Scott Turner, You Can't Run For President

At the opening lunch for the Texas Public Policy Foundation's annual Policy Orientation, the speech by State Representative Scott Turner (@ScottTurnerTX on Twitter) knocked it out of the park.

Planned Parenthood resorts to blatant lies to fight #prolife bill; UPDATED with information about violent tactics from #prochoice protesters

The special session debate over Texas' abortion bill (HB2/SB1) continues to attract national attention, with both pro-life and pro-choice organizations weighing in. As expected, Planned Parenthood has been one of the ringleaders on the pro-abortion side.

Facebook ads supporting State Senator Wendy Davis and the pro-choice cause have been a constant presence in my Facebook feed since the evening of Davis' filibuster, and Planned Parenthood has been a sponsor of many of them. 

Will Weatherford ready to lead "innovative conservative" Florida House

RedState's Erick Erickson and Will Weatherford

Speaker-designate of the Florida House Will Weatherford stopped by the RedState Gathering in Jacksonville last Friday to chat with the conservative activists and bloggers who were attending the conference. 

What I like about Weatherford is that he isn't just a proud Republican, but that he is consistently cheerful and positive about it, treating politics as a method for finding solutions. He truly believes that conservative principles are the best way to provide the most opportunities for success for the most people, and is dedicated to the idea of making government as simple and streamlined as possible.

While Weatherford was at the Gathering, he was nice enough to chat with me for a few minutes. Here is a video of the interview:

Why is the Florida Legislature playing Russian Roulette with our property insurance?

Our luck won't last forever.

Smart people don't play Russian Roulette. 

They definitely don't consider playing it repeatedly, knowing that every turn they take would increase the chances of catastrophe.

So why is the Florida Legislature using Russian Roulette as a model for our property insurance?

The Florida Legislature: Cooler Than You Knew

Who knew the Florida Legislature was so cool? They apparently now have their own rap song:


YouTube | AssociationStudios | Senator Bennett: "I Drink That Scotch"

Hat tip to Brad Herold, who tweeted out this video last weekend along with a comment that, "I'm so glad that someone is finally realizing my dream of auto-tuning the FL Legislature."

Conservative Opposition Dooms Destination Resorts Bill

One of the most contentious fights during the 2012 legislative session (other than redistricting) has been the battle over several gambling bills: legislation that would ban internet "sweepstakes" gambling cafes, and also a proposal that would allow the creation of "mega-casinos" (or, as the proponents refer to them, "destination resorts") in South Florida.

The fate of the internet cafes still remains to be seen, but the destination resorts bill appears to be scheduled for execution within a few hours...

State Rep. Scott Plakon: "Rush Limbaugh is Wrong"

I continue to be shocked and dismayed how far too many people seem willing to latch on to conspiracy theories and make meritless accusations against fellow Republicans. Worse, these accusations continue even when clear evidence to the contrary is presented. 

Such is the case with the furor over Florida's redistricting. Let me say this for the millionth time: There is no conspiracy in the Florida Legislature to hurt Allen West, and Mitt Romney doesn't have a darn thing to do with our redistricting process. 

Meatloaf and Mulligans

Yesterday, the Leon County Circuit Court issued a ruling that removed Amendment 7, also known as the "Religious Freedom Act," from the 2012 ballot:

Another hurricane season ends and Florida keeps playing Russian Roulette

November 30 was the official end of the 2011 Hurricane Season, marking the sixth consecutive year that Florida has dodged a bullet:

The silly obsessions of Scott Maxwell

Not in Dorworth's Fan Club

How can you tell if Orlando Sentinel columnist Scott Maxwell will be attacking State Representative Chris Dorworth? If it's a day ending in a "Y."

OK, it's a dumb joke, but there is some truth to it...

I don't expect journalists to be cheerleaders for elected officials. Disagree with some proposed legislation or how a government program is funded? Fire away. If a politician does something illegal or unethical, the media should call them out. But looking back over Maxwell's columns during the past two years, I can't help but wonder if there isn't something else going on.

Maxwell's bomb-throwing has been especially vitriolic recently. In a column on October 22 titled "Why won't Rep. Chris Dorworth explain $713,000 in new assets?" Maxwell rants and raves about information in Dorworth's latest financial disclosures, insinuates that Dorworth is involved in shady business dealings, and then claims that Dorworth refused to answer a list of 21 questions that Maxwell sent him. Maxwell followed up that column with a blog post two days later.

I know Dorworth from when we were both in college at the University of Florida together, and called him up to hear what he had to say about all of this. As I suspected, his side of the story is a lot different than the one Maxwell wants you to hear.

Maxwell makes two main allegations in his column: (1) that Dorworth is somehow hiding his wealth, and (2) that Dorworth won't answer Maxwell's questions. 

On the first point, Dorworth filed, on time, all of the financial disclosure forms that he is required to file. He actually disclosed more information than the law requires. Anyone who knows anything about real estate and business development knows that there is a value to information, and usually you don't want to disclose anything, for fear of helping your competitors or risking a deal. One little detail that Maxwell omits is that Dorworth was willing to provide the complete details to his business ventures, but wasn't willing to violate contracts or ruin his business deals by letting the newspaper print all the confidential details. Hmmm, that's funny, Maxwell doesn't mention that Dorworth was willing to do this in any of his articles. 

What seems to have Maxwell's panties in a bunch is that Dorworth is doing better financially than he was the year before. Surprising as this may be, Chris Dorworth didn't hatch out of an egg the year that he was elected to the legislature. Ask anyone who went to UF in the past few decades and they'll tell you that being elected Student Body President is a huge deal, but also a job that requires a lot of hard work. After he graduated from UF, Dorworth headed to Duke and earned an MBA: another accomplishment that requires a high degree of dedication and initiative. 

Is it really that shocking that someone who accomplished these things might be able to turn a profit in business once in awhile? Now, Dorworth's business certainly took a hit from the real estate downturn (and, I suspect, from the time he spent away in the Legislature), but now he's turning things around again...and...gasp! He's showing a profit! It's the end times for sure, my friends.

Seriously, what is Maxwell's problem? That Dorworth didn't curl up in a ditch and die after one unprofitable year? That he dared to get back out there, search for projects worth investing in, and do his best to make them successful? Quelle horreur!

The saga gets even wackier when you look at the timeline of events last month as a whole. Dorworth forwarded me emails and phone records that confirm this timeline:

• October 20 – Maxwell contacts Dorworth and emails him the infamous 21 questions. Dorworth was overseas at the time and got the impression that Maxwell had already made up his mind about the issue.
• That same day, Dorworth had a conversation with the publisher of the Orlando Sentinel, where he explained he would no longer deal with Maxwell, but would welcome the opportunity to answer any questions posed to him by other Sentinel reporters, and specifically expressed his willingness to answer the questions that Maxwell was asking.
• October 22 - Maxwell publishes his column, accusing Dorworth of being evasive and refusing to answer his questions.
• October 25 - Dorworth has two telephone conversations stretching almost two hours in length with Victor Schaeffer of the Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board, in which he answers in detail the vast majority of Maxwell's questions. This call resulted in a several hundred dollar phone bill for Dorworth for the international call on his cell phone.
• October 26 – Dorworth submits MyWord column in response to Maxwell’s writings answering in detail questions about his financial disclosure. 
• October 27 –The Sentinel responds that they will not publish Dorworth's MyWord column without significant edits to not just the length of the column, but the content as well. 
• October 28 – A second column is re-submitted by Dorworth. Again, the Sentinel objects to the length of the column. (You try answering 21 complicated questions about your financial dealings in 400 words or less. Just saying...)
• November 1 – Maxwell still refuses to admit that Dorworth has provided any additional information to the Sentinel, even though he wrote another blog post suggesting that Dorworth is refusing to answer questions about his financial dealings. 
• November 1 – A third column is submitted by Dorworth. The Sentinel agrees to publish the column the next day. 

As I mentioned, the Sentinel did publish a short "My Word" column by Dorworth last week, but even that was only half the story...literally.

Once again, Dorworth asked if he could write an op-ed in response to Maxwell's accusations, and submitted a column. He was told that it exceeded the word count, and that some of his direct critiques of Maxwell would not be allowed. Dorworth revised the column and resubmitted it. It was rejected again, with the excuse that it needed to be under 400 words (never mind that the Sentinel's stated editorial policy on their website is that My Word columns are "about 450 words").


For the record, here is the full My Word column that Dorworth originally submitted:

Setting the Record Straight, Again. 

By Chris Dorworth

In just the past year, Scott Maxwell has published columns and blog posts about my mortgage, my marriage, my EPass, my cell phone usage and my Facebook account.  He ignored my work to pass landmark legislation to protect victims of sexual violence, my advocacy for a property tax constitutional amendment and some of the most aggressive pro-jobs regulatory reform in Florida’s history --- issues that matter in the lives of everyday Floridians.

I did not run for office to seek approval from the Orlando Sentinel.  I ran to represent my constituents and to advance good, conservative policy. Scrutiny is part of the job, but no one should be allowed to print lies about people they don’t like, as Mr. Maxwell has done time and again.

Mr. Maxwell’s latest distortions are based on his examination of the financial disclosure form I file each year as a state legislator.

What makes this remarkable is that it was my thorough and extraordinary disclosure that made this available to him in the first place. I went well beyond what is required by state law to disclose, in painstaking detail, how I earn a living, and the valuation of the business endeavors I am involved in. His complaints about a lack of transparency are ridiculous.

Far more troubling however is that Mr. Maxwell levels serious allegations without any facts to back them up. In Mr. Maxwell’s court, you are convicted first and asked to prove your innocence second.

The truth of the matter is that I do not now, nor have I ever, profited in the private sector because of my public service.  In fact, my overall net worth has decreased 99% since my first disclosure was filed.  How anyone could twist this into accusations that I profited from my office is bizarre.

In addition, I do not have any ownership in anything related to the Wekiva Beltway project, another baseless allegation leveled by Mr. Maxwell.  I have never used my position to unduly influence the outcome of any deal – real  estate or otherwise.  Florida law requires that I disclose where my income comes from, and who pays it, and I have done so to the fullest extent of both the letter and spirit of the law. 

My net worth is driven by two projects that I have worked on since 2009.  The increased values were a result of successfully rezoning the land for development and arrangements to sell the improved parcels.  Mr. Maxwell wonders why they were not disclosed on my 2009 form.  It’s simple, there was no new value added to the projects until the 2010 calendar year. 

Finally, Mr. Maxwell wonders in his column why I don’t reply to his questions.
It’s simple.

I consider Mr. Maxwell a gossip columnist, not a serious journalist, a point I made to his editor in explaining why I would no longer have any dealings with Mr. Maxwell. He is not bound by the same rules as legitimate journalists, who need to provide facts to back up the claims that they make.

Any legitimate review of his writings would reveal that the targets of his attacks are almost universally elected officials from the Republican Party.  Further review would show that his political views are almost always liberal to the extreme.  I’m just the latest in a long line of conservative Republicans that has become a subject of Mr. Maxwell’s obsession.

Scrutiny is part of the job for elected officials, and I believe the constituents who I serve have a right to know certain things about those of us who have been placed in a position of trust. I owe it to them to be transparent and accountable, and I will continue to be, but I won’t allow Scott Maxwell to continue to make up lies about me.

To paraphrase the late Patrick Daniel Moniyhan, Mr. Maxwell is entitled to his opinions, but he is not entitled to his own facts.

More conservative legislative endorsements for Adam Hasner

Adam Hasner announced another group of endorsements from conservative legislators today. Something I've noticed about many of Hasner's endorsements is that they have made a point to say that he is the "only candidate" in this race that they trust to hold conservative principles, often even specifically naming George LeMieux to point out that they will not support him (See endorsements from Carole Jean Jordan, Kathleen Shanahan, and Sally Bradshaw).

This most recent round of endorsements also draw a connection to Marco Rubio and how well Hasner and Rubio worked together when they were in the leadership of the Florida House, as noted by Sunshine State News' headline: "Connecting Him to Marco Rubio, Three Legislators Back Hasner in Senate Race."

Here's the press release from the campaign:

Shocking! Never thought I'd see the day...

...that Scott Plakon and Dennis Baxley disagreed on anything.

The two Republicans serve together in Florida's House of Representative, have very similar solidly-conservative voting records, have co-sponsored legislation, both endorsed Adam Hasner for Senate, and describe themselves as "good friends."

So I was surprised - nay, shocked! - to read in yesterday's Palm Beach Post that the two were on opposite sides on an issue:

Scott Plakon: "Government Creates a Business Headwind" [VIDEO]

Here's State Representative Scott Plakon discussing the oppressive effect of government regulations on small businesses:


YouTube | TheFCTA | Government Creates a Business Headwind

Scott Plakon named AFP Florida's Legislator of the Year

Americans for Prosperity's Florida chapter released their "Legislative Scorecard" today, grading Florida's State Representatives and Senators on their voting records during the 2011 session.

The press release included this statement from State Director Slade O'Brien:

The legislative scorecard allows our 86,000 members to see how their elected officials voted on issues affecting individual liberty and economic prosperity. The 2011 legislative session was one of the most business-friendly in years, with successful reform measures addressing unsustainable pensions and Medicaid, health care freedom, and burdensome regulations stifling job growth. These are the issues that will move our state forward and guarantee continued economic growth for Floridians.

Americans for Prosperity-Florida applauds all 79 Legislators - six Senators and 73 Representatives - that received A+ scores for advocating for less government, less taxes, and decreasing burdensome regulations on businesses. These are critical policies our lawmakers must support in order to ensure Florida can compete on the national and international level. The elected officials that received scores of D and F show hostility towards the free market and protecting the individual liberties on which our country was founded.

AFP also awarded State Representative Scott Plakon its "Legislator of the Year" award, noting that he had "repeatedly proven to be a principled leader set on protecting liberty with his sponsorship of vital legislation including the Health Care Freedom amendment." State Senator Joe Negron was chosen from the Senate.


View AFP Florida's Legislative Scorecard here.

Sales tax holiday information from Representative Crisafulli

State Representative Steve Crisafulli sends out "Legislative Update" emails a few times a month.  To sign up for Representative Crisafulli's email updates, click here.

After the jump, today's email has information about the sales tax holiday coming up at the end of the week:

Some local and state government internet resources

I've written before about the great job that the City of Orlando does managing its online presence, and I just wanted to share some other local and state government links I found today:

Florida House of Representatives Goes Mobile

The Florida House has long had a website at www.myfloridahouse.gov, and while there's a wealth of information offered on that site, it wasn't exactly mobile friendly.

No worries, today the House launched a mobile version of their site at http://mfhmobile.com. ("MFHmobile" stands for "My Florida House mobile.")

I tested the site on my Blackberry and it worked very well. Loaded quickly, easy to navigate. Here's the home screen:

[Hat tip: Saint Petersblog]

Winter Park Links

The City of Winter Park has also done a great job developing its online presence.

Pete Weldon posted on his website a list of useful links for Winter Park residents, including how to sign up for e-mail updates and emergency alerts from city government, and of course the City of Winter Park's Facebook and Twitter accounts.

Pete had this to say about Winter Park's efforts to provide information to its residents: "I am honored to live in a city that understands and lives up to the highest standards of government transparency. I encourage everyone to take advantage of these resources and to be informed about our city."
 

My latest appearance on Flashpoint, and some ranting and rambling

Last week, WKMG's Lauren Rowe invited me on her wonderful Sunday morning program Flashpoint, along with Dick Batchelor, to discuss some of the budgetary and other issues facing our Legislature this session.

If you missed the show, here's a link to the video:

Flashpoint | WKMG | April 10, 2011

Dick Batchelor, a former Florida State Representative, is one of my favorite local Democrats. As you'll see, we had a good laugh several times because Dick and I kept agreeing over and over. Lauren's not looking to host a drag-out screaming match, but usually when she invites a Democrat and Republican to appear, there's a little more difference of opinion between the guests.

Go ahead and call me a RINO (I've been called worse, ha), but some things are just common sense...or at least, some things should be common sense. Everyone knows that treating poor and uninsured people in the emergency room is the worst solution possible - it's  more expensive, more stressful, and less effective in actually making people healthy. Preventative care is the best solution for both uninsured patients and taxpayers footing the bill, and Dick and I naturally agreed on this point (note also that he agreed with me on what's normally viewed as a conservative position, that deregulating certain businesses is a good idea as long as safety is not impacted).

I do have to say, regarding the topic of this year's budget cuts, both in Florida and around the country, I am disappointed in the tone the debate has taken. 

I want moooooore money!

There's been too much hysteria and hostility from liberal interest groups this year. Anyone who suggests that even one penny might be cut from schools or any program that serves the poor, children, or the elderly is met with wailing and gnashing of teeth. "You can't cut that program! It's for the children!" "You denied our funding request? Why do you hate senior citizens?" Our problems with government overspending are caused in large part by treating far too many issues as sacred cows.

I've made the analogy before that far too often, supporters of a government program will do the equivalent of holding up an adorable little puppy and then arguing that the cuteness of the puppy is, in and of itself, an argument for increased funding. Go ahead and call me heartless, but especially in tough budget times, I want to hear specifics on how the money will be spent and what exactly is going to be done to help the puppy. Does the puppy actually need assistance? Is there another way to help the puppy? Or is the puppy just being used as a cute and fluffy form of budgetary blackmail?

If you cut the budget, that means this puppy will die.
Yeah, this puppy. We're whacking him first.

HJR 1097: An Assault on Judicial Independence

I don't often speak out on individual bills, but House Joint Resolution 1097 is so horrible I just can't keep quiet. 

You can read the complete text of the bill here, but essentially what it would do is change how judges are appointed, removing a well-run process which uses Judicial Nominating Commissions ("JNCs"), and instead placing the power to choose judges solely in the hands of the Governor, subject to confirmation by the Senate.

I was planning to write a critique of this bill when I found the following commentary on a friend's Facebook page. John Hamilton is a litigation partner at the Orlando office of Foley & Lardner, where I had a summer clerkship in the Summer of 2002. I found John to be an extremely thoughtful and intelligent attorney. He and I do not see eye-to-eye on a number of political issues, but I admire his ethics and commitment to our justice system. His thoughts on HJR 1097 are spot on, and I am reprinting them here with his permission:

[HJR 1097 is a] profound, outrageous attack by the Florida legislature on the independence of the Florida judicial system. It’s shameful, embarrassing, disgusting, and appalling. No legislator who actually cares even remotely about our system of justice could even consider voting for this bill...

This bill proposes [an] amendment to the Florida Constitution—one that would change the method by which Florida appellate judges are chosen. When the great treatise is eventually written on the History of Bad Ideas, an entire volume will be devoted to this one.

Currently, appellate judges (the judges on Florida’s five District Courts of Appeal and the justices on the Supreme Court of Florida) are selected through a constitutionally-mandated process that uses bodies known as Judicial Nominating Commissions (or JNCs). The JNCs—one for each appellate court—consist of attorneys and laypersons who are essentially appointed to the commissions by the governor. When a vacancy appears in an appellate court, an applicant for that seat submits an application for appointment to the court. The JNC then considers all of the applications, interviews the applicants, and deliberates. It then submits a list of at least three names, but no more than six, to the governor, who must then select the new judge from that list.

When this system was instituted in the 1970s, it replaced a system in which the governor alone selected the appellate judges. The purpose of the JNC system was to fix a judicial system that was broken—a system that had become a laughingstock because it was far-too-often tainted by appellate judges who were corrupt, incompetent, or mere political cronies of whoever happened to be governor. Often, judges fell into more than one of those categories. The JNCs were thus created “to screen applicants for judicial appointments within their respective jurisdictions and to nominate the three best qualified persons to the Governor for his appointment. The commissions were to be an arm of the executive appointive power to supplant, at least in part, the Governor's so-called ‘patronage committee’ composed of political supporters, to insure that politics would not be the only criteria in the selection of judges, and to increase generally the efficiency of the judicial appointive process.” In re Advisory Opinion to Governor, 276 So. 2d 25, 29 (Fla. 1973) (emphasis omitted).

In other words, “[t]he purpose of the judicial nominating commission is to take the judiciary out of the field of political patronage and provide a method of checking the qualifications of persons seeking the office of judge.” Id. at 30. “One of the principal purposes behind the provision for a nominating commission in the appointive process was . . . to place the restraint upon the ‘pork barrel’ procedure of purely political appointments without an overriding consideration of qualification and ability. It was sometimes facetiously said in former years that the best qualification to become a judge was to be a friend of the Governor! The purpose of such nominating commission, then, was to eliminate that kind of selection which some people referred to as ‘picking a judge merely because he was a friend or political supporter of the Governor’ thereby providing this desirable restraint upon such appointment and assuring a ‘merit selection’ of judicial officers.” Pleus v. Crist, 14 So. 3d 941, 944 (Fla. 2009) (quoting Spector v. Glisson, 305 So. 2d 777, 783 (Fla. 1974) (emphasis omitted)). The JNCs have, and were always intended to have, “constitutional independence.” Advisory Opinion, 276 So. 2d at 30.

This idiotic bill would return Florida to its failed past by eliminating JNCs for appellate judicial positions. If approved as an amendment to the state constitution, it would provide that appellate judges would merely be chosen by the governor, subject only to the approval of the state senate. The inevitable result of this would be a judicial system that is worse, weaker, less effective, and less honorable—one conducive to graft, corruption, cronyism, political patronage, and incompetence. No legitimate interest is served by such a change—none at all.

If anyone has a sufficient amount of shamelessness to try to defend this abomination, he or she will likely put forth an inapt, intellectually dishonest comparison to the method of selecting federal judges under Article III of the United States Constitution (under which judges are chosen by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate). Once again, don’t be fooled. The state of Florida and the United States are not interchangeable, and what is brilliant on a national level is ridiculously unsuitable for the state level. That isn’t a mere guess; we already KNOW that from past experience.

Now no one needs to say or think that my views on this subject should be taken with a grain of salt. I freely concede that my objectivity could reasonably be questioned by those who don’t know me well, given that I have recently been selected twice by the JNC for the Fifth District Court of Appeal as one of the six nominees to fill vacancies on that court. And yes, the second occasion was the debacle when Governor Crist unconstitutionally refused to make the appointment from the JNC’s list, until the Supreme Court of Florida was ultimately required to compel him to do so through a mandamus action.

But those who know me, even superficially, will realize that my own JNC experiences do not influence my opinion on this issue in the slightest. I revere the law. I regard the judicial system as a co-equal branch of government, just as our Founding Fathers intended. I prize the genius of the separation of powers and checks and balances that are so indispensable to our system. And I know that attacks upon the independence of the judiciary are attacks upon a cornerstone of our liberty...

John is absolutely right. 

The current JNC system requires a group of citizens - a group that includes both attorneys and non-attorneys - to review a candidate's qualifications, personally interview them, and provide a list of nominees to the Governor. I won't be so naive as to suggest that politics plays no part in the JNC's recommendations or in the Governor's eventual selection, but this process sharply diminishes the ability of anyone to politically corrupt judicial appointments.


I am a supporter of Governor Rick Scott and helped on his campaign, and I have faith that he would be able to make prudent judicial appointments on his own. However, there is no guarantee that I will like any future Governor. Removing the JNC vests way too much power in the Governor's office and creates too strong of a temptation for graft and corruption. Remember, we write laws for the office as an institution, not for the person who is currently occupying it. If you wouldn't have wanted Charlie Crist or Alex Sink to have this power, then you shouldn't want Rick Scott to have it either.

Additionally, the vetting of judicial candidates, if done properly, is a time-consuming process, and allowing the JNCs to continue their excellent work is a better idea than adding to the Governor's already extensive list of responsibilities. This is, plain and simple, a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" situation.


Please contact your Representative and encourage them to oppose HJR 1097. Visit www.myfloridahouse.gov and click on the "Find Your Representative" link near the top left to get the contact information for your Representative.