Thurman Statement On McCollum's Frivolous Lawsuit

Florida Democratic Party Chair Karen Thurman released the following statement responding to Attorney General Bill McCollum's frivolous lawsuit against President Obama's historic health insurance reform law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act:

"Because he has no plans to move Florida forward or bring jobs to the Sunshine State, Attorney General Bill McCollum has filed a frivolous lawsuit to block President Obama's historic health insurance reform - this is just another petty partisan ploy from a Washington politician.

"Bill McCollum has spent much of the last 30 years, since he was first elected to Congress in 1980, either ignoring the growing crisis in our healthcare system or fighting against commonsense solutions to cover the four million Floridians who lack health insurance. That's why Bill McCollum repeatedly voted to cut funding for Medicare in Congress.

"The fact of the matter is, health insurance reform that ensures security for those with insurance, coverage for more than 31 million Americans currently living without health care, and lower costs for everyone has passed in both chambers of Congress and been signed by the President. The people of Florida can't afford more delays, obstruction, or political stunts-they want reform implemented now.

"If Bill McCollum wants to deny middle class families and small businesses relief from soaring insurance premiums, seniors help in paying for their prescription drugs, or sick people a way to be insured once again, that's his choice to make-but he will find himself on the wrong side of Floridians.

"But it is unacceptable for AG McCollum to once again waste taxpayer dollars for his political stunts. Rather than filing politically-motivated lawsuits, McCollum needs to stop wasting our taxpayer money and start doing his job -- like cracking down on Medicaid fraud that is costing our state billions of dollars."

REPUBLICANS, BUSINESS AND CONSUMER GROUPS ALL SUPPORT FOR INDIVIDUAL MANDATE

NPR: "Hatch And Several Other Senators Who Now Oppose The So-Called Individual Mandate Actually Supported A Bill That Would Have Required It...'It Was Invented...[For] George Bush Sr. Back In The Day, As A Competition To The Employer Mandate Focus Of The Democrats At The Time.'" NPR's Julie Rovner reported: "For Republicans, the idea of requiring every American to have health insurance is one of the most abhorrent provisions of the Democrats' health overhaul bills. 'Congress has never crossed the line between regulating what people choose to do and ordering them to do it,' said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). 'The difference between regulating and requiring is liberty.' But Hatch's opposition is ironic, or some would say, politically motivated. The last time Congress debated a health overhaul, when Bill Clinton was president, Hatch and several other senators who now oppose the so-called individual mandate actually supported a bill that would have required it. In fact, says Len Nichols of the New America Foundation, the individual mandate was originally a Republican idea. 'It was invented by Mark Pauly to give to George Bush Sr. back in the day, as a competition to the employer mandate focus of the Democrats at the time.'" [NPR, 2/15/10]

Business And Consumer Groups All Support An Individual Mandate For Obtaining Health Care. "Support grew on Friday for insurance industry demands that all Americans be required to obtain coverage as part of a planned healthcare system overhaul, with a senior Senate Democrat and a coalition of business and consumer groups promoting the idea. ... The coalition includes groups such at the AARP, which represents older Americans, the American Hospital Association, America's Health Insurance Plans industry group, the healthcare advocacy group Families USA, the Business Roundtable and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce." [Reuters, 3/27/09]

Frist Supported Individual Mandate: "I Believe In Limited Government And Individual Responsibility...[But] It Is Time For An Individual Health Insurance Mandate." In an op-ed, former Senate Majority leader Bill Frist wrote, "I believe in limited government and individual responsibility, cherish the freedom to choose, and generally oppose individual mandates-except where markets fail, individuals suffer, and society pays a hefty price. Let's face it, in a country as productive and advanced as ours, every American deserves affordable access to healthcare delivered at the right time. And they don't have it today. It is time for an individual health insurance mandate for a minimum level of health coverage. Catastrophic coverage would be an appropriate place to start." [US News & World Report Opinion, 9/29/09]

Sen. Frist Voiced Strong Support For Individual Mandate. Former Senate Majority Leader Bill First told Time magazine that, "he strongly supports other aspects of the bill--most notably, its requirement that individuals be required to purchase coverage, if they do not receive health insurance through their employers or under government programs." [Time, 10/2/09]

Sen. Grassley: "I Believe That There is a Bipartisan Consensus to Have Individual Mandates." "'Individual mandates are more apt to be accepted by a vast majority of people in Congress than an employer mandate would be, as an example,' Grassley said. 'I believe that there is a bipartisan consensus to have individual mandates.'" [Bloomberg, 6/14/09]

CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERTS SAY THAT INDIVIDUAL MANDATE IS CONSTITUTIONAL AND THAT THE SUPREME COURT WOULD CERTAINLY UPHOLD IT

Yale Law School Constitutional Scholar: "The Supreme Court Will Almost Certainly Uphold The [Individual Mandate]...To Strike Down The Individual Mandate, It Would Have To Reject Decades Of Precedents. It Is Very Unlikely [That The Court Would Stage] Such A Constitutional Revolution." Jack M. Balkin, J.D., Ph.D., Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment of the Yale Law School wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine: "The individual mandate taxes people who do not buy health insurance. Critics charge that these people are not engaged in any activity that Congress might regulate; they are simply doing nothing. This is not the case. Such people actually self-insure through various means...Moreover, like people who substitute homegrown marijuana or wheat for purchased crops, the cumulative effect of uninsured people's behavior undermines Congress's regulation - in this case, its regulation of health insurance markets. Because Congress believes that national health care reform won't succeed unless these people are brought into national risk pools, it can regulate their activities in order to make its general regulation of health insurance effective. One final argument against the individual mandate is that it violates the Fifth Amendment by allowing the government to take property without just compensation. 'Takings' occur when the government seizes property from particular individuals...The individual mandate is just such a tax - not a taking. Although opponents will challenge the individual mandate in court, constitutional challenges are unlikely to succeed. The Supreme Court will probably not even consider the issue unless a federal court of appeals strikes the tax down. In that unlikely event, the Supreme Court will almost certainly uphold the tax, at least if it follows existing law. To strike down the individual mandate, it would have to reject decades of precedents. It is very unlikely that there are five votes on the current Court for staging such a constitutional revolution." [New England Journal of Medicine, 1/14/10]

Stuart Taylor: Most Experts Agree That The Individual Mandate Is Constitutional. "A healthy 20-something might ask: Can the government really order me to spend more than $5,500 a year to buy comprehensive health insurance just because I live in the United States, even though the most I might need or want is catastrophic coverage costing less than $800? Can they really force me to pay a big penalty 'tax' if I won't buy government-approved insurance? And can they use my money to subsidize people who are twice my age, and obese or sick, even if they have more money than I do? The answers are yes, yes, and that's the point! according to most of the experts who have weighed in on whether the Supreme Court would uphold a mandate for individuals to buy comprehensive health insurance unless they're already covered by employer-based plans. They cite the justices' very broad reading since the New Deal of Congress's powers to regulate interstate commerce and to tax and spend." [Stuart Taylor, National Journal, 12/12/09]

David Frum: Health Reform Is "Unquestionably Constitutional. The Federal Government Already Requires Every American To Purchase Health Insurance. That's What Medicare Does." David Frum wrote: "Is the Obama-Reid health reform plan unconstitutional? The answer to that should be obvious: the Reid-Obama plan may be unwise, unsound, and unaffordable ... but it is unquestionably constitutional. The federal government already requires every American to purchase health insurance. That's what Medicare does. The difference now is that everyone will be required to buy a private plan to cover them up to age 65 in addition to the government-run plan they are compelled to buy to cover them after 65. I don't hear anyone in Congress suggesting that Medicare violates the Constitution. So how can the new plan be unconstitutional if the old plan is OK?" [David Frum, 12/26/09]

Prof. Schwinn Of U. Chicago: "Whatever The Merits Of The Policy Arguments Against An Individual Mandate, These Commerce Clause Arguments...Do Not Render Them Unconstitutional." Steven D. Schwinn, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School examined claims that health reform and in particular individual mandates would be unconstitutional: "Whatever the merits of the policy arguments against an individual mandate, these Commerce Clause arguments based on 'state sovereignty' and lack of economic activity do not render them unconstitutional." [Constitutional Law Prof. Blog, 12/4/09]

Prof. Mark Hall: Unconstitutional Argument "Is Unconvincing And Deeply Flawed...There Is No Fundamental Right To Be Uninsured, And So Various Arguments Based On The Bill Of Rights Fall Flat." Mark A. Hall wrote on the Seton Hall University School of Law, Health Law & Policy Program blog: "Is it unconstitutional to mandate health insurance? It seems unprecedented to require citizens to purchase insurance simply because they live in the U.S. (rather than as a condition of driving a car or owning a business, for instance). Therefore, several credentialed, conservative lawyers think that compulsory health insurance is unconstitutional. See here and here and here. Their reasoning is unconvincing and deeply flawed...Under both liberal and conservative jurisprudence, the Constitution protects individual autonomy strongly only when 'fundamental rights' are involved. There may be fundamental rights to decide about medical treatments, but having insurance does not require anyone to undergo treatment. It only requires them to have a means to pay for any treatment they might choose to receive. The liberty in question is purely economic and has none of the strong elements of personal or bodily integrity that invoke Constitutional protection. In short, there is no fundamental right to be uninsured, and so various arguments based on the Bill of Rights fall flat." [Seton Hall University School of Law, Health Law & Policy Program, 8/25/09]

Prof. Hall's Georgetown University Paper: "The Constitution Permits Congress To Legislate A Health Insurance Mandate." Prof. Mark Hall concluded in his paper published by the Georgetown University O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law: "The Constitution permits Congress to legislate a health insurance mandate. Congress can use its Commerce Clause power or its taxing and spending powers to create such a mandate. Congress can impose a tax on those that do not purchase insurance, or provide tax benefits to those that do purchase insurance." [Georgetown University paper: The Constitutionality of Mandates to Purchase Health Insurance, February, 2009]

Prof. Dorf Of Cornell University Law School On Individual Mandate: No Different Than Federal Mandate To Compel Citizens To Jury Duty, No Different From States Imposing An "Affirmative Obligation" On Parents To Educate Their Children. "The CBO memo claims, then, that an individual mandate would be unique because it would impose an affirmative obligation on persons. Most laws either forbid some form of conduct (say, bank robbery) or impose restrictions as conditions on activities that the government could forbid altogether (say, by requiring that companies that are engaged in various lines of business comply with environmental laws, or that professionals pass licensing examinations). As the CBO memo states: 'Federal mandates that apply to individuals as members of society are extremely rare.' The only one that the CBO staff could think of was the requirement that draft-age men register with the Selective Service System...To begin, the CBO memo's authors apparently forgot about jury duty. A federal statute that was already in effect in 1994 provides that 'all citizens shall have . . . an obligation to serve as jurors when summoned for that purpose.'...Consider that every state imposes an affirmative obligation on parents to educate their children--whether in public school, private school, or via home schooling. Surely this obligation cannot be said to be a mere condition on the privilege of raising children, for the state has no authority to prevent people from becoming parents." [FindLaw, 10/21/09]

Prof. Dorf Of Cornell University Law School: "The Individual Mandate Is...Constitutional." Professor Michael Dorf of the Cornell University Law School wrote: "the individual mandate is 'plainly adapted' to the undoubtedly legitimate end of regulating the enormous and enormously important health-care sector of the national economy. It is therefore constitutional." [FindLaw, 11/2/09]

Prof. Shapiro Of Emory University School Of Law: "Whatever One Thinks Of The Wisdom Of The Individual Mandate...It Would Be Surprising If The Constitution Prohibited A Democratic Resolution Of The Issue. Happily, It Does Not." Sen. Max Baucus noted that: "Robert Shapiro, Professor of Law at Emory University School of Law, stated: 'Whatever one thinks of the wisdom of the individual mandate, or of health care reform generally, it would be surprising if the Constitution prohibited a democratic resolution of the issue. Happily, it does not.'" [Statement by Sen. Baucus, 12/22/09]

Constitutional Law Prof. Schwinn: Claim That Individual Mandate Is Unconstitutional Is "Wrong...An Individual Mandate Is Almost Certainly The Kind Of Economic Activity That The [Supreme] Court Would Uphold Under Congress's Commerce Clause Authority." Prof. Steven D. Schwinn of the University of Chicago Law School critiqued an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal by David Rivkin and Lee Casey arguing that the individual mandate provision was unconstitutional: "The authors are wrong on two counts. First, an individual mandate is almost certainly the kind of economic activity that the Court would uphold under Congress's Commerce Clause authority under Raich, Lopez, and United States v. Morrison. These cases allow Congress to regulate activities that have a "substantial effect" on interstate commerce, and they look to the commercial nature of the activity and to the connection between the activity and interstate commerce (among other considerations). An individual mandate is almost surely commercial in nature--in requiring folks to buy health insurance, it requires a commercial exchange. Rivkin and Casey argue that the mandate is not commercial in nature, because it's triggered simply by 'being an American.' This may be true, but it misses the point of the regulation: It requires Americans to engage in a commercial exchange. This is the definition of commerce...The Supreme Court may be on a path to limiting congressional authority under the Commerce Clause, the Taxing Clause, or any clause. But even so, the individual mandate all too squarely falls within the recent and settled jurisprudence." [Constitutional Law Prof. Blog, 9/25/09]

Prof. Mark Hall Of Wake Forest University School Of Law: There Are No Plausible Tenth Amendment Or States' Rights Issues Arising From the Imposition By Congress Of An Individual Responsibility To Maintain Health Coverage." Sen. Baucus said in a statement: "I refer my colleagues to an article by Mark Hall, law professor at Wake Forest University. Professor Hall's article is a comprehensive, peer-reviewed analysis of the constitutionality of a Federal individual responsibility requirement. In it, Professor Hall concludes that there are no plausible Tenth Amendment or States' rights issues arising from the imposition by Congress of an individual responsibility to maintain health coverage. Professor Hall notes further that health care and health insurance both affect and are distributed through interstate commerce. And that gives Congress the power to legislate a coverage requirement using its Commerce Clause powers. Professor Hall notes that the Supreme Court indicated in its decisions in United States v. Morrison and United States v. Lopez - two other cases relied on by the other side - that the non-economic, criminal nature of the conduct in those cases was central to the court's decisions in those cases that the Government had not appropriately exercised power under the Commerce Clause. Health insurance, on the other hand, does not deal with criminal conduct." Prof. Mark Hall wrote, "[p]erusing some of [the Senate health reform bill's] 2000 pages, I came across the following, SEC. 1501 (p. 320), which should put to rest any argument that an individual mandate exceeds Congress' powers under the Commerce Clause." [Statement by Sen. Baucus, 12/22/09; O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, 11/24/09]

A Business Plan or A Record of Killing Business?

From FDP:

Still without a business plan for Florida, Congressman Bill McCollum continues to deny his role in the current economic crisis, forcing Floridians to wonder if he'd bring the same failed economic policies to the Governor's Office that he pushed through Congress.

"Congressman Bill McCollum stands behind the laws he pushed through Congress that have been widely acknowledged as a determining factor in the economic collapse, which has cost jobs right here in Florida - creating a tied record high unemployment," Florida Democratic Party spokesman Eric Jotkoff said. "If Bill McCollum can't even see the error in his economic ways that cost countless Florida jobs, it's clear that he won't be able to move our economy forward if elected Governor, especially since he hasn't even bothered to produce an economic plan or vision."

As Governor McCollum Would Likely Turn Florida's Economy Into A "Permanent Bust":

In Congress McCollum Helped Turn Our "Lemonade Into A Lemon". "In Congress, McCollum helped turn our lemonade economy into a lemon. In 1999, he co-sponsored the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act, which prevented banks from taking on riskier investments that could precipitate the very financial crisis Obama inherited. ... As governor, McCollum would likely turn Florida's economy into a permanent bust." (Column, Sun-Sentinel, 01/15/10)

McCollum Falsely Denied His Record Even As John McCain Called Him Out:

Former Congressman Bill McCollum Defended Cosponsoring and Pushing the Wall Street Deregulation Through Congress. "McCollum says the banker-friendly policies he backed on [the] banking and housing committee in congress contributed in no way to the economic collapse." (St. Petersburg Times/TampaBay.com, The Buzz Political Blog, 12/16/09)

John McCain Supported Rolling Back McCollum's Wall Street Deregulation. "'I don't believe when I was there that we created the foundation in those years for the problems that came after I left in 2000,' he [McCollum] said. ... But on Wednesday, Republican Sen. John McCain proposed reining in Wall Street by resurrecting the Depression-era law that separated commercial and investment banking - the same law McCollum favored repealing as a congressman in 1999. ... As a member of Congress from 1980 to 2000, McCollum served on the committee overseeing financial services and co-sponsored 1999 legislation that tore down the Depression-era firewall between investment banks and commercial banks." (St. Petersburg Times, 12/17/09)

From the Blogs

The latest stories from the Florida blogs (and beyond) about Republicans in the Florida Cabinet.

The Reid Report: Meet Bill McCollum’s healthcare lawsuit buddy: birther queen Orly Taitz

The Reid Report: Repeal is the new litmus test, and McCollum’s cynical ploy

Progress Florida: McCollum Rolls Dice On Medicare & Social Security

FLA Politics: Bill McCollum's Passion

The Reid Report: Bill McCollum’s shady, costly healthcare suit

Bark Bark Woof Woof: When Opportunists Knock

The Reid Report: McCollum’s useless suit to stop healthcare reform, a history

Progress Florida: Bill McCollum Wants To Deny 4 Million Floridians Health Insurance

The Reid Report: McCollum’s folly: Florida Republicans will try and secede from healthcare reform

The Reid Report: Bill McCollum to self-immolate in response to healthcare reform

The Reid Report: Bill McCollum is wasting your time

FLA Politics: How Slimy Is Jeff Atwater?

Progress Florida: Bill McCollum: Solving Florida's Problems One Sentence At A Time

The Reid Report: Timing is everything: Sink pushes for ethics reform

FLA Politics: Has Crist Already Switched Parties?

The Reid Report: Charlie’s Funny Valentine

The New Argument: Bill McCollum: M.I.A. on RPOF

The New Argument: Will Cronyism Take Down Charlie Crist?

Change in Tallahassee: Will McCollum Condone or Condemn Cronyism With Campaign Cash At Stake?

Why Now?: Like I Said

Floridians Have Clear Choice in Governor's Race: Business Plan or Business As Usual

From FDP:

As Florida CFO Alex Sink was rolling out her Business Plan for Florida last week, her Republican Gubernatorial rival Bill McCollum was focused on Washington politics, and absent on the main issues at stake in Florida: the economy and jobs.

"While former Congressman Bill McCollum grandstands on the happenings of Washington, where is his plan for Florida's economy? Where are his ideas to cut wasteful spending in state government? Floridians face a fundamental choice in what they want from their next Governor: a business plan for Florida or more business-as-usual politics." Florida Democratic Party spokesman Eric Jotkoff said. "Florida's unemployment rate has tied a record high. Our state faces massive budget shortfalls and foreclosures have skyrocketed. And where is the leading Republican candidate for Governor, Bill McCollum? His focus is still stuck on playing Washington political games, since that's what he's done for decades."

McCollum has spent the last week on phone conferences, writing and sending letters to Attorneys General in each state and appearing on national cable news, yet McCollum has yet to offer an economic plan for Florida.

Where Is Bill McCollum's Economic Plan? When Will He Produce One?

To understand the fundamental choice Florida voters will face in November, just survey last week's news on the gubernatorial race.

Alex Sink Roles Out Business Plan for Florida:

"And as a candidate for governor, she [Alex Sink] has released a promising, cost-cutting plan to get rid of middle managers in state government. She also is laying out a set of proposals to stimulate job creation in Florida. So far, these generally concern tax credits and tax breaks targeting businesses. This is what I want my governor to do - not get embroiled in some lawsuit against Washington over health care to get headlines." (Mike Thomas Blog, Orlando Sentinel, 3/18/10)

Sink sets economic goals if elected Fla. Governor
(Headline, Associated Press, 3/16/10)

'Business-minded' Dem Sink unveils jobs, economy proposals in West Palm Beach
(Headline, Palm Beach Post, 3/17/10)

Alex Sink offers up economic blueprint for Florida
(Headline, Orlando Sentinel, 3/17/10)

In governor's race, Alex Sink pins hopes on economic savvy, new 'business plan for Florida'(Headline, Venture, TampaBay.com, 3/17/10)

Former Congressman Bill McCollum Promises Business-As-Usual Politics of Washington:

McCollum "Grandstands" On Health Reform Plan. "Bill McCollum very much wants to run against Barack Obama in November. That appears to be a large part of his campaign strategy as he grandstands on Obama's health care plan and tries to tie it to Democrat Alex Sink. This resulted in a rather juvenile letter from McCollum's campaign manager to Sink, demanding she take a position on it." (Mike Thomas Blog, Orlando Sentinel, 3/18/10)

McCollum Declined To Comment About Conference Call With Top Prosecutors From Across The Country About Possible Legal Action Against The Health Reform Bill. According to McClatchy News, "South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster said he and Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum spoke with other top state prosecutors Thursday in a conference call about possible legal action. McMaster said the proposed federal mandate for individuals to purchase health insurance - or face a fine of as much as $750 for most people - is unconstitutional. 'It is my belief and that of other attorneys general that this is clearly unconstitutional,' he told McClatchy. 'That's why we're moving forward. We need to protect the sovereignty of our states and the liberty of our people.' McCollum declined to comment." (McClatchy News, 03/20/10)

While McCollum Failed To Provide Promised Details Of His Legal Challenge To The Press, He Was "On Conference Calls All Day" Trying To "Get Other AGs On Board To File Suit" Against Health Care Bill. According to McClatchy News, "Ryan Wiggins, a spokeswoman, said McCollum was spending considerable time on the phone with other state prosecutors, rounding up support for a lawsuit. 'He's been trying to get other AGs on board to file suit,' Wiggins said. 'He's been on conference calls all day trying to do this lawsuit.'" In addition, "Wiggins didn't follow through on a promise to provide details of the potential legal challenge." (McClatchy News, 03/20/10 and 03/19/10)

McCollum Planned To "Sue Regardless" Over Provisions Removed From Health Reform Legislation. "Attorneys General Henry McMaster of South Carolina -- who is head of a group of 19 GOP attorneys general that started threatening lawsuits in December -- and Bill McCollum of Florida said ... that they are planning legal action over a deal struck between Senate leadership and Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) paying for his state's share for expanded Medicaid coverage, estimated at $100 million. Democrats intend to remove the Nebraska provision from the Senate bill via reconciliation, but McMaster said ... that he and McCollum intend to sue regardless of whether the item is removed." (Politico, 03/19/10)

Atwater's Hypocrisy

From Loranne Ausley:

“Do as I tweet, not as I do.”

That was the headline of the Florida Times Union in response to Senate President Jeff Atwater’s hypocritical statements last month.

In a “tweet”, Atwater criticized federal lawmakers for not balancing their budget while claiming he has done a great job balancing Florida’s budget.

Not to be outdone, the Orlando Sentinel chimed in adding, “Florida Lawmakers want Washington to cut deficit spending – just not in Florida.”

The reference is of course to the fact that the only way Atwater can “balance” the state budget is to depend on those same borrowed dollars.

Last year, Atwater used $5 billion in borrowed federal dollars to balance Florida’s budget…and this year his so-called leadership will call for borrowing an additional $4 billion.

Atwater and his cohorts TAKE the money, and then they rail against the very money they desperately need to make ends meet in Florida. This is exactly the kind of “do as I say, not as I do” hypocrisy that Floridians are tired of.

True transparency…true accountability…and true responsibility means standing up for taxpayers, telling them the truth, and being an honest steward of their tax dollars.

That’s exactly what we need in our next CFO – someone who is honest about our economic conditions, forthright about what it will take to make our state stronger and consistent in talking to Florida’s citizens.

If you too are tired of this two-faced hypocrisy, then join us today.

If you want your next CFO to tell it like it is, then click here.

My pledge to you is to always be straight with you, to be your voice, and to tell you the truth, even when it’s not the popular thing to do.

Sincerely,

Loranne Ausley

Where's Bill McCollum When Tough Economic Times Call For Tough Leaders?

From FDP:

Tough economic times call for tough leaders. But when leadership on the bread-and-butter issue of job growth and job creation has arisen, Bill McCollum has failed Florida.

More than 300,000 Floridians have lost their jobs. The state faces a record-high 11.9 percent unemployment rate. Over 600,000 home foreclosures have beset the Sunshine State. Florida faces a $3.2 billion budget shortfall. And what's Bill McCollum's answer to the economic crisis facing Florida?
Answer: Nothing.

Former Congressman Bill McCollum epitomizes a "career politician" and nothing more than "the status quo." McCollum has yet to propose "a single budget-cutting or job-creating idea," even as his gubernatorial rival Alex Sink announces her business plan for Florida. (Orlando Sentinel, 02/19/10; Editorial, Orlando Sentinel, 01/31/10)

"Tough economic times call for tough leadership. But where's Bill McCollum?" Florida Democratic Party spokesman Eric Jotkoff asked. "Florida can't afford another Washington politician like Bill McCollum. He loves to spend your money but won't help foster the growth of good jobs to help you earn it."

In fact, McCollum helped "turn our lemonade economy into lemon," dangerously pushing the deregulation of the financial industry that led to the economic meltdown. Now, he wants to be governor, in which capacity he'd likely turn Florida's economy into a "permanent bust." (Column, Sun-Sentinel, 01/15/10)

"The race for governor sets a clear choice for the people of our state: a leader that offers a clear vision and business plan for Florida, or a Washington politician offering more of the same," Jotkoff added.

BACKGROUND:

McCollum Epitomizes A "Career Politician" and the "Status Quo". Republicans "should give serious thought to how badly they want to hold on to the governor's mansion. If they do, they may want to rethink their decision to pin all their chances on two-time loser Bill McCollum. This is, after all, a time when residents are sick of the status quo, career politicians and toe-the-line partisanship. McCollum epitomizes all three." (Orlando Sentinel, 02/19/10)

Orlando Sentinel: McCollum Has Yet To Propose "A Single Budget-Cutting Or Job-Creating Idea". A column in the Orlando Sentinel opined: "The Republican running, Attorney General Bill McCollum, has been seizing on big, national issues that the Governor's Office has little direct involvement in - primarily, the national health-care debate - and lambasting Democratic positions on them." And, "McCollum hasn't yet proposed a single budget-cutting or job-creating idea, focusing instead on his virulent opposition to the Democrats' health-care expansion." (Editorial, Orlando Sentinel, 01/31/10)

Sun-Sentinel: In Congress McCollum Helped Turn Our "Lemonade Into A Lemon"-As Governor McCollum Would Likely Turn Florida's Economy Into A "Permanent Bust". "In Congress, McCollum helped turn our lemonade economy into a lemon. In 1999, he co-sponsored the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act, which prevented banks from taking on riskier investments that could precipitate the very financial crisis Obama inherited. According to the St. Petersburg Times, 'After he left Congress, McCollum lobbied for the Mortgage Bankers Association of America and for a nonprofit with a down payment assistance program that was later outlawed by Congress after the Internal Revenue Service dubbed it a 'scam.'' As governor, McCollum would likely turn Florida's economy into a permanent bust." (Column, Sun-Sentinel, 01/15/10)

Bill McCollum is "...So lacking In Perspective, So Caught Up In The Washington Beltway Lifestyle That He Has Forgotten The Reality Of America." "At a time of a huge budget deficit, at a time when Congress and the president are laying billions of new taxes on the American people in the name of deficit reduction, Mr. McCollum voted to raise his salary from $89,000 to $125,000," wrote Orlando Sentinel columnist Charley Reese in 1990. "When I asked him why, he said he was just unwilling to sacrifice the lifestyle to which he had become accustomed. Well, I appreciate his candor, and I hope he appreciates mine. I am just unwilling to vote for a man who is so lacking in perspective, so caught up in the Washington Beltway lifestyle that he has forgotten the reality of America." (Orlando Sentinel, 11/04/90)

Bill McCollum Stays in the Shadows During Sunshine Week

From FDP:

Florida's chief officer of enforcing open sunshine laws, Bill McCollum, was noticeably absent at today's annual Sunshine Appreciation Lunch in Tallahassee, sponsored by the First Amendment Foundation. But this is no surprise given Bill McCollum's record.

"Why is Bill McCollum so scared of putting some sunshine in these dark corners? Good things never come out of shady places," Florida Democratic Party spokesman Eric Jotkoff said. "Bill McCollum doesn't walk-the-walk and today he did not even talk-the-talk when it comes to transparency in government. Where was the officer in charge of enforcing Florida's open government laws?"

Last year, the Palm Beach Post suggested that McCollum might be "stonewalling" when his office told reporters they would have to pay $770 for copies of his public schedule, and added that the request "would take at least a week to purge secret information before the file could be viewed."

At the time, First Amendment Foundation attorney Florence Snyder called McCollum's attempts to hide his schedule "transparent nonsense." Snyder said "This is the officer in charge of enforcing Florida's open government laws. That sort of speaks to itself to the seriousness in which Gen. McCollum's staff takes transparency."

Bill McCollum's office also slowed down efforts by the Florida Democratic Party to get the truth about his no-bid contract to his political consultant for his TV ads paid for with state funds. Only after a letter was sent requesting more information, and specifically citing the public records statutes his office is supposed to enforce, were additional documents turned over by Attorney General McCollum.

McCollum also has a long history of trying to hold himself and his fellow politicians less accountable, including voting to make it harder for ethics complaints to be filed against elected officials.

BACKGROUND:

McCollum First Tried to Charge A "Hefty Fee" To View His Schedule. "Viewing McCollum's complete schedule since he took office in January 2007 would cost $770, including a down payment of $500, McCollum's staff initially said this week in response to a public records request for the schedule. The staff also said it would take at least a week to purge secret information before the file could be viewed. Asked why the office that oversees the state's Sunshine Laws imposes such a hefty fee for records that are in the public domain, spokeswoman Ryan Wiggins said: 'For security reasons.'" [Palm Beach Post, 06/26/09]

Palm Beach Post: "Sounds More Like Stonewalling" From "The Guy Who Is In Charge Of Seeing That Public Officials Comply With Florida's Open Records Law." "One big difference between Ms. Sink and Mr. McCollum ... is that when The Post requested copies of her official calendars since she took office in January 2007, Ms. Sink responded within an hour - completely and at no charge. Mr. McCollum's office told The Post that it would take at least a week to provide the information about his schedule from the beginning of 2007, and that it would cost $770. This from the guy who is in charge of seeing that public officials comply with Florida's open records laws. ... Why would it cost so much and take so long to get Mr. McCollum's complete schedule? 'For security reasons,' a spokesman said. That sounds more like stonewalling." [Editorial, Palm Beach Post, 06/30/09]

McCollum Failed to Turn Over All Public Records On His No-Bid Ad Contract to the Florida Democratic Party. After criticism of McCollum's no-bid ad contract to his political consultant the Florida Democratic Party requested all records pertaining to the ad contract. After receiving only a small amount of the records requested, the FDP wrote the Attorney General "Pursuant to Florida's Sunshine Laws (Florida Statute 119.011), I expect that you will promptly correct your incomplete disclosures by providing digital copies of any and all documents, emails, communications and other related records which detail the creation and crafting of this ad campaign." Following this letter, more documents were turned over. [Letter to Attorney General McCollum, 3/23/09]

McCollum Voted To Make It Harder to File Ethics Complaint Against Legislators. In 1997, McCollum voted to adopt "new rules that make it more difficult for outsiders to bring ethics complaints against lawmakers, and easier for lawmakers to dismiss complaints that are brought. Critics of the new rules charged that they increase the likelihood that serious misconduct will not be investigated and violators will go unpunished." [Vote 413, 9/18/97; Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 9/19/97; New York Times, 9/19/97]

State Senator Dan Gelber (D-Miami Beach) Issues Statement on McCollum's Decision to Block Health Care Reform in Florida

“Today, AG McCollum showed he is tone deaf to the reality we have nearly four million uninsured Floridians, 800,000 of which are children. His decision to challenge the constitutionality of the federal health care reform bill that is working its way through the Congress is shortsighted and nothing more than rank demagoguery.

“We live in a state with a full-blown health care crisis. No state (other than Texas) has a higher percentage of uninsured and yet we see more of the same politics as usual from AG McCollum. Though I am outraged by AG McCollum's decision, I am not surprised. AG McCollum has a pattern of blocking health care. He is spending millions to defend the state’s failure to provide medical and dental care to poor and disabled children (a suit that he should have settled years ago).

“General McCollum's decision to use his office to investigate ways to block health insurance reform is wrongheaded and will cost millions and millions of dollars in a legal battle that is unwarranted. We need solutions to our health care crisis, not obstructions!”

One Sunshine Bill Takes Aim Squarely At McCollum

From FDP:

Of the more than 100 bills affecting public records and meetings swirling around the current legislative session, one sponsored by State Senator Paula Dockery would limit government agencies' ability to charge the public for redacting confidential information from the records, something previously attempted by her gubernatorial primary opponent Bill McCollum.

"Will Bill McCollum support this new legislation to prevent the obstruction of open records requests despite his previous position of charging hundreds of dollars for copies of his schedule? Will McCollum choose Sunshine or politics as usual?" Florida Democratic Party spokesman Eric Jotkoff asked.

The legislation in question would also limit the agencies' ability to charge the public for redacting confidential information from the records.

Last year, it was suggested that McCollum was "stonewalling" on releasing his public schedule after his office said they would charge reporters $770, and claimed the request "would take at least a week to purge secret information before the file could be viewed." [Editorial, Palm Beach Post, 06/30/09 and Palm Beach Post, 6/26/09]

Will Bill McCollum take a position on the Sunshine legislation sponsored by Dockery?

BACKGROUND:

McCollum First Tried to Charge A "Hefty Fee" To View His Schedule. "Viewing McCollum's complete schedule since he took office in January 2007 would cost $770, including a down payment of $500, McCollum's staff initially said this week in response to a public records request for the schedule. The staff also said it would take at least a week to purge secret information before the file could be viewed. Asked why the office that oversees the state's Sunshine Laws imposes such a hefty fee for records that are in the public domain, spokeswoman Ryan Wiggins said: 'For security reasons.'" [Palm Beach Post, 06/26/09]

Palm Beach Post: "Sounds More Like Stonewalling" From "The Guy Who Is In Charge Of Seeing That Public Officials Comply With Florida's Open Records Law." "One big difference between Ms. Sink and Mr. McCollum ... is that when The Post requested copies of her official calendars since she took office in January 2007, Ms. Sink responded within an hour - completely and at no charge. Mr. McCollum's office told The Post that it would take at least a week to provide the information about his schedule from the beginning of 2007, and that it would cost $770. This from the guy who is in charge of seeing that public officials comply with Florida's open records laws. ... Why would it cost so much and take so long to get Mr. McCollum's complete schedule? 'For security reasons,' a spokesman said. That sounds more like stonewalling." [Editorial, Palm Beach Post, 06/30/09]

McCollum Charged Taxpayers More In Pay Raises Than Many Florida Families Will Earn In A Year

From FDP:

When it came to racking up charges on America's credit card, Bill McCollum didn't neglect his own pockets. In fact, McCollum voted to use taxpayer money to increase his own pay at least four separate times in Congress - spending more of our money on his pay raises than what the median Florida household has earned.

"Big Spending Congressman Bill McCollum ran up the taxpayers' credit card four different times to raise his own pay - giving himself more of our money just in raises than many Florida families can expect to earn this year." Florida Democratic Party Spokesman Eric Jotkoff said. "Will Bill McCollum give himself a raise with our money if elected Governor?"

The excuse that Congressman McCollum gave when asked about raising his pay to a six-figure salary was that "he was just unwilling to sacrifice the lifestyle to which he had become accustomed." As Floridians continue to face an economic crisis, this type of self-interested spending is exactly what our state can't afford.

McCollum voted for more than $51,000 in taxpayer-funded pay raises for himself. The median household income in Florida is $47,802 per year according to the census. McCollum's nearly $90,000 annual pay increased to $125,000 during the recession of the early 1990s when many Americans were out of work and facing potential financial ruin.

LIKE A TYPICAL WASHINGTON CONGRESSMAN McCOLLUM VOTED TO USE TAXPAYERS' MONEY TO INCREASE HIS OWN PAY AT LEAST 4 SEPARATE TIMES...

McCollum Voted Four Times To Raise His Own Pay - Total Of Over $51,000 In Pay Raises. During his Congressional Career, McCollum voted to raise his own pay four separate times. These pay raises totaled $51,800 of increased salary for Congressional members. (Vote 358, HR 3660, 11/16/89; Vote 435, HR 2378, 9/24/97; Vote 300, HRes 246, 7/15/99; Vote 419, HRes 560, 7/20/00; CRS Report, Order # RL 30014)

McCollum Voted Himself A Pay Raise in Tough Economic Times Because He Was Unwilling to Sacrifice Lifestyle. "At a time of a huge budget deficit, at a time when Congress and the president are laying billions of new taxes on the American people in the name of deficit reduction, Mr. McCollum voted to raise his salary from $89,000 to $125,000," wrote Orlando Sentinel columnist Charley Reese in 1990. "When I asked him why, he said he was just unwilling to sacrifice the lifestyle to which he had become accustomed. Well, I appreciate his candor, and I hope he appreciates mine. I am just unwilling to vote for a man who is so lacking in perspective, so caught up in the Washington Beltway lifestyle that he has forgotten the reality of America." (Orlando Sentinel, 11/04/90)

Big Spender Bill Runs Up The Taxpayer's Tab

From FDP:

Recent news of Republican Party credit card scandals and lavish expenditures by GOP candidates only serves as a reminder of the outrageous sums Congressman Bill McCollum charged to the American taxpayers while in Washington.

"Big Spending Congressman Bill McCollum ran up the taxpayers' tab in Washington, supporting debt increases that cost over $1 trillion dollars in interest payments alone," said Eric Jotkoff, Florida Democratic Party spokesman. "Bill McCollum ran up the charges on America's credit card. How can we trust him with our tax dollars, seeing how much debt he heaped on our country in Congress?"

Keeping practice with his big spending Washington ways, McCollum has been notably absent of any innovative budget-cutting ideas for the Sunshine State.

THE DEBT LIMIT INCREASES CONGRESSMAN McCOLLUM VOTED FOR HAVE COST AT LEAST OVER $1 TRILLION DOLLARS

McCollum Voted In Favor of Debt Increases That Cost Over $1 Trillion in Interest Payments. Four of McCollum's votes in favor of increasing the federal debt limit permitted the total debt to increase by more than $2 trillion. Through 2010, the interest paid on that debt has totaled more than $1 trillion. (White House Office of Management and Budget; 1986 HJ Res 324, vote 330; 1990 HJ Res 280, vote 336; 1996 HR 3136, vote 102; 1997 HR 2015, vote 345)

BILL McCOLLUM--WHERE ARE THE IDEAS?

Orlando Sentinel: McCollum Has Yet To Propose "A Single Budget-Cutting Or Job-Creating Idea". A column in the Orlando Sentinel opined: "The Republican running, Attorney General Bill McCollum, has been seizing on big, national issues that the Governor's Office has little direct involvement in...McCollum hasn't yet proposed a single budget-cutting or job-creating idea, focusing instead on his virulent opposition to the Democrats' health-care expansion." (Orlando Sentinel, 01/31/10)

Thurman: McCollum's Response Can't Cover Up Failure to More Aggressively Fight Medicaid Fraud

Following Florida gubernatorial candidate Alex Sink's call to for more aggressive action to crack down on rampant Medicaid fraud, and criticism by fellow Republicans, Attorney General Bill McCollum's election year ploys fall short. Any knee-jerk response from Bill McCollum does not cover up a record of dropping the ball on policing Medicaid fraud which costs Florida up to $3.2 billion a year.

"Florida is losing billions of dollars to runaway Medicaid fraud, as our state is facing a Medicaid budget crisis - it is clearly time for strong leadership to crack down on this rampant fraud and ensure better use of our taxpayer dollars," said Florida Democratic Party Chair Karen Thurman. "Unfortunately, Bill McCollum's failure to more aggressively crack down on Medicaid fraud has helped allow these con-artists to steal billions of dollars from our state, and his election year attempts to cover up his failures on Medicaid fraud are too little, too late."

Although Bill McCollum employs more staff to investigate Medicaid fraud than any other state in the country besides New York, Florida's Medicaid Control Fraud Unit currently ranks 39th in the nation for Medicaid fraud convictions per staff position and 25th in the nation for efficiency in fighting Medicaid fraud. Meanwhile, OPPAGA estimates Medicaid fraud accounts for anywhere between $785 million to $3.2 billion of the annual Medicaid budget.

McCollum's failure on Medicaid fraud is so glaring that his fellow Republicans criticized him in the Miami Herald last week. Senator Durell Peaden, who chairs the Senate health budget committee, "faulted the U.S. Attorney's Office and McCollum's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit for not focusing enough on Medicaid fraud." Senator Peaden even said, "[Bill McCollum] needs to get his butt in gear." (Miami Herald, 3/4/10)

Republican Senator Don Gaetz, who sponsored legislation last year that gave fraud investigators more tools, "agreed more enforcement could help," specifically saying "It's time we send in the sheriff." And legislation sponsored by Senator Joe Negron (SB 8) and supported by Senate President Jeff Atwater acknowledges that "Medicaid fraud in Florida is epidemic, far reaching, and costs the state and the Federal Government millions of dollars annually."

In these tough economic times, the number of Floridians on Medicaid has risen resulting in Medicaid costs that will hit $19 billion in 2010 - about 28 percent of Florida's budget. Yet, an analysis by the state's own Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (OPPAGA) estimates that as much as $3.2 billion is lost each year on Medicaid fraud.

Bill McCollum's Failure To Effectively Crack Down On Medicaid Fraud:

McCOLLUM'S MEDICAID FRAUD CONTROL UNIT IS THE SECOND LARGEST IN THE COUNTRY BUT FLORIDA WAS 39TH IN THE COUNTRY FOR NUMBER OF CONVICTIONS & 25TH IN THE COUNTRY FOR MONEY RECOVERED

According to a January 2010 report issued by the Health and Human Services Department, Bill McCollum's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU) lagged behind dozens of other states in the number of convictions and dollars recovered in Federal Fiscal Year 2008:

McCollum's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit Employed More Staff than Every Other State Except New York. Attorney General Bill McCollum's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit employed more staff than any other state with the exception of New York. Florida's MFCU included 201 staff positions, compared to 191 in California, and 187 in Texas.

Number of Convictions by McCollum's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit Was 39th In Country. The number of convictions per staff positions by McCollum's MFCU was 39th in the country. For instance, while Florida had 82 convictions for their 201 staff positions, Ohio had 94 convictions with only 45 staff positions.

Under McCollum, Florida Was 25th In the Country for Fraud Dollars Recovered for Every Dollar Received. In FFY 2008, Florida received $18 million in federal grants to fight Medicaid fraud, and McCollum's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit recovered $121.7 million -- for a total of $6.76 recovered for every federal dollar received. By comparison, Texas received $15.25 million in Medicaid fraud grants and recovered $164.3 million for a total of nearly $11 recovered for every federal dollar received.

(Source: Department of Health and Human Services, SMFCU Statistical Information, FFY 2008)

McCollum Has Not Effectively Tackled Medicaid Fraud- What Would You Do With Up To $3.2 Billion In Fraud?

From FDP:

Florida taxpayers are being swindled out of as much as $3.2 billion each year by people committing Medicaid fraud, yet Republican Attorney General Bill McCollum is failing to do much about, as the Miami Herald reported today. Even though McCollum's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit is the second largest in the country, Florida ranks 39th in the country for number of convictions per staffer and 25th in the country for money recovered per federal dollar received.

"Florida taxpayers are being ripped off by as much as $3.2 billion a year in Medicaid fraud and Bill McCollum is failing to effectively tackle the problem. We need leadership on this issue-If Florida taxpayers could recover the potential billions lost, how could we use it?" Florida Democratic Party spokesman Eric Jotkoff asked. "Bill McCollum deserves to know the answer to that question. So, we're surveying Floridians by e-mail and will share with Bill McCollum what we find out."

In the Herald story, McCollum even admitted that "there is room for improvement" and his fellow Republicans called him to task for his lack of action. As Republican Senator Durell Peaden put it "[Bill McCollum] needs to get his butt in gear. All he's doing is chasing pedophiles around. If he'd spend half the time on Medicaid fraud, we'd be in better shape."

What Could Floridians Get With $3.2 Billion?

A) Erase Florida's Budget Shortfall And Put The State On Sound Financial Footing
B) 640 Miles Of Highway Construction And The 128,000 Jobs It Would Create
D) 21 Solar Plants To Provide Clean Energy For 63,000 Florida Homes
E) 168 Miles Of Light Rail Construction And The 100,480 Jobs It Would Create
F) A Brand New Mac Laptop Computer For Every Child In Florida Public Schools Grades K-12


BACKGROUND:

Erase Florida's Budget Shortfall And Put The State On Sound Financial Footing
Florida's 2010 budget shortfall is currently estimated at approximately $3 billion. (Tampa Tribune, 3/1/10)

640 Miles Of Highway Construction And The 128,000 Jobs It Would Create
The American Road and Transportation Builders Association estimates a cost of between $4-$6 million dollars per mile of highway construction. Taking the $5 million per mile, the state could add 640 miles of new highway construction. (FAQ, American Road & Transportation Builders Association)

According to a 2001 report, for every $1 billion spent on infrastructure spending, an estimated 40,000 jobs are created. $3.2 billion in infrastructure/highway spending could result in approximately 128,000 new jobs. (Release, House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 10/6/01)

21 Solar Plants To Provide Clean Energy For 63,000 Florida Homes
In October, 2009 Florida Power & Light opened North America's largest pholtovoltaic solar power plant in Arcadia, Florida-- $3.2 billion would build 21 more of these solar plants, providing clean energy to more than 63,000 homes and create more than 8,400 desperately needed construction jobs. (Sarasota Herald Tribune, 10/14/09)

168 Miles Of Light Rail Construction And The 100,480 Jobs It Would Create
According to estimates, the city of Baltimore averaged $19 million per mile for construction of their Light Rail Project. At that cost projection, $3.2 billion would fund 168 miles of light rail projects in Florida. (Light Rail Now, 8/2000)

314 jobs are created for each $10 million invested in transit capital funding. A $3.2 billion investment in Light Rail would provide approximately 100,480 jobs directly related to rail in Florida. In addition, transit operations spending provides for a direct infusion to the local economy with more than 570 jobs created for each $10 million invested in the short term. (Benefits of Light Rail Transit, Hampton Roads Transit, 2009)

A Brand New Mac Laptop Computer For Every Child In Florida Public Schools Grades K-12
In 2010 there are approximately 2,587,554 students in the public school system in Florida. $3.2 billion would provide every single public school student in the state of Florida, from K-12, a 13 inch 2.26 GHZ Macbook Pro. (Statistics, Florida.Educationbug.org, 2010)

Bill McCollum's Long Record of Keeping His Political Cronies from Getting Caught

From FDP:

Today's news of Miami Lobbyist Marco Rubio's lavish personal spending spree on his Republican Party AmEx is just one more reason Floridians deserve an independent investigation of this abuse. Yet Washington Politician Bill McCollum is doing what he always does when corruption should be investigated - nothing. Bill McCollum's failure to call for an independent investigation is only the latest time Bill McCollum has treated his political cronies as above-the-law and above concern for any ethical standards.

"When politicians do questionable business in shady corners, they need to look no further than Bill McCollum to protect them from the sunlight and the consequences of their actions," said Eric Jotkoff, Spokesman for the Florida Democratic Party. "A career politician protecting other career politicians, Bill McCollum helped his political cronies sweep their ethical messes under the rug in Washington and now he's at it again in Tallahassee. A life-long politician like Bill McCollum doing his best to cover up the misconduct of his fellow politicians is the last thing Florida needs as governor."

McCOLLUM's RECORD OF PROTECTING FELLOW POLITICIANS , HELP THEM SWEEP ETHICS COMPLAINTS UNDER THE RUG:

McCollum Won't Call For Independent Investigation into RPOF Spending and Doesn't Want to Open Party Books. Bill McCollum has refused to call for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the secret contracts and accusations of misused money at the RPOF. McCollum has also objected to the RPOF turning over credit card statements and opening the party books for public scrutiny. (Miami Herald, 02/05/10 and St. Petersburg Times, 02/18/10)

McCollum Has Refused To Open RICO Investigation into Disgraced Former Speaker Ray Samson. As far back as December 2008, McCollum has been publicly called on to open a RICO investigation covering the actions of the former House Speaker Ray Sansom. For over a year, McCollum has refused to do his job and investigate alleged corruption. (FDP Email, 12/29/08 and St Petersburg Times, 01/21/09)

McCollum Voted Repeatedly To Protect Gingrich From Ethics Investigations; Gingrich Later Admitted To Violations. In 1995, McCollum voted twice to protect then House-Speaker Gingrich from a special investigation by outside council. Then McCollum twice opposed allowing the ethics committee to release the report. That same year Gingrich admitted that he lied to the Ethics Committee and was found to have violated House ethics rules by using tax-exempt organizations to promote the Republican Party. (CQ; Vote 833, 11/30/95; CQ; Vote 287, 6/27/96)

McCollum Voted to Make It Harder to File Ethics Complaint Against Legislators. In 1997, McCollum voted to adopt "new rules that make it more difficult for outsiders to bring ethics complaints against lawmakers, and easier for lawmakers to dismiss complaints that are brought. Critics of the new rules charged that they increase the likelihood that serious misconduct will not be investigated and violators will go unpunished." (Vote 413, 9/18/97; Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 9/19/97; New York Times, 9/19/97)

Putnam’s hypocrisy continues

Last week, a national news online political magazine called out U.S. Representative Adam Putnam for his hypocrisy on asking for special stimulus dollars after railing against the stimulus bill. (Even Wikipedia joined in the action.)

We thought we had seen it all.

But earlier week, President Obama signed into law one of the best consumer protection bills in recent memory. This new law will protect credit card consumers by eliminating retroactive rate increases, ensuring the consumers are fully made aware of charges, and outlawing some of the gimmicks that unscrupulous banks use to trick unwary customers into bad deals.

So it makes sense that Adam Putnam would support its passage… doesn’t it?

For sure, we can expect Putnam to tell us how he supported this bill and voted “Yes” on final passage.

Of course that would be the position of someone who is running for the Florida Cabinet and the title of that post contains the words “Consumer Services”…

But what will Putnam say about his votes to kill the bill in committee, to kill it with procedural votes, or amend it into uselessness?

When the spotlights were dim and Putnam thought nobody was looking, he attempted to kill this good pro-consumer measure.

But when the lights came on and the public was watching, Putnam did what he knew he HAD to do.

Is that hypocrisy?

You decide!

…and the way you can decide is by taking a moment and joining our efforts to end the political career of this veteran of Washington double-speak.

Join us today and help us put an end to the hypocrisy.

Sincerely,

Scott Maddox

Link