Government
Weekly Roundup: Big and Mostly Bad for Gov. Rick Scott
Around the State
When Gov. Rick Scott signed off Friday on the SunRail commuter-rail system in Central Florida, he drew derision from some of his conservative supporters.
But it was that kind of week for Scott, who sometimes seems like a magnet for criticism.
Orlando-area business and political leaders have long pushed for SunRail, but tea party types -- a large part of Scott’s political base -- see the project as a costly boondoggle.
Scott also faced criticism this week on issues such as requiring government employees to contribute 3 percent of their paychecks to the state pension fund, reducing the number of weeks of unemployment benefits, and deciding to suspend agency rule-making.
But on the flip side, Scott has strong backing from business and conservative groups for requiring the pension contributions and scaling back unemployment benefits.
ON TRACK:
Scott created a huge amount of suspense about SunRail when he killed a Tampa-to-Orlando high-speed rail project earlier this year.
But when it came time to announce his decision Friday, the governor sent out Department of Transportation Secretary Ananth Prasad to confirm SunRail would go forward.
Among the key factors for his decision: assurances from local officials that the state would not have to pay more than it has already pledged for the project.
“There were no new facts,’’ Prasad said. “It was just the governor’s due diligence.’’
Tea partiers felt abandoned by the decision. But maybe nobody felt as lonely as Sen. Paula Dockery, an early Scott supporter who spent years trying to derail SunRail.
In a statement, the Lakeland Republican described Scott’s decision as betraying the “trust of the conservative electorate who put him in office by moving forward with the least cost-efficient commuter rail project in the nation.’’
Scott set a July 1 deadline for the SunRail decision. But July 1 is a magical date in the Capitol for other reasons, as it marks the start of the fiscal year and is the effective date for many new laws.
The governor signed his final bill (SB 404) Tuesday, keeping on track a statewide boarding school for academically at-risk students. Lawmakers approved the school on the hectic last night of the legislative session.
The school was criticized by one lawmaker who thought it had not been vetted and would cost the state too much money. But Scott sided with the boarding school supporters and signed the bill with some caveats. He said supporting the bill did not mean he would approve funding for it in the future.
COURTING CONTROVERSY:
As the top lawyer for Scott, Charles Trippe may have to get used to the short walk from the Capitol to the white-domed Florida Supreme Court building.
Trippe spent his Wednesday morning explaining to seven Supreme Court justices that Scott had not, in fact, exceeded his authority when he issued an executive order shortly after taking office to freeze all state agency rulemaking and to change a process for developing new rules.
Though the issue involves wonky government policy, advocates for the disabled, elderly and the environment did their best to explain how Scott’s order impacted real people.
The case, Whiley v. Scott, involves a blind woman who was awaiting an agency rule change that would make it easier for her to apply for Food Stamps. By freezing rulemaking, her attorney argued, Scott had attempted a power grab that was illegal. The power to determine how agency rules are set belongs to the Legislature, said prominent Tallahassee attorney Sandy D’Alemberte.
But Trippe told the justices – in an argument very similar to one he made earlier in a lawsuit about high-speed rail -- that “the governor's power and duty is provided directly by the Constitution.”
A few blocks away Thursday, a Leon County circuit judge started considering a constitutional challenge to another Scott-driven issue. The Florida Education Association and other labor groups are trying to block a new law that requires 3 percent pension contributions from hundreds of thousands of state and local workers.
Comments (27)
Few people in the private sector would consider government jobs as "jobs created", nor the resulting layoffs as reduction of jobs. Since the government does not produce (except Government Motors - but at a loss), the result of those 1,600 gov't jobs equals more money in our pockets since we no longer have to cover their pay, benefits, travel and incidentals.
It is rare that any local, state and federal employee receives a layoff notice. (So rare that they need special counseling.) Welcome to the real world, where the private sector has had to lay off employees in record numbers along with shutting the doors of many businesses, but we are ALL still required to chip in to pay the government critters to work in slow-mo. Sorry, no sympathy from this private citizen.
First, in terms of turning around the economy, a job is a job. There is no difference between a public sector and a private sector job in this regard. For recovery it's not about what people are doing on the job, it's about whether they are spending money. The more money is spent, the greater demand there is for goods and services, which leads to private sector companies hiring new employees, who get paid and end up spending money that feeds into the economy.
The last I looked, money is money. Public sector employees spend money just like private sector employees, and that money fuels the economy. This is sort of what happened last year with that stimulus that the Tea Partiers demonized. The problem with the stimulus? No, it wasn't that it increased the deficit, it was that it wasn't large enough to really get the economy moving again.
As for those lost gov't jobs equaling more money in your pocket, don't count on it. The lost spending from these workers will have braking effect on the economy, which will reduce state sales tax (among other gov't revenues), which--if there are any responsible adults left in Tallahassee--will prevent the implementation of additional tax cuts.
As for GM, the last I looked, they were profitable. But that fact does not fit your narrative, so you can't recognize the good that government action is capable of producing.
So good luck to you. And if you happen to be the last person in Florida when it all goes to hell, please close the door on your way out. Up is down, down is up, so when Florida drops into a depression, you will probably believe the state is going in the right direction.
If Disney (private sector) has a new position (create a job), you and I do NOT have to scrape up the money to pay for that position. We contribute nothing for that job unless we spend money at Disney - our choice. That new employee then spends money - just as does a new government critter, contributing to the general economy. The cost of government to be paid by the taxpayers does not increase by the newly hired Disney worker's salary and related payroll taxes and benefits. The new Disney worker NOW reduces my individual percentage needed to cover the government costs because the new worker is CONTRIBUTING with non-taxpayer funded payroll money.
A newly hired public sector is paid 100% by taxpayers, along with their benefits. Any taxes they pay in do NOT cover the cost of their own payroll and benefits, therefore, the other combined taxpayers must now pay MORE taxes to cover the new government critter's unit cost shortage - and they contribute nothing to the remaining government budget. Whether or not the position is deadwood, we taxpayers must foot payroll bill in additional to our original bill BEFORE the new public position was created.
The opposite happens with jobs lost. The private sector job loss means the remaining taxpayers must pick up that share to cover the government's costs. A public sector job loss equates to LESS government costs and therefore LESS per taxpayer unit cost - which means that the taxpayers will have more money in their pockets.
If Government Motors was such a good deal, why has the price of stock never been higher than the price we taxpayers paid? Now the feds want to dump the stock at another huge loss for the taxpayers.
It is sad that common sense is now the exception instead of the rule.
Deadwood? You choose: firefighter of ticket taker?