Rep. Byron Donalds addresses the Conservative Political Action Committee in 2022.
Oct. 11, 2023 by David Silverberg
Even as he expresses support for Israel and denounces President Joe Biden, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.) is using anti-Semitic tropes and the stereotype of Jewish financier George Soros to raise funds while alleging a conspiracy against himself.
His e-mailed appeal issued yesterday, Oct. 10, comes amidst rising fears of anti-Semitism and tightened security at Jewish houses of worship in the United States.
“George Soros has been quietly funding a new generation of far-Left activists on TikTok – a platform that’s beholden to the Chinese Communist Party – to manipulate the 2024 election,” stated the fundraising appeal.
As Donalds put it: “Documents reviewed by the New York Post revealed George Soros is paying an army of Gen-Z TikTokers to indoctrinate young voters with Marxist propaganda that pushes his left-wing causes and praises Joe Biden.”
The fundraiser quotes the article, stating: “The woke foot soldiers regularly go into battle on behalf of abolishing border enforcement, defunding cops, and ending cash bail according to their website.”
Donalds’ fundraising appeal continues: “But Soros’s TikTok influencers don’t just praise Biden and the radical Left. They’re also viciously smearing MAGA patriots at all levels of government – and as a pro-Trump black conservative leading the Biden impeachment inquiry, I’m Public Enemy No. 1.”
Further, “Some far-Left radicals are even calling for MAGA Republicans like me to be thrown out of Congress and banned from holding political office forever!”
Donalds’ use of Soros as a scapegoat is nothing new.
“In far-right circles worldwide, Soros’ philanthropy often is recast as fodder for outsized conspiracy theories, including claims that he masterminds specific global plots or manipulates particular events to further his goals,” according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a Jewish organization that fights anti-Semitic slurs. “Many of those conspiracy theories employ longstanding antisemitic myths, particularly the notion that rich and powerful Jews work behind the scenes, plotting to control countries and manipulate global events.”
Soros, 92, announced his retirement from philanthropy in June, when his son Alexander assumed control of the Open Society Foundations founded by his father. Those foundations are dedicated to “build vibrant and inclusive democracies whose governments are accountable to their people,” according to their website.
“Even if no antisemitic insinuation is intended, casting a Jewish individual as a puppet master who manipulates national events for malign purposes has the effect of mainstreaming antisemitic tropes and giving support, however unwitting, to bona fide antisemites and extremists who disseminate these ideas knowingly and with malice,” states the ADL.
Ever since Hamas launched its attacks on Israel on Saturday, Oct. 7, Donalds has been vigorously expressing his support for Israel and denouncing President Joe Biden.
“Israel is under attack, Americans are being held hostage by Islamic-Nazi murders, the Middle East is unraveling & JOE BIDEN hosted a BBQ at the White House,” Donalds stated on X on Monday, Oct. 9. The following day he stated: “Thank God for the State of Israel. May God Bless America and our brothers and sisters of the sacred and treasured land of Israel.”
In remarks to the nation yesterday, Oct. 10, President Biden, in addition to making clear his condemnation of terrorist atrocities and support for Israel, announced measures to protect Americans from hate and persecution at home.
“In cities across the United States of America, police departments have stepped up security around centers of Jewish life,” he stated. “And the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are working closely with state and local law enforcement and Jewish community partners to identify and disrupt any domestic threat that could emerge in connection with these horrific attacks.”
He emphasized: “Let’s be real clear: There is no place for hate in America — not against Jews, not against Muslims, not against anybody. We reject — we reject — what we reject is terrorism. We condemn the indiscriminate evil, just as we’ve always done.”
“I encouraged [Donald Trump] to run for Speaker because he could unite the Republican conference in historic ways,” stated Steube yesterday, Oct. 6, on X. “But I have full confidence in President Trump’s pick for our Speaker: [Jim Jordan]. We must unite around Chairman Jordan who has led the charge in [investigating weaponization of the federal government] and the [House Judiciary Committee]’s critical work to protect our freedoms. Jim is a great patriot who can get the job done! He holds the respect of so many in our conference and I trust him to lead!
“No one is better prepared to lead the House from the minute they are elected than [Steve Scalise]” Diaz-Balart declared on X on October 5.
Shortly after midnight on Friday, Oct. 6, Trump issued a post on his Truth Social network endorsing Jordan, reciting Jordan’s background and accomplishments and concluding (capitalization as posted): “He will be a GREAT Speaker of the House & has my Complete & Total Endorsement!”
DeSantis’ endorsement was more indirect: “…I think you have guys like Chip Roy from Texas who’s excellent, Thomas Massie from Kentucky who’s excellent, Jim Jordan from Ohio” said DeSantis in an interview on South Carolina’s WSPA-TV channel. “These guys are all good guys and I think they would do a good job.”
Whoever is elected Speaker must win a majority of House votes. House Democrats have remained united as a bloc, effectively making them kingmakers amidst Republican infighting and factionalism.
Scalise, Donalds and Southwest Florida
Scalise, currently the House majority leader, has some familiarity with Southwest Florida.
During Donalds’ 2020 primary race for Congress, Scalise was a heavy contributor to Donalds’ primary and general campaigns. The support came from two Scalise-related committees: Scalise for Congress and his Eye of the Tiger Political Action Committee (PAC). In 2020, Scalise for Congress contributed $4,000 to Donalds so he could retire some of his primary election campaign debt and Eye of the Tiger PAC contributed $10,000.
These were particularly important contributions coming as they did during a nine-candidate primary race when Donalds’ success was very uncertain.
Scalise had previously clashed with Donalds’ predecessor, Rep. Francis Rooney when Rooney was proposing a ban on oil drilling off the Gulf coast.
Like the Paradise Coast, Scalise’s Louisiana district is dominated by shoreline and wetlands—but unlike Florida, it is home to an extensive offshore oil exploration and exploitation industry. Indeed, Scalise is such a spokesman for the oil industry that one trade publication was led to ask if he was the “oil industry’s best friend in Congress.”
In 2018 Rooney and Scalise had a memorable exchange when they were on the House floor together and Scalise told Rooney that the oil industry would object to his efforts to keep the eastern Gulf off-limits to exploration. In an address to a private group at the Alamo gun range and store in Naples on May 30, 2018, Rooney related what happened next:
“I was on the House floor with Steve Scalise and I got in his face and I said, ‘You’re telling me that the industry won’t go for protecting the Eastern Gulf in Florida? What industry are you talking about? I’m talking about tourism. I’m talking about why we’re all here, okay? Just because Louisiana is a pit, doesn’t mean we want to become a pit. Okay?’”
In the 116th Congress, neither man got what he wanted: Scalise never opened the eastern Gulf and Rooney never closed it. However, with the help of then-Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-12-Calif.), Rooney was able to get a ban on offshore drilling approved by the entire House, although it never advanced in the Senate.
Donalds’ pivot to Jordan as Speaker represents a rejection of the man who was one of his earliest backers.
However, Donalds has also based his past campaigns and current standing on his relationship with Trump.
Jordan, a founder of the House Freedom Caucus, a closed, invitation-only group of extreme conservative members of Congress, has been in the House since 2007 and has loudly and aggressively fought nearly anyone with whom he came in contact.
As The Washington Post reported in a 2019 article on Jordan: “For years, Jordan led a band of misfit conservatives who grappled not so much with Democrats, but Republicans: helping drive two GOP speakers of the House out of town, killing bills that didn’t pass purity tests, shutting down the government. Jordan became such a despised member of his conference that some of his colleagues began suggesting to party leaders that they redistrict him out of his seat.”
Since 2016 Jordan has been an outspoken and extreme partisan of Trump both when Trump was president and afterwards. Jordan worked to discredit investigations into Russian election interference and did everything he could to prevent the first Trump impeachment inquiry. He was a leading congressional advocate of the big lie that Trump actually won the 2020 election and voted to overturn the election. After the Jan. 6 riot and insurrection he refused to assist the January 6th Committee investigating it and defied its subpoena.
A Jordan speakership promises to be extreme, Trumpist and completely obstructionist.
An alternative was put forward by head of the Democrats, House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-8-NY) in an op-ed in The Washington Post that appeared yesterday, Oct. 6, titled, “A bipartisan coalition is the way forward for the House.”
Democratic and Republican cooperation is essential to accomplishing the nation’s business, Jeffries argued. “In short, the rules of the House should reflect the inescapable reality that Republicans are reliant on Democratic support to do the basic work of governing. A small band of extremists should not be capable of obstructing that cooperation,” he wrote.
“At this point, we simply need Republican partners willing to break with MAGA extremism, reform the highly partisan House rules that were adopted at the beginning of this Congress and join us in finding common ground for the people,” he stated.
A vote on the new Speaker is expected shortly after the House reconvenes next week.
For the first time in American history, the Speaker of the House of Representatives has been ousted from his position by the members of Congress.
The vote this afternoon was 216 to 210, with 210 Republicans voting to keep him and 208 Democrats voting against him. Eight Republicans voted against him. Three Republicans and four Democrats did not vote, otherwise the party blocs remained solid.
Southwest Florida’s congressional delegation, Reps. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.), Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.) and Mario Diaz-Balart (R-26-Fla.), all voted to keep McCarthy, which meant voting “nay” on House Resolution 757, which stated that the Speaker’s position was vacant.
In the immediate wake of the vote, only Diaz-Balart issued a statement on his vote. He blamed the ouster on “radical left socialist” members.
“A small group of members in coordination with the radical left socialist squad are attempting to derail the conservative GOP agenda,” he stated on X, formerly Twitter. “Over the last 9 months, Speaker McCarthy has demonstrated his ability to unite the GOP, kept his promise to pass the strongest border security bill, and pushed back against the Biden Administration’s wasteful spending, regulatory overreach and woke agenda. I refuse to vote with the socialists in the squad to remove the Speaker chosen by GOP members.”
The vote was engineered by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-1-Fla.) who launched the effort because of McCarthy’s willingness to compromise with the White House and Democrats on a number of issues.
The Speaker’s gavel now passes to the President Pro Tempore of the House designated by McCarthy, which is Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-10-NC). He will preside until a new Speaker is elected.
Rep. Byron Donalds explains his failure to vote on Fox News Sunday. (Image: Fox News Sunday)
Oct. 2, 2023 by David Silverberg
Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.), must now live with the consequences of his failure to cast a vote on one of the most momentous issues of the 118th Congress.
The failure to cast a vote implies an inability to make a decision, to take a stand, to hold and defend a political position. Doing those things are the marks of a leader and a skillful politician.
In this case, Donalds’ non-vote was an act of cowardice and dereliction of duty, a failure to serve his constituents and the partisans who supported and elected him.
Why is this? What were the circumstances of the vote and why was it so important? What are the likely consequences of this failure for Donalds, his ambitions and his political future?
The circumstances
On the afternoon of last Saturday, Sept. 30, it looked like the United States federal government would shut down at midnight.
House Speaker Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-20-Calif.) had until that moment been unable to get the Republican caucus to vote in favor of a continuing resolution (CR) to keep the government funded.
The chief opponent of that CR was Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-1-Fla.), a member of the hard-right, Trumpist, 45-member, Make America Great Again (MAGA) Freedom Caucus.
Donalds had been a player in events leading to that impasse. He had negotiated with McCarthy on behalf of the Caucus and endorsed a compromise CR. That CR never advanced and Donalds was ferociously denounced by Gaetz and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-14-Ga.), as well as his own constituents for his willingness to compromise.
McCarthy wanted to pass his CR with only Republican votes but it was clear that he couldn’t do that by the deadline so he turned to the House Democrats. The CR resulting from those negotiations had no money for Ukraine, which Democrats and many Republicans wanted. However, it would keep government functioning for 45 more days until a more complete solution could be found.
Very importantly for Southwest Florida, the CR contained $16 billion to replenish the National Disaster Relief Fund and keep the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) functioning. FEMA is playing an outsized role in the region given the ravages of Hurricane Ian last year. FEMA funding is also essential to all of Florida in the wake of this year’s Hurricane Idalia.
So this was not some abstract intellectual debate being played out in some remote ivory tower. While local media looked backward and celebrated individual tales of resilience and signs of recovery on the anniversary of the hurricane, all future progress was in jeopardy. The CR also included money to keep people clothed, housed and fed on the ground in Southwest Florida.
On Saturday afternoon the new CR went to the House floor. It needed a two-thirds vote of the members to suspend the rules and go straight to a vote of approval. The votes were there and it passed overwhelmingly, 335 to 91. All Democrats but one voted for it along with 126 Republicans. Only 90 Republicans voted against it.
In the final tally, 426 of 435 members of Congress—roughly 98 percent—voted on the CR one way or another. None abstained (an option if a member doesn’t want to vote for or against a measure). Seven members did not vote at all.
One of these was Byron Donalds. (The others were: Reps. Earl Carter (R-1-Ga.), John Carter (R-31-Texas), John Joyce (R-13-Pa.), Anna Paulina Luna (R-13-Fla.), Mary Petolta (D-At Large-Alaska), and Katie Porter (D-47-Calif.).
To date, Donalds has offered several explanations for his failure to vote.
Immediately after the vote he announced on X that he would have voted “no” but the time to vote closed before he could cast his ballot.
On Sunday, Donalds appeared on Fox News Sunday and was asked directly about his absence.
“First of all, why did you miss this vote and not vote?” asked host Shannon Bream. “Everyone knew it was coming, it was a big deal. You put something on X, formerly known as Twitter, but the replies are pretty brutal.”
“Listen, here’s what happened. I was coming up the elevator in the Capitol Building to go vote,” replied Donalds. “They closed the vote down because there were members on the House floor who were changing their votes from ‘yes’ to ‘no.’ I was told that there were senators on our floor begging our leadership to close the vote so the measure would pass because it needed two-thirds. The leadership knew I was a ‘no.’ If I was a ‘yes’ they would have held the vote open for me. It’s that simple.”
Analysis: The ‘whys’ have it
Donalds’ explanation simply does not hold water. Members have a specified time in which to vote. The period for changing votes comes after the formal voting has closed. Four hundred twenty six members of Congress were present and able to vote during that time. (Although one, Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-16-NY) pulled a fire alarm in a House office building, supposedly to gain more time but he says accidentally. The incident is under investigation although Republicans are calling for his prosecution.)
But in the case of Donalds, one has to wonder why he was supposedly rushing to vote during the change period, after the vote had closed.
The obvious conclusion is that he was present in the Capitol for the vote; he knew the voting was taking place and he could have easily voted. But he didn’t want to vote, so he held back until the voting was fully closed and then blamed his absence on the Republican leadership, i.e., McCarthy.
The other alternatives are that he was so neglectful and indifferent to the vote that he simply ignored it until it was too late (perhaps having a Johnny Walker in his office?) or he is so spectacularly inept after nearly three years in Congress that he doesn’t know the Capitol, doesn’t know how to get to the House chamber and doesn’t know how to vote.
It’s hard not to draw a conclusion from this interpretation of events: that purely and simply, Byron Donalds is lying.
This raises the question: Why would Donalds deliberately not want to vote?
It puts the spotlight on the difficulty of making the kinds of hard choices that face leaders.
If Donalds had voted “no,” he would have been voting to significantly damage the United States by bringing its government to a shuddering halt. More parochially, he would have been voting against the $16 billion in disaster aid that his state and district so desperately need. He would have been directly harming the people of Southwest Florida who are looking for federal help at this time and who voted for him in the last election. He would have come in for outrage and criticism for enabling this suicidal course of action and not just from marginal liberal bloggers but from community leaders and elected local Republicans.
However, if he voted “yes,” he would have outraged his MAGA base and his idol Donald Trump, who had called for a shutdown to stop his own prosecution. Donalds was already being hammered by Gaetz for his willingness to compromise on the CR, now the voices calling him a Republican In Name Only and a turncoat to the extreme Trumpist faith he has embraced would have reached a screeching new volume.
Neither course was palatable. He could have abstained but that would have also been on the record and drawn criticism—and he would have stood out as the only abstention.
So the easiest—if most cowardly—course was to skip the vote altogether, if possible, and hope no one would notice. Then, when it was noticed, he tried to shift the blame to forces outside his control.
Even Fox News didn’t buy that.
Commentary: The consequences
It is premature to say that this action—or inaction—ends Donalds’ political career. People have come back from worse setbacks in the past.
But it certainly doesn’t help at all.
Donalds’ political career has been marked by his ambition. He embraced the Republican Party credo of “just win, baby,” which holds any falsehood, innuendo, hypocrisy or contradiction acceptable as long as there’s election victory at the end of the day. He built his brand as “everything the fake news media says doesn’t exist: a [Donald Trump]-supporting, liberty-loving, pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment black man.” It enabled him to win election and represent a heavily MAGA, 85-percent white district. He fought masks and embraced vaccine skepticism during the worst pandemic of the century as it killed constituents. He is willing to front for the nuclear power industry and follow an ideological line that often contradicts the real interests of his coastal district.
Once in the House, his ambition glowed again when he ran for the third-place Republican position, only to lose. Then, as a sophomore representative-elect, he had the brazenness to put himself forward as a Speaker of the House, nominated by no less than his close friend Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-3-Colo.). It brought him international prominence, good committee assignments and raised his star in the Republican firmament.
Donalds’ unique position as a vocal black MAGA Republican provides all sorts of opportunities: there was always the Speakership, or else a slot as Donald Trump’s vice presidential running mate, or a run at governor of Florida in 2026 when the current governor steps down. There was the chance for significant fundraising, attracting major donors and spreading his own largesse to build his following among other Republicans and the public at large. And there were the perks of national, mainstream media appearances, speaking slots at conservative conclaves and the chance to meet and greet famous politicians and celebrities.
However, by ducking this important vote and displaying abject cowardice in the face of both enemies and circumstances, he has confirmed what his critics have long alleged: that he lacks the character and capability to handle those higher offices and greater responsibilities.
Instead of a smooth potential path to the speakership or higher office in the Republican caucus, the failure to vote showed Donalds unable to lead or take a stand and face the consequences. He transgressed Trump’s sacred dictum that a shutdown was desirable. He enraged Gaetz and the Gaetzniks who are ready to burn the nation to the ground. He also provided Gaetz a weapon against himself should they both pursue the governorship. He violated the holy unity of the Freedom Caucus, whose whole purpose is to ensure lockstep loyalty to whatever positions 80 percent of them adopt. Constituents who tend to ignore congressional politics may forget this incident but his absence will be remembered by his Republican colleagues in the House. And he has invited a MAGA revolt in his own district that could take the form of an even more extreme primary challenge in the next election.
Donalds has responded to criticism of his non-vote with his usual barrage of accusations, imprecations and denunciations of President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Democrats, border crossers, and phantom far-left radicals.
That may fool some people who, as President Abraham Lincoln once said, can be fooled all of the time.
But as Lincoln also famously noted: “You can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”
The United States Capitol. (Photo: Architect of the Capitol)
Sept. 30, 2023 by David Silverberg
Mere hours before deadline, at 2:42 pm this afternoon, the US House of Representatives approved a bill that funds the government for the next 45 days and averts a government shutdown.
The vote on the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2024 and Other Extensions Act (House Resolution (HR) 5860 was a lopsided 335 to 91 with 7 members not voting.
Among the Southwest Florida delegation, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.) did not vote.
Rep. Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.) voted against the bill.
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-26-Fla.) voted for the bill.
“Today, voting closed before I could cast my NO vote,” stated Donalds on X, formerly Twitter. “I DO NOT support today’s flawed CR [Continuing Resolution], which continues Pelosi’s reckless spending, fails to secure our border & pushes us closer to the fiscal brink. Instead, I offered a conservative alternative, which would’ve slashed agency spending by 29% and secured OUR border.”
Even Steube was scornful of Donalds’ absence.
“Should’ve just pulled a fire alarm and bought some time,” Steube stated on X, referring to Rep. Jamal Bowman (D-16-NY) who pulled a fire alarm in a House office building, triggering an evacuation. (Bowman said he accidentally pulled the alarm as he was rushing to vote. The incident is being investigated.)
Diaz-Balart did not issue a statement on his “yea” vote.
Cindy Banyai, Donalds’ past Democratic opponent, was also scornful of his absence.
“Byron Donalds did not vote on the Continuing Resolution to keep the government open. He was never serious about making the government work for you. He only wanted to make massive cuts to appease his donors,” she stated on X.
The bill passed with 209 Democratic and 126 Republican votes. 90 Republicans and a single Democrat opposed it. Seven members did not vote, including Donalds.
Following the vote, the bill was sent to the Senate for passage.
Rep. Matt Gaetz denounces Rep. Byron Donalds on the floor of the US House of Representatives. (Image: C-SPAN)
Sept. 27, 2023 by David Silverberg
It is extraordinary that a congressional impasse that could bring the world’s richest and most powerful government to a halt has featured a personal fight between three Florida men—one of whom represents Southwest Florida.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-1-Fla.) has become the face of intransigent, anti-government, pro-Trump fanaticism in the US House of Representatives.
Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.), ordinarily a vociferous Make America Great Again (MAGA) Trumper, was the face of willingness to compromise within the House Republican caucus and is now under attack for a supposed lack of extremist zeal.
And former President Donald Trump is playing the role of inciter and agitator, urging a government shutdown in the hopes it will defund federal prosecutors seeking to bring him to justice.
Like the three witches in William Shakespeare’s play Macbeth, these three Florida men have been fighting over the ingredients in their cauldron. Each has his reason for cooking the toxic brew, each has an idea of what should be in it, and none care that its contents just may poison the United States of America.
What has happened
Every federal fiscal year, which begins on Oct. 1, Congress must approve and the President must sign 12 appropriations bills to fund the government for the next fiscal year.
Congress rarely makes its deadline. Instead, it often consolidates all the bills into a giant spending measure called a “continuing resolution” (CR) that funds the government at existing levels for a limited amount of time while all the details are worked out and the bills are actually passed.
Critics on both sides of the aisle have often complained that CRs are too complex, cumbersome and hasty for responsible budgeting. However, they do provide a mechanism to keep the government going, which is usually the main priority of all concerned. When neither bills nor CRs have been passed the government shuts down until a funding measure is approved.
This year most of the opposition to all government spending has come from the “Freedom” Caucus in the House of Representatives, an extreme, Trumpist, conservative group of roughly 45 invitation-only members who agree as a condition of membership to vote as a block. (Current Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) was one of nine founding members when he served in Congress in 2015 and Southwest Florida Reps. Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.) and Donalds are current members.)
In January, in order to be elected Speaker of the House, Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-20-Calif.) made a number of concessions to the Caucus, some public, some still secret. Some of these were agreements to change the rules of the House to inhibit tax raises and benefits and make it easier to vote out the Speaker with a “motion to vacate;” a snap election.
Others concerned spending, like a promise to vote on a 10-year balanced budget plan and to balance a rise in the national debt ceiling with cuts to the budget, especially in social safety net programs.
When President Joe Biden and McCarthy reached a deal to raise the federal debt ceiling in May, Caucus members were furious, arguing that because the deal didn’t have the drastic spending cuts they wanted, McCarthy had violated the terms of their agreement.
Donalds emphatically rejected that deal. Before the vote he tweeted: “After I heard about the debt ceiling deal, I was a NO. After reading the debt ceiling deal, I am absolutely NO!!” At a Caucus press conference he elaborated: “Washington is doing it again. While you were celebrating Memorial Day, [The Swamp] was cutting another crap deal, more debt with no real changes whatsoever.”
Nonetheless, the deal passed the House by a resounding vote of 314 to 117, with 149 Republicans voting for it.
The experience of the debt deal and vote hardened Caucus opposition to a CR. In keeping with longstanding conservative priorities Caucus members sought “clean” appropriations bills that funded each individual federal department rather than what are known as “omnibus” bills that lump many measures together.
When Congress reconvened after Labor Day, and the countdown to a government shutdown began to get tighter, McCarthy called together Republicans of all ideological persuasions to formulate a common position.
Donalds was appointed a Caucus negotiator with McCarthy, a highly delicate and dangerous position.
Contentious compromise
On Sunday night, Sept. 17, McCarthy and the Republicans came up with a proposal among themselves for a 30-day CR to keep the government going. Donalds was a signatory.
“The 30 day CR does 2 things,” Donalds announced on X (formerly Twitter) the next day. “1. Secure the southern border. 2. Cut government spending by 8%. **There is NO Ukraine $$$** The truth is Congress needs more time to do the necessary spending cuts and reforms to stop the weaponization of our government and save our country.”
The response from fellow congressional extremists was immediate and ferocious.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-14-Ga.) argued that the CR funded Ukraine. (Caucus conservatives want to cut off Ukraine funding, which would aid Russia’s invasion.)
“Your CR funds Section C and Section K of Public Law 117-328,” Greene argued on X. “Here’s what the law says. It funds Ukraine in multiple sections, including 2 funds with no specified dollar amount that leaves the spending up to Biden. Billions more could end up being sent to Ukraine with your CR!”
“Actually, you are wrong,” Donalds replied. “The provision is to train our troops, so they can train our allies. It’s been in law since 2013. It was in the [National Defense Authorization Act], which you VOTED FOR this year.”
But Greene’s complaints were as nothing compared to the outrage and fury of Rep. Matt Gaetz, the primary leader of the shutdown movement.
First Gaetz reacted on X: “The problem with the Donalds CR is that it gets the job done for Jack Smith!” stated Gaetz, referring to Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is prosecuting former President Donald Trump.
“Matt, tell the people the truth,” responded Donalds. “The [Department of Justice] will operate whether the government is shut down or not. Special Counsel’s [sic] have always exempted themselves from shutdowns. What’s your plan to get the votes to defund Jack Smith? You’ll need more than tweets and hot takes!!”
Gaetz was hardly deterred. He took to the floor of the House that day to give an impassioned one-minute speech (called a “special order”) to the empty chamber to denounce Donalds. For a full understanding of the situation, it merits quotation in full:
“Mr. Speaker,
“I’m not voting for a continuing resolution offered by my friend and colleague from Florida, I’m not voting to continue the failure and the waste and the corruption and the election interference and in some cases, the efforts that could lead this country into World War III.
“I oppose the CR offered by friend and colleague from Florida, Byron Donalds. The Donalds CR continues the Ukraine policy negotiated by Speaker Pelosi and Mitch McConnell in the omnibus that conservatives were against!
“The Donalds CR is a permission slip for Jack Smith to continue his election interference as they are trying to gag the President…the former President of the United States, the leading contender for the Republican nomination and the Donalds CR abandons the principle that it is only a review of a single subject spending bills that will save this country and allow us to tweeze through these programs and force these agencies to stand up and defend their budget.
“My friends, we are approaching the days when we are facing 2-trillion dollar annual deficits atop a 33-trillion dollar debt. This is unsustainable and just to continue things with some facial 8-percent cut over 30 days that will lead to no programmatic reform is an insult to the principles we fought for in January.
“I yield back.”
In the end, it was all moot. Speaker McCarthy could not get the House to agree on the procedures for a vote on the compromise CR (called a “rule”) and so the CR could not proceed. It was widely seen as a defeat for McCarthy and any compromise.
And then, in the midst of all this, Donald Trump threw in his eye of newt. On Wednesday, Sept. 20, he posted on his Truth Social media platform: “A very important deadline is approaching at the end of the month. Republicans in Congress can and must defund all aspects of Crooked Joe Biden’s weaponized Government that refuses to close the Border, and treats half the Country as Enemies of the State,” he wrote. “This is also the last chance to defund these political prosecutions against me and other Patriots.”
This now set the doctrinal line for Trumpist loyalty both in Congress and in the heartland.
As this is written, there is no agreement and the country is barreling toward a government shutdown, starting at 12:01 am on Sunday, Oct. 1.
Analysis: Byron on the brink
The battle over funding the government is now largely in the hands of Biden, McCarthy and both the Democratic and Republican leadership in the Senate, with Gaetz playing the role of spoiler.
Like a boat tossed onshore following Hurricane Ian, Donalds is left in an awkward—if interesting—position, teetering on dry land.
He’s promoted himself as a staunch Trumper but by agreeing to a semi-reasonable compromise he violated the positions of both his idol and of what might best be described as the Crazy Caucus.
His stepping out of lockstep with the most extreme members of the Caucus has taken a toll. The early reactions could be seen in some of the anonymous comments on X after Gaetz gave his speech.
“I’m so disappointed in Byron Donalds. I had high hopes for him,” commented CTLakeside14.
“Very very disappointing, they got to him,” wrote MichelleRM68.
And those were some of the ones that can be repeated.
Donalds has tried to come back into MAGA grace with even more vehement denunciations of Biden, fulminations over the border situation and calls for the president’s impeachment.
On Sept. 19, as the reaction was mounting to his endorsement of the CR, Donalds announced in a fundraising email that he had launched something called The MAGA Victory Fund.
“With President Trump now the indisputable frontrunner to win back the White House, I figured this was the perfect time to launch a new fund dedicated to helping MAGA Republicans win big in 2024 – from the White House all the way to the bottom of the ticket,” the email stated. “By making a contribution to my MAGA Victory Fund today, you’ll support both President Trump and my campaign as we work together to Make America Great Again!”
The Fund seems designed to do two things: Get Donalds back into MAGA world’s good graces and, if it collects any money, buy favor with disgruntled incumbents and upcoming candidates—in addition to showing his loyalty to Trump and raising money for himself.
However, the danger of allying and identifying with an extreme movement is that there’s always someone more extreme at the fringe defining the orthodoxy and Donalds has veered from the true faith.
And Trump remains a wild card, having endorsed a shutdown but not having commented on Donalds. If Trump condemns him, Donalds’ career as a right-wing ideologue may be over.
There may be another factor in the Gaetz-Donalds conflict.
DeSantis is term-limited and if he doesn’t win the presidency he can’t run for another term in 2026. Both Gaetz and Donalds have been mentioned as possible Republican gubernatorial candidates. The current maneuvering may be the early skirmish in the battle for the Governor’s Mansion three years hence, with both politicians trying to win the favor of the MAGA base.
Interestingly, though, support for compromise came from an unexpected source.
“The Freedom Caucus has rules. Some are unwritten, but most exist in writing. I know because I wrote them,” stated Mick Mulvaney. He served as Trump’s acting chief of staff in 2019 and 2020. Before that he served as a representative from South Carolina from 2011 to 2017 during which he was a co-founder of the Freedom Caucus.
In an essay titled “The House Freedom Caucus has apparently changed its rules” in the Capitol Hill newspaper The Hill, Mulvaney argued that Caucus principles never precluded compromise on CRs. In fact, Caucus founders always believed in working with moderates.
“The truth seems to be the never-CR-never-Kevin-burn-the-place-down effort isn’t really coming from an organized group at all,” he observed. “Someone this week called it a collection of ‘caucuses of one.’ Some seem to be using the effort to raise their public profiles on Fox News and social media; others are looking to leverage the newfound attention to run for higher office.”
Hmmm. Who could that be?
Whether it’s a matter of personal ego or ambition, or mere maneuvering for personal advantage, the country faces what could be a crippling government shutdown. What is more, it comes amidst a painful recovery from a summer of natural disasters, a proxy foreign war that must be won and the relentless prosecution of an increasingly obvious criminal former president.
It’s quite a witches’ brew. “Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn and cauldron bubble,” as the witches said in Shakespeare’s play.
Macbeth was a story of a fiercely ambitious nobleman who sought to be king—and whose crimes in pursuit of that ambition brought him to a bad end. Perhaps there’s a lesson in that now for those Florida Men who would destroy the country in their own pursuits of the crown, or the presidency, or the speakership, or the governorship—or just power for its own sake.
The US National Mall in Washington, DC is marked “closed” during a 2013 government shutdown. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)
Sept. 24, 2023 by David Silverberg
A federal government shutdown starting at the first minute of Sunday, Oct. 1 now seems highly likely.
As of this writing, the Republican caucus in the House of Representatives remains at odds over US appropriations. Those appropriations must be approved and signed into law before the start of the 2024 federal fiscal year.
That approval could still happen. Nonetheless, it makes sense to survey the likely effects of a government shutdown on Southwest Florida.
The 2018-19 shutdown was the result of a fight between then-President Donald Trump and congressional Democrats over funding for Trump’s proposed border wall. Ultimately, Trump relented but not before the shutdown, which was the longest in US history, reduced the US gross domestic product by $11 billion.
When the government shuts down, it stops spending money. Federal contractors are not paid and no new contracts are signed. Many government services are suspended or curtailed. In past shutdowns many federal employees were furloughed or made to work without pay but with the expectation they would receive back pay once the government was funded again.
Nonetheless, some essential services will continue. These differ from federal agency to agency.
Below are some of the federal agencies and activities directly related to Southwest Florida with a projection of the effect a shutdown is likely to have on Southwest Floridians. They are listed by order of their likely impact on people’s lives and the urgency of their needs.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
This year FEMA is a major player in Southwest Florida, which is still recovering from the effects of Hurricane Ian almost exactly a year after it made landfall. Further north in Florida and in the states beyond, FEMA is active in supporting the people in counties directly hit by Hurricane Idalia.
FEMA is already struggling because of depletion of its Disaster Relief Fund. On Tuesday, Sept. 19, Deanne Criswell, FEMA’s administrator testified before Congress that a government shutdown would impose even more restrictions on its operations. In a shutdown FEMA would have to operate with whatever cash it had on hand at that moment and that “would be insufficient to cover all of our ongoing life-saving operations,” she said.
“We would have to continue to reduce the scope of what it is that we are supporting in our operations,” she testified.
The aftermath of Hurricane Idalia was just one disaster. As of Sept. 21, FEMA was handling 79 major disasters and 4 emergency declarations around the country.
During the Trump shutdown of 2019, FEMA was able to operate on money from the Disaster Relief Fund. That may not be available for long this time. The administration has requested $16 billion from Congress to replenish the Disaster Relief Fund, which is now hung up in the congressional impasse.
In the event of a shutdown, federal disaster money would suddenly stop flowing to Southwest Florida disaster victims, FEMA contractors and communities receiving FEMA funds. FEMA officials would suddenly stop providing services and processing existing requests and assistance. It is likely that only the most urgent, essential life-saving activities would be maintained by a small cadre of unpaid FEMA professionals.
In the Trump shutdown, FEMA stopped issuing flood insurance certificates to banks. The certificates allowed the banks to loan federally-backed money to homeowners wishing to build on FEMA-designated floodplains. With about 40,000 mortgage closings a month, banks and mortgage companies lobbied for an exception that allowed FEMA to continue to issue certificates despite the shutdown.
It’s not clear that the same exception would apply this time. At the very least, a government shutdown will likely hinder or completely halt the recovery activities in the town of Fort Myers Beach and impede the efforts of its homeowners.
Weather and forecasting
Hurricane season is usually considered to end on Nov. 30. The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30. That means that government shutdowns tend to occur towards the end of hurricane season but still within its clutches. (For example, Hurricane Sandy formed late in October, 2012.)
All essential weather forecasting is done by federal agencies like the National Hurricane Center, the National Weather Service, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and a variety of supporting institutions.
Weather forecasting and hurricane monitoring doesn’t stop with a shutdown; in the past, unpaid scientists continued at their posts. However, it can have increasingly deleterious effects depending on how long the shutdown lasts. Forecasting can slow or lose detail. A more subtle corrosive effect is the slowdown of research efforts and improvements for future forecasting. Preparations for upcoming storm seasons slow or stop.
Forecasting is absolutely essential for Southwest Florida given its vulnerability to hurricanes. All the forecasting on local television stations depend on federal data. While the stations’ advanced radars (which also provide data to federal forecasters) can provide pictures of local conditions, the federal government’s satellite network provides long-range forecasts of the entire Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico.
However, it’s not just hurricane forecasting that’s damaged. Federal forecasters watch for other threats that affect Southwest Florida like drought and dry conditions conducive to wildfires. Harmful algal blooms like red tide and blue-green algae are monitored by NOAA and the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science.
A government shutdown diminishes the ability to see climatic dangers of all kinds ahead—and that’s not a good place for Southwest Florida to be during hurricane season.
The US Coast Guard
The US Coast Guard is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and as such, unlike the Defense Department, is not exempt from government shutdowns.
The Coast Guard has many missions, of which lifesaving is a primary one. However, it is also responsible for coastal security, drug interdiction, maritime safety, environmental protection, law enforcement, waterway management, port safety, immigration control and many more.
Lee County has a Coast Guard station in Fort Myers. Lee and Collier counties also have Auxiliary stations and Charlotte County has an Auxiliary flotilla. The Auxiliary is a volunteer arm of the Coast Guard that assists its many missions. Typical Auxiliary activities include boating safety training, patrolling, and classroom instruction.
During the Trump shutdown the Coast Guard continued its lifesaving search and rescue functions uninterrupted, even though Coast Guard personnel were unpaid.
However, Auxiliary activities were curtailed. Normal operations like vessel examinations, partner visitations, safe boating classes and community relations appearances were put on hold. While Auxiliary volunteers were allowed in January to meet and do public outreach and education, they were prohibited from taking any actions that might have required spending Coast Guard funds.
National parks and reserves
During the Trump shutdown, Southwest Florida parks and reserves, like the Florida Panther and JN “Ding” Darling national wildlife refuges, Everglades National Park and Big Cypress National Preserve were open but unstaffed. Visitor centers closed and National Park Service (NPS) websites and social media postings were suspended.
“Park visitors are advised to use extreme caution if choosing to enter NPS property, as NPS personnel will not be available to provide guidance, assistance, maintenance, or emergency response,” announced an NPS press release. “Any entry onto NPS property during this period of federal government shutdown is at the visitor’s sole risk.”
After the Trump shutdown was over, NPS announced it would use visitors’ fees to fund cleanup of the trash and debris that had accumulated while NPS personnel were absent. Volunteers pitched in to clean up the mess.
The same problems are likely to occur if there’s a shutdown this year.
Aviation operations
Southwest Florida has three airports: the Southwest Florida International Airport in Lee County has regular, scheduled commercial flights as does Punta Gorda Airport in Charlotte County. Naples Airport in Collier County serves private and general aviation.
All air traffic controllers are federal employees of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). In the past they have worked without pay during shutdowns. However, the Trump shutdown did cause delays and put strains on air travel at major airports and the same can be expected this time.
Because safety inspectors were unpaid, in 2018 and 2019 the FAA did curtail some administrative actions like issuing safety certifications, issuing new pilot safety ratings, and conducting and grading pilot examinations, among other activities.
Both the directorate of Customs and Border Protection and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) are parts of DHS. During the Trump shutdown, administrative functions at these agencies were affected. TSA screeners were unpaid and some did not report for work, further delaying and disrupting travel and air-based commerce.
For everyday air travelers, the shutdown manifested itself in longer lines at screening checkpoints and the uncertainty of delayed or cancelled flights.
Social Security, Medicare and more
In the shadow of a shutdown, social programs offer one of the few bright spots.
During the Trump shutdown the Department of Health and Human Services, which administers Social Security and Medicare, had been funded by an appropriations bill that had already passed Congress so there was never an interruption in payments.
That is not the case this year. However, these social programs are funded by a separate law that does not require annual appropriations. While many government employees administering the programs will likely work without pay for the duration of any shutdown, recipients should see no interruption in their benefits.
However, activities like issuing new Social Security cards, handling complaints and problems, and verifying applicant eligibility will likely be curtailed.
Other government services will likely slow down or stop. Passports are unlikely to be processed or issued by the State Department. The Small Business Administration is unlikely to handle small business loans. Law enforcement and prison personnel will be expected to work without pay. During the Trump shutdown federal law enforcement and corrections personnel slowed down their activities or took leave.
Mail delivery should not be affected since the US Postal Service operates from different funding sources.
Analysis: No small matter
There is a tendency by politicians justifying a shutdown to minimize or dismiss its impact both to avoid blame and not alarm constituents. They should be ignored—shutting down the government is a big deal. People will feel it on the ground in myriad ways. Additionally, it adds to the cost of everything, driving inflation and lowering the nation’s gross domestic product.
There is also a tendency to hope and expect that a shutdown will be brief. That, however, cannot be counted upon. As with wars, which people usually hope will be swift, decisive and victorious, shutdowns can drag on and have unexpected complications; a good recent example of this is Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. He expected the war to be over in a matter of days or, at most, weeks—it is now in its nineteenth month.
In the past, shutdowns or “funding gaps” as they are more technically known, were addressed immediately by Congress and the executive branch. Everyone realized they were bad for the country, the economy and the American people. However, since then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (today a Naples resident) forced two politically motivated shutdowns in 1995 (the second of which went 21 days into 1996), they have become longer, more acrimonious and more dangerous.
Donald Trump’s 35-day shutdown in 2018 and 2019 was the most damaging to date. This year, on Wednesday, Sept. 20, on his Truth Social media platform he called for another shutdown “to defund these political prosecutions against me and other Patriots.”
How the current impasse will play out remains to be seen (and will be covered and analyzed in a separate article). Suffice it to say that no matter how distant or untouched Southwest Floridians may feel from the federal government, they will feel the effects of a shutdown—in their wallets, their travel and their daily lives.
A sign announces that the JN “Ding” Darling National Wildlife Refuge visitor center is closed during the 2018 government shutdown. Despite the shutdown, the center reopened d in January 2019. (Photo: Andrea Perdomo/WGCU News)
On Monday, Sept. 11, the Collier County Public School Board voted 4 to 1 to defer a decision on holding an invocation prior to its meetings, pending a similar decision by the School Board of Miami-Dade County.
Members Jerry Rutherford (District 1), Stephanie Lucarelli (District 2), Chair Kelly Lichter (District 3) and Erick Carter (District 4) voted to approve the resolution. Tim Moshier (District 5) voted against it.
The vote followed hours of public comment on both sides of the issue.
The debate and vote were prompted by a proposal that a religious invocation be conducted prior to Board meetings.
The background
School Board member Jerry Rutherford. (Image: CCSB)
Last year’s election brought Rutherford, Moshier and Lichter to the School Board. All had campaigned as ideologically conservative candidates. Only Lichter had previous School Board experience and a professional background in education.
At the July 31 meeting Rutherford proposed that the Board adopt a policy opposing seven ideologies that he characterized as “Anti-American, Anti-God ideologies whose net effect is to alter or abolish the Constitution of the United States of America and damage our American Culture.” The seven were: critical race theory; social emotional learning; diversity, equity and inclusion; Black Lives Matter; “Anti-Fa” [sic]; “Gay Agenda”; and “Woke.” (The original document with definitions can be accessed here.)
Discussion of the policy was expected at the Sept. 11 meeting and both opponents and advocates mobilized for the event.
However, the proposed policy was not put on the official agenda, which was issued publicly about a week before the meeting.
Instead, there was a proposal to establish a religious invocation prior to Board meetings. In some ways the invocation debate became a proxy for the ideological debate.
The proposal for an invocation was made at the Board’s Aug. 8 meeting by Keith Flaugh, head of the Florida Citizens Alliance, an organization advocating conservative education and policies. The suggestion was favorably received by Board members and put on the Sept. 11 agenda.
The Board’s existing practice prior to the start of meetings is to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and have a moment of silence for contemplation or prayer.
A 2015 invocation proposal was defeated by a 3-2 vote of the Board.
The discussion and debate
Numerous speakers made points on both sides of the debate. Opponents included Rev. Anthony Fisher, pastor of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Greater Naples. Advocates included Flaugh.
When the Board members discussed the invocation proposal they ran into the difficulties of actually implementing an invocation. The District’s attorney, Jon Fishbane, concluded that to be legally acceptable, the Board would have to establish standards for the invocation that would include a prohibition on proselytizing or disparagement. That led to a discussion of what any invocations should or should not include.
Alan Gabriel, attorney for the School Board, noted that any invocation had to be religiously neutral and not denigrate or discriminate against any faith.
Lucarelli suggested a trial period for invocations and that they last no longer than 90 seconds to 3 minutes and that clergy of all faiths be invited to participate.
Sandra Eaton, the District chief of staff proposed that instead of an invocation, the Board could extend the length of its regular moment of silence.
Rutherford responded that the problem with that was that a moment of silence might not be long enough for a prayer to be completed, heard by God and answered. “If a prayer isn’t heard, how do I know if it’s been answered?” he asked. He said he made lists of his prayers and knew when they had been answered.
An invocation, on the other hand, was a form of encouragement to the Board members, he argued.
Luccarelli noted that there were times during her worship when she was unable to finish her prayers but a set moment of silence provided sufficient time for people to plan and pray.
Schools Superintendent Leslie Ricciardelli noted that all schools provided one minute of silence for prayer or contemplation.
Luccarelli pointed out that the Board would be modeling behavior for the schools and that a misstep could result in a lawsuit.
She also argued that she did not want Board meetings “to become a circus.” In the past, she pointed out, passions had flared in Board meetings and faith leaders taking positions had been verbally attacked when they left the chamber. She did not want a repeat of that due to invocations.
Both Lucarelli and Lichter argued that entirely too much time was being spent on the matter. “I think the point here that this is a distraction from what we are, what we are supposed to focusing on,” said Lucarelli.
Lichter agreed. “There are so many layers that we heard tonight that gives me major pause. It’s becoming bureaucracy!” she said. “What we’re going to end up doing is spending a lot of time, energy effort, money and then, is it going to explode in our face with litigation?” She added: “To me it’s going to be out of control and we’re losing focus on the real priorities of why we’re here.”
But Rutherford was ready for a fight. “Anybody for any reason can sue,” he said.
“Believe me, I know!” interjected Lichter. (The Collier County School Board was sued by Francis Alfred “Alfie” Oakes III when it selected Ricciardelli as superintendent against his wishes.)
Rutherford continued: “Anybody can sue. The ACLU [American Civil Liberties Union] and some of these other organizations, some of them here tonight, use intimidation and threats in order to get their way. They don’t want to see our point of view but they want to see their point of view.”
He continued: “I would say the best thing to do is put it out there as a challenge because if they do it, OK, they’re going to have to win the case.” But there was little appetite expressed by anyone in the room for that approach.
The attorneys and members noted that the Miami-Dade County school district had been revising a policy and developing a standard for an invocation over the past several months but had not yet formally adopted it.
Given that the Miami-Dade school district is the largest in the state and fourth largest in the country, Lichter suggested that Collier wait and see how their invocation proposal was developed and received.
She then suggested that the invocation idea be tabled for later consideration, especially pending Miami-Dade’s action. That prompted a discussion of whether the item should be “tabled” (postponed for a definite period) or deferred indefinitely.
Lichter tried to move the Board members to unanimity that they would defer the question of the invocation until after Miami-Dade makes its decision. However, she was unable to gain a consensus and the motion was put to a formal vote. Moshier was the sole member voting in opposition.
Commentary: Church and state, past and future
Rutherford may not have intended it, but the whole discussion of an invocation demonstrated the wisdom of the Founders in separating church and state.
The proposal and discussion was actually a colossal, wasteful distraction that veered away from the real business of the Board and into the metaphysical when Rutherford started complaining that a moment of silence might not be enough time to have his prayers heard and answered. It was like a digression into the Middle Ages.
The whole proposal also unnecessarily stirred up community passions and divisions without providing any solutions to the real issues facing Collier County schools.
When it came to the boring but vital stuff like budgeting and millage rates that are the real nuts and bolts of school administration and which were discussed during a work portion of the meeting, Lichter expressed frustration that Rutherford and Moshier, the two most ideological members, hadn’t done their work—or their homework. Both had campaigned on cutting the school budget but neither had done any work on making actual cuts to the actual budget. Indeed, they sought to abstain when the time came for decisions.
“I’m having a hard time understanding what you guys are bringing to the table here today,” she said to them at one point.
The entire discussion of the invocation proved just how complex and unnecessarily burdensome injecting religion into secular proceedings could be.
President Thomas Jefferson was quite clear on the benefits of a separation in his letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1801: “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
That’s a solemn reverence the Collier County School Board should share when it comes to injecting religion into the school system on any level. The wall between church and state will not only serve them, the people of Collier County and its students well, it protects them from all the ills that the Framers sought to avoid by adopting the Bill of Rights.
Gov. Ron DeSantis, President Joe Biden, former President Donald Trump. (Illustration: Neil Freese, UC Berkeley)
Sept. 9, 2023 by David Silverberg
Natural disasters create political winners and losers.
As a general rule, disasters favor incumbents—but only if they perform well.
Florida has just been through Hurricane Idalia. So how well did the three of America’s top politicians (two in Florida) perform in response? And what are the likely political consequences of their actions?
Joe on the spot
President Joe Biden, with a map of Florida, coordinates the federal response to Hurricane Idalia. (Photo: White House)
For a sitting president, disasters are dicey propositions. A responsible president wants to be alert and aware of all developments and take whatever actions are necessary to aid and support the victims and the response. He wants to do all this without seeming to exploit the situation for political or partisan benefit.
A good example of this occurred in 1969 when President Richard Nixon stayed in touch with affected governors in the run-up to Hurricane Camille. As the storm approached the Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama Gulf coasts, Nixon appointed Vice President Spiro Agnew to personally handle states’ needs. Mississippi Gov. John Bell Williams received a phone call from Agnew. “…The Vice President of the United States wanted us to know in advance that they stood ready and anxious to assist us in any way that they could,” Bell said afterwards.
Today the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) handles all the preparing, prepositioning, mobilizing and coordinating when a storm is about to strike. (Of course, sudden, unexpected disasters like the Maui wildfires pose different challenges.) There are well-established protocols before, during and after the event.
Once the disaster has occurred all officials face new choices. High-profile executives like presidents, governors and mayors want to get a sense of the scope of the disaster with a personal visit and provide comfort and show concern for the victims. Against this is the concern that a visit will interfere with operations and rescues. Moreover, failing to visit in person or waiting too long can seem to signal indifference or neglect.
Biden has seen many disasters and responses during his time as a US Senator, Vice President and President, so Hurricane Idalia was nothing new. Just ten days before Hurricane Idalia hit, he visited wildfire-stricken Maui.
Before the storm, Biden was in contact with all the governors of the likely affected states. After speaking to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) he prepared an emergency declaration so Floridians would get the federal support they needed once the hurricane struck.
With Biden’s approval, FEMA surged emergency personnel into the affected area and got endangered residents out.
“As a matter of fact, I have asked that [FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell] get on a plane and leave for Florida this afternoon,” he announced on Aug. 31. “She will meet with Governor DeSantis tomorrow and begin helping, conducting the federal assessment at my direction.”
He also told the press corps: “I let each governor I spoke with know that if there’s anything — anything the states need right now, I am ready to mobilize that support of what they need.”
He also convened a Cabinet meeting to make sure that all federal departments and agencies contributed to a “whole-of-government” response.
That may seem like an obvious action to take but that hasn’t always been the presidential response in past disasters.
Particularly dicey was Biden’s relationship with DeSantis, who as a Republican presidential candidate had been relentlessly criticizing and attacking him. However, the two had experience working together on other disaster responses: the Surfside building collapse in 2021 and Hurricane Ian in 2022.
Biden was asked directly about this by a reporter: “Mr. President, Governor DeSantis is also running for president. You are running for reelection. Do you sense any politics in your conversations with him about this issue?”
Biden answered: “No, believe it or not. I know that sounds strange, especially how — looking at the nature of politics today.
“But, you know, I was down there when…the last major storm. I spent a lot of time with him, walking from village to — from community to community, making sure he had what he needed to get it done. I think he trusts my judgment and my desire to help. And I trust him to be able to suggest that he’s… .This is not about politics. This is about taking care of the people of his state.”
Biden came to Live Oak, Fla., on Saturday, Sept. 2 to see Idalia’s damage for himself.
“I’m here today to deliver a clear message to the people of Florida and throughout the Southeast,” he said, standing in front of a home with a massive, downed tree in the background. “As I told your governor: If there is anything your state needs, I’m ready to mobilize that support — anything they need related to these storms. Your nation has your back, and we’ll be with you until the job is done.”
Of course, DeSantis wasn’t present to hear those words.
Ron returns
Gov. Ron DeSantis gives one of his press conferences regarding Hurricane Idalia. (Photo: NBC)
On Saturday, Aug. 26, while still campaigning in South Carolina, DeSantis declared a state of emergency in 33 Florida counties. This allowed the Florida National Guard to mobilize 1,100 troops and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to assign officers and mobile command units to hurricane response. Throughout the state, government agencies prepared for the impact, including the Florida Highway Patrol and the departments of Commerce and Transportation.
On Sunday, Aug. 27, DeSantis suspended campaigning and returned to Florida to oversee the Idalia response.
“We’re locked down on this. We’re gonna get the job done. This is important, so people can rest assured,” DeSantis told reporters during a briefing at the state Emergency Management Center. Asked where he’d be for the next week, he replied: “I am here. I am here.”
DeSantis wasn’t just returning to a hurricane; on Aug. 26 a racist gunman in Jacksonville randomly killed three black shoppers at a Dollar General store before committing suicide. On Sunday DeSantis was booed when he attended a vigil honoring the dead.
But the hurricane was an ongoing and impending threat that demanded attention. In the days that followed, as Idalia strengthened, traveled up the coast and made landfall in the Big Bend region, DeSantis focused on his gubernatorial duties, regularly briefed the media, and warned Floridians of potential dangers and urged precautions. He seemed in command, both of the forces on the ground and of the facts.
DeSantis didn’t just suspend his in-person campaigning, he also suspended his hostility to Biden.
“When you have situations like this, you’ve got to put the interests of the people first,” DeSantis told reporters in Tallahassee the next day. “There’s time and a place to have [a] political season, but then there’s a time and a place to say that this is something that’s life-threatening. This is something that could potentially cost somebody their life, that could cost them their livelihood. And we have a responsibility as Americans to come together and do what we can to mitigate any damage and to protect people.”
He appeared authoritative and knowledgeable and when Idalia made landfall and moved on, the DeSantis campaign was ready to make the most of it.
Andrew Romeo, DeSantis campaign communications director, issued a campaign memo praising DeSantis in for “Strong Leadership” and a “Swift Response.”
In the memo, obtained by Florida Politics reporter Jacob Ogles, which provided talking points for DeSantis supporters, Romeo stated: “The DeSantis Administration helped guide the state through another historic storm.” He noted that, “As part of that effort, Ron DeSantis appropriately left the presidential campaign trail to focus on the needs of Floridians.”
Democrats were unimpressed. “It’s the bare minimum,” said state Rep. Anna Eskamani (D-42-Orlando). “In the context of responding to a hurricane, of course you’re supposed to be here and to help communicate what first responders are doing. In the context of innocent people being murdered for the color of their skin by a racist gunman, the bare minimum is to express condolences with loved ones.”
After Idalia passed, DeSantis faced a new choice: how to react to Biden’s visit? Now that the immediate emergency was over, it was time for politics.
On the one hand, DeSantis and Biden had seemed to reach a truce in order to serve Floridians.
Much depended on where and when the President would visit.
According to FEMA Administrator Criswell, the White House took operational issues into consideration when choosing the place and time and informed DeSantis in advance.
“When the president contacted the governor to let him know he was going to be visiting … the governor’s team and my team mutually agreed on a place that would have minimal impact into operations,” Criswell said on the program CNN This Morning. “Live Oak, you know, the power is being restored. The roads aren’t blocked, but there’s families that are hurting there.”
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre confirmed Criswell’s account, saying: “The president spoke with the governor. It was an understanding. The president said to him he was coming to Florida. We never heard any disagreement with it.”
Biden said he expected to meet DeSantis when he arrived.
But the day before, DeSantis announced that he wouldn’t be present.
“We don’t have any plans for the Governor to meet with the President tomorrow,” Jeremy Redfern, DeSantis’ press secretary, announced in a press statement. “In these rural communities, and so soon after impact, the security preparations alone that would go into setting up such a meeting would shut down ongoing recovery efforts.”
Once he was in Live Oak, Biden was asked if he was disappointed that DeSantis was absent.
“No, I’m not disappointed,” Biden responded. “He may have had other reasons because…but he did help us plan this. He sat with FEMA and decided where we should go, where it’d be the least disruption.”
In pointed contrast, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), a bitter rival of DeSantis, was present and had fulsome praise for Biden.
“First off, the President did a great job with the early declaration before the storm hit the coast. That was a big deal. It helped all these first responders,” said Scott, who as governor had weathered Hurricane Irma. “And then with how fast you approved through FEMA the individual assistance, the public assistance and debris pickup is a big deal to everyone in these communities.”
Biden, for his part, said he was “very pleased” that Scott was present even though politically they do not agree on “very much at all.” That was especially gracious given that last year after Hurricane Ian and just before his visit to Southwest Florida, Scott called Biden “a raving lunatic.”
Another of DeSantis’ political rivals had sharp words for his absence from the president’s visit—and he spoke from hard experience.
Then-Gov. Chris Christie greets President Barack Obama in 2012 after Hurricane Sandy struck New Jersey. (Photo: NJ Governor’s Office)
On Oct. 29, 2012, amidst a presidential campaign, Hurricane Sandy came ashore in Brigantine, NJ as a Category 3 storm and did tremendous damage to the Garden State and neighboring New York City. Republican Chris Christie was then the governor and was considered a leading vice presidential candidate for nominee Mitt Romney and a potential contender in 2016.
When Democratic President Barack Obama, running for re-election, offered help to the stricken state, Christie eagerly accepted it and praised the president, whose assistance he called “outstanding.”
“I want to thank the president personally for his personal attention to this,” said Christie at the time, adding later that Obama kept all his promises. When Obama arrived on the last day of October to see the damage for himself, Christie hugged him and faced scorn and vituperation from fellow Republicans ever afterwards.
So Christie, a presidential candidate this year, knew whereof he spoke when it came to disasters and presidential visits.
“Your job as Governor is to be the tour guide for the President. It’s to make sure the President sees your people, sees the damage, sees the suffering, what’s going on, and what’s going to need to be done to rebuild it. You’re doing your job. And unfortunately, he put politics ahead of his job. That was his choice,” Christie said of DeSantis in a television interview.
He continued: “I’m not the least bit surprised that that’s what he chose to do. You’re the governor of the state. The President of the United States comes and you’re asking the President of the United States or the Congress for significant aid, which Ron DeSantis is doing, and especially if you voted against it ten years ago for Sandy aid, you should have been there with the President to welcome it.” That last reference was a bit of payback for DeSantis’ vote when he was a congressman to deny an appropriations bill that helped New Jersey.
DeSantis maintained he spent the day touring other places. “I was in the communities that were the hardest hit by the storm. And Joe Biden didn’t go to those areas, I think correctly, because the whole security apparatus would have shut down the recovery. So I was exactly where I needed to be,” DeSantis said in a television interview at the end of the day.
Missing man
Former President Donald Trump.
Former President Donald Trump did not have any executive authority or operational responsibilities during Hurricane Idalia. However, he was a Florida resident and a presidential candidate, so his actions and pronouncements were in the public domain.
Like both Biden and DeSantis he had experience with disasters. On Sept. 14, 2017 he visited Fort Myers and Naples after Hurricane Irma, accompanied by his wife Melania and Vice President Mike Pence. He offered words of thanks and encouragement to first responders and in East Naples handed out sandwiches. This followed a visit to Texas and Louisiana to see the effects of Hurricane Harvey, which had struck 16 days earlier. Then, on Oct. 4, he visited Puerto Rico, which had been struck by Hurricane Maria. It was on that occasion that he infamously tossed paper towels to a church full of hurricane victims.
This year, Trump did not take any actions or make any statements related to the hurricane, which bypassed his Palm Beach home, Mar-a-Lago.
He did, however, maintain a drumbeat of criticism of DeSantis on his Truth Social media platform, ranging from floating a false statement that DeSantis had dropped out of the race to attacking him for Florida’s high insurance rates.
“Trump ignored the storm for days, instead posting a litany of insults aimed at his political adversaries while highlighting positive poll numbers for his campaign,” reported Max Greenwood in the Tampa Bay Times on Aug. 31.
“By the time Trump mentioned Hurricane Idalia in a Wednesday afternoon post, he had already posted more than 140 times on Truth Social since Monday on a multitude of subjects, even dredging up an old letter the late actor Kirk Douglas sent him in 1998. (The count of Trump’s posts includes times in which he reposted messages from other accounts.)
“Kirk was a real Movie ‘Star,’” Trump wrote Wednesday, before mentioning the hurricane. “Not many left today. They are mostly woke and weak!”
When asked about Trump’s hurricane-related silence at one of his press conferences, DeSantis shrugged it off. “Not my concern. My concern is protecting the people of Florida, being ready to go,” he said.
Analysis: Winners and losers
Of the three politicians, DeSantis faced the most difficult choices: one was to decide whether to suspend his campaign and return to Florida and the other was whether to meet Biden when he visited.
The decision to return to Florida was relatively easy: First, he belonged in Florida at that moment. Secondly, if he had not returned, he would have faced blistering criticism from all quarters and been hammered for not being presidential. It would have also damaged the state and its people. While the lieutenant governor could have handled the crisis, an absent governor would have seemed cowardly and hurt the response. His already declining poll numbers would have plummeted. It might have meant the end of his candidacy. Returning was the obvious and proper thing to do.
The Biden visit presented a very different challenge. With the storm passed, political considerations were paramount. DeSantis and his people had to worry that perhaps the governor’s relationship with the President had become too close and might alienate Republican primary voters. After all, they had the example of Christie’s 2012 embrace of Obama as an example of extreme Republican voter retaliation for a momentary human act of bipartisan cooperation (as well as Florida Gov. Charlie Crist’s 2014 Obama embrace).
Also, greeting the president might have made the defiant, anti-Biden DeSantis seem too subservient to a president he had repeatedly insulted and denigrated and might be running against. And Biden would have completely eclipsed the governor, who would have had to respectfully and silently stand behind him as he spoke.
So the choice was: greet the president for the sake of Florida and face Republican primary voter retaliation, or avoid the president and face media and opposition criticism.
Whatever the exact calculation, DeSantis chose to snub Biden—and snub it was, the DeSantis camp’s lame excuses notwithstanding. It made DeSantis seem petty, overly political and irresponsible, as Christie pointed out. It added to his image of meanness and arrogance.
The snub has already overshadowed an otherwise capable performance as governor in a crisis. People expect calm, command, and competence from their leaders during events like hurricanes and in this DeSantis delivered. His job was to make the emergency declarations, authorize the proper state agencies to take action and facilitate the response. From all evidence, he did this.
The question for DeSantis is not whether this will find favor with Floridians since they’ve already voted and he won’t be running again for governor. The real question is whether an effective performance as governor in Florida will have any resonance at all with Republican primary voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. South Carolinians know from hurricanes; Iowans and New Hampshirites, not so much. They’re more likely to remember a presidential hug than a hurricane response, so snubbing Biden came at less cost to DeSantis than the value of a meeting for the state of Florida.
Whether Idalia made DeSantis a winner or loser will be told in polls in the days to come and especially in the primaries and caucuses next year, which will determine his presidential fate.
For Biden, Idalia completely confirmed the truth that disasters, if competently handled, favor incumbents
From the outset, Idalia posed no political threat to Biden unless he utterly flubbed the response—which he certainly did not.
In natural disasters, presidents are expected to offer and authorize support for affected areas, coordinate among states and governors, ensure as smooth a federal response as possible and provide comfort and encouragement to victims. Biden did all these things.
While Biden is being criticized for his age, his long governmental experience, political savvy and past disaster management showed in his competence and responsiveness to the Idalia challenge. He knew to stay out of the way of the operators in FEMA and on the ground. He offered a non-partisan hand of cooperation to DeSantis despite the latter’s previous attacks on him. He was high-minded and gracious in the face of an obvious, though petty, snub. He showed care and concern for everyday Floridians hurt by the storm.
It’s not as though he couldn’t get his partisan digs in but they were subtle and dignified yet telling. For example, by making perfectly clear that his visit had been coordinated with DeSantis beforehand he reinforced the perception of DeSantis as petty and politically-obsessed. But Biden did it without anger or rancor.
Clearly, Biden emerged from the storm a winner.
As noted before, Donald Trump had no operational responsibilities or command authorities during the storm. Nonetheless, he is a presidential candidate, a public figure and a Floridian. Despite this, his response, as is so characteristic of him, was deranged, narcissistic and divorced from the reality of a crisis afflicting what is now his home state. Unless the storm had damaged Mar-a-Lago, it’s doubtful he would have noticed it at all.
What is more, at a time when all the other Republican candidates suspended their attacks on DeSantis while he faced the crisis, Trump barely skipped a beat. His attacks “underscore the degree to which Trump, in ways that often escape notice anymore, forgoes the traditional, sober-minded approach of nearly every other Republican and Democratic politician in times of crisis in favor of a style that keeps the focus on himself rather than imperiled communities,” Greenwood observed in the Tampa Bay Times.
“The former president overcame that unorthodox approach to win a presidential race in 2016. But it does still carry some political risk for the candidate, including from some conservatives who bristle at his decision to stay on the attack against DeSantis even amid Florida’s recovery efforts,” he wrote.
As though the indictments, impeachments, past incompetence and insults did not already make clear that Trump is unfit for any office, his response to Idalia should remove any doubts—if doubts anyone can still have.
This particularly applies to Floridians who should remember it when it comes to the presidential primary next March or if, as seems likely, Trump is the Republican nominee in the general election in November. Trump currently leads DeSantis in presidential polling in Florida. But when Florida specifically was threatened, Trump just did not care even though he lives on the same peninsula and shares its fate.
If Joe Biden had Floridians’ backs, Donald Trump turned his back on Floridians.
By any objective measure, Trump should be classified an Idalia loser—but there’s no telling if it will play out that way when the votes are counted in the early primary states and Florida.
Hurricane season is not over. Climate change is producing wild and unpredictable weather. There will be other storms, there will be wildfires, there will be roasting heat, there will be plagues.
Elected leaders will have to cope with all these challenges. A good leader in a crisis saves lives, manages well and provides comfort. The electorate should know what to look for in those who seek to lead them— and make their selections accordingly.
Hurricane Idalia as it approached Florida. (Photo: NOAA)
President Joe Biden surveys the damage from Hurricane Idalia during a visit to Live Oaks, Fla. (Image: CSPAN)
Sept. 4, 2023 by David Silverberg
On Saturday, Sept. 2, President Joe Biden came to Live Oak, Fla., to see the damage from Hurricane Idalia for himself.
During a press conference, Biden was asked: “Are you confident there will be enough money to deal with the disaster and other disasters that have happened and will continue to happen around the country?”
Biden answered: “The answer is I am confident because I cannot imagine Congress saying, ‘We are not going to help.’ There are going to be fights about things that do not relate to this. But I think we will get through it, I cannot imagine people saying ‘No,’ they are not going to help.”
And yet there is a very significant faction in Congress saying exactly that.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30 and this year, as in past years, the far right Freedom Caucus in the US House of Representatives is threatening to shut down the government if its policy demands aren’t met.
In an Aug. 21 statement, the Caucus listed their demands before approving government appropriations for the next fiscal year. They demanded that the United States vastly restrict border access and end “woke” policies of inclusion and non-discrimination in the military. But their truly significant demand was that Congress “address the unprecedented weaponization of the Justice Department and FBI to focus them on prosecuting real criminals instead of conducting political witch hunts and targeting law-abiding citizens;” i.e., stop investigating and prosecuting former President Donald Trump and other insurrectionists like fugitive Proud Boy Christopher Worrell of Naples.
If these demands are not met and the Freedom Caucus succeeds in stopping next year’s appropriations in any form, the government will stop functioning at midnight on Sept. 30. Critical services and functions will shut down. Most importantly, federal aid and assistance to people and communities suffering from natural disasters like Hurricane Idalia will suddenly stop at a time when need will still be extremely high.
Among the members of this extreme, Trumpist, invitation-only 45-member Caucus is Rep. Byron Donalds (R-19-Fla.), who is ready, willing and eager to bring government to a halt. (Another member is Rep. Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.))
“I’m not afraid of shutdowns,” Donalds told Punchbowl News, a website that focuses on Washington news. “American life doesn’t halt because government offices are closed … We have to be serious about spending.”
As early as July 25 he told reporters “If it’s [a government shutdown] a requirement to break bad habits, so be it. And this town [Washington, DC] has a bad habits problem.”
Of course the people who would suffer to break these bad habits would not be in Washington, DC; they would be in Florida and in the places where they’re still recovering from the effects of the storm.
In a more immediate impact for his constituents, Donalds’ support for shutting down the government sabotages his own legislation, introduced early in the session, to help protect Southwest Florida from the effects of harmful algal blooms (HABs) even if there’s a government shutdown.
In fact, this contradiction brings to light Donalds’ legislative record in the current Congress, which is, to put it mildly, abysmal. He’s introduced 46 bills and then ignored them all.
Background to the blooms
The HABs bill has its origins in 2018’s massive and persistent red tide and blue-green algal blooms. Then-Rep. Francis Rooney, the Republican congressman who represented the 19th Congressional District covering the coastal area from Cape Coral to Marco Island, introduced two pieces of legislation.
One was the Harmful Algal Bloom Essential Forecasting Act. This bill ensured that federal agencies would monitor HABs even if there was a government shutdown. The agencies included the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science. Their monitoring enables local communities to prepare for bloom effects and warn residents of health and water hazards.
The other bill added HABs to the official roster of major disasters eligible for federal aid. The Protecting Local Communities from Harmful Algal Blooms Act consisted of a three-word amendment to The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. Under this, Southwest Florida businesses and residents would be eligible for a variety of federal support if businesses or livelihoods were damaged by a bloom just the same as if they were hit by a hurricane.
Neither bill made any progress during Rooney’s two terms in office, which ended in 2021.
This year Donalds reintroduced Rooney’s two previous pieces of legislation.
(Also in February he introduced a new water-related piece of legislation, the Water Quality and Environmental Innovation Act (HR 873). This established and funded a Water Quality and Environmental Innovation Fund that for five years would provide money to the Environmental Protection Agency to use advanced technologies to protect water quality. This proposal would also be sabotaged by a government shutdown.)
These bills directly benefited Southwest Florida. But none of them have made any progress after being introduced. In fact, of 46 bills he has introduced, he has not worked to advance any of them. None have made any progress at all.
To understand why this constitutes such a legislative failure, it helps to understand the legislative process.
Protocols and procedures
When a member of the House of Representatives introduces a stand-alone bill (one not attached to any other piece of legislation), the Speaker of the House (actually, his office) refers it to a committee for consideration.
Especially when a bill is of a technical or scientific nature, the committee chair usually refers it to a subcommittee handling specialized topics.
The subcommittee holds hearings, gets input from the public and listens to experts before recommending that the bill be considered by the full committee. The committee considers it, often does a “mark-up,” in which it is edited and revised, then votes whether to send it for consideration by the full House of Representatives.
If the bill gets to the floor and passes, it’s then sent to the Senate for consideration. If it passes the Senate in the same form as received from the House it then goes to the president’s desk for signature and implementation.
Any member of Congress can introduce a bill on any topic. But the art and craft of legislating is in moving a piece of legislation from introduction, through committee, to full passage—to say nothing of getting Senate approval and presidential signature. It’s an arduous process full of compromise, contention and often controversy. It takes skill, perseverance and attention to get a piece of legislation all the way through the process.
In this session of Congress, Donalds has not advanced a single stand-alone bill he introduced.
He counts as successes three amendments to other people’s legislation, which passed. Two were related to the nuclear industry, one streamlining the permitting process (House Amendment (H.Amdt) 133) and the other (H.Amdt. 149) to require a report on the status of US uranium. A third, (H.Amdt. 265) established an aircraft pilot apprenticeship program.
None directly affected Southwest Florida.
Legislation introduced this year by Rep. Byron Donalds and its status
Below is a list of all the stand-alone bills introduced this year by Rep. Byron Donalds with their status and a brief description. They are in chronological order. Categories are assigned by the author. No bill has advanced further than its initial introduction. More details on each individual bill can be obtained by going to Congress.gov and entering the bill number in the search box or by accessing and downloading the Excel Workbook available at the end of this article. (Source: Congress.gov)
Analysis: Going nuclear
Instead of attending to the legislation he introduced that directly affected Southwest Floridians, Donalds chose to become a champion of the nuclear power industry and is putting all his effort into promoting and expanding it through legislation. No doubt most—if not all—of the legislation he has introduced on this topic, some of it very technical and specific, was drafted by nuclear industry lobbyists and simply introduced under Donalds’ name.
None of this is directly related to the 19th Congressional District, which is drenched in 266 days of sunshine a year and perfectly situated to take advantage of solar power. As of this writing, no known nuclear power plants are planned for the district.
Opponents of nuclear power will be comforted, however, by the fact that Donalds hasn’t advanced any of his nuclear bills, nor is there any prospect of him doing so. Like his every other piece of original stand-alone legislation, they sit at their committees’ doors, ignored by their sponsor. They are more likely to be promoted by far more active and attentive nuclear industry lobbyists than anyone working on behalf of Southwest Florida.
More than any legislative efforts, Donalds has put his real energy into ideological crusades, either promoting extreme Make America Great Again positions, defending former president Donald Trump, raising money, impeaching President Joe Biden, or trying to rise in the Republican Party. Political speculation is that he’s either angling for a slot as Trump’s vice president or positioning himself to run for Florida governor in 2026.
Whatever Donalds’ aims, protecting Southwest Florida from harmful algal blooms and helping hurricane-devastated Floridians are not among them.
Commentary: Moving the legislation
When it was introduced, HR 325, the bill keeping forecasting going in the event of a shutdown, was referred to the Water, Wildlife, and Fisheries subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee. It was also referred to the Science, Space, and Technology Committee.
HR 1008, treating blooms as a natural disaster, went to the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials. It was also referred to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
In normal times, it’s unlikely that either of these would be passed by the whole Congress this late in the legislative session. But with a government shutdown looming, it may make sense for Southwest Floridians to take matters into their own hands and try to lobby for the legislation that their congressman seems to have forgotten.
As a start, concerned, active Floridians can contact the subcommittee chairs and ranking members (the most senior member from the other party) and tell them that in light of their congressman’s inaction, they themselves are urging that these pieces of legislation be advanced as soon as possible to beat a possible shutdown.
It’s a Hail Mary play but when the quarterback is missing in action, there’s not much else anyone can do. (Contact information is at the end of this article.)
Commentary: No time to shut down
Donalds’ embrace of a government shutdown at this time is incredibly irresponsible. A government shutdown will be a new form of devastation for Floridians already suffering from the devastation of Hurricane Idalia. It would certainly hinder, if not bring to a screeching stop, operations by FEMA. Assistance to individuals, communities and the state could be cut off just when people need it the most.
Donalds’ willingness to shut down the government is especially illogical in light of the fact that legislation he introduced is intended to ensure that essential forecasting services helpful to his district continue despite a possible government shutdown—a shutdown which he himself is now accepting and promoting as a position of the Freedom Caucus—which might better be termed the Crazy Caucus.
Donalds’ action (or inaction) on these matters has brought to light his gaping failure to responsibly advance the legislation he has introduced during this session. Clearly, to Donalds, introducing bills is nothing more than throwing mud at a wall, hoping some of it sticks and not even waiting around to see if it does. He’s not serious about what he proposes; it’s merely an ancillary activity while he concentrates on ingratiating himself with the nuclear industry and Donald Trump.
And his efforts are in the service of the Crazy Caucus’ efforts to disrupt, derail and destroy the government. These people want to shut down the government chiefly to protect Donald Trump, who is finally facing justice in a court of law.
President Joe Biden has other priorities more critical to Florida: “As I told your governor, if there’s anything your state needs, I’m ready to mobilize that support,” Biden said at his news conference. “Your nation has your back, and we’ll be with you until the job is done.”
The Crazy Caucus threat to the nation’s appropriations comes as FEMA’s disaster fund is running low because of all the climate change-related natural disasters it’s had to handle. The administration is asking Congress for $16 billion to cover not just the Idalia cleanup but everything else as well and looming future challenges.
Providing that funding in the next fiscal year or sooner is really what Congress needs to be doing—not wrestling with a government shutdown caused by a handful of fanatics that will hurt all Americans and especially those suffering in Florida and its Southwestern region.
Donalds should be giving his loyalty to the people he represents, not an indicted former president and a suicidal cultic caucus.
At a May 30 press conference at the Capitol building Rep. Byron Donalds and other members of the Freedom Caucus listen to Rep. Lauren Boebert. (Photo: Washington Post)
__________
To contact members of Congress and urge them to advance legislation to full committee consideration, contact the following key chair people and ranking members. E-mail addresses are only for constituents so this requires a paper letter or phone call. In any messages, it should be made clear that you are contacting them in their capacity as leaders of their subcommittees. Be sure to mention the bill number and your concern for the 19th Congressional District of Florida.
The Paradise Progressive 