Once Again, Why Meek Must Continue On

Based on the reporting being done all over the state and in Washington, D.C., it now seems apparent to me that Bill Clinton did at least broach the topic of Meek dropping out, and that Meek absolutely will not do it.

I have spent much of the last six months trying to tell progressives why they should vote for Meek and ignore Charlie Crist. I don't think I have been nearly successful enough in that endeavor, but it is clear to me now the major focus needs to be on the Democratic establishment demonstrating its support for Meek. I will lay out my reasoning below.

1. Kendrick Meek is the qualified nominee. He won a difficult and sometimes uncertain primary against Jeff Greene, and a lot of supporters weathered some heavy criticism at the time. The battle was viewed by many, including myself, felt the credibility of all Florida Democrats was on the line. The better candidate won out, and he has an obligation to carry the standard through election day.

2. This will hurt the entire party with black voters. I have argued in recent days how frustrating it is to see national Democrats rally around the very fresh-faced Scott McAdams in a three-way race in Alaska. It has occurred to me, probably wrongly, that the "demographic appeal" of one of those men may be playing into the choices. Most low-info voters don't follow all the national blogs, but I guarantee it will suppress black turnout in Florida if Democratic leaders turn their back on the first credible candidate for the Senate from Florida since reconstruction. Now, I am by no means saying, as Smooth Like Remy once said of a Kos interpretation, that "the only use Democrats have for Meek is to get the n--- out to vote for Alex Sink." Far from it. But betraying the entire African-American community in Florida isn't good for the Democrats short-term or long-term.

3. Coattails. Some may argue that with Meek polling at 15 that this doesn't matter much. But the Senate race is the TOP item on the ballot this year. There are voters who come out specifically for Meek, and almost all of them are likely to vote for Democrats in every other state office. That doesn't just include the highly-important governor's race, but races for Attorney General, Agriculture Commissioner and Chief Financial Officer. There are also six or seven vital Congressional races in Florida this year where turnout is going to be what determines if we win or lose. And for goodness sake, if the DCCC is reserving ad time for Allen Boyd right now, national Democrats can at least pretend they want a Democrat running for Senate to win this race. That will help Boyd too.

4. This is an offense race for us. With all the hyperbole about how awful it would be for Rubio to be the next Senator, we tend to forget this is a seat the Republicans are defending. This isn't like races in West Virginia or Illinois where seats held today by Democrats are at risk of flipping to the other side. If you don't think Meek can win this race, just focus on another race then. Don't sabotage an outstanding, progressive Congressman's political career by throwing him under a political bus to make way for a value-less, disloyal hack like Charlie Crist.

5. When this whole fiasco got underway in April, I did suspect Crist could win, but he blew it by going exclusively for the left-wing vote. He was running like a Democrat, but was too cowardly to jump into the Democratic primary. That is what has all but won Marco Rubio this Senate seat. Rewarding that sort of behavior is not the way to set up a future where Democrats are taken seriously by Florida voters.

I'm under no delusions right now. I am casting my vote for Kendrick Meek because it is the right thing to do, not because I still believe he can win. I do think he could have taken this race if not for the meddling of Charlie Crist.

I'd Sure Like to Know What's Going On

Varied reports out there are saying different things on Kendrick Meek. All seem to agree Bill Clinton asked him to drop out.

13 News says Meek is still in it. Politico seems to think things are more on the verge than that.

But without Meek on the ballot, I will leave this race blank. Update: Rereading this, I want to make something clear. Meek cannot actually be removed from the ballot. Should he formally drop out, votes for him would simply be cast aside, and I think it is actually too late for him to formally drop out. I will fill in the bubble for Meek no matter what happens at this point.

I don't respect Crist enough to cast my vote for him, and I disagree with Marco Rubio on virtually everything.

My greatest concern if Meek was to drop out would be the effect on other races. I would expect someone with Clinton's savvy to consider that. Will this damage Alex Sink's chances? How about Gelber or Maddox or Ausley? I don't expect everyone to win, but all of these races are competitive. And that's saying nothing about what effect this could have on critical races like the Grayson, Kosmas or Boyd contests.

I am fed up right now with national Democrats screwing around with this race. Charlie Crist cannot win this race. Perhaps there was a way once, but he gave up on that the minute he decided to run as a liberal but forsake jumping into the Democratic primary.

I'm not kidding myself right now. I am not holding my breath waiting for this race to turn so overwhelmingly in Meek's direction to believe he can win. But Crist is not the alternative here. Not for me. Not for the Democratic Party as a whole. And if we lose the entire slate of major races this year at a time when the Republican party is in total disarray, that will just be a crime on the part of national Dems from Bill Clinton to Markos Moulitsas.

Don't Lecture Us On Cheating, You Fraud!

Entirely too much ink is being spilled about a passed note in the CNN debate. I find it ironic someone who tends to answer questions by taking the Fifth could get the upper hand on this ridiculous discussion.

If you haven't heard, a staffer sent Alex Sink a message during her debate. That was against the rules. Sink fired the staffer, Brian May, for sending it. And Rick Scott has spent a couple days thumping Sink for cheating.

So what did the note say? The reported text was "The attorney who won the Sykes suit said alex sink did nothing wrong. Tell not to let him keep talking about her."

That was because Scott was distorting Sink's private sector record by attacking Sykes Enterprises. That is part of the whole bad investment mess which Republicans are using to hammer Sink, but the note from May is true. The problems with that case were not Sink's fault, nor her responsibility. And they were small potatoes compared to the massive fraud conducted by HCA under Scott's watch.

And what would passing notes do? Theoretically, it could let a candidate have an upper hand because staff was conducting research on the side. But this matter never came up in the debate again after Sink received this illicit note. It's like looking at your neighbor's test but not using any of his answers. Is that cheating? Receiving a text message but not leveraging any advantage from that?

This is nonsense and straight-up political hay. Of all the substantive issues discussed in the debate, of all the important matters facing Florida today and of all the relevant parts of these candidates' personal histories, this is the issue gripping Florida's political press less than a week before the end of the campaign.

Straighten up, Florida. Learn something important. When Alex Sink is governor, I hope she relies on detailed research and facts, and I hope she utilizes a hard-working staff to full effect. If Scott wins, maybe we can expect him not to rely on any help and just exercise his best personal judgement. And we all know how well that has worked out for him before.

My Take on Florida's Constitutional Amendments

Some people have asked me to explain and offer an opinion on the Constitutional Amendments which appear on Florida's statewide ballot this year. And being so full of myself, I decided to go ahead and proclaim which measures should pass and which should go down.

As I have done before, this post is an index post, a table of contents if you will. The links below go to posts on Rantings From Florida which fully explain my positions on the issues. I hope all of you informed readers will follow each link. Maybe you will agree with me, and go vote just as I tell you. This will provide me with delusions of grandeur beyond imagination. Or maybe you will think I am crazy, leave a nasty comment and deflate my self worth. That's fine too.

Either way, enjoy.

Amendment 1 - Public financing is good. I oppose this repeal

Amendment 2 - Not another tax break. I oppose this giveaway

Amendment 4 - This would stop all growth, good and bad. I oppose it.

Amendments 5 and 6 - Redistricting needs reform. I support these measures.

Amendment 8 - Leave class-size restrictions alone. I oppose this reform killer.

Public Financing is Not a Bad Thing

It's funny to see an amendment on repealing public financing appear on Florida's ballot just as public financing becomes such a hot issue. For me, the terrible prospect of Rick Scott becoming governor shows problem enough with letting elections go to the highest bidder. But there are plenty of places in America where public financing is celebrated, not denigrated.

There are issues, of course, and if the courts ultimately put an end to this, then so be it. But people running for office ought to have the public's interest as their top priority. This would do that. A system where the success of a candidate depends directly upon the financial support they can rally from outside parties who stand to gain from the actions of public officials is a system with the possibility of corruption built in from the start.

And people can come around on public financing. Just ask Bill McCollum. But he's dead to me now. I wonder if he now thinks it was right that his message could be drowned out by Rick Scott's millions.

But as much as I hate Scott, the truth is that Florida's most important political offices today are only attainable for the elite. You can make millions in the private sector, like Scott or Alex Sink, or you can build political power, as all three major Senate candidates this year have done. Not to go all teabagger on this, but there is a problem when the general public is so far removed from the political process.

Public financing has a cost, and I realize some have a problem with tax money being spent on people's personal ambitions. But then, we pay elected officials with public dollars, and I have always been glad for it. If the taxpayers aren't writing the checks, someone else will.

I don't want to repeal public financing. I am voting against Amendment 1.

More Inequity with Amendment 2

There are so many inequities in Florida's tax structure as it is. For the life in me, I cannot figure out why we would want another. But that is what Amendment 2 would create. This one is wrapped up in fuzzy patriotism, but it is a genuine crime that this would even be considered at a time when tax revenues are on such a decline.

The measure would provide an additional homestead exemption for military personnel. Here is the thing, though. Florida is already one of the most popular places for active and military to call home because we don't have a personal income tax. I am not saying we should have an income tax, or that I don't appreciate the sacrifice soldiers make to our country. But when we are talking about offering tax breaks, it should be as an incentive to attract people to contribute more to our economy. This does not do that.

Florida has a ton of military people stationed in Florida. Those people, about 25,000 according to the News-Herald, stand to gain greatly from this measure. But the state would suffer to the tune of $14.9 million.

Unfortunately, this amendment has seen no organized opposition, and was put on the ballot through a unanimous vote of the Legislature. Even in times when state programs are being cut because of revenue shortages, a patriotic give-away seemed in order.

Florida in recent years has doubled the homestead exemption already in place through a giveaway pushed by Charlie Crist. It now cuts a break for people adding on to their homes to care for a parent, never mind that the parent provides added burden on local infrastructure. tax cuts always have political support because it puts money in people's pocket. I have never seen Floridians vote down a tax exemption.

But they should vote this down. I am voting against Amendment 2.

Amendment 4 is Overkill, Not Democracy

I know I will piss off many of my progressive friends with this one, but the Hometown Democracy is not a good idea, and I am voting against it.

I know as well as anyone the problems urban sprawl can create. I grew up in Central Florida, and have covered county and municipal governments across the state. I recognize the unholy alliance which can exist between big developers and donation-hungry officials fighting to keep their small time jobs in big media markets. But this amendment would stop good growth along with bad, and it would probably stick us with bad decisions of the past which still have the potential to be reversed.

For the uninitiated, the Hometown Democracy referendum would require that all comprehensive plan changes approved by local officials also go out to a vote from the people. The vote could happen during a regularly scheduled election, or it could be put on a special election ballot, likely funded by the developer.

Activist Lesley Blackner has been working for years to get this on the ballot. Her story is classic NIMBY but her goals were always noble. She wanted to stop those big, bad developers from paving over Florida's paradise to make a quick buck, and she worried intervening in hundreds of municipal elections was an insurmountable task.

But this proposal is straight-up overkill. And I am afraid its desired effects would not be the end result. Consider, should a special election on a sprawling subdivision be held, who will fund the better campaign? The rich developer with millions already invested in a project? Or the local chapter of the Sierra Club?

To use an example dear to my heart, developer Gary Morse has done tremendous damage to Central Florida with creation of The Villages, an enormous mess that now spans three counties. I don't like what it has done to the area I consider home. He got way too much approved by buying the souls of County Commissioners. And when the officials in one county got fed up, he went to another and started buying officials there. Sometimes, officials would get fed up, and Morse would just fund an opponent to take them out next election. He also owns state leaders in both parties, so no resistance was provided in Tallahassee either.

But what would have happened if the needed comp plan amendments had gone to ballot? He would have launched a massive media, promoted his own point of view in the newspaper his own company publishes, convinced people living in the area that growing the community was best, send out his own employees to vote for the change, and he would win, the same way he wins county elections when he wants. None of this is illegal, even if it all seems unsavory. The Villages would be built anyway.

Now think of a smaller development, perhaps a redevelopment effort which looks to take a blighted area which wasn't planned to last. Changes may need to be made to allow commercial development in areas designated today for sprawling residential growth. Would it pass? Probably, but there would be no glossy campaigns to ensure it. And if even a small part of the plan was controversial, it may not. Because of the uncertainty, most developers wouldn't even try. Instead, slumlords would sell to other slumlords, who would build with existing conditions, and the cycle would go on and on.

We don't need a disincentive to job creation right now. We don't need a hindrance to positive development ever. The system will never be completely free of corruption. Amendment 4 sure wouldn't eliminate it. But it could eliminate a ton of economic prosperity for a lot of hard-working people.