Seaside stampede: Nine Republicans jostle in race for Florida’s District 19 nomination

A Republican seaside stampede in Florida’s 19th Congressional District. (Illustration: AI for TPP/ChatGPT)

October 7, 2025 by David Silverberg

Correction: The correct name of the company owned by Jim Schwartzel is Sun Broadcasting, which has no ownership stake in WINK TV.

What was promising to be a messy but obscure congressional race for Florida’s 19th Congressional District was suddenly catapulted into national prominence on Tuesday, Oct. 1, when Madison Cawthorn, a 30-year-old former North Carolina congressman and media bad boy announced that he would be running.

Because of his past behavior and erratic record, national and local media suddenly focused on him and the district. But in fact he’s an unlikely candidate with long odds in a crowded field.

The real focus of all this attention is the seat being vacated by Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.), who is seeking the governorship.

As of right now there are nine declared Republican aspirants to the congressional seat and a single Democrat.

It’s very reminiscent of the 2020 congressional election when at one point there were 12 Republican candidates scrambling for the seat of retiring Republican Francis Rooney. He stepped down after two terms and the unpardonable sin of saying that the evidence should be considered in Donald Trump’s impeachment trial.

From that scrimmage (which ultimately narrowed to nine candidates) Donalds emerged the victor. Now the seat’s up for grabs again, with a whole new cast of characters—and with a little less than a year until the Republican primary election on Aug. 18, 2026, there may be new entrants.

It needs to be emphasized that it is still very early in the election cycle. Some candidates have not yet posted websites explaining their proposals and positions. They have not yet filed Federal Election Commission campaign finance reports. Nor have they all registered with the Florida Department of State. Candidates have until noon on Friday, April 24 of next year to qualify and more may appear.

This article will survey just the Republican candidates, their backgrounds and platforms. A separate article will evaluate and analyze the race. A third article will profile Democrat Howard Sapp.

But first, a look at the district.

The 19th Congressional District

A map of Florida’s 19th Congressional District. (Map: Ballotpedia)

The 19th Congressional District of Florida covers the coastal area from Cape Coral to Marco Island. Its eastern boundary largely follows Interstate Highway 75 with a small, special carve-out for Donalds’ home that was made in the last redistricting so that he would reside in the district without changing his address.

The District is older, whiter and slightly richer than the rest of the country.

It has a population of 809,197 people according to one estimate based on Census data. That population is 67 percent White, 21 percent Hispanic and 7 percent Black. The median age is 53 years, which is 25 percent higher than in the rest of Florida and 1.4 times higher than in the entire United States. Women represent about 51 percent of its population.

At $52,402 per year it has a higher per capita income than both Florida and the United States and at $76,248 its median income is about the same as the rest of the country but a little higher than the rest of Florida. Even so, it has about a 12 percent poverty rate.

The Cook Political Report, the authoritative survey of congressional districts, rates it solidly Republican. For the 2026 election the Cook Partisan Voter Index is rating it R+14, meaning that in the past two presidential elections, the district’s results were 14 percentage points more Republican than the national average, making it the 88th most Republican district nationally.

The district encompasses two counties, Lee and Collier, both of which are majority Republican in registered voters. In Lee County, of 508,919 registered voters, 48 percent are Republican, 21.9 percent are Democratic, and 29.9 percent are registered as “other,” according to figures from the Lee County Election Supervisor. In Collier County, of 259,982 registered voters, 55.2 percent are Republican, 19.3 percent are Democratic, 22.4 percent have no party affiliation and 2.9 percent are registered to other parties, according to figures from the Collier County Supervisor of Elections.

This is the district that the following candidates are vying to represent in the US House of Representatives.

They are listed in alphabetical order, according to last name.

Madison Cawthorn

A state trooper confronts Madison Cawthorn at the scene of his most recent car crash on April 14, 2025. (Image: TikTok)

The instant he announced that he was running for Congress on Oct. 1, Cawthorn stole the media spotlight in Southwest Florida politics.

The reason is that he previously held the seat for North Carolina’s 11th District from 2021 to 2023. Currently separated from Christina Bayardelle, his wife of one year (from 2020 to 2021), the 30-year old Cawthorn made headlines and raised eyebrows during his brief congressional tenure.

In that time he carved out a role for himself as an extreme, vocal Trumpist and conspiracy theorist who made unsubstantiated assertions and hurled insults at opponents, journalists and fellow Republicans.

He voted to overturn the results of the 2020 election and addressed the “Stop the Steal” rally on the Ellipse that led to the attack on the US Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Then-Rep. Madison Cawthorn addresses the Stop the Steal rally on the Ellipse in Washington, DC on Jan. 6, 2021. (Image: Madison Cawthorn on X)

His most infamous statement was his assertion in a March 2022 interview that he had been invited to an orgy by a fellow Republican lawmaker (unnamed at the time and ever since) and that he had seen prominent politicians using cocaine in front of him.

He was denounced by fellow Republicans, was the subject of numerous calls for ethics investigations and was the focus of multiple allegations of financial improprieties, favoritism, and House rules violations.

Cawthorn was defeated in a North Carolina Republican primary in 2022, after which he announced that  “It’s time for the rise of the new right, it’s time for Dark MAGA to truly take command,” with “Dark MAGA” generally understood to represent vengeful Trumpism.

It was after this loss that Cawthorn purchased a $1.1 million home in Cape Coral and moved there, registering as a Florida voter in 2023.

As he states on his campaign website, “Florida gave me a second chance, and now I’m running for Congress to fight for faith, family, freedom, and the America First values we believe in. Washington is full of snakes, but I’m ready to drain the swamp and defend Florida.” He calls himself “an unapologetic conservative and one of President Trump’s strongest allies.”

As of this writing, Cawthorn was not yet registered with the Florida Department of State as a candidate.

He has, however, considerable familiarity with Florida—and Florida law enforcement.

It was near Daytona Beach, Fla., in 2014 during a Spring Break trip that he lost the use of his legs in a car accident. He was a passenger and the injury left him dependent on a wheelchair. More recently, on April 14, 2025 Cawthorn was the driver when his 2021 Mercedes rear-ended a Florida Highway Patrol car on Interstate 75 in Collier County. He was cited for driving without a license on Aug.19, 2025 and then arrested on Sept. 10 when he failed to appear for his court date.

Madison Cawthorn following his Sept. 10, 2025 arrest. (Photo:LCSO)

Chris Collins

Chris Collins (center) leaves a New York courthouse following his conviction for insider trading in 2019. (Image: ABC7 News)

Like Cawthorn, Christopher Carl “Chris” Collins is another former Republican congressman with a criminal record.

Collins, 75, represented New York’s 27th Congressional District, the area around Buffalo, NY from 2013 to 2019. He was the first member of Congress to endorse Trump for president in 2016.

In August 2018 Collins and his son were arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation for insider trading and making false statements.

The charges related to a company called Innate Immunotherapeutics, where Collins recruited investors while in office. In 2017, when he received news that the company’s medication to treat multiple sclerosis had failed its tests, Collins called his son from a lawn party at the Trump White House and told him to sell the stock before the news was made public. By doing this his son and another close relative avoided nearly $800,000 in losses when the stock’s price plummeted 92 percent the next day.

Collins was charged while he was in the midst of a re-election campaign. He suspended the campaign, then restarted it, then went on to a very narrow victory in the November 2018 election and took office in January 2019.

However, Collins didn’t last long in his seat. On Sept. 30, 2019 he announced his resignation to take effect the next day and that same day pleaded guilty to the charges against him.

“By virtue of his position, Collins helped write the laws of this country and acted as if the law didn’t apply to him,” said US Attorney Geoffrey Berman, after Collins pleaded guilty.

Collins was barred by the Security and Exchange Commission from serving as an officer or director of any public company. In October 2020 he began serving a 26-month prison sentence. But that didn’t last long either—he was pardoned by Trump on Dec. 22, 2020.

Collins purchased a home on Marco Island and told a judge in 2019: “I’m now a Florida resident and will be FL for a while as the press settles down and moves on.” He served his prison time in a federal prison in Pensacola.

In June, Collins was one of the first candidates to announce his run for the 19th District shortly after Donalds launched his bid for governor. He is listed as a candidate with the Florida Department of State.

As of this writing Collins did not have a campaign website, nor had he posted any policy positions related to Congressional District 19.

John Fratto

John Fratto as he appeared in his 2024 campaign rap video. (Image: Campaign)

John “Johnny” Fratto, 46, is switching his sights to the 19th Congressional District from the 26th, where he ran for Congress unsuccessfully in 2024.

Fratto’s chief claim to fame in that race was a campaign rap video extolling Fratto’s Trumpist virtues that was filmed at Oakes’ Seed to Table market and was meant to appeal to the district’s Hispanic voters.

“America’s first bloodline mafia congressman versus deep state communist,” said the opening lines of the rap, which continued with a chorus that sounded like: “The man knows, voting Johnny Fratto.”

It didn’t work. Fratto was crushed by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-26-Fla.), who won by a lopsided 73.2 percent in the Republican primary to Fratto’s anemic 16.5 percent, despite Fratto’s endorsement by local farmer, grocer and political kingpin Francis Alfred “Alfie” Oakes III and Republican political operative Roger Stone.

In 2024, responding to questions from the website Ballotpedia, Fratto stated that he was born in Des Moines, Iowa but then seems to contradict himself with the statement: “Originally from Southern California, I moved my family to Southern Florida to be close to my wife’s family, and to raise my kids in a state that will help them become hard working, honest adults.”

He listed his career experience as “working as an entrepreneur.” He has also claimed to have been an executive producer for TV and movies.

As of this writing, Fratto did not have a campaign website for his District 19 run but he had announced his candidacy on Facebook. He did not post any specific policies or proposals but he has made clear his support for Trump and his agenda in the past. He says he wants to restore the country to “its traditional values.”

Fratto is registered as a candidate with the Florida Department of State.

John Fratto (left) is endorsed by Alfie Oakes (right) in the 2024 campaign rap video. (Image: Campaign)

To see Fratto’s 2024 2-minute, 38-second campaign video, click here. [Editor’s Note: You have to see it to believe it.]

Ola Hawatmeh

Ola Hawatmeh (Image: Ola Hawatmeh/Instagram)

Ola Nesheiwat Hawatmeh is a registered candidate with the Florida Department of State.

Hawatmeh does not have a campaign website.

A LinkedIn profile states that she is a senior policy advisor, chief executive officer and founder of Mom Me Makeover and OLA Style, apparently a sole proprietorship. She is also listed as a senior policy advisor to Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-5-Ind.) as of December 2024.

The only policy statement attributable to Hawatmeh is an undated Instagram video post, made from an unidentified airport when Hawatmeh was on her way to a week of lobbying in Washington, DC on behalf of the non-profit Moms for America, a national, conservative education advocacy group.

In that post Hawatmeh earnestly says:Today, reading about 20,000 migrants in Springfield, Ohio, killing dogs, killing cats, ducks in our parks, no accountability. It is our country. Illegals are being placed before American citizens. No accountability for them, but we have to be held accountable if we don’t pay our taxes, if we don’t pay our bills. We have no say as to who our neighbors are now? You want to place illegals in our neighborhood. We have to have a say. Never give up, never give in. Speak up. It’s our America, it’s our country.”

Hawatmeh’s connection to the 19th Congressional District is unclear from any online sources or statements. Nor does she make clear that she resides in the district or the state.

Catalina Lauf

Catalina Lauf in 2023 at a natural products exposition. (Photo: Campaign)

According to an Oct. 2 article by reporter Jacob Ogles on the website Florida Politics, Catalina Lauf of Bonita Springs served in the first Trump administration as special advisor to the US Department of Commerce from December 2018 to July 2019. At that point she founded the Defense of Freedom PAC where she continues serving as executive director.

In 2022 Lauf ran for Congress in Illinois’ 11th Congressional District but lost to Democrat Bill Foster with a total of 43.5 percent to Foster’s 56.5 percent.

In 2020 she lost the Republican congressional primary in a field of seven candidates in District 14 to Jim Oberweis who garnered 25.6 percent of the vote to Lauf’s 20.1 percent. (More about Oberweis below.)

Lauf issued a statement to Florida Politics when she announced her Florida run on Oct. 2, the day after Cawthorn made his announcement.

“Southwest Florida deserves bold, principled leadership — leaders in the mold of Byron Donalds, who stand up fearlessly for our values, and who are champions of President Trump’s America First agenda. I was proud to work for President Trump’s administration and now I’m running to continue that tradition of strength, courage, and service for the people of FL-19.”

As of this writing Lauf was not yet registered as a candidate with the Florida Department of State. She had posted a campaign Facebook page but did not yet have a dedicated campaign website.

On the Facebook page she stated that “Like many Americans, Catalina is concerned with the young socialist progressive wing in Congress.”

Dylan Modarelli

Dylan Modarelli (Photo: Campaign)

According to his LinkedIn profile, Dylan Modarelli is chief executive officer of Empire Gems in Fort Myers. He lives in Cape Coral and is in his mid-30s. He’s married with one child.

He is originally from North Bergan, New Jersey but does not state on his professional campaign website how long he has lived in Florida. Nor does he mention any prior political or government experience.

Modarelli’s candidacy is registered with the Florida Department of State.

“I come from hardship, raised in a home where giving up was never an option,” he writes. “When I was just five years old, I lost my father to a heroin overdose, leaving my mother to raise me alone while relying on family donations to survive. Those early struggles taught me resilience, empathy, and the belief that our circumstances do not define our future.”

Without providing dates, he states that he served as a police officer (no mention of where), then entered the emerald trade, building a business.

He’s taking a Trumpist/populist approach. As he says on his Facebook campaign page, he’s “pro-life, pro-freedom, pro-guns.”

“I’m ready to fight. I’m tired of the grifters, the career politicians, and the power hungry elites who have forgotten the people they swore to serve,” he says in a video. “Washington has turned into a playground for the connected and the corrupt, while hardworking Americans are left behind. I’m not here to play their games. I’m here to break them. I’m here to stand up for the working man, the struggling families, the seniors, the veterans, and the forgotten communities. We’ve been ignored for too long, and I refuse to sit quietly while they sell out our future. It’s time to send a fighter to Congress who answers to the people, not the lobbyists. This is our fight and I’m just getting started.”

Unlike most of the other candidates, Modarelli has a platform with defined positions on a variety of issues.

Asked in a Ballotpedia questionnaire what areas of public policy he was most passionate about, Modarelli responded, “I’m passionate about protecting animals. I believe no animal should be killed just because it’s unwanted. I stand firmly against euthanizing healthy animals in shelters.” Indeed, on his campaign website he lists ending “kill shelters” as his third most important issue after promoting affordable housing and declaring war on fentanyl.

One particularly noteworthy issue that Modarelli lists is ending private, for-profit prisons. Florida currently operates 12 for-profit prisons and two concentration camps.

As Modarelli states: “The prison system should focus on justice and rehabilitation not corporate profit. I will fight to end for-profit prisons that prioritize filling beds over public safety, turning incarceration into a money-making scheme.” He adds: “It’s time to bring prisons under public control and ensure they serve the people, not shareholders.”

Jim Oberweis

Jim Oberweis during a lobbying trip to Washington in June 2025. (Image: Fox4News)

Jim Oberweis, 79, is a veteran politician, with a mixed record of wins and losses in his native Aurora, Illinois.

Prior to politics he worked as a teacher and a financial services advisor before buying and running his family’s dairy, which had a product line of what Oberweis calls “the richest ice cream in the world.”

Oberweis began his political career in 2004 when he ran for the Republican nomination for US Senate but lost. In 2012 when he ran for the Illinois state Senate and won in District 25. He made another bid for the US Senate in 2014 but lost to Democrat Dick Durbin. He returned to the state Senate in 2012, was reelected in 2016 and rose to the position of Minority Whip.

In 2020, Oberweis ran for the Republican nomination in the Illinois 14th Congressional District, the area of Chicago’s western suburbs, centered around Aurora.

In that election he faced Catalina Lauf, who is running in the current District 19 election (see above). In a field of seven candidates, Oberweis beat Lauf, who came in third, with only 20.1 percent of the vote to Oberweis’ 25.6 percent.

However, Oberweis lost in the general election to Democrat Lauren Underwood, whom Oberweis claims stole the election.

“As of election night he had won against his Democrat incumbent opponent and was sent to Washington for New Member Orientation where he met Byron Donalds, also a newly elected Congressman,” states Oberweis’ third-person account of the election on his campaign website.  “But when 20,000 previously uncounted mail-in ballots were counted, he had lost.  The uncounted ballots were never initialed by an election judge as required under Illinois law but were counted anyway.  After 3 days of new member orientation Jim was told he might as well go home because things did not look good.”

Oberweis thought he was permanently done with politics and, as the website puts it: “Jim went home, packed his bags and moved permanently to Bonita Springs where he and wife have owned a condominium for 16 years, and became a full-time Florida resident.”

However, with Donalds’ quest for the governorship, Oberweis decided to try again.

Oberweis is a conservative, Trumpist Republican so most of his positions reflect orthodox Trumpism. However, he does weigh in on the local environment by calling for protection of the Everglades. He says more needs to be done to protect against the polluting runoff from cane sugar processing.

“We need to return the natural southerly flow of water through the Everglades which can help reduce the threat of red tide and provide more fresh drinking water,” he states on his website. “Mother Nature is nonpartisan. Hurricanes bearing down on your home don’t care about your political beliefs.  We need to do what we can to mitigate damage from future hurricanes.”

As of publication time, Oberweis had not yet responded to a question about his position on Alligator Alcatraz, which opponents say injures the Everglades’ natural environment. He is listed as a candidate by the Florida Department of State.

Oberweis has also made a major commitment to his campaign with $2 million in personal loans and outside donations that raise his total to $2.12 million.

Mike Pedersen

Mike Pedersen takes his leap into politics. (Photo: Campaign via Gulf Coast News)

When most aspirants “jump into the race” it means they’re just announcing that they’re running for office. In May, Mike Pedersen literally jumped out of an airplane and parachuted to earth to make his mark.

It was a smart move. It gave him enough distinction to land a television interview with Dave Elias, political reporter for Gulf Coast News and broke him out of what was then a very small pack. He is registered as a candidate with the Florida Department of State.

Pedersen is a retired US Marine with a 20-year record of active service including 66 combat missions during Operation Desert Storm and deployments all over the world.

Mike Pedersen. (Image: Gulf Coast News)

He graduated from the US Naval Academy in 1979, which would put his age in the 60s, although this is not confirmed on his website or in answers to questions sent to him by The Paradise Progressive. His wife was born in the Philippines, he has three children and eight grandchildren.

He has lived in Cape Coral for 26 years and worked as a pharmaceutical salesman after his active duty, focusing, he states, “on women’s healthcare across Southwest Florida”—although he doesn’t state among his positions whether he supports women’s right to choose abortion.

His positions are, otherwise, conventionally Trumpist: America first, an unmatched military, tightly restricted elections, protection of the Second Amendment, debt reduction, tight borders, a promise to “fight to protect our kids from radical agendas in the classroom and in sports”  and “Continue the DOGE Mission” to achieve government efficiency. He does not list any local issues among his concerns on his website.

Jim Schwartzel

Jim Schwartzel attending the Press Club of Southwest Florida. (Photo: Author)

There is no other Republican candidate that is as purely Southwest Florida-born, bred and raised as Jim Schwartzel. A native of the area, he attended Bishop Verot Catholic High School in Fort Myers and Stetson University in DeLand, Florida.

Schwartzel, 49, is a media entrepreneur whom some media outlets refer to as a “mogul.” He announced his candidacy in April and is listed as a candidate by the Florida Department of State.

He’s president of Sun Broadcasting based in Fort Myers, which owns five local radio stations and four television stations. He also owns Gulfshore Life Media, which publishes the magazines Gulfshore Life, Gulfshore Business and The Naples Press. The financial data website Quiver Quantitative puts his net worth at $15.94 million. (Full disclosure: This author writes a monthly, non-political column for The Naples Press.)

Schwartzel is very conservative and does all he can to let the world know it.

This is reflected in his media holdings, which include radio station 92.5 FM Fox News, an all-talk conservative radio station based in Fort Myers.

Another expression of this is the country-western music radio station 93.7 FM, branded as “Trump Country,” whose history provides an interesting snapshot of the Southwest Florida political climate.

On Sept. 16, 2020 the station flipped from a rock and roll format to country-western and renamed itself “Trump Country.” The format lasted only three months. After Trump lost the election, it switched to country-western “Hell Yeah 93.7” under the call letters WHEL. The station went off the air during Hurricane Ian in 2022 and when it returned it was in a Latino current hit format. It then resumed as “Hell Yeah” on October 21, playing contemporary hits. On Inauguration Day 2025 at noon it switched back to calling itself “Trump Country.”

Given his conservative history, it’s no surprise that Schwartzel’s platform is all-out Trumpist. He states that he’s running for Congress “to give President Donald J. Trump the support he needs and to fight for the conservative values that make Southwest Florida strong.” He claims to be anti-career politician and “a straight-talking outsider” who will fight the standard array of MAGA-perceived threats that include “the ruling class of career politicians,” “socialist policies” and “outside political interest groups.”

When it comes to local issues, Schwartzel lists two: water and infrastructure.

On water,  he states that he’ll “support common-sense water management policies” but “not the agendas of environmental extremists or special interest groups.”

On roads, he pledges to “push for funding to complete the projects necessary to reduce traffic congestion and enhance safety… .”

Schwartzel has loaned his campaign $1 million, bringing its total to $1.2 million. But while that still trails Oberweis’ total, he expects to surpass it by the end of the year.

To come:

Analyzing where it all stands, what it all means and where it’s all going

A look at Howard Sapp, Democratic candidate

To see previous coverage of Congressional District 19, click here

Liberty lives in light

© 2025 by David Silverberg

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

A tale of two piers: FEMA, favors, Kristi and Ian

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, center, speaks with Mayor Teresa Heitmann of Naples, Florida, and City Manager Gary Young on the city’s damaged historic pier on Aug. 29. (Photo:DHS/Tia Dufour)

Sept. 29, 2025 by David Silverberg

Who would have thought that sleepy, obscure Southwest Florida, including Collier County and the City of Naples, would move to the forefront of national attention under the second administration of President Donald Trump?

First, there was the establishment of the Alligator Alcatraz concentration camp in far eastern Collier County. Implemented by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), Alligator Alcatraz has drawn national scrutiny, condemnation, lawsuits and opposition. As intended, it has been a model for a whole gulag archipelago of anti-migrant concentration camps rising throughout the nation. Its fate is uncertain.

But now there’s a new focus: the City of Naples pier, which was destroyed in 2022’s Hurricane Ian.

New developments in the restoration of the Naples pier also serve to highlight the story of the Fort Myers Beach pier—and how each one is being treated illuminates larger trends in America today and the way government now operates.

Kristi Noem and the Naples pier

The current state of the Naples pier, seen over the shoulder of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during her visit to Naples on Aug. 29. (Photo: Kristi Noem/Instagram)

For those unfamiliar with it, the City of Naples is an incorporated municipality of roughly 20,000 people. It sits on the Gulf of Mexico at the southwestern tip of Florida and is primarily a tourist and leisure destination. Always a winter haven for the wealthy, its attractiveness to the millionaire—and billionaire—class has grown in recent years.

Among its attractions, Naples has an iconic pier that extends into the Gulf. Originally used for the offloading of supplies when Naples was founded and developed starting in the 1880s, it subsequently became a tourist attraction, a place above the beach to stroll and fish.

The Naples pier in 2020. (Photo: Author)

The pier has been destroyed by hurricanes several times, most recently by Hurricane Ian in 2022.

After Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem visited Naples on Aug. 29, she immediately ordered $12 million in federal funds for its rebuilding, granted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that she heads.

It emerges that the grant was the result of city lobbying and the intervention of a major Naples-based Noem donor.

The entire story of the lobbying and Noem’s intervention is presented in an article titled “Kristi Noem Fast-Tracked Millions in Disaster Aid to Florida Tourist Attraction After Campaign Donor Intervened.”

The article was published last Friday, Sept. 26, by the non-profit investigative journalism newsroom, ProPublica, which, as it states, “investigates abuses of power.” ProPublica is known for its meticulous journalism. The article is based on emails and records obtained through public records requests, as well as interviews by its three authors: Pulitzer Prize winner Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski.

The article details how Naples Mayor Theresa Heitmann, frustrated by delays in getting the pier addressed, contacted Naples cardiologist Dr. Sinan Gursoy, who had been a $25,000 donor to Noem when she was governor of South Dakota.

At Gursoy’s urging, “Noem flew to Naples on a government plane to tour the pier herself. She then stayed for the weekend and got dinner with the donor, local cardiologist Sinan Gursoy, at the French restaurant Bleu Provence,” according to the article. Noem stayed the weekend at the Naples Bay Resort & Marina.

She toured the wrecked pier with Heitmann and City Manager Gary Young.

Afterwards she posted on Instagram: “The iconic Naples Pier was destroyed in 2022, and the city is still waiting on answers from FEMA. They couldn’t even get permission to remove the old pier. I saw this failure first-hand today with Mayor Heitmann and Gary Young, and now the project is back on track.

“Americans deserve better than years of red tape and failed disaster responses. Under @POTUS Trump, this incompetency ends.”

It is important to note that the article does not allege any illegalities or criminal activity by any party.

However, it states: “Noem’s actions in Naples suggest the injection of political favoritism into an agency tasked with saving lives and rebuilding communities wiped out by disaster. It also heightens concerns about the discretion Noem has given herself by personally handling all six-figure expenses at the agency, consolidating her power over who wins and loses in the pursuit of federal relief dollars, experts said.”

DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin told ProPublica that the pier decision “has nothing to do with politics,” since Noem has visited the sites of other disasters. “Your criticizing the Secretary’s visit to the Pier is bizarre as she works to fix this issue for more than 1 million visitors that used to visit the pier,” she said.

A visualization of the restored Naples pier. (Rendering: City of Naples)

The Fort Myers Beach pier

The Fort Myers Beach pier before and after Hurricane Ian. (Photos: WINK News/Matt Devitt)

Noem’s treatment of Naples can be contrasted with the experience of Fort Myers Beach, just 20 miles northward, whose tourist pier was also wrecked in Hurricane Ian.

Fort Myers Beach, like Naples, is a tourist-oriented, incorporated town on the Gulf of Mexico, although appealing to much smaller and less wealthy population than Naples, both in permanent residents and visitors. Its population is about 5,300 people.

This is the town where Hurricane Ian made landfall as a Category 4 hurricane and it did horrendous damage, virtually scraping buildings from their foundations all along the sea front and well inland.

The damage included its tourist pier. (Most towns along this stretch of coastline have piers because in their early days they were supplied entirely by boat.)

Like Naples, Fort Myers Beach officials are also trying to rebuild their pier.

Also, like Naples, Fort Myers Beach officials applied for FEMA funding. They were granted funding but only for the pier’s original structure. However, the city wants to expand and lengthen the pier, adding 415 feet so that it extends 1,000 feet into the water. They also want to widen it by four feet so it spans 12 feet.

This is expected to cost the city $17.1 million and the new parts won’t be covered by FEMA. To make up the shortfall, on Sept. 16, the Lee County Commissioners voted to seek $7 million from the Gulf Consortium, which manages compensation for the British Petroleum (BP) Deepwater Horizon oil spill of 2010. That money is provided under the RESTORE (Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies) Act of 2012, administered under Florida’s State Expenditure Plan.

“The project is proceeding as planned and designed,” Lee County spokesperson Betsy Clayton told the Fort Myers Beach Observer and Bulletin. “The plan all along was to use FEMA and Tourist Development Tax [funds].”

However, if BP funds are approved, “this would reduce the need for Tourist Development Taxes,” Clayton told the newspaper.

Meanwhile, Fort Myers Beach and Lee County officials can only sit and wait to hear.

The restored Fort Myers Beach pier as conceived. (Rendering: Fort Myers Beach)

Commentary: Winners and losers

While Fort Myers Beach officials can lobby for their hoped-for BP funds to move the application process along, it seems doubtful that they can arrange a lunch with Kristi Noem and get the full funding over a weekend, as the far richer City of Naples did.

The incident also highlights why allegations of favoritism and political interference are—or should be—a sensitive issue and why inequitable distribution of government funding can be so disruptive.

What is more, both piers are very small disasters for FEMA and Noem amidst a very large array of natural events. As of Saturday, Sept. 27, FEMA was handling 58 major disasters and seven emergency declarations all around the United States and territories.

Complaints about slow responses and bureaucracy have always plagued FEMA.

However, this is nothing new. After every disaster people demand that aid arrive instantly, which, other than help from immediate neighbors, it never does. Government at all levels takes time to work, even when a response is urgent. As for its bureaucratic and procedural slowness, FEMA is bound by laws and regulations and has always had to ensure that money is properly accounted for, monitored and distributed.  

But there are new reasons for FEMA delays and bottlenecks, chiefly the result of Trump and Noem’s own actions. FEMA has been battered by layoffs and staff dismissals, cuts to funding and Trump’s repeated attacks on it to the point of calling for its disestablishment.

After Hurricane Katrina in 2005, FEMA was reformed and streamlined, with two Floridians taking a leading role: R. David Paulison, a former Miami fire chief, and Craig Fugate, who had been Florida’s chief emergency manager. Under their administration and that of other DHS secretaries, FEMA was reworked to provide more timely responses and be completely evenhanded and apolitical in its actions and funding. It also made a major effort to prevent future disasters through preparedness, mitigation and increased resilience.

In the first Trump administration there were fears that Trump was politicizing responses, withholding aid to Democratic states like California and reducing preventive measures that responded to climate change challenges. Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation blueprint for a future administration, proposed that much more of the fiscal burden for disaster recovery fall on the states. (See “Project 2025 remake of FEMA would hit communities hard after disasters.”)

On the campaign trail Trump repeatedly attacked the agency and its responses, especially in the wake of Hurricane Helene and flooding in North Carolina. Among these he leveled baseless accusations of political favoritism by President Joe Biden.

Once in office Trump has maintained the drumbeat of criticism and repeatedly threatened to eliminate FEMA as an agency. The agency’s layoffs and dismissals have hampered its functioning and ability to respond to disasters.

Noem from the beginning has been an aggressive operative for the Trump agenda, implementing cuts to the FEMA workforce, verbally attacking the agency, as in her Instagram post, and echoing Trump’s lies.

As the ProPublica article pointed out, she has also insisted on personally approving all FEMA expenditures over $100,000, making her personally responsible for them—and since $100,000 is a very small expenditure in government operations, it means she has to be personally involved in every small and petty purchase.

This requirement vastly slows down the process of approving any sort of aid or expenditures—unless a community can short-circuit the entire system by going straight to the Secretary as Naples did. Other communities awaiting assistance and with far greater damage have been left hanging, also hoping for the kind of aid that was previously processed through established, rationally conceived procedures.

It needs to be emphasized, as previously, that there are no allegations of illegality or criminality here and certainly not on the part of Naples City officials. They were confronted with frustrating delays and a lack of response from FEMA. They chose to take action, as should be expected of city officials.

According to the ProPublica article, Mayor Heitmann tried a variety of different avenues to address the issue. The City already employed some expensive Washington consultants to guide the process but this was unproductive. She wrote directly to FEMA, attempted to enlist Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), a Naples resident, and finally decided to go directly to Noem through Gursoy, who had introduced Heitmann to Noem at a private party when Noem was governor.

When she contacted Gursoy, he agreed to “get on it.”

It has to be said: It was a good idea that produced results.

Interestingly, nowhere did Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.) appear to play a role in any of this even though his district encompasses both towns with their piers and he would logically be the first official to contact in pursuing the city’s interests in Washington.

However, Donalds has been notoriously lax in producing results for his district in Washington, DC and he is currently running for governor, so his attention to the district, already tepid, is now nearly non-existent.

If there is fault to be had it lies with Noem. In pre-Trump days, a secretary of Homeland Security when faced with this kind of request would have declined it. Perhaps he or she would have responded: “Thank you for this kind invitation. Due to the many requests and needs from deserving communities across the country, I have to respectfully decline. However, I will forward your request to the proper offices in FEMA.”

But that kind of rectitude and propriety is a thing of the past.

The bigger issues

Beyond problems created for FEMA aid and distribution caused by Trump, Noem and the Department of Government Efficiency when it was operating, Noem’s personal intervention in the Naples pier project illustrates much broader issues of governance, personalization and inequality among communities.

The United States has been unique in creating “a nation of laws, not men,” as President John Adams put it. Constitutionally, its institutions are intended to function according to law and objective facts, not the personal preferences of any one person.

That is not the case with Donald Trump who is openly and blatantly making governance about himself, whether that applies to prosecuting his perceived enemies, or levying tariffs, or silencing those who satirize him.

As Trump has driven toward a more authoritarian, dictatorial form of government that centers entirely on his personal decisions and predilections, his personalization of government operations is leaching down into lower levels of decisionmaking.

This is glaringly evident in the case of the Naples pier. Noem may say that she’s heroically cutting red tape and taking action—and she may actually think it—but it also sends a signal to all other distressed communities around the country that the way to get disaster aid is not to follow the law and procedure but to somehow reach her personally, with paid travel and a nice dinner (at the least). It announces that emergency management decisionmaking now officially depends on her whims and personal preferences. It also announces that the American people and their communities cannot depend on a government that previously responded to their distress as one of its primary duties.

There has always been an element of personality and lobbying in government operations, whether in the legislative or executive branches. It’s what created the vast lobbying industry that exists today at all levels of government. But lobbying and advocacy was always peripheral to the government’s essential decisionmaking. Now, with Trump’s personalization and weaponization of government, it’s central to it.

In 1655 King Louis XIV of France is reputed to have said, “L’État, c’est moi!”—“I am the state.” It has gone down in history as the ultimate expression of personal power. The American revolution was an explicit rebellion against that philosophy. The state was the Constitution, an expression of “We the people”—all Americans.

As Trump drives toward becoming the embodiment of the American state, situations like Noem’s favoring Naples, or for that matter Tom Homan, head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) taking cash for favors and then escaping any kind of law enforcement, are becoming more common.

The Naples pier is just one small example of the increasing personalization of government in America today. It’s also the embodiment of increasing stratification between affluent, well-connected communities and more obscure, modest and poorer communities in getting attention paid to their needs by a government originally formed to be of them, by them and for them.

So, while the focus in this instance may be on two closely-placed towns and their structures of planks and concrete jutting out into the waters of Florida, the gulf between them is actually broader, vaster, more profound—and, unfortunately, growing.

Liberty lives in light

© 2025 by David Silverberg

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

Breakfast table battle: Brazil and Bolsonaro, America and Trump, and the squeezing of Florida

Art: AI for TPP/ChatGPT

Sept. 16, 2025 by David Silverberg

Your breakfast table is now a battlefield.

Your morning coffee and your orange juice are the weapons.

Taste them, savor them, pay attention to their flavors and subtleties and enjoy them to the fullest because they’re going to be taxed, perhaps beyond what you’re willing to pay for them in the future. What was once ordinary and routine is about to become rare and precious.

And all this is because President Donald Trump is trying to reverse a just judgment against a coup plotter, insurrectionist and would-be dictator in a land far away.

Last Thursday, Sept. 11, while Americans memorialized the terrorist attacks of 24 years ago, the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court found Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil’s former president, guilty of plotting a military coup to overthrow Brazil’s democratic government.

He was sentenced to 27 years and 3 months in prison. The likelihood is that Bolsonaro will have to serve his time—the Brazilians aren’t kidding around.

Their judgment is informed by a 21-year experience of military dictatorship. They know what it means to be governed autocratically and to lose their freedoms. So when a politician plots to overthrow a democratically-elected government and sends a mob to destroy the legislative branch of government, they know that they have to respond firmly and decisively. The guilty party has to be punished fully because nothing else will preserve the rule of law, the Constitution and democracy.

Bolsonaro closely imitated Donald Trump in numerous ways.

His fate holds important lessons for the United States and for democracies that seek to defend themselves from demagogic authoritarianism. In this affair there are warnings—and especially lessons—for Americans.

As important, all Americans, including those living in Southwest Florida, are going to feel the effects of this battle.

The ‘Tropical Trump’

Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and US President Donald Trump share a moment in the White House during a meeting on March 19, 2019. (Photo: Isac Nóbrega, Wikimedia Commons)

Bolsonaro was dubbed the “Tropical Trump,” a politician who took his cues from Donald Trump in both his election campaigns and governing. He was a demagogic, extremist populist campaigner and president who used insults and personal attacks both on the stump and through social media. He dismissed critical press coverage as “fake news.” He promised to “drain the swamp” of Brazilian politics.

Bolsonaro served as president from 2019 to 2023. In contrast to Trump he’d had a lengthy career in electoral politics before assuming the presidency. In 1990 after serving in the military he was elected to the city council of Rio de Janeiro and then to the Chamber of Deputies, the Brazilian House of Representatives. He served there for 27 years and became known for his conservatism. In 2018 he ran for president on a very Trump-like platform and won.

When he took office, Bolsonaro had to immediately deal with an economic crisis, which he did by favoring laissez fare economic solutions. He also rolled back protections for indigenous people and their lands and most notoriously stripped environmental protections from the Amazon rainforest in favor of agribusinesses.

He also advocated removing police restrictions to fight the country’s high crime rate. “A policeman who doesn’t kill isn’t a policeman,” he said while campaigning. In a country that had one of the highest rates of police killings in the world, he wanted greater lethality and defended the use of torture.

Once elected, Brazilian crime rates fell and the economy slowly recovered. But then, like Trump, Bolsonaro was hit with a curve ball: the COVID-19 pandemic.

Like Trump, Bolsonaro initially dismissed the disease, calling it “a little flu” and belittling media warnings as “hysteria.”

But as in the United States, COVID struck hard in Brazil. As in the United States voters didn’t forget. And like Trump, Bolsonaro paid the price when those voters went to the polls.

In the United States, Trump lost the 2020 election to Democrat Joe Biden. Unwilling to accept the results, on Jan. 6, 2021Trump incited his followers to attack the United States Capitol, overturn the election and lynch Vice President Mike Pence, when he wouldn’t de-certify the results as Trump wanted. After several hours of inaction by Trump, the insurrection was suppressed by police and National Guard troops.

Rioters storm the United States Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

In Brazil, Bolsonaro lost the 2022 election to the progressive, trade-unionist Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, universally known as Lula. Like Trump, Bolsonaro refused to accept the results and on Jan. 8, 2023 a pro-Bolsonaro mob stormed government buildings in the capital, Brasilia, demanding that Lula be deposed and a military coup be staged. Unlike Trump, Bolsonaro wasn’t in the capital—he was in Orlando, Florida, where he’d gone to avoid Lula’s inauguration.

Rioters storm government buildings in Brasilia on Jan. 8, 2023. (Photo: TVBrasilGov)

In the United States Trump faced condemnation and impeachment but was not removed from office and did not face any criminal charges or punishment for his role despite a detailed congressional investigation.

In Brazil, however, Bolsonaro was investigated and in November 2024 was indicted for attempting to mount a coup. He was charged in February 2025, placed under house arrest in August for violating court rules and tried in the Supreme Federal Court beginning on Sept. 2.

Last Thursday, Sept. 11, he was found guilty and sentenced to 27 years and 3 months (327 months) in prison.

Protecting the protégé

Having retaken the US presidency, Trump is actively trying to protect his Brazilian protégé using the full resources of the United States.

On July 31, Trump signed an executive order imposing 50 percent tariffs on Brazilian goods and declaring a national emergency regarding the country.

“The Order finds that the Government of Brazil’s politically motivated persecution, intimidation, harassment, censorship, and prosecution of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and thousands of his supporters are serious human rights abuses that have undermined the rule of law in Brazil,” it stated.

“By imposing these tariffs to address the Government of Brazil’s reckless actions, President Trump is protecting the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States from a foreign threat,” it stated.

The order declared that Brazilian court orders were tyrannical and arbitrary and charged that Brazil had tried to extort and coerce US companies into censoring free speech. It ordered revocation of the Brazilian Supreme Court Judge Alexandre de Morae’s visa to the United States and any issued to his family.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio added his own imprecations on the day Bolsonaro was found guilty.

“The political persecutions by sanctioned human rights abuser Alexandre de Moraes continue, as he and others on Brazil’s supreme court have unjustly ruled to imprison former President Jair Bolsonaro,” Rubio stated on X. “The United States will respond accordingly to this witch hunt.”

Of course, Trump is willing to go further. On Wednesday, Sept. 10, the day before Bolsonaro’s verdict and sentencing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that “I can tell you this is a priority for the administration and the president is unafraid to use the economic might, the military might, of the United States to protect free speech around the world.” The comments were taken as a possible military threat against Brazil.

Defiance and costs

President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and First Lady Rosângela Lula da Silva arrive in Brasilia for his 2023 presidential inauguration. (Photo: Gov. of Brazil)

Brazilian authorities are defiant in the face of Trump’s threats.

“A president of one country cannot interfere in the sovereign decisions of another country. If he chooses to take further action, that’s his problem. We will respond as measures are taken,” Lula told a local television station.

“Threats like the one made today by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a statement that attacks Brazilian authority and ignores the facts and compelling evidence in the case files, will not intimidate our democracy,” Brazil’s foreign office said on X.

The potential impact of the dispute on US-Brazilian trade could be considerable. Last year trade between the two countries was worth an estimated $127.6 billion, according to the US Trade Representative. What is more, the US runs a surplus, with exports worth $49 billion and imports worth $42.3 billion and until now that surplus was growing. The US exports aircraft parts, refined oil, and gas turbines to Brazil and Brazil exports crude oil, coffee, unfinished iron and beef to the United States.

Analysis: The experience of dictatorship

Art: Maarten Wolterink

The Brazilian government’s stance against Bolsonaro’s attempted insurrection and coup is informed by some harsh history in the tropical nation.

On April 1, 1964, Brazil’s top military commanders launched a coup against Brazilian President João Goulart and the parliamentary republic he headed, which they alleged was heading in a communistic direction. They established a military dictatorship that engaged in all the abuses for which dictatorships are known: extrajudicial disappearances, use of torture, media censorship and suspension of due process, among other crimes.

At first tentative, as the years went on the dictatorship became harder, deeper and more intrusive. The Constitution was suspended, Congress and state legislatures were dissolved and the civilian justice system was replaced with a military one that was more repressive, arbitrary and merciless. The dictatorship reached down into everyday life, into the school system, the humanities and the arts.

Brazil’s dictatorship lasted 21 years, until 1985. Despite its early fiscal successes and an economic “Brazilian miracle,” it ultimately collapsed amidst economic stress, inflation and popular demand for a return to democracy. In 1985 an election was held to select a new president. A new, democratic Constitution was approved in 1988.

It is this dictatorship that Brazilians remember as they protect their democratic government and Constitution. They know what dictatorship means in a way that Americans, who have never experienced one, do not. It gives an urgency and determination to their administration of justice and prosecution of Bolsonaro. It also makes it likely that he will actually have to pay the penalty for his duly established crimes.

By contrast, in the United States, Trump was impeached for his role in the Jan. 6 insurrection but never removed or criminally prosecuted. Without a historical memory of loss of democracy and freedom, American politicians presumed that after 2021 Trump was neutralized and no further effort was required to defend democracy. Clearly they were wrong.

Now, in addition to assaulting democracy, due process, civilian control and the Constitution, Trump is attempting to undermine democracy in a democratic Brazil and defend a rogue president who assaulted the nation’s fundamental institutions in the same way he himself did in the United States.

The United States has played an intrusive and sometimes contradictory role in Brazil. It supported the coup and its plotters in 1964. Brazilians fought back and at one point the US ambassador was kidnapped by resistance fighters but released unharmed. Then, in the mid-1970s the United States, under President Jimmy Carter, condemned human rights abuses and suspended military aid.

The current situation harkens back to the bad old Cold War days of covert American interference in the sovereign, independent processes of otherwise democratic states. Only now, instead of defending American democracy against communism, Trump’s regime is overtly and blatantly trying to protect a convicted criminal, would-be dictator and, arguably a traitor against the application of justice in his own country—and Trump is no doubt fearful of a similar fate in his own case.

Commentary: The breakfast battle

So why should Americans—and specifically Floridians—care what happens in a land far away?

Actually, everyday Americans will feel the pain of this trade war and pay its price—and they’ll feel it every single morning.

That’s because when it comes to coffee, the United States gets 35 percent of its coffee from Brazil, the largest portion of all the coffee that comes in from Latin America. (Colombia comes in second, with about 27 percent of US coffee imports.)

From the moment that Trump first announced tariffs on coffee in April, exporters and people knew that the cost of coffee was going to rise precipitously.

“If Brazilian coffee suddenly becomes 50% more expensive in the US, roasters will have little choice but to look elsewhere. But none have the scale, pricing consistency, or logistical muscle of Brazil. This could lead to shortages and price hikes, not just in the US, but globally,” warned Sarah Charles, writing for the trade website Coffee Intelligence.

But the impact on coffee is as nothing compared to the impact of Trump’s tariffs on orange juice—because Brazil provides over half of US orange juice.

Trump’s tariff is likely to drive the price of retail orange juice up by double digits. Ironically, this is likely to badly affect the Florida citrus industry, already declining because of citrus greening, migrant worker crackdowns and hurricane damage. Indeed, as Florida production has declined, the middle processing and distribution companies have become more dependent on Brazilian imports.

With all orange juice prices set to rise because of the tariffs and a likely decline in demand as a result, purchase of Florida’s orange products will also fall. The new punitive tariffs will also decrease processing companies’ profits and disrupt the supply chain.

When Trump first announced tariffs in April, Brazilian orange juice was exempted. However, now that he’s specifically targeting Brazil for political reasons, those exemptions are off the table, unless he changes his mind again.

There is a real possibility that the addition of Trump’s trade war on Brazil, coming on top of all its other woes, will bring Florida’s citrus industry to an end.

But for the everyday American, it’s in the two most common breakfast staples that Americans will feel the most immediate pain of Trump’s Brazilian tariff tantrum. After a century of promoting orange juice as a refreshing and healthful way to start the morning, orange juice may be priced out of reach. Those office coffee breaks that everyone took for granted may be a thing of the past, along with the stereotypical office coffee pot sitting on the burner all day reducing the liquid inside to a caffeinated sludge.

Coffee has been a politically-charged beverage throughout American history. In 1773 following the Boston Tea Party and protests against an English tea tax (which was a tariff), Americans switched to coffee in a show of patriotic protest. The change held and Americans have been coffee drinkers ever since.

Now a domineering president has unilaterally put a new tariff on coffee as well as other vital imports in an effort to protect and defend a fellow insurrectionist and would-be dictator against his own people’s justice and democracy.

One of the key complaints against King George III in the Declaration of Independence was that he was “cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world” and imposing taxes without the peoples’ consent.

Perhaps it’s time for another protest against an unfair, unrepresentative and damaging tariff imposed by fiat, for, as the Declaration of Independence put it: “A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

Just remember that as you drink your next morning orange juice and down your breakfast cup of coffee.


On a personal note: Doing business with dictators

I first became aware of Brazilian trade issues when I worked as the international trade reporter for the newspaper Defense News.

In that capacity I made the acquaintance of José Luis Whitaker Ribeiro at a trade conference.

Ribiero was chief executive officer of the giant Brazilian firm, Engesa. In the days before e-mail, we would communicate by fax. He was always prompt in responding, was always on the record, never held back, and provided a revealing and often humorously sarcastic insight into his business and his competitors. In other words, a perfect source.

An engineer, he and colleagues had founded Engesa to manufacture oil equipment in 1958. When the United States embargoed military supplies to the Brazilian dictatorship under President Jimmy Carter, Engesa began producing equipment for the Brazilian military.

But Engesa’s biggest boost came in 1979 when Saddam Hussein invaded Iran. Engesa became a major supplier to the Iraqi military and its business boomed as it churned out tough, reliable, easily operated military vehicles. It even began developing its own main battle tank, which required a major investment.

The Iran-Iraq War ended in 1988 and Engesa presented Hussein with the bill, which was considerable.

And, as Ribeiro told me, Hussein simply decided not to pay. He just didn’t feel like it. He casually refused to do it. There was no collection agency in the world that could make him.

Engesa’s business collapsed. It would never recoup its investments. It wouldn’t be paid the billions it was owed. In 1993 it declared bankruptcy.

That experience provides yet another insight into the nature of dictatorships, wherever they’re located. No matter how much contractors, corporations and related parasites may believe they’re going to profit from a dictatorship, there’s a lesson to be learned.

That lesson: Dictators don’t pay their bills.

Liberty lives in light

© 2025 by David Silverberg

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

After Alligator Alcatraz: A modest proposal

Judge Kathleen Williams

Aug. 25, 2025 by David Silverberg

On Thursday, Aug. 21, Judge Kathleen Williams of the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida ruled that the state of Florida’s concentration, detention and deportation camp, Alligator Alcatraz, had to cease operations and be dismantled within 60 days, which falls on Oct. 21.

The State of Florida appealed the ruling within an hour of the decision’s announcement. That appeal is now pending and could go up to the Supreme Court.

However that appeal plays out, it is not too soon to begin thinking about what should happen to the site of what had previously been the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport.

This essay recommends that the site be converted into the “William J. Mitsch Memorial Wetlaculture Experiment and Everglades Restoration Project.”

The article will review the court ruling and explain the proposal.

The ruling and reaction

In her ruling, Williams found that the State of Florida, in its haste to set up Alligator Alcatraz, had violated federal laws requiring an assessment of the camp’s environmental impact.

The most relevant law was the  National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), “which requires that major federal actions significantly affecting the human environment undergo environmental review processes.”

While state and federal officials (Defendants) acknowledged possible “deficiencies” in their haste to establish the camp, they argued that any injunction should be vacated while the case made its way through the judicial process (i.e., the camp should be allowed to continue functioning throughout legal deliberations).

Williams was having none of it. Indeed, so blatant was the state’s indifference to due process and the rule of law that Williams’ scorn comes through even in the dry language of a court ruling.

“Here, there weren’t ‘deficiencies’ in the agency’s process,” she wrote. “There was no process.” [Emphasis ours.]

She continued: “The Defendants consulted with no stakeholders or experts and did no evaluation of the environmental risks and alternatives from which the Court may glean the likelihood that the agency would choose the same course if it had done a NEPA-compliant evaluation.”

(The full, 82-page text of William’s ruling can be read here and is also available for viewing and download at the end of this article.)

The ruling also dealt with issues of venue, finding that the Southern District of Florida was the proper court to consider the case; the degree of permanent environmental harm the camp was causing; and responsibility for the camp’s establishment and operations (the State of Florida rather than the federal government).

Because of its violations of law and environmental impact, Williams issued an injunction that prohibited the defendants from installing any new lighting “or doing any paving, filling, excavating, or fencing; or doing any other site expansion, including placing or erecting any additional buildings, tents, dormitories, or other residential or administrative facilities,” although modification of existing buildings is permitted for the sake of safety or environmental mitigation.

New detainees cannot be brought to the camp.

The order applies to everyone involved in camp operations, whether state or federal.

According to the order, “No later than sixty (60) days,” which falls on October 21, state and federal officials have to remove the fencing, lighting and “all generators, gas, sewage, and other waste and waste receptacles that were installed to support this project”—essentially, returning the site to its prior state and giving Miccosukee Tribe members complete access to the area.

Lastly, the plaintiffs were required to post a token, $100 bond.

Not only was an appeal of the order immediately filed in the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, Ga., but it was predictably denounced by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R).

“This is a judge that was not going to give us a fair shake,” DeSantis said the day after the ruling during remarks in Panama City. “This was preordained, very much an activist judge that is trying to do policy from the bench.”

He continued: “This is not going to deter us. We’re going to continue working on the deportations, advancing that mission,” referring to President Donald Trump’s roundups and deportations.

The state is proceeding with plans for a “Deportation Depot” camp west of Jacksonville, Fla.

“We’re not going to be deterred; we’re totally in the right on this,” DeSantis said. “But I would also note, because of the success of Alligator Alcatraz, there’s demand for more.”

While appealing the ruling, Florida officials may simply ignore the judge’s order. There is precedent for this.

In that case, Williams was the judge whose order was defied by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier. In April she issued an injunction against enforcing a Florida law making it a misdemeanor for undocumented migrants to enter the state. Uthmeier sent a letter to police chiefs and sheriffs saying that the injunction was legally wrong and he could not force them to obey it. In June, Williams found Uthmeier in contempt but his only punishment was to produce biweekly reports on enforcement actions.

“Litigants cannot change the plain meaning of words as it suits them, especially when conveying a court’s clear and unambiguous order,” Williams wrote at the time. “Fidelity to the rule of law can have no other meaning.”

It remains to be seen if those words will have any impact on the dismantlement of Alligator Alcatraz.

A modest proposal: Restoration and renewal

Bill Mitsch in his natural habitat, 2021. (Photo: Bill Mitsch)

William Jerome Mitsch was one of the world’s foremost scientific experts on wetlands like the Everglades and did much of his work at Florida Gulf Coast University. In 2022 he retired after a 47-year career and passed away in February of this year at the age of 77.

(To see a full profile of Mitsch and his work see: “On a personal note: An appreciation of Bill Mitsch, a wetlands warrior.”)

In 2018, Mitsch proposed a solution to the problem of pollution affecting the Everglades.

He called it “wetlaculture.”

The concept was that pollution could be defeated by creating new wetlands and this could be done by planting sawgrass, which is native and thrives in this area. The sawgrass would filter out contaminants while letting water flow. These new wetlands could be created on previously cultivated land. He believed that the grass would create soil so fertile that nitrate fertilizers would be unnecessary.

He calculated that new wetlands could be created over a 10-year time period. At the end of that time, the soil would be flipped and used for farming for 10 years. Then, it could be flipped again to lie fallow for another 10 years and so on, indefinitely.

A small-scale Wetlaculture experiment is already under way in Freedom Park in Naples, Fla. There, 28 bins hold sawgrass and researchers experiment with different levels of water and nutrients in the different bins as the sawgrass grows. Scientists measure nutrients in the soil and see if nitrates and phosphorous are being removed. When the soil is deemed to be clean and fertile enough they’ll plant crops and see how well they grow.

A sign marks the spot of the current Wetlaculture experiment in Freedom Park in Naples, Fla. (Photo: Author)

Now the time has come to attempt a Wetlaculture experiment on a grander scale—perhaps the scale of the 39-acre site of Alligator Alcatraz.

Commentary: A better future

If Alligator Alcatraz is in fact closed and dismantled the “William J. Mitsch Memorial Wetlaculture Experiment and Everglades Restoration Project,” would be a most fitting replacement.

The concrete, asphalt and especially the runway could be scraped and removed and in its place be planted with sawgrass with an eye to flipping it after 10 years, or whenever scientists deem it appropriate. The plantings would likely restore water flow, cleanse pollution and prepare the soil for crops in their turn.

Instead of destroying the natural environment, the “William J. Mitsch Memorial Wetlaculture Experiment and Everglades Restoration Project” would restore it. Instead of the constant floodlights, the area would be restored to the darkness that made it part of Big Cypress’ International Dark Sky Park. Instead of noise and traffic, there would be quiet and calm. Instead of harming wildlife, animals could thrive. Instead of fencing out the public and the Miccosukee Indian Tribe, all would have access.

As for the expense, it would be far less than the $450 million expected to cost Florida taxpayers to run Alligator Alcatraz this year alone. It would also cost Florida and the nation far, far less to maintain in every subsequent year. Moreover, because it would be a scientific experiment, it would be eligible for academic and research funding.

Most of all, it would replace a concentration camp that is likely to be a blot and a stain on Florida’s history and on the history of the United States. Rather than a disgrace, Florida and the Everglades would have a site that improves the future, addresses environmental challenges and would be in harmony with the land, water, plants, animals, people and climate. Instead of punishment, the Mitsch Memorial Experiment would be a place of possibilities.

“When you come to a fork in the road, take it,” Yogi Berra, the Yankee baseball catcher famous for his malapropisms, supposedly said. Along the old Tamiami Trail, right on the Collier County-Dade County line, Florida and the American people have come to a fork in the road. One path leads to a concentration camp of deliberate human suffering, oppression and brutality. The other path leads to a restoration of nature’s balance, a hopeful future and great potential benefits.

The time has come to take the fork in the road. A “William J. Mitsch Memorial Wetlaculture Experiment and Everglades Restoration Project” is clearly the better path to follow.

The Everglades. (Photo: National Park Service/Robert Krayer)

To read all of The Paradise Progressive’s coverage of Bill Mitsch, click here.

Click the button below to read and download the full 82-page text of Judge Kathleen Williams’ decision.

Liberty lives in light

© 2025 by David Silverberg

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

Collier County ‘Bill of Rights Sanctuary’ law could be lifeline for Alligator Alcatraz detainees

The ordinance establishing Collier County as a Sanctuary County.

Aug. 21, 2025 by David Silverberg

State and federal actions at the Alligator Alcatraz detention and deportation camp that violate the US Constitution’s Bill of Rights could be nullified under Collier County’s “Bill of Rights Sanctuary County” ordinance, since the camp is in Collier County, Florida.

Violators of these rights can be personally held liable in civil litigation under the ordinance.

This may present a lifeline to detainees and a possible avenue of release for their attorneys to pursue.

The camp is intended as a holding facility for undocumented migrants seized in roundups prior to their deportation. It faces growing opposition from local residents, religious leaders, the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida and environmentalists. (For more on the camp see: “Straight outta Dachau: Past lessons and potential futures for ‘Alligator Alcatraz’.”)

The venue argument

On Monday, Aug. 18, Judge Rodolfo Ruiz of the US District Court in the Southern District of Florida ruled that the proper venue for resolution of a lawsuit regarding Alligator Alcatraz was in the Middle District of Florida.

Prior to that, lawyers for detainees being held in the camp had filed their lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida, which covers Miami-Dade County since the site sits on the boundaries of Collier and Miami-Dade counties and the facility was previously run by Miami-Dade County.

(The lawsuit brought by the detainees’ lawyer named Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem as defendant and charged that authorities at Alligator Alcatraz had denied detainees their First and Fifth amendment rights by blocking and impeding access to counsel.)

The Southern District of Florida, comprised of Broward, Dade, Highlands, Indian River, Martin, Monroe, Okeechobee, Palm Beach, and St. Lucie counties. (Map: US District Court)

However, the state, which established the camp and opened it on July 1, argued that the camp’s proper address was Ochopee, Florida, which is in Collier County.

(The camp sits on the 39-acre site of what was the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport. Two thirds of it is in Collier County, although the training facility was run by Miami-Dade County. Its precise coordinates are: 25°51′42″N 080°53′49″W.)

State lawyers argued that because it was in Collier County, the proper venue for any litigation was in the Middle District of Florida, which includes that county.

The Middle District of Florida, comprised of Baker, Bradford, Brevard, Charlotte, Citrus, Clay, Collier, Columbia, De Soto, Duval, Flagler, Glades, Hamilton, Hardee, Hendry, Hernando, Hillsborough, Lake, Lee, Manatee, Marion, Nassau, Orange, Osceola, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Putnam, St. Johns, Sarasota, Seminole, Sumter, Suwannee, Union, and Volusia counties. (Map: US District Court)

In his ruling, Ruiz agreed, officially establishing Collier County as the location of the camp. (The full text of the 47-page  ruling is available for reading and download below.)

Collier County is a ‘Bill of Rights Sanctuary county’

On Aug. 22, 2023, by a vote of 4 to 1, the Collier County Board of Commissioners passed an ordinance declaring the county to be “a Bill of Rights Sanctuary County.”  

(The full text of the ordinance is available for viewing and download at the end of this article.)

“Collier County has the right to be free from the commanding hand of the federal government and has the right to refuse to cooperate with federal government officials in response to unconstitutional federal government measures, and to proclaim a Bill of Rights Sanctuary for law-abiding citizens in its County,” states the ordinance.

It defines an “unlawful act” as “Any federal act, law, order, rule, or regulation, which violates or unreasonably restricts, impedes, or impinges upon an individual’s Constitutional rights including, but not limited to, those enumerated in Amendments 1 through 10 to the United States Constitution.”

Further, it states: “Any such ‘Unlawful Act’ is invalid in Collier County and shall not be recognized by Collier County, and shall be considered null, void and of no effect in Collier County, Florida.”

The ordinance defines penalties for violations in Section Five: “Anyone within the jurisdiction of Collier County, Florida, accused of being in violation of this ordinance may be sued in Circuit Court for declaratory and injunctive relief, damages and attorneys’ fees.”

Of note: The ordinance specifically states that “anyone” in the county may be sued if they violate a person’s constitutional rights.

Analysis: Possible implications

Because Collier County is a “Bill of Rights Sanctuary” county, Alligator Alcatraz detainees may have standing to sue the US government for violation of their constitutional rights.

What is more, their guards and the operators of the camp may be personally liable for any constitutional violations under the same ordinance.

Further, county employees, officials and law enforcement officers are prohibited from aiding, assisting or abetting federal Alligator Alcatraz activities if those activities are determined to violate constitutional rights.

Detainee lawsuits under the county ordinance—and the ordinance itself—could pause or halt transfers into the camp and force due process adherence and proper treatment. It could also be the basis for an injunction stopping the camp’s operations. (The camp is already under an injunction prohibiting construction and infrastructure expansion. This injunction is set to expire today, Aug. 21.)

The county ordinance has never been applied or tested in court. During the debate preceding its passage, opponents argued that it was unconstitutional on its face. Nonetheless, the Collier County Board of Commissioners passed it.

Environmental lawsuit

A different lawsuit filed by Friends of the Everglades, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida is currently ongoing and has venue issues similar to the one ruled on by Judge Ruiz.

That lawsuit was filed in US District Court in Miami on June 27. It named the heads of the US Department of Homeland Security, its US Immigration and Customs Enforcement directorate, the Florida Division of Emergency Management and Miami-Dade County as defendants.

To read The Paradise Progressive’s previous coverage of the Collier County sanctuary ordinance’s passage and the concept of sanctuary in general, click here.

Click the button below to read and download the full, 6-page Collier County Bill of Rights Sanctuary Ordinance.

Click the button below to read and download the full 47-page ruling by Judge Rodolfo Ruiz.

Liberty lives in light

© 2025 by David Silverberg

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

Heavily redacted Alligator Alcatraz evacuation plan sheds little light on hurricane response

A hurricane hits Alligator Alcatraz. (Art: AI for TPP/ChatGPT)

Aug. 4, 2025 by David Silverberg

A draft hurricane evacuation plan for the Alligator Alcatraz concentration camp in the Everglades released by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) is so heavily redacted that the public and relevant officials cannot determine its effectiveness or use it for planning purposes.

(The full document is available for viewing and download at the end of this posting.)

“We can’t go by just blacked-out information in a 30-page document and just trust the DeSantis administration,” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-25-Fla.) told CBS News Miami in an interview. “This is what is unacceptable. We absolutely need to have a clear, written, confirmed plan in hand from the Division of Emergency Management and ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement], who are responsible for these detainees at the end of the day.”

“The 33-page draft plan appears to detail alternate facilities that could be used in an evacuation, procedures for detainee transportation and other measures that would be enacted in the event of a powerful storm or other emergency,” stated state Rep. Anna Eskamani (D-42-Orlando) in a Facebook posting. “But specific details are a secret. Officials blacked out almost all of the pages, citing exemptions in the state’s public records law that allow information about ‘tactical operations’ during emergencies to be shielded from disclosure.”

DeSantis released the draft “South Florida Detention Facility Continuity of Operations Plan” on Wednesday, July 30 in response to a report in The Miami Herald newspaper the same day that Alligator Alcatraz lacked an evacuation plan in the event of a major weather event.

“Legacy media made a mistake by concocting a false narrative that can so easily be disproven…” he posted on X. “Failed drive-by attempt…”

He released the draft to Florida’s Voice Radio, a conservative media platform, which headlined its X posting, “WRONG AGAIN! The Miami Herald reports FAKE NEWS that @GovRonDeSantis, @KevinGuthrieFL and @FLSERT  have no “formal hurricane plan” for Alligator Alcatraz. Here it is.”

The Voice then posted two pages of the plan, the cover and a summary sheet. The full 33-page plan was then released to media outlets with extensive redactions. (The plan refers to Alligator Alcatraz as the South Florida Detention Facility (SFDF), its bureaucratic designation.)

The evacuation plan was not posted to any official state website that this author could determine. Since it is still a draft—essentially, the concept of  plan—The Miami Herald was technically correct that Alligator Alcatraz does not have an evacuation plan.

Commentary: The hidden dangers of hiding

Because details of the plan remain secret, emergency managers, law enforcement, medical personnel and local officials cannot take it into account when they make their own hurricane plans should an evacuation be necessary, nor can they coordinate their efforts with those of authorities, either state or federal, at Alligator Alcatraz.

This is particularly acute for officials and law enforcement officers in Collier and Miami-Dade counties, where Alligator Alcatraz sits astride their mutual borders.

There is a historic precedent for a plan’s secrecy causing extreme harm during an emergency.

In 1906 the emergency plans for the city of San Francisco resided in the mind of one man: Fire Chief Dennis Sullivan, who never shared them with anyone. Sullivan was incapacitated in the first shock of the earthquake that occurred in the early hours of April 18. Living on the top story of one of the city’s firehouses, he fell through the floor into the basement when the building broke apart, getting severely scalded by a broken radiator when he hit the bottom.

Sullivan never recovered from his injuries, dying three days later. As a result, first responders and officials had no guidance or direction in their response, which contributed to the city’s extensive damage when it was ravaged by fire.

As the 2012 book Masters of Disaster: The Political and Leadership Lessons of America’s Greatest Disasters by this author states: “…A critical lesson from the San Francisco earthquake and fire is that a plan is only as good as the people who know it. Disaster plans have to be known in advance by key decisionmakers and shared among those people who will implement them. They cannot rely entirely on a single individual and ultimately, they cannot be kept secret.”

Alligator Alcatraz has been so hastily thrown together and poorly conceived that nothing about it—not its detention, inmate processing, housing, food, shelter, or evacuation plan—can be judged at face value as acceptable.

Further, its secrecy in all aspects, whether the refusal to allow unannounced inspections, the difficulties of attorneys to meet their clients (currently the subject of a lawsuit), the blindsiding of local officials, and now the covertness of its evacuation plan make everything about it suspect. As an unfinalized draft, there is no telling which officials have input into the final product. Even  then, if this is the final plan, its secrecy to all but a few officials renders it ineffective.

If Alligator Alcatraz is in all respects legal and proper, as DeSantis contends, it should be open to inspection, visits, detainee access, due process, public scrutiny, press examination and all the other legal standards of incarceration that govern correctional facilities in the United States.

And an evacuation plan that’s secret to all but a few is no plan at all.

Click on the button below to read and download the full “South Florida Detention Facility Continuity of Operations Plan” with redactions.

WARNING: Drastic Florida deportation roundup plan envisions ‘circumventing’ humane treatment, federal restraints

Could this be Florida’s future? Deportees from the United States are processed at El Salvador’s CECOT (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo) prison in March 2025. (Photo: Office of the President of El Salvador)

May 20, 2025 by David Silverberg

Florida’s “Immigration Enforcement Operations Plan” unveiled by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) on May 12 envisions actions that “circumvent” federal regulations and restrictions, including standards and procedures ensuring humane treatment of detainees—and its first use may be against Venezuelans who lost their temporary protected status yesterday, May 19.

The 37-page Plan lays out creation of a state immigration enforcement and detention system separate from the federal one in “support of President Trump’s fight against the ‘deep state’ within federal agencies.”

The “Preliminary Potential Actions” section suggests the most radical actions the state could take. The majority of the Plan is concerned with authorities and areas of responsibility by various state and federal agencies.

Venezuelans who lost their legal status in the United States could be the first aliens to be subject to the Florida plan.

Yesterday the US Supreme Court ruled that President Donald Trump had the authority to revoke the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) of Venezuelans in the United States. TPS allowed Venezuelans fleeing the dictatorial regime of President Nicolas Maduro to legally live and work in the United States for a specified period of time. They are now subject to detention and deportation.

An estimated 900,000 Venezuelans are living in the United States. Of these, an estimated 500,000 are covered by TPS, which was issued twice, in 2021 and 2023. Approximately 350,000, who were granted TPS in the second issuance, are subject to deportation and of these, an estimated 225,000 live in Florida.

If Florida decides to implement its Plan, this population could be the first target, subject to mass roundups and deportations by a state whose officers feel themselves unbound by standards of law, humane treatment or due process.

Key state proposals

Under existing law the federal government and its officers have sole authority for all matters of immigration, naturalization and border security. This is administered through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its enforcement and removal arm, the directorate of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Under the Florida Plan’s recommendations, local police trained under the 287(g) program would become “fully empowered immigration officers,” which the Plan states “would enable the State to bypass the operational bottleneck caused by the limited availability of ICE personnel.”

The 287(g) program trains local police to cooperate and support federal immigration personnel and efforts, but does not supplant them. Under this proposal, state officials, police and local law enforcement officers would be enabled to act with the same powers as federal immigration officers, detaining and ultimately possibly deporting detainees.

To oversee the anti-immigrant effort, the Plan would “Create a command structure led by the state that empowers coordinating officers to act without prior federal authorization.”

In other words, Florida would act independently of the federal government, establishing its own immigration command. It would act independently, taking on a role that was and has been confirmed as federal under the Constitution.

Why would it do this? As the Plan states: “Due to the limitations of the current Federal Executive Order, there has been a lack of leadership coming from the federal government that could be supplemented if the state of Florida were to assume operational control and enabling timely decision-making.”

The Plan proposes waiving “federal detention facility requirements” in order to “expand housing capacity for arrested individuals.”

“One of the stumbling blocks that we perceive exists in the detention section of the overall removal cycle. At present, the Federal government does not possess adequate bedspace capacity for its ambitious, and long overdue, enforcement strategy. While this can be mitigated by better, quicker through-put in physical repatriation—an important factor—it still poses a choke-point to be addressed.”

It continues: “At its current state, ICE is overwhelmed with the number of detainees that have been arrested prior to the state assisting with the process. With the state’s assistance, this number will grow by multitudes, which will likely become unsustainable if ICE were to remain operating at its current state. Many of the individuals arrested by state and local law enforcement will be forced to be released due to the lack of space in ICE detention facilities.”

Under current law and procedure the federal government has standards for housing inmates and detainees to ensure humane, sanitary, and proper treatment and housing. The Plan proposes waiving those requirements to allow holding of inmates under non-standard conditions, presumably substandard ones.

The federal standards are contained in the National Detention Standards (NDS). These are the standards used by ICE. It is against these standards that local jails are judged when it comes to housing federal detainees.

However, the Plan considers NDS too restrictive for what it has in mind.

“The standards are so limiting that many county jails cannot meet the standard even though they are otherwise accredited by the American Correctional Association,” complains the Plan. It finds it “anomalous” that local jails holding American citizens are considered unfit to hold detained aliens.

“This self-limiting proposition works against achieving the President’s goals,” argues the Plan, which also complains that it drives up costs and makes “transportation and logistics more complex and cumbersome.”

To correct this, the Plan suggests that the Department of Homeland Security suspend the standards for the duration of the presidential state of emergency. (Trump declared an emergency on the US southern border on Jan. 20, 2025, the first day he took office.)

As an afterthought, the Plan adds that despite the suspension detainees will still be treated humanely and facilities will try to maintain humane standards.

All of this would be done to rapidly increase capacity. “Waiving select requirements would significantly increase the State’s capacity to detain individuals,” it states. If the standards are suspended, the state would be allowed to hold more people more rapidly under substandard conditions and “pave the way to set up soft-side detention as needed and desirable”—i.e., house them in tents.

If the state cannot build out this holding capacity on its own, it envisions turning to private companies to provide additional space. As the Plan puts it the state could “Utilize existing logistics vendors to establish additional detention space. If the State chooses to forgo the federal detention sites as well as the federal detention standards, logistics vendors are prepared to rapidly deploy detention facilities statewide.”

All of this is intended to hold massive numbers of people swept up in deportation raids, both state and federal.

The only obstacle to implementing the effort envisioned by the Plan is the fact that it may not be reimbursed for the expense by the federal government.

“The federal government has shown itself to be very hesitant to commit to any form of reimbursement to past or future immigration operations,” it complains. “There may come a time when, without federal assistance, a long-term immigration support mission may become fiscally untenable.”

Analysis and commentary: Bad ideas

Make no mistake: This is a plan for a mass roundup of people, using dubious justification, to be housed in questionable circumstances prior to deportation, which may be done by the state of Florida on its own authority. It would “circumvent” or supplant federal authorities, rules and regulations.

With these recommendations the State of Florida is proposing a completely separate state anti-migrant system and command structure without federal oversight, input or approval. Its operations would be conducted by local law enforcement officers who would have the powers of federal immigration officials but without the training, legitimate authority or legal background. Detainees would be housed in facilities and tents unregulated by federal standards of humane treatment including those of nourishment, healthcare and shelter, all of which it views as “bottlenecks” and “chokepoints.”

This would all be done at Florida taxpayers’ expense without any assurance of federal reimbursement or funding. Aside from its legal and humanitarian aspects, it would add an enormous expense to the state budget.

It would also be a gold rush for private for-profit detention companies, which could pursue lucrative, barely monitored contracts no doubt issued with little to no competitive bidding. The potential for graft, corruption and profiteering is enormous.

All this would be done in great haste, “circumventing” all proper procedures for due process, adjudication, regulated law enforcement or oversight.

Why the urgency? Partially because of a flawed, deeply questionable national “emergency,” partially in opposition to a delusional “deep state,” and purely out of what appears to be hatred, prejudice and rage against an alien population, whether legally resident or not. Trump and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem have cited the presence of a Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua, to justify their targeting of Venezuelans.

But Tren de Aragua is tiny group whose presence is being exaggerated to stereotype an entire population. In a press conference on Monday, May 19, Adelys Ferro, executive director of the Venezuelan American Caucus, a non-profit advocacy organization, stated that Tren de Aragua members constituted “just 0.04 percent of our community.”

The Supreme Court decision allowing the Trump regime to revoke TPS for Venezuelans immediately establishes a vulnerable population to be preyed upon by the mechanism envisioned by the Plan.

This is especially relevant to Florida given its large Venezuelan population.

“As a lawyer and as the vice mayor of this city, I will continue to advocate and fight so that our community has access to the resources and information necessary to continue to fight and continue to prepare for what may come from all of this,” said Doral Vice Mayor Maureen Porras (R). Doral, Fla., is home to a Venezuelan population estimated at around 34,000, the largest in the United States.

She also warned, “Currently Venezuela is not in a position to receive its Venezuelans in a safe manner.” (Porras was first profiled by The Paradise Progressive when she ran for state representative in 2020.)

As of this writing, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-26-Fla.), whose district includes Doral, had not issued any statements regarding the loss of TPS on any of his social media accounts, although he has been extremely active in the past in denouncing the Maduro regime.

Right now the most radical elements of the Plan are recommendations only. They can still be stopped by the legislature when it passes its budget for the next fiscal year. People can protest against them, with a reasonable chance of defeating them.

They are evil ideas proposed at an evil time for evil reasons. They’re a form of darkness that should never see the light of day in the Sunshine State.

Click above to download the 37-page PDF Florida Immigration Enforcement Operations Plan with redactions.

Liberty lives in light

© 2025 by David Silverberg

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

SWFL congressmen absent from effort to restore FEMA funds

The United States Capitol. (Photo: Architect of the Capitol)

April 15, 2025 by David Silverberg

While over 80 senators and congressmen from both parties are urging the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to unfreeze funds already approved by Congress to help communities prepare for natural disasters, Southwest Florida’s congressmen are absent from the effort.

Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.), who is running for governor, Rep. Greg Stuebe (R-17-Fla.), and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-26-Fla.), all of whom represent hurricane-vulnerable districts in Southwest Florida, did not sign the letter, sent on the eve of the 2025 hurricane season.

“We are writing to urge the Administration to reinstate the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grant (BRIC) program within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),” states the letter. “BRIC funds are spurring communities across the country to strengthen their resilience to extreme weather, and forgoing these critical investments will only make it harder and more expensive for communities to recover from the next storm.”

The letter was dated May 12 and was addressed to Kristi Noem, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and David Richardson, the acting administrator of FEMA.

The letter explains: “The BRIC program was established by Congress in the 2018 Disaster Recovery Reform Act and signed into law by President Trump with bipartisan support. In the years since, this program has catalyzed community investments in resilient infrastructure, saving federal funds by investing in community preparedness before a disaster strikes.”

Even if reforms need to be made to the program, the signers wrote, the funds should still be reinstated.

Also absent from the letter were Florida’s two senators, Rick Scott and Ashley Moody.

FEMA canceled approximately $882 million in BRIC funding approved in fiscal years 2020 to 2023, calling it “wasteful and ineffective.”

The letter points out that BRIC funding has helped communities harden their infrastructure and prepare and protect themselves from natural disasters like floods and wildfires.

Florida is facing what is expected to be a very active hurricane season this year.

The full text of the letter and signatures can be read by clicking here.

To see all The Paradise Progressive’s past coverage of Rep. Byron Donalds, click here.

Liberty lives in light

© 2025 by David Silverberg

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

The Donalds Dossier: Revelations from a tumultuous town hall meeting

Rep. Byron Donalds responds to a question at his town hall meeting in Estero on Monday. (Photo: Author)

April 24, 2025 by David Silverberg

The town hall meeting of Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.) held at Estero High School is now in the history books.

This was a lot different from his previous town halls. Not only did it generate a lively turnout, it attracted major media, including CNN, and it was covered extensively by local media, which often give scant coverage to politics. It was raucous and rambunctious and that’s where most of the coverage focused.

But it was a political event a cut above the run of the mill in Southwest Florida and given that Donalds is a declared candidate for governor it provided some indicators of the kind of governor he would be.

So what were the broader implications of the meeting, what deeper lessons can be derived from it, and what did it reveal about the politician, the political dynamic in the district, the state and the nation?

Reading the room

A view of the audience just prior to the start of the meeting. (Photo: Author)

After initial indications that the meeting would be highly restricted, when the event occurred it appeared that virtually anyone who wanted to get in could do so. Even with that, the hall was not filled. This author estimates the crowd at 300 to 400.

An indication of the strength of Donalds’ supporters came early when he came out on stage and they gave him a standing ovation. From this author’s vantage, those standing appeared to constitute a quarter of the audience at most.

Questions were written out on cards and the questioners in the audience were named and acknowledged when the questions were asked. This author counted 18 questions being formally asked during the session. Other questions were shouted from the audience, which Donalds occasionally answered as well. Most questions received lengthy answers.

Other than welcoming the audience and thanking the people who arranged the meeting, Donalds did not make any opening statement other than to say he was not going to get into politics (in the sense of purely partisan discussion) and he was not going to address his gubernatorial bid. Instead he opted to go right to the first question. That question, his answer and the audience’s response set the tone and was a precursor of the direction the rest of the meeting would take.

The question was: “As a member of the Oversight Committee, what oversights are you imposing on Elon Musk and DOGE [Department of Government Efficiency]?”

The question brought prolonged, vigorous applause and cheers. “You like that question,” Donalds joked. He answered that Musk was a special White House employee, similar to others that had been appointed by previous administrations. He specifically mentioned President Barack Obama’s appointment of former senator John Kerry as “climate czar” in his administration to deal with climate change issues.

Because DOGE was not run with congressionally appropriated funds, Donalds said, it was outside the House Oversight Committee’s purview.

“What DOGE is doing right now is they’re going through every agency and they’re examining any contracts or any inefficiencies in spending federal dollars,” he said but was interrupted by shouts and expressions of disagreement, with people pointing out DOGE’s mass layoffs and disruption of government operations.

Donalds’ answer and the response began an uproar that never really died down and Donalds never regained full control of the proceedings.

Nonetheless, he compared DOGE’s actions to those taken by President Barack Obama to increase government efficiency. This kicked the uproar into a higher gear and intensity. “You cannot deny that President Obama famously said that he wanted to examine efficiency or lack thereof in the government. Elon Musk is doing the exact same thing,” which elicited even louder expressions of outrage.

“The Oversight Committee is doing the responsible thing, we are letting DOGE complete its work,” he said. “Most of the budget cuts that DOGE will present have to go through the appropriations process. It goes through the Appropriations Committee and most of the judgments of federal spending will occur there and then get an up or down vote in the Appropriations Committee first and then on the floor of the House” before moving to final approval. “That is the process.”

As he was saying this the calls and shouts from the crowd were mounting in volume, complaining that he wasn’t addressing the broader issues created by Musk and DOGE.

But Donalds continued his defense. “Now, it is actually clear that from the President, who is the unitary executive under our system of government…he wants [Musk] to work in the federal government. So, I find it interesting that people who are upset about Elon right now, were not upset, as I brought up earlier, when John Kerry was going around” doing work for the Obama administration as a special employee.

After trying to calm the crowd, Donalds continued. “Here is the last thing. There is a report that comes out every single year. This is the GAO [Government Accountability Office] report. The GAO report, every single year, says the government wastes more than 250 billion dollars a year. 250 billion!” which also elicited shouts of dismissal. “Over the last 20 years the federal government has wasted 3 trillion dollars. (More about GAO and its report below.)

“I believe that it is in the interests of the people of Southwest Florida and of the United States to examine all inefficiencies in the federal government,” which elicited prolonged applause from his supporters. “If there are concerns [it is] that Elon Musk and his team are going through agencies and cancelling contracts that are inefficient”—which brought an outburst of disagreement from the rest of the crowd.

“When appropriations language is ready, under federal law today, Congress has given discretion to the secretaries of the various Cabinet agencies. So what the DOGE is actually doing is that they are working with Cabinet-level secretaries, who have all been confirmed by the United States Senate, to bring their findings to that secretary and then that secretary is the one who is making the decision because the authority has been given to the Cabinet secretary by Congress. You may not like it but that’s the way the law is written.”

After some of the shouting died down from that, he continued: “As a member of Congress, I actually believe that Congress should not give discretion to the federal agencies, no matter who’s president and Congress should actually prescribe how money is spent in the federal government but the Congress has been derelict in its duty and allowed money to go through the federal branch, the executive branch, and they have given full discretion to the executive branch, which goes around Congress and goes around these issues in the United States of America.”

He continued: “This is where there’s a little bit—a little bit—of public perception. If you examine broad-based polling on government efficiencies, it is popular with the American people.”

Then, he asked a question of his own: “For those in the room upset about DOGE; are you going to be upset when DOGE gets to the Department of Defense?” There was a resounding affirmative response. Then he repeated the question and the response rose higher. “Every recommendation that DOGE makes, is approved by the Cabinet-level secretary and confirmed by the United States Senate.”

Then he stated, “At the Oversight Committee we have to actually observe DOGE do its work first and we’re in the process of doing this, number one. Number two, for true accountability if we truly believe it’s necessary true accountability for DOGE will be found in the appropriations process. At that point, any recommendations that DOGE has made, the Cabinet-level secretary will be reflected in budgetary requests and it will get an up or down vote through the appropriations process.”

Answering that question took approximately 7 minutes.

Analysis: Call and response

Elon Musk wields a chain saw at a meeting of the Conservative Political Action Committee on Feb. 20, 2025 (Photo: Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons)

The entire event took about 90 minutes. It is beyond the scope of this essay to recount every question and answer. (The full meeting can be seen in a 1-hour, 30-minute video on YouTube posted by Forbes magazine. Fair warning: the audio is poor and ads precede the video. Donalds also posted a full video on his Facebook page, also with poor sound.)

All the media coverage of the meeting has focused on its raucousness and the anger of the audience. A major question, though, is: why was it so raucous and why were constituents so angry?

It was not because there was any kind of advance planning or “astroturfing” (paid disruptors) to cause chaos. Rather, as was clear from the very first question and answer there was a yawning reality gulf between Donalds and his audience.

Each appeared to exist in a separate universe and there was little to no connection between them. Donalds’ answers, which uniformly defended President Donald Trump, Elon Musk and the regime, also presented a picture that, while presented as factual, was completely at odds with the reality understood and experienced by constituents.

As shown in the first answer, Donalds was putting DOGE in the context of the congressional appropriations process and addressing it as a regular budgetary process. But the audience, like the rest of the American public, is experiencing DOGE as a furious, unchecked, personally-directed purge of the federal government, with massive layoffs, severe cuts to services, disruption of orderly processes, threats to mandated benefits and intrusion into personal information.

Donalds would not acknowledge or address these concerns among his constituents. Instead, he blindly recited the Trumpist catechism and defended the regime’s actions. He did not provide even a hint of sympathy or understanding for constituent concerns. His approach was that if he explained it, or in the phrase he repeatedly used, “if we’re intellectually honest,” it would be sufficient.

He also repeated assertions that were wildly at variance with what the rest of the audience understood to be the truth, prompting amazement and outrage.

(At this point it seems appropriate to address some of the inaccuracies and misconceptions in Donalds’ first answer.

For example, there is no equivalency between previous special presidential employees and Elon Musk. John Kerry was Special Presidential Envoy for Climate of the United States from 2021 to 2024. He represented the United States in climate forums and made recommendations to other government agencies to accommodate climate issues. He did this as a highly qualified former US senator and secretary of state. There were no instant layoffs, agency closings or data intrusions at his command. Elon Musk is a private citizen and profit-driven entrepreneur with no prior government background who has physically wielded a chainsaw to demonstrate his approach to government operations.

The GAO report referenced by Donalds is the annual report on federal programs with fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative goals or actions. As part of its mandate GAO annually suggests hundreds of ways to address problems, reduce costs and boost revenue. It makes suggestions, often of a very technical or financial nature, for achieving those ends. In the 2024 report it made 112 suggestions, recommending for example that “Congress and the Internal Revenue Service should take action to improve sole proprietor tax compliance, which could increase revenue by hundreds of millions of dollars per year,” or saving money by “using predictive models to make investment decisions on deferred maintenance and repair for federal buildings and structures.” It has never recommended—much less imposed—abruptly closing down entire agencies or making mass layoffs. Even so it estimates that its recommendations have saved the US government $667 billion over the past 13 years.

Also, if DOGE and Musk were really just making recommendations to be worked through the appropriations process, all the closings and layoffs would be submitted as recommendations to Congress for consideration during the normal 2025 appropriations process. They would not be  implemented until the 2026 fiscal year. They would be examined, debated and then approved by Congress, and conducted in an orderly fashion, not suddenly imposed by executive fiat and lockouts.)

Other assertions that Donalds made during the meeting were:

  • That the answer to gun violence lies in mental health care rather than any kind of gun restrictions or red flag laws, which he opposes. “It always goes back to the mental health of the shooter,” he said.
  • That DOGE/Musk access to Social Security information is equivalent to the access allowed to 53 students under President Joe Biden’s administration. (Donalds didn’t elaborate on the source of this information and it is nowhere else on the Internet that this author could discern. It’s not clear whether these alleged 53 students were interns at the Social Security Administration, when, why or where this happened or what they accessed.) As Donalds put it: “It is not intellectually honest to be upset with Elon Musk and not with the 53 students.”
  • That DOGE/Musk are examining Social Security files to find waste, fraud and abuse and have found 300 alleged recipients over the age of 100. (This claim was debunked by Leland Dudek, the acting commissioner, who said in February that the raw numbers did not reflect actual benefits being paid and that only 89,106 people older than 100 years were listed on Social Security rolls as of December 2024. “The reported data are people in our records with a Social Security number who do not have a date of death associated with their record. These individuals are not necessarily receiving benefits.”)
  • That the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB) is unconstitutional and uncontrolled by Congress. “I want to get rid of the CFPB, it is a rogue agency” and “a terrible agency,” he said.
  • That Trump’s tariffs are “re-setting the balance of global trade.”
  • That nuclear power should be the future source of energy in Florida rather than solar power, which Donalds said does not produce sufficient energy. Also, he said discarding and recycling solar equipment is ultimately dirtier and more polluting than nuclear power.
  • That 60 percent of phone calls to the Social Security Administration for assistance are fraudulent.
  • That the problem with diversity, equity and intrusion (DEI) lies in the equity portion, since life is inherently inequitable and that DEI programs and practices do not level the playing field. “Equity is an impossible standard to achieve,” he said. The only time Donalds became angry and emotional was when he was giving this answer, which he took personally.
  • That the US Agency for International Development (US AID) was pursuing programs that were not in the American interest and were even treasonous.
  • That the No Rogue Rulings Act (House Resolution (HR) 1526), which would restrict the ability of federal district judges to issue national injunctions, and passed by the US House on April 10 with Donalds’ vote, would not pass the Senate.
  • That illegal aliens have more rights and due process entitlements than American citizens. He charged that President Joe Biden abused the asylum process. Donalds said that he supports illegal alien deportations.
  • That parents and “community members” have a right to inspect school instructional materials, because they make up the bulk of the taxpaying base but that school boards have final say.
  • That President Donald Trump has pledged not to touch Social Security and it will not be subject to congressional budget reconciliation but that if it becomes insolvent there will be an automatic cut, so it must be reformed.   
  • That he missed votes in Congress because he was campaigning for Trump.
  • That he does not vote party when in Congress but “I vote the Constitution.”
  • That Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth did not violate the Espionage Act when he shared classified operational intelligence in Signal chats.

The most dramatic moment in the meeting occurred when a question was asked whether Israel’s cutoff of water and food to the Palestinians of Gaza was a war crime, along with the deaths of 35,000 Gazans.

Donalds answered that the 35,000 casualty figure was from Hamas, that Israel had been careful in its strikes on Gaza, that Hamas was using both Israeli hostages and civilian Gazans as human shields and Israeli forces had warned them before striking.

He said that the United States would have reacted similarly if Mexican drug cartels had taken American hostages in the United States. “On October 7, it was not an Israeli incursion into Gaza, it was Hamas that incurred into Israel,” he said. “We should stand behind Israel 100 percent and make sure the hostages come home. My stance is to stand by our ally.”

This answer prompted an audience member to stand up and loudly protest on behalf of the Palestinians. She continued to do so until a security officer approached her to remove her and she left of her own volition.

An audience member protests on behalf of Palestinians. (Photo: Author)

Analysis: Omens and portents

First, credit must be given where credit is due: Byron Donalds did not have to hold this town hall meeting at all.

It was a risky idea from the start and no doubt there were voices in his camp arguing against it. He could have easily let it slide and been none the worse for wear. In fact, the head of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee has recommended that all Republican members of Congress avoid town hall meetings and Donalds could have followed his guidance.

He could have made the meeting a gubernatorial campaign rally but he did not. Nor did the questions seem to be filtered to avoid challenges or controversy.

Beyond subjecting himself to angry constituents, Donalds risked damaging his gubernatorial campaign. Whether the meeting proves detrimental or provides useful publicity remains to be seen but it certainly gave him some local and national headlines.

Contrary to some of those headlines the meeting was not “chaotic” or “in chaos.” Chaos is when punches are thrown, the benches empty and the police charge in with tear gas and tasers. This was certainly rancorous and at times disorderly but it was hardly chaotic. Most people stayed in their seats except when they got up and left, which a significant contingent did early.

But, as stated earlier, what was really in evidence was the vast gulf in the realities between constituents and their congressman.

It was obvious that much of the audience reaction was driven by fear, outrage and worry. The repeated questions about Social Security and DOGE showed key points of concern.

That fear is also fueled by the man in the White House and the tone of hatred, prejudice and rage he exudes to the nation. The day before, those attitudes were on full display in an Easter greeting on the X platform.

President Donald Trump’s Easter greeting on X.

It was no wonder that constituents were fearful, angry and loud in their turn.

A more skillful or empathetic politician would have acknowledged the concerns and explained what he or she was doing to allay them or seek solutions. A more accomplished congressman might have told the audience what he or she was doing on their behalf.

But that was not the approach Donalds took. He was there to recite the Trumpist creed, not connect with the audience. For every question about the activities of Trump, Musk or DOGE he responded with Trumpist talking points and standard Make America Great Again fodder that was often at odds with the audience’s general perception of reality. Several times when challenged about Trump or Musk actions Donalds took refuge in a “whataboutism” response: what about John Kerry? What about the alleged 53 students?

In fact, Donalds’ true constituents appeared to be Donald Trump and Elon Musk. They, at least, will likely be pleased with the meeting results.

Donalds did not reveal himself to be a deep or original thinker in this regard.

After the meeting Donalds was interviewed by the media.

“How do you feel about being a congressman tonight?” asked WINK TV reporter Claire Galt.

“Great. Look, this is part of the reason I signed up for the job a couple of years ago. I do think it’s important to bring information to the electorate,” he replied.

“Did it surprise you?”

“No. I don’t get surprised by much anymore,” he smiled. “You know, you just kind of deal with it as it comes. I could tell from the first question or two what kind of night it was going to be. But that’s alright, it’s part of the business.”

It was a mature and professional answer. It’s also one Donalds should get accustomed to giving—because as long as he remains a faithful Trumpist as he pursues the governorship there are going to be many more nights like the one in Estero.

Rep. Byron Donalds interviewed after his town hall meeting. (Image: WINK TV)

To see all The Paradise Progressive’s past coverage of Rep. Byron Donalds, click here.

Liberty lives in light

© 2025 by David Silverberg

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!

SCOOP! Collier County Republicans condemn Republican officials for supporting TRUMP Act over DeSantis bill—Updated

“When elephants battle, the grass gets trampled”–African proverb. (Art: AI)

Feb. 6, 2025 by David Silverberg

Updated 4:40 pm with additional material.

Updated Feb. 10 with comment from John Meo.

Four prominent local Republican elected officials were condemned in absentia on Monday, Feb. 3, by the Collier County Republican Executive Committee (CCREC) for failing to support an anti-immigration bill favored by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R).

The CCREC voted further to censure the officials if they continued to support the legislative version of the bill in question, the Tackling and Reforming Unlawful Migration Policy (TRUMP) Act (CS/SB 2-B), which passed the both the Florida House and Senate on Jan. 28 in a special session.

None of those condemned were present when the resolution passed by a voice vote.

The condemnation was directed at State Sen. Kathleen Passidomo (R-28-Naples), former president of the Florida Senate, and state Reps. Lauren Melo (R-82-eastern Collier County), Yvette Benarroch (R-81-western Collier County) and Adam Botana (R-80-Lee and northern Collier counties).

The meeting was chaired by CCREC Chair John Meo. Lawyer Douglas Lewis projected both the TRUMP Act and the DeSantis bill version on a screen before the audience. The audience was asked for a show of hands on which legislation they favored. The DeSantis legislation was overwhelmingly favored by a voice vote at the end of the presentation. Meo called the vote unanimous but the group’s parliamentarian corrected him that there were dissenting voices.

At the outset of the meeting Michael Lyster, former chair of the CCREC, argued against proceeding with the agenda item, saying that it was premature and the resolution was improper. He argued that under the CCREC’s rules it cannot censure the party’s elected Republican officials. However, he was ignored.

All the officials were in the Florida capital of Tallahassee at the time and did not participate or have the opportunity to participate in person or remotely. There were no speakers presenting the officials’ side of the story.

The resolution

The Republican Party of Florida (RPOF) officially endorsed the TRUMP Act over DeSantis’ bill, which prompted the CCREC response.

A Republican Party of Florida flyer endorsing the TRUMP Act. Below, the CCREC’s response.
A CCREC flyer responding to the RPOF.

After its establishing clauses stating the current situation as it sees it, the CCREC resolution “formally expresses its displeasure with the Florida Legislature” and “fully supports” both DeSantis’ and Trump’s efforts to deport “criminal illegal aliens.”

It calls on the named Republican legislators to work with DeSantis but if they “fail to work with Governor DeSantis and fail to vote in favor of strong legislation and appropriations, on or before the end of March 2025” on legislation “acceptable to Governor DeSantis” [emphasis theirs], then the CCREC would hold a formal vote censuring the officials.

(Thanks to multiple sources, the full resolution is available at the conclusion of this article.)

Present at the meeting were Collier County commissioners Chris Hall (R-District 2), Dan Kowal (R-District 4), and William McDaniel (R-District 5), School Board members Jerry Rutherford (District 1) and Tim Moshier (District 5). Also attending was Chris Worrell, a Proud Boys member convicted of assaulting police officers with a chemical agent during the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol, who evaded police before being apprehended and incarcerated, and who was just pardoned by Trump.

According to attendees who requested anonymity, the whole event was rushed through, with presentation of the resolutions, debate and a vote taking place in the space of a half hour.

“The CCREC taking action to censure legislators before anything has been decided is totally not within their purview,” Diane de Parys, a former member of the CCREC and president of the Republican Women of SW Florida Federated, told The Paradise Progressive. “The role of the CCREC under the Republican Party of Florida is to get out the vote and taking positions on special session bills that have not been decided is totally wrong in my opinion.”

“Heated, political discourse is to be expected in these challenging times. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with the CCREC disagreeing with how an elected official voted,” noted former Republican county commissioner Penny Taylor in a publicly distributed email. “But leadership who ignore the basic [tenets] of fairness such as giving a man or woman his or her day in court before passing judgement … that leadership is reckless and needs to be questioned.”

“Everyone knew it was going on,” Meo told The Paradise Progressive in a Saturday, Feb., 8th phone call. “Everyone got notice 24 hours beforehand and as far as the number of people complaining, there were very few; not more than two or three.”

The legislators named were able to join remotely. “They had input,” he said. “They could have Zoomed in.” He said he spoke to Melo and Benarroch the week before the meeting. He made the point that the presentation took 35 minutes and was very detailed regarding the dueling bills.

Meo said that there had not been any critical feedback since the meeting and that the majority of Republicans “have been very supportive.”

He also reiterated his support for the substance of the resolution. “We’re in a virtual war with criminal illegals where they’re taking over hotels in cities,” he said. He also hoped that DeSantis, as head of the Florida Republican Party would work out a compromise with legislative leaders but “stay strong” because one thing he cannot abide is having immigration enforcement in the office of Commissioner of Agriculture.

Comment was also requested from Passidomo, Melo, Benarroche, and Botana but no response had been received as of posting time. (This report will be updated if responses are received.)

The context

The CCREC vote comes amidst a dispute between DeSantis and the legislature over the best means of cracking down on undocumented migrants in Florida.

On Jan. 13, DeSantis called for a special session of the legislature in order to pass 10 measures against undocumented migrants, among other proposals. The governor’s bill would:

  1. Mandate maximum participation in the 287(g) deportation program, with penalties for non-compliance, including suspension of officials;
  2. Establish a state crime for entering the U.S. illegally and a process for self-deportation;
  3. Appoint a dedicated officer to oversee coordination with federal authorities and the Unauthorized Alien Transport Program (UATP);
  4. Expand UATP to detain and facilitate the deportation of illegal aliens from the U.S.;
  5. Broaden the legal definition of gang-related activities to include more groups of dangerous illegal aliens;
  6. Repeal in-state college tuition for illegal immigrant students;
  7. Require voter registration affirmation of U.S. citizenship and Florida residency;
  8. Increase penalties for unauthorized aliens committing voter fraud or providing false voter registration information;
  9. Mandate identity verification for foreign remittance transfers; and
  10. Create a rebuttable presumption that illegal aliens are flight risks and deny bail. 

Florida state Senate President Sen. Ben Albritton (R-56-DeSoto and Hardee counties) and Speaker of the House Rep. Daniel Perez (R-116-Miami-Dade County) pushed back against DeSantis’ special session call, labeling it “premature.”

In a memorandum issued within hours of DeSantis’ call, the two stated: “It is completely irresponsible to get out ahead of any announcements President Trump will make, especially when uninformed or ill-timed state action could potentially impair or impede the success of President Trump’s forthcoming efforts to end illegal immigration, close our borders, and protect the sovereignty of our nation.”

The dispute became personal as DeSantis accused Albritton and Perez of “theatrics” and called them “RINOs” (Republicans in Name Only) and said their bill “gutted all the enforcement provisions” in his bill.

“This  is really the SWAMP Act,” he scoffed and complained the bill, “takes power away from me … the power that I’m currently exercising now.”

After an initial standoff, the legislative leaders convened the governor’s special session on Jan. 28 but then immediately adjourned it, without passing any legislation. Then, the same day, they convened their own session and passed the TRUMP Act.

The major difference between the governor’s proposal and the legislature’s bill was that authority for enforcement was put in the hands of the Commissioner of Agriculture, in this case Florida Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson.

In 2023, DeSantis had used his authority as governor and state funds to transfer migrants to locations such as Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., and the Vice Presidential Residence in Washington, DC, as a show of protest and to make a political point. Under the TRUMP Act he would no longer have that authority.

DeSantis was clearly furious when the legislature passed the TRUMP Act.

“They decided to do a bill that not only won’t work, that actually is weaker than what we have today,” he said during a roundtable discussion at the Brevard County’s Sheriff’s Office in Titusville. “Everything that I’ve proposed is stronger than what the Legislature has done.”

Albritton and Perez slapped back with a letter issued the same day: “The Legislature will not act in a disingenuous or dishonorable way by attacking anyone, especially our law enforcement. Unlike others, the Legislature is not interested in misleading or attacking Floridians, especially Florida law enforcement. Our number one goal is to work together with President Trump. Anyone that says anything otherwise is not reading the bill, not reading executive orders, or just not telling the truth.”

DeSantis threatened to act politically against legislators who voted for the TRUMP Act by using funding from his Florida Freedom Fund Political Action Committee to oppose them in primaries.

“The FL Freedom Fund was instrumental in raising huge sums of $ to defeat Amendments 3 and 4 in 2024,” he posted on X on Jan. 30. “For the 2026 cycle, the FFF will raise even more resources (1) to ensure support for a strong conservative gubernatorial candidate and (2) to support strong conservative candidates in legislative primaries. We need to elect strong leaders who will build off FL’s success and who will deliver on the promises made to voters.”

He stated he would veto the legislation when it came to his desk.

As of this writing, there are indications that the two sides were in discussions and might find an accommodation.

“We’ve had great discussions. I think we’re going to land the plane,” DeSantis said on Feb. 3.

Analysis: Impact

Locally, it’s unclear how much weight the CCREC condemnation or censure will have in local Republican politics or how much influence it will have with local Republican lawmakers. However, it yet again displays a streak of authoritarianism that has long been associated with the CCREC and with those local Republican activists who repeatedly use threats to intimidate officials into surrendering to their demands.

And it also bears noting the real losers in all these disputes: migrants and immigrants of all legal status whose labor provides the products, services and assistance that keeps the local, state and national economies working and prosperous.

Below, the full text of the CCREC resolution.

Liberty lives in light

© 2025 by David Silverberg

Help defend democracy in Southwest Florida—donate here!