I think the teacher pay bill will come back, but it is telling the Legislature did not simply override Charlie Crist's veto last month when they were in special session. Other high-profile legislation, such as the abortion bill, also were passed over, but I think the Legislature this year will simply do something even more Draconian.
This is a Legislature where right-wingers have unprecedented control over the lawmaking process, and one where leadership is already spitting in the eye of dissent. See, for instance, the early remarks of Speaker Dean Cannon. He attacked both the courts and Congress as he boldly stated Republicans the Florida House were new kings of the universe.
Via the Miami Herald:
---
Cannon criticized ``government run amok'' in Washington and blasted Congress for ``taking over banks and financial institutions . . . socializing medicine . . . and trampling the property rights of citizens and the sovereignty of states.''
He criticized the Florida Supreme Court for striking three constitutional amendments crafted by the Legislature from the November ballot, saying the work of lawmakers was ``demolished by five unelected justices on the Supreme Court.''
Cannon, a lawyer who personally defended the Legislature's substitute amendment for two redistricting referendums backed by Democrats, called the court decisions to strike down the proposals and congressional actions ``just a few examples of threats to freedom,'' but added ``there are many others.''
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/11/16/1929602/8-crist-vetoes-overridden.html#ixzz17G0l8XJm
---
Notice, this isn't just judicial activism anymore, but apparently legislative activism but higher legislative bodies. No branch of government dare trounce on the will of the House representatives.
To describe a Legislature-generated constitutional amendment intended to undermine the voter approved Fair Districts referenda as a "freedom" under threat is the ultimate in hubris.
But why focus on all of this. 'The elections are over, Jake,' you say. 'Now we need to focus on issues.'
Sadly, politics is the biggest issue facing the state right now. We have no minority party with any standing to act as even a speed bump in the legislative process. We have a governor with no interest in moderating legislation, and no power to do so even if he wanted. And we have lawmakers already planning to challenge Roe v. Wade, gut teacher pay and block federal healthcare reform. Those hated courts are the only left to stop legislation, and judges will only stand in the way of the most heinous over-reaches.
That means the top priority of progressives in Florida right now is not trying to block legislation passed this session. It is to convince voters throughout the state that we need to reverse some of these acts. Our biggest legislative focus on the next two years has to be on getting a fair shake in the redistricting process, and sadly, our best options there may also be within the courts. While I doubt Fair Districts will have an enormous effect on the process, it at least offers a judicial release valve. We need to fight for decent redistricting both in Legislature and in the state and federal courts.
But most of all, we need to prep for 2012. A president will be on the ballot then who will do what he can to activate the Democratic base statewide, and we need to make sure local parties and Democratic candidates all the way down the ballot are prepared to fight for votes. We need to be able to take back seats in the state House and Senate which were lost this year, and take a few back that never managed to get into play.
Florida is a state where Democratic voters far outnumber Republican ones, but where Democratic lawmakers are a dying species. And every year, those Dem voters become a little more liberal. WE must convince those voters that what is happening in Tallahassee is just as important as what takes place in Washington, D.C., if not more so.
We face tremendous challenges as progressives in Florida, but we also are faced with an opportunity. We will learn in the next two years what one-party rule truly means in the Sunshine State. We will see what happens when one extreme end of the political spectrum is allowed to run amok in the halls of the state Capital. And we need to seize the change to bring about change.
This cannot be done by Barack Obama. It cannot be done by the few Democratic lawmakers allowed to step foot on the floor of the state House and Senate. It must be done by us. It must be done by grassroots, netroots and the average Democratic voter.
And that is why I continue to focus on politics. All we have left is ourselves.
I think that a large percentage of Florida's registered Democrats are Blue Dogs who are only with the national party on some issues, but not on others. Democrats have always outnumbered Republicans in Florida - when I was in college, the ratio was more than 4 to 1, but the state has been more evenly divided during the last twenty years. This State has known extreme one-party rule for many years and it wasn't pretty as Democrats could do pretty much anything they wanted to for the first 70 years of the twentieth century.
ReplyDeleteThe GOP has never had that degree of control, and still doesn't as it would only take one election cycle to return the Democrats to power in the Florida House. Plus the judiciary still has many of the incompetants appointed by Chiles and Graham still on the bench. On the Supreme Court two justices were appointed by Chiles, one a joint appointee of JEB and Chiles and the other four by RINO Crist
Something to contemplate: if the requirement ever came about requiring voters to vote a straight party ticket , if registered as either Democrat or Republican that both parties would suffer massive defections, but the Democrats more so than the Republicans due to the large number of blue dogs
My suspicion is that the number of so-called "Progressive" Democrats represents only a small percentage of the total electorate
There is no question that the Florida Democratic Party of yore had a huge number of Blue Dogs. I don't deny many of them are still there, but the Democratic base of voters today is far more liberal than it used to be.
ReplyDeleteThat isn't necessarily to say I disagree with you greatly about the percent of progressives overall. Rather, I think many of those who once might have registered as Democrats but voted conservatively are now registering Republican. The conservative Southern Democrat truly is a dying breed.
But the majorities held by the GOP in the Legislature's chambers are enormous and unprecedented this year. Yes, there was a time when Democrats had large majorities but they were never as unified as this. Recall the old Will Rogers line about never belonging to an organized political party. Your comment about the House is only true in that every member is up for election every two years, so by that definition, no majority has ever been completely invulnerable.
I fully acknowledge the courts are the only liberal branch of government, but do the math there PWD. Five justices were appointed or jointly appointed by Republicans. You can call Crist a RINO all you want. I've no interest in defending the man. But to call him a liberal by anything but intra-party standards is a joke.
I thought I'd left a reply on the post about Rick Scott going to DC to meet with Jim Boehner, but apparently it didn't post. Your mention of education policy reminded me about it. One of the things that Rick Scott did in DC that was actually related to his actual job was, he convinced Michelle Rhee to join his transition team to advise on education issues. I'm curious what your impression of her is, although I wouldn't be surprised if you've never heard of her - the only reason I have is because I read the Washington Post for the Redskins coverage. Anyway, she's the former head of the DC school system, and was fairly controversial - she made moves to institute merit pay and remove tenure, and to fire underperforming teachers. It was pretty unpopular with the teachers union, but she had some success, both implementing policies and increasing achievement.
ReplyDeleteThere was also something about Obama being a good public speaker and not relying on things obviously identifiable as sound bites to the extent that other politicians do, which I guess makes him somewhat less guilty of the thing I actually have a problem with - the lack of a rational discussion about real issues.
And then I apologized for calling politicians and voters idiots, and rephrased my opinion in less derogatory terms. Something like "self-interested politicians" and voters "content to be uninformed".
The addition of Rhee is very interesting. I don't have much more insight into her than what you provided right here, but I think it signals what the resurgence of SB6 might look like. As I noted in the post above, I think it telling the Legislature did not override the veto of the teacher pay bill (SB6), and so I don't think it will come back in exactly the same form.
ReplyDeleteThis does show Scott intends to direct education policy from the Mansion rather than leaving it to the Legislature, as I tend to think he will do with the abortion law. My guess is that the system in D.C. offers a template for what the Scott education plan will look like, more so than the language of SB6.
That probably means things are a little better than they could be. I doubt teachers' unions will be that happy about Rhee, but the system there was far more equitable than what was passed in the Legislature this year.