Southwest Florida politicians and activists reacted strongly to yesterday’s impeachment of President Donald Trump by the US House of Representatives. Below, a sampling as of noon today:
Democrats:
Cindy Banyai, congressional candidate, 19th Congressional District: “While I am proud of our American governance processes in action, I am saddened that it was necessary. I expect more from our leaders than petty manipulations for personal gain and constant deception. I expect transparency, honesty, and truth from our leadership. This is something that every American should expect and demand.” (Banyai’s full statement follows this article.)
Annisa Karim, chair of the Collier County Democratic Party: “Congress, co-equal to the President, did its job in protecting our country and fulfilling their oath of office to, ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.’
“Deflection and distraction do not change facts.
“Fact: the President sought help from a foreign government against an American citizen who might challenge him for his office. That is an impeachable offense and Congress had a duty to act.”
Republicans:
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, 25th Congressional District: “There should not be any doubt about the ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ that form the basis of an impeachment. As the facts demonstrate in this case, there were no violations of law, and therefore, this impeachment has no merit.”
Rep. Greg Steube, 17th Congressional District: “Tonight, I voted no on the Articles of Impeachment for President Donald J. Trump. This impeachment charade was riddled with procedural failures, denials of due process, and partisan games. The facts are clear, the president has not committed an impeachable offense, and certainly not a high crime or misdemeanor as the Democrats allege. I urge the Senate to quickly evaluate the lack of evidence and acquit the president, so we can all focus on improving the lives of Americans instead of further dividing our nation.”
(As of this writing, Rep. Francis Rooney, 19th Congressional District, had not released a post-vote statement.)
State Rep. Dane Eagle, 77th Florida District, congressional candidate: “Our President has been impeached as part of a political stunt. A sad day for our country. We can’t afford to go down this path any longer – we need leaders in Congress who will stand up for the President and the prosperity of our nation!”
Dan Severson, congressional candidate, tweet: “Pray for our @POTUS. He is an innocent man. Today the @TheDemocrats have attacked all Americans who voted for him, who are now employed, whose economic outlook has improved, whose 401Ks have grown. An attack on @realDonaldTrump is an attack on all of us.”
William Figlesthaler, congressional candidate statement: “Tonight’s vote highlights the sickness of liberals in Congress and the need for conservative Republicans to take back control of the House.”
Other congressional candidates had not issued statements as of this writing.
Cindy Banyai, full statement:
The House of Representatives passed two articles of impeachment on December 18, 2019. There is much to be proud of as Americans – the courageous testimony of government officials in reporting malfeasance, representatives pushing forward in the face of criticism and political attack to preserve our institutions and the balance of power that makes us strong. There is also much to lament – the mere fact that the egregious corruption that prompted the articles even occurred, the flip response of the president on impeachment, including the statement “I’m having a good time” made during his Battle Creek rally that evening.
Impeachment is not something to be celebrated, but a necessary check on unbridled power like that which we have witnessed from President Trump. While I am proud of our American governance processes in action, I am saddened that it was necessary. I expect more from our leaders than petty manipulations for personal gain and constant deception. I expect transparency, honesty, and truth from our leadership This is something that every American should expect and demand.
The United States as a nation is a model to the world in terms of our Constitution, government structure, and adherence to the rights of people against the powerful. We need processes like impeachment to remain a model for democracy and we need to continue to restore faith in our institutions. Our adversaries want to see the failure of our model and democracy moreover. We need to keep fighting to retain integrity in our government because the whole world and all of humanity is counting on us standing up for democracy.
House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi at the dais during the vote on the second article of impeachment.
Dec. 18, 2019 by David Silverberg
Southwest Florida’s Republican members of Congress: Reps. Francis Rooney (R-19-Fla.), Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.) and Mario Diaz-Balart (R-25-Fla.), all voted against impeaching President Donald Trump tonight.
The first article of impeachment, abuse of power, passed the US House of representatives by a vote of 230 to 197 along a largely party-line vote.
The second article, obstruction of Congress, passed by a vote of 229 to 198.
House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-12-Calif.) stated in a news conference following the vote that “we’ll see what happens” before naming impeachment managers and sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate. She stated that she wanted to know more about how the Senate intends to conduct a trial.
Rep. Francis Rooney (R-19-Fla.) announced at 4:12 pm today that he would be voting against the impeachment of President Donald J. Trump.
Rooney was one of the last undeclared Republicans to make his intentions known.
Rooney cited what he considered the unseemly speed of the process as the reason for his vote.
His full statement follows:
“The impeachment of a President is among the most somber votes that any Member of Congress can take. The process should not be rushed or based on an artificial timeline, nor should it be partisan or incomplete. It should be thorough and convincing. I repeatedly urged the leaders of the process to stay these proceedings until all executive privilege claims and refusals to deliver documents could be adjudicated by the courts, and all relevant primary sources of testimony could be heard under oath, as was the case in both the Clinton and Nixon impeachment hearings.
“Additionally, having asked numerous ex-White House Counsels and well-known government attorneys, there can be no ‘obstruction of Congress (or of justice)’ while the person refusing to comply is relying on a claim of executive privilege. Only after losing in court, and still refusing to comply with a subpoena, would a claimant be obstructing.
“Based on the limited evidence provided to the House of Representatives, the President’s behavior, while inappropriate, was neither criminal, nor does it rise to the level of justifying impeachment.
“It is now time to get back to the business of passing the USMCA, securing our borders, fixing our immigration system, protecting our environment, and working to reduce our unconscionable national debt.”
Pro-impeachment demonstrators in Naples yesterday. (Photo: author)
Dec. 18, 2019 by David Silverberg
Today is Impeachment Day, and the US House of Representatives is expected to vote on the two articles of impeachment against President Donald J. Trump.
The guys with the votes
As of this writing Rep. Francis Rooney (R-19-Fla.) remains officially undecided on his vote, perhaps the only such Republican. Yesterday, Dec. 17, he told NBC2’s Peter Busch that he was leaning toward a “no” vote. According to Busch’s twitter feed, Rooney wanted Democrats to wait for the courts to compel Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and others to testify about their direct communication with President Trump.
According to Busch, Rooney believes what President Trump did with Ukraine was wrong but is not sure if it rises to impeachment. He told Busch that he would spend the day researching and talking to experts but more than anything he wanted Democrats to slow the process.
Rep. Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee was an outspoken Trump defender during that committee’s hearings and can be expected to vote against impeachment. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-25-Fla.) has been silent on impeachment but can be expected to vote the party line against it.
Impeachment demonstrations
Democratic congressional candidate Cindy Banyai calls for impeachment before a crowd outside Rep. Francis Rooney’s office in Cape Coral. (Photo: Jacob Ogles)
While Diaz-Balart may be silent and Rooney undecided, Southwest Floridians took to the streets to make their preferences known.
In Cape Coral, a crowd estimated at over 300 appeared outside Rooney’s office in Cape Coral.
Democratic congressional candidate Cindy Banyai addressed the crowd, saying some Congress members need an ethics lesson, according to Jacob Ogles, who covered the event for Florida Politics. Banyai called for impeachment and removal.
Ogles estimated that there were also 50 pro-Trump demonstrators present, including Republican congressional candidates Dan Severson and William Figlesthaler.
Based on reporting by Dave Elias for NBC2, the pro and anti-impeachment demonstrators mixed together in Cape Coral, leading to considerable friction and jostling.
NBC-2’s Dave Elias reports amidst a raucous crowd in Cape Coral.
Further south, in Naples, perhaps 300 protesters appeared for a demonstration at the corner of Rt. 41 and Airport Pulling Rd., outside the Collier County government complex, to demonstrate for impeachment. The peaceful demonstration began at 5:30 pm and elicited considerable support from passing drivers. It was organized by Collier Freedom organization, spearheaded by activist Cindy Nayer.
The small number of pro-Trump demonstrators in Naples.
Only three Trumpers appeared in the crowd and the interaction was peaceful, friendly and good-natured. Eventually, they left. About a half hour after the main demonstration began, a handful of pro-Trump demonstrators appeared on the other side of Airport Pulling Rd.
Police presence was heavy. The event was covered by NBC2 and WINK-TV. There is no mention of it in the Naples Daily News.
Another candidate in the 19th?
Trae Zipperer
Yet another candidate may jump into the Republican primary for Rooney’s seat. He’s
Trae Zipperer, a real estate broker who says on his Twitter feed: “I’m leading the charge to clean every veteran headstone in America by Memorial Day 2020. Every veteran headstone should look like it belongs in Arlington.”
Although reportedly considering a run, Zipperer has not yet filed his candidacy with the Federal Election Commission.
This week you will face the most momentous vote of your time in Congress: whether or not to impeach President Donald J. Trump.
Only you know the full events of your past but I do not think I’m exaggerating if I say that this may be the single most important decision of your life. Previously your decisions affected you, your family, your business and your employees. As a member of Congress you have voted before to chart the course of the United States. However, this vote, more than any other, will determine the future of all the people of the United States, and indeed the people of the entire world and the planet on which we all live.
I also know from your statements that you fully appreciate the gravity and momentousness of this matter as well as its burden and responsibility and the magnitude of its implications.
I will not go over the evidence and arguments that have already been made. You have been far closer and better informed about this matter than any of us outside government could ever be.
But as a constituent and a citizen and American who still has and cherishes the fundamental right to speak freely and petition government for a redress of grievances, I would like to address larger issues.
When the founders of this nation met to draft the Constitution they had to deal with the ultimate fundamentals: How do people behave? What is government? What is fairness? What is justice? What is effective? What is right? What is wrong?
We have not had to think of these things in the last 240-plus years because they got it so right. We’ve very successfully lived within the framework and rules they created. By doing so, generations of Americans built the richest and most powerful nation humanity has ever seen and spread its best ideals and values around the world.
But now we have to address those fundamentals again. It is extraordinary that a single man has in less than three years so challenged centuries of precedent, experience and institutional strength to the point where the foundation of this society and civilization is at risk. But here we are.
You, more than most, know the full scope and sweep of American power and influence. Having served as an ambassador representing the United States abroad, you also have a broader perspective than many of your colleagues in Congress. You have worked shoulder to shoulder with the men and women of the US diplomatic corps and you know first-hand their intelligence, their commitment and their patriotism. These are the people under relentless attack by this president.
You know the subtleties of policy and how decisions made in the US capital can ripple outward and either erode or nourish foreign shores. You, more than most, can appreciate the full dangers of a president using the vast power of the United States for petty, personal ends—and I believe that you have a full appreciation of the scope of that economic, military and political power.
As an advocate of Kurdish independence you appreciate more than most the disaster this president’s casual betrayal of the Kurds caused and the genocide he unleashed.
You have very reasonably and responsibly said that you will keep an open mind about the evidence in this case and its implications. For that you’ve been attacked by the people who were your political base before that moment. You have quite rightly said that “impeachment is such a grave matter that it demands that a strong and clear case be made” and those who pursue it should “assure that no stone is left unturned.”
But who is the person who has ensured that those stones remain unturned? Who has built a virtual stone wall around the White House and Oval Office to ensure that Congress did not get the facts and testimony it legitimately sought and to which it is legally entitled?
Very much to your credit you urged the administration to cooperate and fulfill its constitutional duties. You specifically called on Energy Secretary Rick Perry and other top officials to testify.
You and I come from very different ideological perspectives and there is much about which we disagree. But I can say without fear or favor that in these matters you’ve behaved with probity and responsibility. Your observations have been insightful and your actions prudent. Your statements have been well-reasoned and logical.
However, when it comes to this president, White House and administration, your “repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury,” as the founders put it in the Declaration of Independence.
And so we come to the current pass and this week’s vote.
When you vote this week, you’ll be voting on more than just two articles of impeachment. As the founders did, you’ll be addressing fundamentals. You’ll be voting on whether the entire structure of this government will remain standing, whether this Constitution will stay in force, whether the experiment begun by the founders to have a government that rests on reason and compromise and the popular will rather than the whims of a single individual will survive. In short, you’ll be voting on whether “government of the people, by the people, for the people” shall or shall not perish from the earth.
As an American, as a constituent, as a citizen, as the grandchild of immigrants, let me issue this appeal: For the sake of ourselves, our families, our grandchildren and their grandchildren; for the sake of all Americans; for the sake of every person everywhere who has aspired to American dreams and ideals; for the sake of huddled masses yearning to breathe free; for the sake of equal justice under law; for the sake of fighters against tyranny everywhere; for the sake of the founders; for the sake of the Constitution; for the sake of democracy; for the sake of liberty; for the sake of freedom; for the sake of independence; for the sake of your honor; for the sake of your courage; for the sake of your place in history; for the sake of your conscience; and for the sake of your country, the last best place on earth, please, please, please
Dec. 13, 2019 by David Silverberg — Updated 3:30 pm with Steube tweet and statement.
The US House Judiciary Committee voted today to approve two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump.
The vote on both counts was 23 to 17, along party lines. The articles charged abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
Rep. Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.), who represents Port Charlotte and Venice, voted with the minority against the articles.
At 10:19 am, Steube tweeted: “For a 5 minute vote in the Judiciary Committee, members were forced to stay in Washington. In my case, I was unable to attend an event addressing beach erosion and shoreline protection on Manasota Key with the Army Corps of Engineers and local constituents. This is unacceptable.”
“This sets a dangerous precedent for future American presidents,” he stated. “With this vote, we have set the precedent that at any time in the future, whenever a majority party in the House doesn’t like what’s happening in the White House, they can impeach the President for Abuse of Power.”
“No collusion, no obstruction, no quid pro quo, no treason, no bribery, and no high crimes and misdemeanors. And the only Abuse of Power that I see committed, is the Abuse of Power of this Democrat-led Congress in their attempt to overturn the 2016 election and the will of 63 million American voters.”
The articles will now go to the full House for consideration. A vote is expected on Wednesday.
Congressional candidate Ford O’Connell talks to NBC2’s Dave Elias.
Dec. 13, 2019 by David Silverberg
This was a busy week in the race for Florida’s 19th Congressional District seat.
The ‘epic dog fight’ on the right begins
Rhetoric on the right began heating up as Republican candidates started vying to out-Trump each other in the race for the seat being vacated by retiring Rep. Francis Rooney (R-19-Fla.).
Ford O’Connell, a Fox News analyst and commentator, filed his candidacy on Dec. 6 and immediately began blasting Rooney and loudly announcing his allegiance to Trump.
“When Francis Rooney didn’t talk in lockstep with Donald Trump, he not only let down the president, he let down the district,” O’Connell told NBC2’s Dave Elias in a Dec. 11 interview.
As for Rooney’s stated openness to hearing the evidence and making an independent decision, O’Connell said: “That’s a disgrace frankly! When he does that, he’s playing the Democrats and the media game.”
O’Connell continued: “It’s not just your allegiance to the president. You have to understand, I have spent the last three-plus years fighting for Donald Trump in the national media.”
And, in true, personalized Trump style, O’Connell took a shot at State Rep. Dane Eagle (R-77-Cape Coral): “I have a feeling that some people might actually want to go back to Tallahassee rather than stay in this, what is going to be an epic dog fight.”
Eagle countered with a barrage of photos showing him with Trump and a tweet yesterday, Dec. 12, stating: “We need representatives in Congress that will work with @realDonaldTrump, not obstruct him.
An undated campaign photo from State Rep. Dane Eagle showing him with President Donald Trump. The other person on the left is unidentified.
“For two years, the Democrat controlled House has done nothing but obstruct (now trying to impeach) him. I’ll be one of the strongest fighters for the President when I get to Washington!”
Commentary: It’s hard to avoid noting that only dogs engage in dog fights.
Dumornay goes indie
Antonio Dumornay never appeared to fit into the Republican primary race for Rooney’s seat. On Nov. 30, he switched his party affiliation from Republican to independent.
Antonio Dumornay
“The Republican Party was key to bringing slavery to an end, and also with Civil Rights Movement, a lot for Republicans were key factors in legislation being passed, because they were facing Jim Crow laws in the South put in place by the Democratic Party,” Dumornay told Jacob Ogles of Florida Politics in an article appearing on Dec. 10. “Those are the values of the Republican Party that many in the public don’t know about.”
Dumornay called for a “Grand New Party” on his campaign website. But he felt he couldn’t run in what is rapidly turning into a high-priced race. He told Ogles that he believes he’s the only candidate running who makes less than $30,000 per year.
“I saw a lack of focus on people in this community who make less than $60,000 a year and those are the ones most affected in their living situation by cost of living increases, the trade war and everything becoming more expensive,” he told Ogles. “I’m simply a 9-to-5 working man looking to make a difference for the average American.”
If he meets all the requirements, he will appear on the general election ballot next November.
Standing pat
In what is already a crowded field, those who decide to stand pat have as much impact as those who jump in.
This week State Rep. Bob Rommel (R-106-Naples) announced that he would not run for this office. That leaves him facing Democratic activist Sara McFadden in the race for the 106th District seat.
Also declining to get in the game is Peter Simmons, Republican mayor of Bonita Springs. Simmons told Florida Daily that while he’d received an enormous number of messages and e-mails and appeals to get in the race, he wasn’t going to do so.
“I am flattered beyond words to be held in such high regard by so many friends, activists, business men and women, donors, and political organizations, however, for something that was not on my radar screen a few months ago – after consideration I am announcing that I will not be seeking the Republican nomination for United States Congress,” he stated.
The US House of Representatives this afternoon passed the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act (House Resolution 3) by a largely party-line vote of 230 to 192.
The bill aims to lower prescription drug prices.
Two of Southwest Florida’s representatives, Reps. Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.) and Mario Diaz-Balart (R-25-Fla.) voted against the bill. Rep. Francis Rooney (R-19-Fla.) was absent.
With an impeachment vote looming, the members of Southwest Florida’s congressional delegation are preparing for a day of reckoning when they must vote whether or not to impeach the president. The magnitude of the issue has made for increased scrutiny of their statements and criticism of their reactions.
Rep. Rooney’s reasoning
Rep. Francis Rooney
Rep. Francis Rooney (R-19-Fla.) has not retreated from his earlier statements that he is open to considering the evidence but that a strong case needs to be made if impeachment is to occur.
“Surprisingly, I have been criticized by many ardent supporters of the President for saying that I can’t say whether I am for or against his impeachment until I see all the facts and evidence,” he stated in a Dec. 9 statement. “I still feel strongly that we need to develop all possible evidence that could bear on such an important decision. How can such an important decision be made otherwise?”
Nonetheless, he stated that “I do not believe that the President’s behavior related to Ukraine was proper” and the work of US diplomats should not be undermined.
He also complained that top officials and individuals like Rudy Giuliani, John Bolton, former national security adviser, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had not testified. “How can we move forward on such an impactful process as impeachment without them…?” he asked.
He argued that the impeachment process should not proceed until “no stone is left unturned.” However, the statement did not rule out his voting for impeachment should it come up for a vote in the House.
(Rep. Rooney’s full statement follows at the conclusion of this article.)
Steube’s statement
Rep. Greg Steube and Barry Berke.
Rep. Greg Steube (R-17-Fla.), whose district includes Port Charlotte and Venice, has been vocal in criticizing the impeachment process and Democrats.
The impeachment process “is nothing but an attempt to subvert the will of nearly 63 million voters,” Steube said in an Oct. 31 statement following the House vote establishing the procedures for the impeachment process. Nothing he has said since has indicated any change in that position.
Steube sits on the House Judiciary Committee where he has been an ardent defender of the president.
It was while questioning witnesses on Monday, Dec. 9 that Steube’s remarks sparked widespread online criticism for what many observers regarded as an anti-Semitic slur.
Steube read a prepared statement condemning Barry Berke, the lawyer who presented the Democratic case for impeachment. As special counsel to the Committee, Berke served as the architect of the Democratic case and laid out the facts in testimony before the committee.
“Mr. Berke is an unelected, New York lawyer, specifically brought in by the Democrats to give his opinion,” said Steube when it was his turn to speak. “[He is] a politically biased consultant who has given hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal elections to the likes of Act Blue, Hillary Clinton, Obama and Biden.”
Steube kept hammering at Berke’s New York connections. “Mr. Berke is a white collar criminal defense lawyer who brags on his website of getting New York financial brokers deferred prosecution for tax fraud, and fund managers off insider trading charges.”
Steube repeatedly charged that Berke had “lied”—without giving evidence. “This is who was sitting at the top of the dais, next to the chairman, acting like a member of this committee; a partisan New York lawyer with a written bias against President Trump who gave thousands to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.”
The term “New York lawyer” has widely regarded by many observers as an anti-Semitic dog whistle for “Jewish.”
Rep. Ted Deutch (D-22-Fla.), also a member of the committee, tried to ask Steube what he meant by “New York lawyer” but Rep. Jerold Nadler (D-10-NY), chairman of the committee, would not allow the question in order to keep the proceedings moving forward.
“Rep. Greg Steube just described Barry Berke as a ‘New York lawyer.’ Multiple times,” tweeted a Jewish activist group called Bend the Arc. “Let’s be clear: that’s coded language for ‘Jew.’ Again and again, Trump & his enablers invoke antisemitism to distract from impeachment & promote bigotry. Leave our Jewish community alone.”
Steube dismissed the controversy. “It’s ridiculous to think my comments were anything but aimed at liberal Democrats who will stop at nothing to impeach this President,” he said after the hearing.
Mario’s silence
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-25-Fla.), whose district stretches from Golden Gate to Hialeah on the east coast of Florida, has remained remarkably silent on his position regarding impeachment.
In the past, Diaz-Balart has been a faithful party soldier, voting with the president 91 percent of the time over the course of his career, according to the website FiveThirtyEight.com.
The Paradise Progressive reached out to Diaz-Balart’s office for comment and clarification of his impeachment position. If an answer is received, this article will be updated.
Full statement of Rep. Francis Rooney on impeachment:
Regardless of my or anyone’s opinion about the President’s treatment of the Ukrainians, Rudy Giuliani or anyone else, impeachment is such a grave matter that it demands that a strong and clear case be made. Personally, I do not believe that the President’s behavior related to Ukraine was proper and feel that he should not undermine the work of our Ambassadors and foreign service officers who spend their careers protecting United States’ interests around the world, often at great hardship, but the issue is whether this is criminal and impeachable or not.
Surprisingly, I have been criticized by many ardent supporters of the President for saying that I can’t say whether I am for or against his impeachment until I see all the facts and evidence. I still feel strongly that we need to develop all possible evidence that could bear on such an important decision. How can such an important decision be made otherwise?
There are several important sources of first-hand testimony about what was or was not said by the president that should be heard under oath, namely Giuliani, Amb. Bolton, Sec. Pompeo, Chief of Staff Mulvaney and the former Secretary of Energy Perry. We will soon know the outcome of the challenge to former White House Counsel Don McGahn’s claim of executive privilege. The result of this case plus existing precedents suggest that a compelling basis exists to compel all these individuals to testify. First-hand accounts like these would affirm that the impeachment process is seeking substantive outcomes based on real facts and accurate information, rather than reflecting a more political objective.
How can we move forward on such an impactful process as impeachment without them, and without any other collateral evidence these witnesses might lead us to, in order show the American people the fairness and thoroughness that this measure merits? Like the legal canon of avoiding “even the appearance of impropriety”, I urge that the leaders of the impeachment process go the extra mile to exemplify impartiality, fairness and objectivity in their deliberations.
This consideration of broadening the inquiry is a different one from whether the facts known at this time justify impeachment. Impeachment is not like a routine criminal indictment that may or may not be based on all possible facts if the legal case has been made. It is a significant Constitutional procedure that fundamentally impacts our institutions and is inextricably linked to the confidence of the American people in their legislators and government. Accordingly, having enough evidence per se is not enough to move forward when much more probative testimony is available to assure that no stone is left unturned.
People march in Naples, Fla., on Jan. 21, 2017 following the inauguration of President Donald Trump to protest his attitudes toward women. (Photo: author)
Dec. 10, 2019 by David Silverberg
Doris Cortese has a nightmare.
The 80-year-old “godmother” of Lee County Republican politics told NBC-2’s Dave Elias in a Nov. 12 interview that her worst fear is that someday Lee County could turn blue.
“I was worried about it. I hope and pray it never happens,” Cortese said.
Doris Cortese is interviewed by NBC-2’s Dave Elias.
Making Cortese’s nightmare come true is exactly what every local Democrat dreams of accomplishing—and not just Lee County but all of Southwest Florida.
But Democrats are under no illusions. No Democrat goes into an election in Southwest Florida thinking that the race will be easy—and no one is ever disappointed.
The race is hard, the path is steep, the odds are long and the obstacles daunting. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be done or that victory is unattainable.
So how can a Democrat win in Southwest Florida? This analysis focuses on the 19th Congressional District, the coastal strip from Cape Coral to Marco Island and the congressional race, but many of the structural issues apply as well to Southwest Florida state legislative districts and districts.
First, let’s survey the obstacles.
The structural impediments
The first thing any candidate looks at are the relative registration rolls and for many the story is told right there: In Lee County, as of Dec. 9, there were 196,365 Republicans or 42 percent; 124,693 Democrats or 27 percent; and 141,563 “others” or 31 percent. In Collier County it was 105,320 Republicans or 52 percent; 48,130 Democrats or 23 percent; and 50,300 “others” or 25 percent.
The party disparity is reinforced through gerrymandering, which keeps potentially Democratic communities like Lehigh Acres and Golden Gate outside the 19th District and absorbed into the largely Republican 17th and 25th districts.
As a result of the Republican majority, all elected public officials are Republican. What is more, the local media tend to be dismissive of Democratic candidates, ignoring their activities, their statements, their stands on the issues and their campaigns. And Republican dominance gives them a tremendous fundraising advantage.
Republican dominance is ironic, given Florida’s past as a solidly southern Democratic state. However, like the rest of the south, Florida began becoming more Republican beginning in the 1950s. President Richard Nixon’s “southern strategy” accelerated the trend in 1968 and 1972. Republicans took over the state house in 1996.
Even so, Florida has been a finely divided toss-up state in election after election.
That see-saw battle, however, has not applied along the Paradise Coast. Naples is the southernmost point of Interstate Highway 75, which comes straight down from the Canadian border, through Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and Georgia. As a result, since the highway’s completion in the 1970s, the area has seen a steady influx of Republicans from the colder regions of the upper Midwest, both as snowbirds and permanent residents. The influx continues today.
If one presumes that past is future, there is no reason not to suppose that this situation will continue. People from Minnesota, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio and Indiana, mostly Republicans, will continue migrating hither. Republican dominance could be indefinite.
But past trends in this case do not guarantee future returns.
What a Democrat must do to win
How many votes must a Democratic candidate get to win a congressional seat in the 19th Congressional District?
We can begin by looking at the last two general elections, one a midterm, the other a presidential election. (Figures used here come from Ballotpedia.)
In 2018, a total of 339,607 votes were cast for this office. Francis Rooney won 211,465 or 62.3 percent, David Holden won 128,106 or 37.7 percent and “other” votes came to only 36 votes.
But how much higher is the turnout in a presidential election year? In 2016, voter turnout was 363,166. This was Francis Rooney’s first election and he won 239,225 votes or 65.9 percent against Robert Neeld, who without doing any campaigning, won 123,812 or 34.1 percent of the vote. In this election “other” votes came to 129 votes.
Two years later, with vigorous campaigning, fundraising and television advertising, Holden was able to raise the Democratic percentage from the previous election from 34.1 percent to 37.7 percent.
Despite that fluctuation, it’s fairly safe to say that the percentages of Republican to Democratic vote totals in SWFL usually break down to around 65 percent to 35 percent. This has also held true in state races, so it’s a credible assumption.
Turnout in 2020 is likely to be higher than ever before in Southwest Florida. This author is going to project a total vote of 400,000. To win, a candidate would have to get at least 200,001 votes, although 51 percent is a more realistic goal, which in this scenario comes to 204,000 votes.
If the vote total is split 65 to 35 percent, that yields 260,000 Republican to 140,000 Democratic votes. Any Democratic candidate needs to add 64,000 new votes to the Democratic total to reach 51 percent. To be safe, though, it’s better to shoot for 53 percent, or 212,000 votes. That means the Democrat must win 72,000 new votes.
(Editor’s note: Readers are welcome to challenge these numbers and assumptions and provide their own conclusions in comments on the article. However, the one proviso is that to be credible you must show your work: your data, your sources and your calculations.)
Where are so many new votes to be found? Obviously, they must come from the existing base of registered voters.
In this regard new circumstances have upended the old status quo and opened new populations to Democratic candidates. These circumstances are:
The Trump factor
A crowd at the Collier County fairgrounds reacts to candidate Donald Trump’s denunciation of the media on Oct. 23, 2016. (Photo: the author)
For local Republicans, Donald Trump is both their greatest asset and their greatest liability.
He’s an asset in that he can fire up his local base. He’s already proved that with local rallies in 2016, 2018 and with two rallies in 2019, one in Orlando and the other in Sunrise. These events, which are combinations of circus, carnival, worship service and presidential therapy session, indisputably build adoration for him among the faithful. He can be expected to hold at least one in Southwest Florida in the run-up to the election, particularly since Florida is a crucial state for him and he’s now officially a resident. (A first-hand account of a Trump rally by this author can be seen here.)
Trump’s also a liability in that his behavior, his actions, his insults and his increasing irrationality offend and repulse thinking people and many traditional Republicans.
Such Republicans have been expressing themselves openly since his election in 2016. In October 2018, William MacArthur of Naples wrote in a letter published in the Naples Daily News that “Even though I’ve been a Republican for most of my life, as was my father before me, I cannot justify to my grandchildren my voting for Rep. Francis Rooney, senatorial candidate Rick Scott or gubernatorial candidate Ron Desantis.” More recently, in a Nov. 27, 2019 letter in the Naples Daily News, Bruce Beardsley of Naples stated, “It is with increased shame that I admit to still being registered as a member of the Republican Party. The Republican Party exists in name only. It has become the Party of Trump.”
Trumpers dismiss such people as RINOs—Republicans in name only—but the fact is that the more bizarre and offensive the president’s behavior and pronouncements, the more disastrous his decisions, and with impeachment bringing out evidence of his corruption, the larger their ranks grow. That said, their local numbers may not be sufficient to make the decisive difference at election time. But every Republican that Trump drives away from the Grand Old Party is one more vote that’s potentially Democratic, or at the very least, not Republican.
“Grab ‘em by the …”
Protesters at the second women’s march in Naples, on Jan. 20, 2018. (Photo: author)
From the day in 2016 when he was overheard crudely boasting of his sexual exploits, Trump has offended and demeaned women and they have lashed back. It started the day after Trump’s inauguration when millions of women around the world took to the streets to protest, including robust turnout in Southwest Florida.
Women have been motivated to run for office like never before and it made a difference in turning Congress in 2018. Will the same outrage and energy manifest itself in 2020—especially in Southwest Florida where women constitute a majority in Lee County (51.1 percent) and half of Collier County (50.7 percent)?
It’s incorrect to discuss a “women’s vote” as though women are a uniform, unthinking bloc. Like all voters, female voters are diverse and while they share some commonalities, making generalities—on either side—can be a grave error. In Southwest Florida, women for Trump have turned out in numbers at his rallies, while anti-Trump protestors have made impressive showings at demonstrations and protest marches.
One issue that has mobilized politically active women is the question of abortion and provision of women’s health services. In Southwest Florida, the Trumper candidates are almost uniformly anti-choice, at least those who have expressed themselves on the issue. State Rep. Dane Eagle, the leading candidate for the Republican congressional nomination, is vehemently anti-choice and has a legislative history of trying to restrict and reduce women’s health options and abortion access.
Trump is also opposed to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and his administration has done everything it can to gut the program, something that also doesn’t sit well with voters who care about health and family issues.
So it may be that female Republican voters offended by Trump and opposed to Trumpist attitudes on healthcare and women’s health issues offer one of the best opportunities for a Democratic candidate to win over new votes.
The uncommitted
The number of voters who are not registering with either major party has grown in recent years and now constitute 31 percent of Lee County voters and 25 percent of Collier County, according to Election Office figures.
(Terminology note: Independent voters and non-party affiliated (NPA) voters are not the same. There is an Independence Party of Florida, so technically, “independents” are actually members of a party. In this article non-party affiliated voters will be referred to as NPAs.)
Theoretically, the “other” voters represent a rich source of votes. However, the appearance is deceptive. NPAs may not register with a party out of laziness, indifference or ignorance rather than conviction, meaning that they may not bother to vote at election time.
“Although great emphasis is placed upon the importance of winning independent voters, their vote has been relatively evenly split in the recent past,” she wrote. “In 2008, Obama won the independent vote by only 7 percent and, in 2012, Rick Scott won the independent vote by a similarly small margin (8 percent).”
So while there is no reliable survey data, the likelihood is that NPA votes may split in the same proportion as party votes. In short, NPAs can be won over but it would be a mistake to assume that they can make the decisive difference.
On Nov. 6, Democrats made great gains in Virginia, Kentucky and Pennsylvania thanks in large part to suburban voters. Indeed, the Pennsylvania results were considered particularly significant.
“The biggest red flag I’d be worrying about is Pennsylvania,” Russ Schriefer, a Republican strategist wrote to The Washington Post after the election. “[It is a] key, targeted state and critical to the Trump coalition. Yet Democrats cleaned up in the suburbs, sweeping in Delaware County — a county with a 30,000 [Republican] plurality and under [Republican] control since the Civil War, an area filled with college-educated, upper/middle income, primarily white voters that were once the bedrock of the Republican Party.”
That seems to describe suburban sentiment across the country.
Southwest Florida is not Delaware County but in 2020 attitudes could change.
New northern influxes
Although Midwesterners provide the majority population in the district, there are increasing numbers of northeasterners coming to Southwest Florida, particularly from Massachusetts and states like New Jersey. Unfortunately, no hard figures are publicly available and not all these northeasterners are Democrats or liberals. Nonetheless, they may provide additional votes for Democratic candidates.
Seniors, youth and families
Southwest Florida has very high proportions of seniors: 28.6 percent of Lee County is 65 years old or older and 32.2 percent of Collier County. (The national average is 16 percent.) In the past, these voters have tended to be conservative and voted Republican.
However, there are increasing numbers of more youthful voters entering the polling places and especially family-age voters. Nationally, younger voters are trending Democratic. This may also occur in Southwest Florida, particularly in Cape Coral, which has a higher proportion of families with school-age children than in the rest of the district.
Trump policies are neither senior-friendly nor family-friendly. Trump’s international trade policies are driving up prices, eroding the purchasing power of fixed-income seniors. While Trump boasts of his job creation, he’s been no friend to retirees. There have been indications that Trump and Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) are taking aim at Social Security and plan to make significant cuts to the program if Trump is re-elected, which would be devastating to Southwest Florida seniors. If Southwest Florida seniors take this into account they could turn against Republicans.
Trump’s relentless war on the Affordable Care Act, while very satisfying emotionally to his followers, is at odds with the national popularity of affordable healthcare, which is a particular concern of Southwest Florida’s many seniors and parents. It may be an issue that Democrats can leverage to their advantage.
The minority vote
President Barack Obama inspired unprecedented minority turnout for his candidacy. Memories of that support linger in many Democratic minds and minority votes, particularly among African Americans and Hispanics who have been so brutally scapegoated and denigrated by Trump, may make a difference nationally in 2020.
But Southwest Florida in general and the 19th Congressional District in particular, are overwhelmingly white—86.8 percent in Lee County, 89.3 percent in Collier County, which translates into 83 percent in the District.
Even if every single eligible minority voter turned out and voted Democratic—and minority turnout has historically been low—it would not be enough to turn the District Democratic.
In 2018 an inordinate amount of local Democratic time and effort was spent on minority campaigning. There is a Democratic commitment to fairness and civil rights that powers this. But while those minority votes are important and will add to Democratic totals—and remember, not all minority votes will be Democratic—the fact of the matter is that while winning minority votes is important, a Democrat is going to have to tear votes away from the white Republican majority in order to win.
That said, statewide, Democrats are making a new push to register and motivate minority voters. Former gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum announced on Dec. 5 that he would be leading a new effort to engage and mobilize young and minority voters across the state and that may have some impact in Southwest Florida.
Hopes and fears
As overwhelming as the task before Southwest Florida Democrats may seem, there are favorable omens around the country.
Again and again since 2016, Democrats have won elections in deep red states like Alabama and Kentucky and turned long-Republican districts in Pennsylvania and Virginia.
In 2020 much will depend on who is nominated as the Democratic presidential candidate. Floridians don’t get to weigh in on the question until very late in the process, the presidential preference primary on March 17, when the nominee will probably be known. But a winning national candidate could translate into local momentum.
Winning characteristics
To overcome the obstacles and deficits and win the general election, the Democratic candidate in the 19th Congressional District has to be a fighter, someone who is exceptionally aggressive and energetic. This person will have to be able to connect with people on an emotional level and be both passionate as well as pragmatic. She or he must win over reluctant and recalcitrant voters and give traditional Republicans who have doubts about a second Trump presidency the motivation to vote Democratic, many for the first time. This person will have to be backed by exceptionally committed and energetic activists in both Lee and Collier counties. And robust fundraising abilities certainly will not hurt.
Such a scenario may not have been seen before but that’s not to say it can’t happen at all. What’s past is not necessarily prologue.
And so, on Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2020, Doris Cortese, the godmother of Lee County Republican politics, may just wake up to discover that her nightmare has come true—Southwest Florida has turned blue.
The impeachment vote of President Donald Trump.
Cindy Banyai, congressional candidate, 19th Congressional District: “While I am proud of our American governance processes in action, I am saddened that it was necessary. I expect more from our leaders than petty manipulations for personal gain and constant deception. I expect transparency, honesty, and truth from our leadership. This is something that every American should expect and demand.” (Banyai’s full statement follows this article.)
Annisa Karim, chair of the Collier County Democratic Party: “Congress, co-equal to the President, did its job in protecting our country and fulfilling their oath of office to, ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.’
Dan Severson, congressional candidate, tweet: “Pray for our @POTUS. He is an innocent man. Today the @TheDemocrats have attacked all Americans who voted for him, who are now employed, whose economic outlook has improved, whose 401Ks have grown. An attack on @realDonaldTrump is an attack on all of us.”
William Figlesthaler, congressional candidate statement: “Tonight’s vote highlights the sickness of liberals in Congress and the need for conservative Republicans to take back control of the House.”
Pro-impeachment demonstrators in Naples yesterday. (Photo: author)
Democratic congressional candidate Cindy Banyai calls for impeachment before a crowd outside Rep. Francis Rooney’s office in Cape Coral. (Photo: Jacob Ogles)
NBC-2’s Dave Elias reports amidst a raucous crowd in Cape Coral.
Rep. Greg Steube votes against impeachment.
Congressional candidate Ford O’Connell talks to NBC2’s Dave Elias.
Rep. Greg Steube and Barry Berke.
People march in Naples, Fla., on Jan. 21, 2017 following the inauguration of President Donald Trump to protest his attitudes toward women. (Photo: author)
A crowd at the Collier County fairgrounds reacts to candidate Donald Trump’s denunciation of the media on Oct. 23, 2016. (Photo: the author)
Protesters at the second women’s march in Naples, on Jan. 20, 2018. (Photo: author)
The Paradise Progressive 