it as it pertains to Trayvon Martin case in op-eds before they were appointed.

From The Tampa Tribune:

"The short answer to your request is found in the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and in Article 1, Section 8 of the Florida Constitution," Scott replied.

Both sections guarantee citizens' rights to keep and bear guns, he noted.

In his letter, Buckhorn appealed to the governor to restrict carrying firearms during the RNC in downtown Tampa under the emergency powers granted to the governor during times of emergency. Given the highly charged atmosphere surrounding the RNC, placing no limits on gun possession could increase the threat to public safety, Buckhorn's letter argued.

Scott replied that he understood Buckhorn's concern. The city already plans to ban sticks, poles, water guns and lots of other potential weapons from a downtown "event zone."

(In his letter, Scott adds this: "Firearms are noticeably included, however, in the 2nd Amendment. The choice to allow the government to ban sticks and poles, but not firearms, is one that the People made in enacting their state and federal constitutions.)

"But it is unclear how disarming law-abiding citizens would better protect them from the dangers and threats posed by those who would flout the law," Scott wrote. "It is at just such times that the constitutional right to self defense is most precious and must be protected from government overreach."

Scott said he was confident law enforcement would be able to protect Tampa's citizens and visitors without the extra step of banning guns.

Buckhorn said he wasn't concerned with people licensed to carry concealed weapons, a list that used to include him. He said he was more worried about one of those licensed weapons getting loose and landing in the wrong hands.

"Some of the people that will be here in August are not exactly model citizens," he said. "I think even the most ardent 2nd Amendment supporter would understand why I made that request."

Yes, even the most ardent 2nd Amendment supporters would understand Buckhorn's point, (not to mention law-enforcement officers) but this is Rick Scott we're talking about, and we can add this to the very long list of things that he fails to understand about governing. 

Also not shocking is the hypocrisy employed in Scott's decision. 

It seems Gov. Scott would prefer risking a "shootout at the O.K. Corral" situation rather than diss the NRA trample on one's constitutional rights. After all, Scott is a well known defender of constitutional rights!

Except when he isn't.

Also in his letter to Mayor Buckhorn, Scott wrote: 

“We have had political conventions in this country since the dawn of the Republic. They are an essential means of furthering our constitutional rights to free speech and to vote. “Our fundamental right to keep and bear arms has coexisted with those freedoms for just as long, and I see no reason to depart from that tradition this year.”

Surely you jest, Gov. Overreach? Our constitutional rights to free speech and to vote? In Rick Scott's Florida, constitutional rights are selective.

For example, some would say that the concept of free speech ceased to exist once Scott bought his way into Tallahassee and declared Florida "Open For Business." Scott's alliance with "big business" has been beneficial to both, and he seems to be a firm believer in the Mitt Romney school of thought:

"Corporations are people, my friends!"

That's not the only similarity between the two. In fact, anyone thinking of voting for Romney might want to pay a visit to Florida or talk to a resident first. Florida under Scott's slash and burn policies can provide an ugly preview of the potential disaster in the wake of a President Romney. The lower your income, if you have one, the less rights you have. Just ask a Florida welfare recipient.

Voting rights were one of the first things to come under assault in Florida after Scott arrived. Sure, we still have the "right" to vote, but thanks to Scott and the conservative majority in the legislature, it's much harder to exercise that right. Where was Scott's love of the Constitution when the chairman of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on civil rights and the Constitution was holding hearings on those voting restrictions? As you'll recall, when asked what steps Scott’s administration planned to take to ensure Florida’s new laws didn’t disenfranchise Florida voters, he didn't bother to respond. He never showed up for the hearings either.

In fact, Rick Scott spends a great deal of time AND money on issues dealing with the rights of Floridians. Unfortunately it's taxpayer money, and it's due to Scott restricting those rights rather than defending them, and we all pay dearly on both counts. Never mind that the courts have often ruled in our favor. Scott, or the "Supreme Executive" as he refers to himself, just declares those courts "wrong" and we're forced to spend more on seemingly endless appeals. So many, in fact, when Scott "disagreed" with a judge recently who found an unconstitutional breach of contract where Scott cut state salaries to offset pensions, the governor's press release began with: "As you would expect, I believe this decision is simply wrong."

"As you would expect" will no doubt become boilerplate for many a future press release from the governor's office, as the potential for appeal list is long. From drug testing welfare recipients and state employees, to privatizing prisons and education from elementary schools to colleges and universities, and on and on.

With so many challenges at such high costs, Scott's method of governing seems to fly in the face of his philosophy as a fiscally conservative, "small government candidate," but no matter. While Rick Scott disagrees with so many in the judicial branch, he's come up with a "simple" solution for that too. Simply convince the legislature to give you the power to hand pick the judges yourself, pretend that your constituents would like nothing more than allowing their governor unchecked power, then give this response publicly to the media: "When you're elected governor, people expect you to not have a limit on who you can appoint." 

In Florida right now, Constitutional rights are fragile things and they need to be protected. Do you trust this man with yours?

(Photo: M. Jackovics)

Florida Republicans Poised To Give Rick Scott Unprecedented Power

The subject came up last year, and it's back again: Rick Scott wants the power to pick judges.

Even worse, he claims that's what Floridians want, to give him even more power than he has now.

Worse still, this year Republicans in the legislature are apt to give it to him, because they say they've gotten to know him better.

And that's just the beginning.

From The Associated Press:

It's still early in the 2012 session but the Republican-controlled Legislature is starting to move ahead with proposals that would give Scott more hands-on power to shape the judicial branch and control regional job development agencies.

Scott could also win his bid to have more of a say over state incentives used to lure businesses as well as get a legislative blessing for the way he has tackled the rule making process of state government.

These moves are already drawing sharp complaints from Democrats, who warn this could be the start of a major concentration of power into the hands of the governor.

But many top Republicans say that in the last year they have come to know Scott and trust him more than they did when he first came into office.

This is a turnabout from a year ago.

Scott, a former hospital chain executive who used more than $70 million of his own money to win the governor's race, entered office barely knowing many top GOP legislators. In his first few months many of his budget recommendations were ignored, he was sued by two legislators over his decision to reject high-speed rail funding from the federal government, and the Senate's budget chairman contended that the governor's office had broken the law by the way it sold off the state plane.

Those early misgivings have given way to a more cooperative attitude as Scott has tried to remake his image, pared back his agenda and turned to Tallahassee insiders to help him in his dealings with state legislators.

During last week's opening of the session that cooperation paid off. A House committee approved a top Scott initiative to give him more control over regional workforce boards that control millions in money for job training and job placement services. Scott made the push in the wake of reports of misspending by several boards, including handing out contracts to family members. Last year he demanded that members of a central Florida workforce board resign.

The bill now moving would spell out that the executive director of the boards "serve at the pleasure" of the governor and could be fired at any time.

That's similar to the approach included in a measure that would give Scott more power over judicial nominating commissions.

I can only imagine that Republicans think they'll benefit from this somehow. For anyone who has gotten to know Rick Scott better than when he first took office, one would be less inclined to give him even more power. His approval ratings aren't low for nothing.

Furthermore, while Republicans may think they can trust him, chances are good they'll trust him at not only ours, but their own peril. Maybe they haven't been paying attention, as there's little evidence that anyone can really trust Rick Scott. Look at his record so far.

So what do you think Florida? Would you be happy handing more power to Rick Scott than any other governor in Florida has had before?

Rick Scott Thinks Floridians Want Him To Have More Power

Like? Not So Much

Hey, remember last year's legislative session when this happened?

Republicans in the Florida House Civil Justice Committee recently passed three bills that would give Gov. Rick Scott the sole power to appoint appeals court and Supreme Court justices by restructuring the Florida court system, in the name of "accountability."

Oh, the memories!

Yes, that was the year when the Florida legislature wanted to focus on "accountability" by making sure their Governor hand-picked the judges. Who could blame them with a track record like this:

The Republicans want the body to "focus on accountability." There's that word again. "Accountability" has quite the ring of hypocrisy to it coming from the Republican party in Florida who has a rather large group of members who have either been in jail and on trial, faced ethics violations, as in current Senate President Mike Haridopolos, or are under investigation  for various financial disclosure problems like current U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio and Rep. David Rivera, just to name a few. As for Rubio and Rivera, in their cases being under investigation merely boosted their credibility with the Thug Republican Party and vaulted them into higher office. The Republican Party Of Florida's idea of holding themselves accountable is merely investigating themselves for a short period of time, and then unanimously finding themselves completely innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever.

If you missed the story the first time around, well, SPOILER ALERT:

Florida Governor Rick Scott thought that having the ability to hand-pick judges himself was just a great idea! He tried to contain his glee, apparently, with this casual statement of "surprise:"

"I heard about that this morning. I understand that the real value of that is we could accelerate some of the cases and things like that. So I'm going to look at it."

Gov. Scott understands "the value" all right. So much so that he voiced the opinion recently that he hopes they will revisit the idea this year:

Gov. Rick Scott recently said he hopes the proposal comes back. "When you're elected governor," he declared in a recent interview with WFLA radio in Tallahassee, "people expect you to not have a limit on who you can appoint."

Whoa! Settle down down there, 26 percent! Yes, people in Florida expect a lot from a Governor, but that's not it. Trust me. The last thing people want you to have is more power. Sure people live in and come to Florida for the climate, but they don't want scorched earth.

It's apparent that Scott was, and remains clueless in the governing department. After all, calling yourself a "jobs governor" means more than Tweeting a "Help Wanted" ad. Pretending to "reach out" to the public means more than just asking for suggestions on how to "sell the state" to others on your Facebook page. Although the one that suggests Scott resign is promising, but that one now appears to have "gone missing." If indeed Scott's staff took a page from another famous do-nothing Governor by editing his Facebook comments, they took the wrong page. She actually quit.

But let's go back to that comment from Gov. Overreach, shall we?

"When you're elected governor, people expect you to not have a limit on who you can appoint."

Wrong. Here's something people DO expect Gov. Scott:

They expect things like fair elections, just for starters, but you know that, because that's where the whole idea of making you the guy who appoints the judges started in the first place, remember?

Sure you do!

Funny how Rick Scott just made the assumption that the people of Florida expect him to have limitless power to appoint judges without first consulting them on Facebook?

Despite Court Ruling, Rick Scott Still "Informally" Advising, Reviewing State Rules

In August, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that Florida Governor Rick Scott overstepped his constitutional authority when he suspended rule-making by state agencies shortly after he took office in January. The ruling came on the heels of an action by Scott that prevented a low income blnd woman from applying for food stamps. Scott claimed he had "supreme executive authority" to oversee regulations.

Gov. Scott reacted to the ruling he disagreed with this way:

"I don't think it follows the Constitution. It's a disappointment."

Not surprisingly, Scott hasn't changed his mind. Perhaps he feels he has "supreme executive authority" over that court ruling as well, as it appears he's still reviewing those regulations "informally."

....a spokesperson said Wednesday the office is still reviewing the proposals — informally.

But a few House Democrats said such action may violate at least the spirit of justices’ 5-2 decision.

“Isn’t this like an end run around the court decision, that you”re subverting the court ruling?” Rep. Franklin Sands, D-Weston, asked Patricia Nelson, deputy director of Scott’s Office of Fiscal Accountability and Regulatory Reform.

Nelson said the governor still insisted on a “very close oversight of agency rule-making.” But she denied that agencies had to go through the governor to get a go-ahead.

Indeed, Nelson said that if an agency has a standard that it must set quickly, or if there’s a backlog slowing review of a proposed rule, officials are told to enact it.

“We tell them you can move forward, because you don’t have to wait for my approval, based on the Supreme Court ruling,” Nelson said.

In a letter to agency heads sent shortly after the court ruling, Scott chief-of-staff Steve MacNamara said the governor “believes the majority opinion is illogical and grossly misreads the Florida Constitution.” MacNamara said Nelson’s three-person office will continue to “advise” agencies on what kind of rules they should enact.

Does the "Man Who Would Be King" feel he doesn't need to follow any court ruling he disagrees with? How does one "informally review and advise" exactly?

Apparently this ruling means little more than the one that says gubernatorial transition e-mails are public records, given that Rick Scott's transition e-mails were deleted from his accounts not only housed on a Texas company server, but also from the governor's iPad and now also from his Blackberry as well. Coincidence? 

Do ANY rules apply where Rick Scott is concerned? 

Rick Scott, Jeb 2.0, And The Case Of The Missing E-Mails

Gov. Ricky-Jeb

Transparency in government. What a concept.

By now I'm sure you've heard the story of Florida Gov. Opaque And The Missing E-mails.

If not, to make a long story short, it seems that the e-mail accounts of Rick Scott and most of the governor-elect's transition team were deleted soon after he took office, potentially erasing public records that state law requires be kept.

To make a long explanation short, Chris Kise, Scott's transition attorney and public records adviser summed it up this way:

But Kise describes it as an oversight, the result, he said, of a chaotic transition run by a largely out-of-state staff still learning Florida law and unfamiliar with the technology that ran the e-mail system.

A few observations here:

1. Right....

2. Rick Scott has a "public records adviser??"

3. That paragraph pretty much explains the entire Rick Scott administration, which is why many of us          said he shouldn't be the governor in the first place.

The governor now claims to be on the case and is investigating himself. The suspense is killing me on just how that will pan out.

However, all was not lost. Some records were actually recovered. Among the recovered e-mails was one from a former governor to the present office holder, and that governor apparently wasn't finished being governor yet.

Despite his two terms in office, it seems Jeb Bush has some unfinished "business" he wants to take care of. Business he was hoping Charlie Crist would take care of for him. Sadly for Jebbie, Crist didn't take the hint, so Jeb tried again, in spite of his claim that he didn't "want to be presumptuous."

Right. Because everyone knows the Bush clan is anything but "presumptuous!" That's why Jeb's little known son recently announced he was endorsing Jon Huntsman for President, and the nation reacted thusly:

"Who? Oh. Whatever..."

So former Gov. Un-Presumptuous sent an e-mail to current Gov. Presumptuous AND Incompetent outlining some to-do items apparently left over from his own list:

"Save the e-mails!"

No, not really. Just kidding. Although I'm sure Jeb wishes the cyber-dog had eaten this particular e-mail.

Here is some of the actual advice and some of the "guidelines" Jeb Bush kindly wrote out for Rick Scott to follow:

"You didn't ask for this, but it is the standard envelope in the desk to the new guy' for words from the old guy," Bush wrote. "To be honest, I did the same thing to Gov. Crist but he did nothing I suggested, so with the risk of being presumptuous, I am trying again."

Bush's list of "lessons learned through trial and error" covered a range of issues, including an assurance that it was "OK to veto stupid bills" from lawmakers and to make sure Scott's wife, Ann, had an effective staff as first lady.

Bush's e-mail was sent just days before Scott was sworn in on Jan. 4.

In two separate documents attached to the e-mail, Bush urged Scott to end one of the state's pension plans, sell the Florida Virtual School and take his first trade mission to Brazil and Colombia. (Scott is traveling to Brazil in October.)

Bush, the state's last two-term governor, also told his fellow Republican to "own the budget," even though lawmakers are in charge of appropriating money.

"By aggressively dominating the budget, the Legislature will grouse but it brings order to the whole process for them to be working off your budget and agenda," Bush said. "The budget drives policy."

Some of Bush's ideas were turned into state law this year, including a plan expand online education in public schools and another to put Medicaid patients into managed care. Scott supported both on the campaign.

Surely his advice on virtual schools and online learning had nothing to do with Jeb's Foundation For Florida's Future, or Ignite!, the education software company run by Jeb's brother Neil?

Bush urged Scott to push for "education savings accounts," acknowledging that the universal private school vouchers would be a constitutional issue.

"I don't know how our court will respond but it will be a game changer for the country and you might have the chance to change the makeup of the court," he wrote.

Coincidentally, Rick is already working on that whole "makeup of the court thing."

Bush also suggested saving more than $150 million a year by stopping the state from paying for "institutes" at universities and selling off the Florida Virtual School while using the proceeds to fund a technology initiative that would lead the nation.

Bush's advice veered away from policy to suggestions on how to lead the fourth-most populous state in the country.

Bush said the ability "to convene to listen and learn" was among the most "understated" powers of the office.

Listen and learn? Sorry Jeb. Scott's ignoring that one, for the most part.

"You can bring together the best and the brightest throughout the state and around the country, and you should take advantage of it," Bush wrote. "If you have a view already, the power to convene can validate that view and allow for a great chance of its implementation."

So it looks like the governor who rarely takes advice from anyone is taking quite a bit from Jeb Bush. For Floridians who thought they were finished with Jeb, only to descend to the bottom of the barrel with Rick Scott, it looks like they're getting the worst of both worlds.

Welcome to your worst nightmare: Jeb 2.0.

Supreme Court Rules Against Self-Proclaimed "Supreme Executive" Rick Scott

Rick Scott Wants To Make The Rules, Not Follow Them

Yesterday the Florida Supreme Court found that Florida Governor Rick Scott overstepped his constitutional authority when he suspended rulemaking by state agencies shortly after he took office in January. The court ruled 5-2 in favor of Rosalie Whiley, a blind food stamp recipient who filed the petition because one of the rules Scott froze prevented her from applying for food stamps online.

When Whiley's petition was filed, Scott responded by claiming he had the "supreme executive power" granted to a Governor and has the final say over rules developed by state agencies.

While Scott may think he has "supreme executive authority," over regulations in Florida, including the power to prevent a low income blind woman from applying for food stamps, the court found otherwise. The justices said that Scott had violated the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches. 

Of course it will probably come as no surprise to anyone that Scott disagrees with the ruling:

"I don't think it follows the Constitution. It's a disappointment."

Sadly for him, he doesn't have supreme executive authority over the Florida Supreme Court....yet.

...the state's high court said that Scott's edict had "impermissibly" trampled the separation of powers, since rulemaking is a process that lawmakers -- not the governor -- have delegated to state agencies.

"Absent an amendment to the Administrative Procedure Act itself or other delegation of such authority to the Governor's Office by the Florida Legislature, the Governor has overstepped his constitutional authority and violated the separation of powers," the justices wrote.

Cindy Leann Huddleston of Florida Legal Services, one of the attorneys representing Whiley, said the court's decision is a victory for people who, like her client, have little political clout but are directly affected by the rules governing state services.

Rulemaking, she said, is a public process in which citizens have direct input. The court's decision, she said, restores the right of average people to influence the government rules affecting them.

Given that Scott has brought "trampling" over the people of Florida to an art form since taking office, it's a small step to "impermissibly trampling" the separation of powers as well. Once upon a time Republicans in control of the state legislature pushed back a bit against Scott, but it didn't last long. In a perfect world a ruling like this one might give them something resembling a spine, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Of course, restoring the rights of individuals to have influence over government rules that affect them isn't something that sits well with self proclaimed "Supreme Executive" Rick Scott. His response?

The money quote:

Scott, however, said the ruling "doesn't make any sense to me."

Not much of anything that involves governing a state makes any sense to Scott, it's not in line with his business plan.

"The secretaries of these agencies report to me, and they work for me at will, and then I'm not supposed to supervise them?" asked Scott, whose prior experience was in the business sector.

Maybe Scott should have studied up on how government and Democracy works before he jumped from the textbooks of what not to do in business ethics, such as operating a company that set the record for Medicare fraud fines, to buying his way into the Governor's mansion.

"I got elected -- part of the reason, and part of my seven-step plan, is to look at the rules in this state," Scott said. "If you look at what we've got to do to grow jobs … We're in a tough economy … if we don't really continue to think about the regulations killing jobs in this state, we're not going to grow jobs."

Typical response from Scott, when backed into a corner the only way out is to recite those meaningless talking points about his seven steps and all those "job killing regulations" that prevent corporations already sitting atop mountains of cash from creating jobs! If only life were simpler for the businesses in Florida, how dare people expect regulations that protect them from harm in everything from health care to water pollution, to the regulations that afford a blind woman the dignity of being able to apply for her own food stamps instead of having to rely on others.

Nope, restoring the rights of people in this state to again have a say in the rules affecting every aspect of their lives would resemble a Democracy, not Rick Scott's business model.

To quote Gov. Scott: "part of my seven-step plan is to look at the rules in this state." Scott may look at the "rules," he just doesn't feel he needs to follow them.

Well sorry Governor Scott.

A "supreme power" of higher authority than yours says you're wrong.

Gov. Rick Scott Claims "Supreme Executive Power" Over Rule Blocking Blind Woman's Food Stamps

On March 28 by Rosalie Whiley of Opa Locka filed a petition in the Florida Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of one of Rick Scott's first actions when he became Governor, freezing all rule making subject to his approval.

Whiley, who is blind, filed the petition because one of the rules Scott froze prevented her from applying for food stamps online.

“Because of my visual handicap, I have to get someone to come in and put in information for me online. I feel like it’s important for me to do it by myself,” said Whiley, 54, who lost her vision due to glaucoma, which she has suffered with since age 16.

Whiley said she has to reapply for food stamps every six months.

“I’m really concerned,” she said of Gov. Scott. “He’s coming in and he’s disrupting a lot of things that are going to affect a lot of people. A lot of people.”

In his response to the petition, Scott claims that he has the "supreme executive power" granted to a Governor and has the final say over rules developed by state agencies.

From the St. Petersburg Times:

An 80-page response from the Governor's Office cites similar executive orders from President Barack Obama and former Democratic Gov. Lawton Chiles as proof that Scott has the right to approve or reject rules created by agency heads to implement laws passed by the Legislature.

"It has become common practice for chief executives to review and assert control over agency regulatory activity," attorneys for Scott wrote.

There's also this quote from Alexander Hamilton's Federalist papers: "A feeble executive implies a feeble execution of government."

Scott's attorneys argue that because agency heads who write rules are hired and fired by him, he can ask that the rules reflect his priorities.

Unfortunately for Rosalie Whiley, her food stamps just aren't on Rick Scott's priority list.

Whiley wants the executive order revoked, which prevents her from applying for those food stamps. The rule has already been approved by the governor's regulatory reform office, but hasn't gone into effect yet, proving yet again that Rick Scott's "Let's Get To Work" was never more than a meaningless slogan.

Three groups have filed with the court in support of Whiley, and several other rules that are on hold as well, concerning environmental issues and the disabled.

Disability Rights Florida argues the rule making freeze suspends consideration of extending Medicare waiver benefits to some people with autism, is delaying discussion of treatment for at-risk juveniles with emotional disturbances, and slows implementation of rules for the Florida Division of Vocational Rehabilitation.

The elder law attorneys say the rule suspension is slowing payment of some Medicaid benefits. 

So while Rick Scott is busy flexing his legal, "supremacy" muscle, people like Rosalie Whiley and those above, the elderly and the disabled have to wait for their benefits. 

Add to the list the new law passed in the Florida legislature last week requiring forced drug testing that they'll have to take in order to get those benefits, tests which they'll have to pay out of their own pockets until the tests prove they aren't taking drugs.

In the so-called Sunshine State, apparently this is just the new normal of what living under the rule of the "Supreme CEO" himself, Rick Scott will be like. Exercising his "supremacy" so that Florida won't become a "feeble government?"

Please.

This is a blind woman who merely wants to apply for food stamps online so she won't have to rely on someone else to do it for her. 

Sounds more like just one more out of control overreach of power by Rick Scott against the less fortunate. 

(Cross posted at Daily Kos.)

Florida House Proposes Giving Rick Scott Sole Power To Appoint Judges

Republicans in the Florida House Civil Justice Committee recently passed three bills that would give Gov. Rick Scott the sole power to appoint appeals court and Supreme Court justices by restructuring the Florida court system, in the name of "accountability."

Think about that. The governor whose biggest claim to fame before he bought himself the office was running a company that made the record books for Medicare fraud. (Scott himself was never charged.) That's the guy they think should cherry-pick his own justices. Because he's an "accountability" guy. The guy who boasts a glowing report on his official bio what a fantastic job he did running Columbia/HCA but makes no mention of that little "Medicare fraud" thing. 

Republicans came up with this nifty idea a little over a week ago which had a hint of retribution because the courts had the nerve to throw out an Amendment that would have prevented Florida voters from having the fair election they fought for. Democrats are calling them out on the proposal.

"This is a very scary thing – we're supposed to have separation of powers," said Rep. Marty Kiar, D-Davie, during debate on one of three bills that passed through a House committee Thursday.

"These amendments are direct infringements on what's supposed to be a separate branch of government."

But Republicans backing three bills, two calling for constitutional amendments, deny they're trying to control the judicial branch. Instead, they said, it's an attempt to increase court efficiency and add accountability in selection of judges.

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fort Walton Beach, backing one of the bills, called the Democrats' accusation "absurd."

He said House Speaker Dean Cannon, a Winter Haven Republican, "has instructed this body to focus on accountability, and that's what this bill does."

The Republicans want the body to "focus on accountability." There's that word again. "Accountability" has quite the ring of hypocrisy to it coming from the Republican party in Florida who has a rather large group of members who have either been in jail and on trial, faced ethics violations, as in current Senate President Mike Haridopolos, or are under investigation  for various financial disclosure problems like current U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio and Rep. David Rivera, just to name a few. As for Rubio and Rivera, in their cases being under investigation merely boosted their credibility with the Thug Republican Party and vaulted them into higher office. The Republican Party Of Florida's idea of holding themselves accountable is merely investigating themselves for a short period of time, and then unanimously finding themselves completely innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever.

The most severe punishment handed down recently was when Haridopolos got caught red-handed. He, like his colleagues before him, failed to make certain financial disclosures. The Republicans jumped right on the case, and before you could say "you got paid HOW MUCH for a book deal manuscript??" he was shockingly found to be an actual wrong-doer by the other cult members. So what was his punishment? It amounted to this: "Aw shucks fellas' I'm sorry." That was it. Not even "Double Secret Probation!" I guess being Senate President has it's privileges.

Yes, this is the group who now wants to hand over the sole right of hand picking judges to Dictator Rick who ran the company made famous as a textbook case for the Medicare fraud business model. What could possibly go wrong?

Or in Scott's favor, what could go right?