I spent nine years on the other side of the fence from journalism, running more than 100 campaigns. Having spent all that time in the belly of the beast before escaping, more or less intact, I'm often asked: How would you make it better?
With Tampa and Pinellas municipal elections bearing down on us, it seemed like an apt time to offer some answers.
I solicited ideas from people involved in Florida politics, getting about a dozen responses from elected officials to activists. I was surprised by how many repeated the same desired changes and how many of those ideas crossed party lines.
I boiled the suggestions down to the 10 political fixes in the list that follows.
Some great ideas didn't make the cut, either because they were impossible to execute or are heading for passage. By far, the most popular was to require a paper trail for voting. Gov. Charlie Crist beat us to the punch, calling on the Legislature to spend $32 million to install optical-scan paper ballots in the handful of Florida counties (including Sarasota, Pinellas and Hillsborough) where touch-screen machines are now used.
Two other frequent suggestions didn't make the list, either.
Take the top priority of Birgit Van Hout of Community Tampa Bay: "Outlaw negative campaigning." Almost everyone agreed with this sentiment, but the courts would never allow interference with the content of speech (unless it's libelous or unless you want to yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater).
Public financing of elections? This was probably the second-most cited on everyone's wish list. It's a problematic move in that it shifts the responsibility for campaign expenses to taxpayers, and there doesn't seem to be much sentiment in Florida for it. But the change has been instituted in parts of the U.S., according to the clean elections advocacy group Public Campaign (publicampaign.org). Three states — Arizona, Connecticut and Maine — give full public financing for all of their legislative and state campaigns. Two cities, Portland, Ore., and Albuquerque, N.M., have also gone this route.
These great ideas aside, here are the 10 that made the cut, in no particular order:
1 Nonpartisan races for county elections
The problem: Highways, potholes and public safety aren't partisan issues, so why shouldn't the officeholders in charge of these matters be non-partisan, too? That's the question being raised by opponents of partisan county elections. Plus, removing party designations from the ballot would take the visible element of partisanship out of such offices as the supervisor of elections, who is supposed to do the job without regard for political party.
Why make the change? "So we elect moderate people interested in solving county problems vs. pursuing pure politics," said Deanne Roberts, a Tampa advertising company owner active in civic and business affairs. Making the races nonpartisan would allow all voters to choose among all county candidates, and it would force voters to learn more about a candidate than just the letter after his or her name.
How it could be done: Change the county charters. For those counties with home-rule charters (Pinellas, Hillsborough and Sarasota), the change could be made through a referendum, either by a supermajority of the County Commission putting it on the ballot, citizen initiatives or placement by a charter review board. Each county's rules are slightly different on the methods. Counties that do not have home rule, such as Manatee, would need state legislation to amend their charters.
Status: Unlikely, given the control political parties have over the majority members on the county commissions. But there is hope: In 2002, Polk County voters made all of their county offices (such as sheriff, property appraiser and clerk of the courts) except county commissioner nonpartisan. Orlando-Orange County has had nonpartisan local races for years.
2 Same-day reporting of campaign contributions and expenditures
The problem: Politicians (and political parties) have to reveal who gives them money and where they spend it. But they only have to do so every three months during most of the year, and their final reports almost always arrive at the elections office too late to be considered by voters. Many politicians use this loophole to hide money from unpopular sources (such as developers or other special interests) or to shield how they spent it.
Why make the change? To eliminate the archaic lag in campaign finance reporting. That's a priority for Susan MacManus, a University of South Florida political science professor. She wants "complete transparency of campaign contributions (and expenditures) in real time. My pet peeve is the quarterly nature of such reports, which makes it impossible to discern 'who gave it and who got it' information in the very critical quarter immediately prior to the election." Politicians might have to think twice before taking a check from someone seeking legislation from them if they know they will have to go back to the office and put it on the Internet that night.
How it could be done: Legislation at the state level.
Status: Some financial actions of political committees are subject to 24-hour notification (when such groups pay for attack ads against a candidate, for instance), but campaign finance legislation filed so far this year does not extend that notice to all campaign activity.
3 Ban corporate contributions in state and local elections
The problem: Individuals are limited to writing a $500 check to a politician. But some business owners use their many different corporations — legally — to bundle huge contributions to campaigns, in the tens of thousands of dollars, in some cases.
Why make the change? People, not shadowy corporations, would have more say in financing campaigns. In turn, it would be harder for corporate special interests to buy a politician.
How it could be done: Change state law to mirror federal law, where corporations have been prohibited from writing a direct contribution to a campaign since the Watergate era.
Status: Corporations gave billions to Florida politicians and political parties over the past decade. Do you think legislators want to turn off that faucet?
4 Ban or limit shadow political committees
The problem: Almost all of the dirtiest political work these days is done by (allegedly) independent organizations, some of which don't have to report their financial activities in detail and all of which can take unlimited amounts of money.
Why make the change? Democratic Pinellas County Commissioner Kenneth Welch bemoans "the gutter level advertising that [these groups] spawn." And even some Republicans hate them. "My pet peeve has and continues to be the ability of third-party advocates that are able to collect and spend unlimited amounts of money to destroy candidates without proof or facing any accountability," said Republican political consultant Mark Proctor. "While free-speech advocates would cry foul if this were curtailed, I believe it would be in everyone's best interest if these political entities were forced to follow the exact same guidelines as the candidates."
Sure, special interest money (like groundwater) will always find a way to the surface, but eliminating the secrecy and unfair fundraising advantage these political groups enjoy would change the tone of campaigns for the better — much better.
How it could be done: Federal and state law would have to be changed to impose contribution limits or change the way these groups operate, and First Amendment rights make regulation tricky.
Status: Legislation is in the hopper to regulate Florida's 82 Electioneering Communications Organizations, notably House Bill 393 by Democratic Orlando State Rep. Scott Randolph, which would limit contributions to most ECO's at $5,000, down from the average $142,000 contribution they now receive. Getting passage in a Legislature aided and abetted by these political groups, however, is still a long shot. Randolph said he hopes that, at least, provisions that would force these shadow groups to report how they spend their money in more detail will survive. "It is no less than money-laundering," the way these groups operate now, he added.
5 Make Election Day a national holiday, along with easy-access balloting via mail-in and the Internet
The problem: Only about half of Florida's residents who are eligible to vote are actually registered to vote. And in primary elections, as few as one-quarter of those actually show up to decide who should be running the show.
Why make the change? Some argue against pumping up voter turnout, saying that only the most committed and issues-educated voters should show up and not dummies who are only there because they got the day off. But our democracy is stronger when everyone has a stake in it because they voted. And larger voter turnouts negate the advantage that extreme political groups have in current primary elections, giving results that reflect society and not just a small subset of it.
How it could be done: An act of Congress (for the national holiday) and changes in state law for other voting-ease changes. Thirty states now allow workers to take the day off to vote; Puerto Rico is the only one that declares it a holiday. According to VoteJustice.org, voter turnout in Puerto Rico in 2000 was 83 percent, compared with a U.S. average of 52 percent.
Status: Florida has already come a long way in the past decade, easing rules about absentee voting and providing early voting.
6 Proportional representation
The problem: Our winner-takes-all system gives many minority voices in our community no say in the lawmaking and governing process. All of the seats in the Legislature, for instance, go to whichever party or ideology can muster 50.1 percent of the vote.
Why make the change? FairVote (fairvote.org) is a leading advocate for this change, saying it would allow a more accurate representation of our diverse society within government. There are several ways to do it, the leading two of which are by allotting seats by the percentage of votes gained in an election (proportional) or by allowing voters to rank their votes for a group of candidates (choice voting).
How it could be done: Amend the state and U.S. constitutions.
Status: There has been little to no discussion about proportional representation in Florida.
7 Make the Florida Legislature meet year-round
The problem: The legislature meets for just 60 days each year, starting in early March. As the session rushes toward its end each year, a glut of spending and legislative changes sneak into the law at the last-minute with little to no public review.
Why make the change? One school of thought supports the two-month legislative session, as it means that there are 10 months out of the year when legislators can't screw up Florida more. But others argue that the state's complex and most pressing problems — rising insurance costs, growth management, property taxes, education — can't be resolved by part-time legislators. "You can't govern the state of Florida two months out of 12" and expect good results, said Alan Bomstein, a Clearwater contractor, Republican and chairman of the most recent Pinellas Charter Review Board. Advocates of a professional Legislature add that by leaving Tallahassee for 10 months out of the year, current lawmakers simply empower the bureaucracy that stays behind — which is not elected or accountable to voters.
How it could be done: Amendment to the Florida Constitution.
Status: No change in the offing.
8 Eliminate self-financing for candidates
The problem: The top four campaign contributors in 2006's local elections in Tampa Bay wrote the checks to themselves: county commission candidate Joe Redner and judicial candidates Walt Fullerton, Susan Bedinghaus, and George H. Brown. In Sarasota, Vern Buchanan won a seat in Congress by spending $5.5 million of his own fortune. More and more, especially in judicial races where fundraising is very difficult, you have to be rich to be elected in Florida.
Why make the change? The candidates' millions of dollars wouldn't fuel negative, nasty campaigns. Perhaps they would donate the cash to worthwhile charities, instead?
How it could be done: Change state law; but might conflict with First Amendment rights.
Status: If legislators realized that prohibiting self-financing would mean they don't have to dip into their own pockets any more, they likely would support this. But there has been no serious discussion of doing it.
9 Civics, media literacy and citizenship classes in fifth and 10th grades
The problem: Hyper-focused on teaching to the FCAT, we're not educating children like we used to about how our political process works and why it is important they are part of it.
Why make the change? Smart voters produce smart elected officials.
How it could be done: The Florida Department of Education, with the OK of the Board of Education, could add these elements to the state's curriculum.
Status: Not a priority, given the continued priority of testing and accountability.
10 Independent redistricting
The problem: Florida's political boundaries are drawn every 10 years by the Legislature, in effect giving control over redistricting to the party in power. Both political parties gerrymandered the lines to create the maximum number of districts favorable to their own candidates.
Why make the change? "Take the responsibility for redistricting out of the hands of the legislature," argues Ben Wilcox, whose Common Cause Florida group has led the petition drive to place the issue on the ballot, "and give it to an independent, nonpartisan commission along with standards that specify districts be drawn without favor to incumbents, political parties or candidates." Florida's legislative and congressional districts would become more competitive, offering voters real choices at the polls. It would make both parties work to produce better candidates, rather than just park politicians in "safe" districts where they can't be challenged successfully.
How it could be done: Amend Florida's Constitution
Status: The Florida Supreme Court blocked the Common Cause referendum in 2006; the group is shooting to make the 2008 election.
More political coverage:
- The Tampa vote: We may not want Redner, but do we need him?
- Election primer: a quick rundown of the candidates
This article appears in Feb 28 – Mar 6, 2007.
