Doesn't Bobby Bowden remind you of, um, Donald Rumsfeld?

Bobby Bowden and Donald Rumsfeld...on the surface, they appear to have little in common, other than both are icons in their mid-seventies. And that's where the similarities end, right? Bobby is down-to-Earth and Rummy is a Princeton snob. Bobby plays games for a living, while Rummy's every day was filled with life-or-death decisions. See, they are very different people.

Except that, more and more, Bobby Bowden is starting to sound just like Donald Rumsfeld. Their accents may be different, but their stubborness is eerily alike. Rumsfeld used to talk about how great things were going in Iraq, then the news would cut to a picture of six Marines dying in a Humvee. That kind of dichotmy is what I hear when I listen to Bobby Bowden. He talks about "making progress", of getting things "established" and then FSU loses 33-0 AT HOME to Wake Forest.

Like I said, the former Secretary of Defense and a football coach have little in common, but they are both in a state of denial. We see where that led Rumsfeld. Should Bobby suffer the same fate?

Give Carl Zimmermann credit

Sure, Carl Zimmermann lost his race to neo-populist Peter Nehr by less than 1,500 votes, but Carl did so with determination and style -- and in a district as egregiously gerrymandered as any in Florida.

I served as a consultant to Carl's campaign at the very beginning of his effort. Even then I could tell that Carl was a serious candidate who could have won had he ran in a more competitive district.

Unfortunately, the state and local Democratic party looked at the registration numbers for House 48 and decided the GOP could not be beat. As it turns out, if Zimmermann had had any money to spend on his campaign, he may have won. Two or three mailpieces alone could have turned the tide.

I suspect Peter Nehr will do a very good job in the Florida Legislature -- he's just independent enough to make a difference in Tallahassee. Unfortunately for him, the closeness of his race likely precludes Nehr from defeating Will Weatherford, Allen Bense's son-in-law, for the Speaker's race.

As for Carl Zimmermann, he can take solace in knowing he ran a very good race. I don't think we've heard the last of him.

UCF's SAE chapter closed for hazing

One of University of Central Florida's oldest fraternities has been disbanded by its national headquarters following allegations of hazing involving heavy drinking and pledges wearing women's underwear.

The Sigma Alpha Epsilon chapter will be closed immediately, said Brandon Weghorst, a spokesman for the Evanston, Ill.-based fraternity. "Our board does not feel it's worth the effort to rehabilitate the group," Weghorst said Wednesday. He said as many as two-thirds of the chapter's approximately 90 members may have been involved.

The first thing to do: improve the lobbyist disclosure law

If there is one aspect of Florida's campaign finance laws that does not benefit big business and its lapdogs in the Legislature, it is laws requiring the Division of Elections to provide an Internet-based disclosure system that details "who gives what."

By visiting the Division's site and scrolling down to the Candidates and Committees section, any Floridian with computer access can see who gave what to which candidate, and how much. You can pull up all the candidates for a particular race or a particular county. You can sort all of this information by a variety of fields. You can download the information directly to your computer where you investigate the information more thoroughly. There is literally a cornucopia of information to be obtained on this site, making it one of the few ways the public can hold candidates accountable for their campaign finance actions.

The information on the site has been utilized by the media, researchers and students, if not opposing campaigns, to keep each candidate as honest as possible about who is funding their campaign. Certainly, the system could be better (why not require contribution information in real-time during the final weeks of the election when campaigns receive large infusions of money?), but the system could be far worse. How bad could it be?

Just take a look -- not that there is much to see -- at what the Florida Legislature discloses concerning the compensation of legislative lobbyists. State legislators enacted a sweeping ban last December on gifts from lobbyists and also required, for the first time, that lobbyists disclose how much their clients pay them.

The first disclosures were due in May, but state officials waited until June 1 to send lobbyists a warning letter that gave them 30 days to comply or face fines or harsher penalties (Gary Fineout, Miami Herald, June 18, 2006). Visit the websites of either the Florida House or the Florida Senate, click on Lobbyist Information, then Legislative Lobbyist Compensation Reports and you will taken into a black hole of files and PDFs so cumbersome to review that you will inevitably give up whatever search you had undertook. Then again, isn't that the point? Not to provide due diligence, merely the appearance of it.

Look for yourself! Whoever "designed" this system has organized the site into a series of PDFs -- not Excel or Access based data. That means someone interested in finding out how much the NRA is paying Marion Hammer to influence the Legislature has to scroll through every single PDF to get the full picture. The PDFs, most of which appear to be handwritten documents scanned into a database, are organized by the date they were filed, as if that's a logical starting point. Then they're sorted alphabetically. That's like organizing your garage by the color of your tools. Because everything on these forms is either handwritten or typed in, it is unrecognized by the search function in the latest version of Acrobat Reader. So to find information about Ronnie Book, for example, you'll need to look through every report just to make sure you didn't miss something. (Not that these forms are that illuminating anyway. They merely indicate which firm was paid, and only in ten thousand dollar ranges.)

So let's recap, to comply with Senate President Tom Lee's most important piece of legislation, his own staff created a database of PDFs that is sorted in the most illogical way possible. If Tom Lee is serious about this law, he needs to instruct his staff to build a complete database of the lobbyists' compensation information. It needs to be as thorough as the Division of Elections campaign finance database, meaning the information needs to be data-entered so that it can be easily accessed and researched. Then the database should go one step further and match the compensation reports with the state's listing of lobbyists. But that's only if the Florida Legislature is serious about restoring integrity to its body. Otherwise, we'll just keep plowing through these PDFs.

The difference between strategy and tactics in H-52

As excited as I was to see Charlie Crist win and Katherine Harris lose, no election result satisfied me more than to see Angelo Cappelli lose in H-52. Angelo's loss is a textbook example of the difference between good strategy and good tactics.

What does this mean? It means that Angelo's campaign made sure that while "the trains ran on time", its strategic decisions were illogical. Angelo's right-hand man, Nick Hansen, is a very good campaign manager (just like Chris Davis was for Frank Farkas): he made sure the events were planned, the volunteers were organized, the yard signs were distributed. Those are tactics. Where Angelo fell short was in his strategy.

His decision to go negative in the primary was both weird and wrong. What threat did Ross Johnson represent? To continue with such fierce negativity in the general election was disastrous. Like Bo Michael, The St. Petersburg Times came to the defense of one of its favorite candidates once they were attacked. If Angelo had any chance of winning the race, he lost it once the Times blew him away in the last days of the campaign.

It's easy to forget that this was Angelo's campaign to lose. He was far better funded than his opponent. Also, Angelo had been running for well over a year, while Heller barely had time to organize his campaign. And, thanks to Frank Farkas, District 52 had been gerrymandered to favor the Republicans.

So how could Angelo Cappelli lose?

The answer begins and ends with Angelo. I really think his ego got in the way. He was Yale-educated and didn't let anyone forget it. He wore French cuffs and three-piece suits to casual campaign events. He drove a Jaguar (so what you say, well when Rep. Waters initially ran for office, the first thing we told her was to park her Jag in the garage. She did and her wealth never became an issue). The resentment of Angelo's elitism showed up on the Times' blog over and over. It also manifested itself when word spread that Angelo was planning to run for Speaker once he was elected.

Angelo needed someone on his campaign to tell him to ditch the French cuffs and park the Jag. He needed someone to tell him 'No'. He needed someone to tell him to worry about winning this race before he worried about running for Speaker.

Angelo's decisions about his direct mail and other media were poor. His first mailpiece sent to absentee ballot requesters left off the necessary disclaimer. And that was only the beginning. When his positive pieces weren't written from his campaign manager's mom, they were coming up with weird concepts, like that Nutty Professor piece. As for Angelo's television, it had all of the production values normally associated with an Adam Goodman spot, but it lacked any edge or original thought. Who the hell wants to watch Angelo Cappelli working behind a desk at night?

Finally, Angelo's decision to attempt to label Bill Heller as a tax-and-spend liberal, because Heller led the campaign to increase teacher salaries via a tax increase, completely backfired. Like completely. That all Heller had to do was get on the air with that horribly produced spot to rebut Cappelli's charge demonstrated how weak the issue was.

Sure, this all sounds like arm-chair quarterbacking. And it is. But it's also a point to all of the people involved in campaigns to look at the forest and not just the trees. Strategy is much more important than tactics. If Angelo Cappelli had had a real consultant, not just a good campaign manager, he could have won.

Congratulations Charlie

First of all, congratulations to my dear friend Governor-elect Charlie Crist. His senate campaign was the first that I ever worked on, so I owe much to the silver-haired, silver-tongued favorite son of St. Petersburg.

I first met Charlie when he came to my high school to discuss the Youth in Government program I was involved in; not soon after he invited me and my friend Estella to be pages in the state senate. From then after Charlie has been nothing less than a great friend to me and my family.

I went on to be one of only two or three staffers Charlie employed for his courageous, albeit futile, bid for the U.S. Senate. Working up-close with Charlie, I witnessed how good-natured and honest he was as a person. That's why its so satisfying to see him become Florida's next Governor; because he is a truly good human being and I know he will act with the people's interests when governing.

I have no advice for Charlie that is any better than the advice he wil be receiving from his closest confidenats. But having worked for Governor Askew at the Florida Institute of Government, and from him getting a real sense of how hard it is to govern this unwieldly state, I only suggest that Charlie remain true to his roots, remain the good and honest person he always has been. The rest will take care of itself.

A reaction to Tuesday

Well, I've been off the blogs for a while, so this is the first chance to comment on what took place this past week. It's nice to see some things haven't changed.

First, let me address the horrible accusations that have been circulating about Kevin King. I'm not going to repeat them because to do so would be to continue one of the most despicable rumor campaigns this county has ever seen. No one has traded barbs back and forth more than Kevin and I, but it was never personal. When I was first approached with the supposed "evidence" to back up the rumors, I called Kevin (he didn't answer) because these kind of tactics, especially when they are coming from the same side of the aisle, are, as I said, despicable. I think Kevin is a good manager and a hard worker. And I hope he continues to manage campaigns as well as he has, while I know he will always work hard. In the meantime, I urge all of those anonymous posters who keep pushing this story to let the issue drop.

As for Liz McCallum's loss, I don't know why I should be blamed for that. I haven't worked for her for over a year. I think she made a pretty good showing, and my ego tells me that if I had been in fighting shape, designing her TV and mail, she may have pulled out a narrow victory. Nevertheless, both Bill Heller and Angelo Cappelli are incredibly intelligent men who will well represent H-52. Neither was my first choice, but what can I say -- they're both very well-educated community pillars. Still, I love Liz, I think she is a nice woman and she did the party a service in 2004 running against Frank Farkas.

As for lumping me with Ed Helm, please don't. Let's just leave it at that. Since he has taken on the role of Javert in my life, it's time for people to know why I really quit his campaign. It had nothing to do with politics or money. It had to do with the fact that Jon Ausman completely freaked me out. Here's the story: we met for a drink to discuss the campaign. This was at the beginning of the campaign and I only knew Jon by reputation. Over the course of the night -- a short one -- Jon kept trying to show me lurid pictures of his wife that he kept on his cell phone. I asked him to stop again and again, but he persisted. I promptly paid my bill and left early. From there on, my interaction with the Helm campaign was negative.

As for The Mallard Group, no one would like to take a shot at them more than me, but I can't. Jack Hebert was the greatest mentor I could ever ask for and if he and were still working together, I KNOW Tuesday would have been a very different day for everyone. Just look at our record in 1998-2002 and you'll see we knew how to win races.

Finally, let me make this comment, Jack Hebert is still one of the most creative political consultants in Florida. Unfortunately, we didn't see his best stuff this season.

We really didn't see anything great this season actually. The TV, mail, radio and websites I've seen are mind-numbingly boring. The logos, colors and slogans of most of the candidates are completely uninspired. Seriously, did anyone see one politcal ad of any medium that was interesting?

I will compliment the Times for really expanding its local election coverage. I hate Adam Smith more than life itself, but the newspaper he works for has done a good job with really comprehensive coverage (although why my fine was newsworthy is beyond me. Let me repeat: I am out of the business and have been for almost a year.)

And for those of you making fun of me for bartending, poor souls, stop in for a drink and we can bend an elbow together.

Yes, Superman Returns does suck

I really, really wanted to like this film. And I actually did enjoy all of the components of this movie. It's a beautifully made film, in fact some of the action sequences are breathtaking.

My problem with Superman Returns is, well, Superman.

Superman, the comic book hero, the omnipowerful savior just doesn't feel real or relevant. And this story isn't told as science fiction, per se, and so to see a man fly around in tights is just out-and-out ridiculous.

I've tracked the origin of my problems with the Superman universe back to my viewing of Batman Begins, Christopher Nolan's masterful deconstruction of Gotham's hero. I didn't realize how brilliant and creative Batman Begins really was until seeing Superman Returns, but having seen it, no other comic-book story can compare, not even the latest serials of Spiderman or X-Men.

Batman Begins reinvented the entire genre, making a superhero relevant to today's movie viewer. We can believe that a Batman figure could exist in our universe. In fact, pop culturists have actually computed a price tag for how much money it would take for an ordinary citizen to become Batman. Nolan's work on Batman Begins is genius because it does not rely on SPFX to show Batman's heroics, rather he filmed most of the Caped Crusader's action without relying on CGI or movie magic.

And no, making Batman more human did not deflate his mythical status. As a comic-book here, Batman isn't a Superhero, he's just an ordinary man doing extraordinary things.

Having seen Batman Begins, having seen Chris Nolan deconstruct the comic book universe, having seen the uber-talented Christian Bale play Bruce Wayne, having seen all of this makes Superman Returns look silly in comparison.

I just couldn't suspend reality enough to accept Superman into my world. Not that the director really wanted that. In fact, throughout this movie and the original films by Richard Donner, we're just suppose to accept that an all-powerful alien that looks exactly like us has arrived on Earth and is going to do good.

Do you know what kind of panic Superman's presence in our world would create? In a single stroke, he would have changed the religious outlook of most of humanity (so another planet was also designed in God's image???). Just the discovery of an Extraterrestial Lifeform would change our entire world.

This kind of impact goes unmentioned in these stories and I find that insulting to the movie goer. But its not the larger issues that really bug me, it's the trivial ones that, by going unanswered, irk me so much that I cannot enjoy the story. As Roger Ebert points out in his scathing criticism of the movie: "Watching Superman straining to hold a giant airliner, I'm wondering: Why does he strain? Does he have his limits? Would that new Airbus be too much for him? What about if he could stand somewhere? Superman is vulnerable to one, and only one, substance: kryptonite. He knows this. We know this. Lex Luthor knows this. Yet he has been disabled by kryptonite in every one of the movies. Does he think Lex Luthor would pull another stunt without a supply on hand? Why doesn't he take the most elementary precautions?"

And so on...

This movie sets up Superman as a messiahnic figure, a mantle Superman seems willing to accept. "You wrote that the world doesn't need a saviour, but every day I hear people crying for one." Superman says this Lois Lane at one point in the movie to explain why he carrys out an endless set of good deeds. My question for that is: if Superman understands this need for a savior and is willing to take this responsibility on, how can he waste any time walking around like Clark Kent? If he spends eight hours a day dressed up as a newspaper reporter, isn't he wasting eight hours when he could be saving the world?

And why the hell is he Clark Kent anyways?

I mean, I like Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth) as much as anyone. I especially liked her when she was a blonde hottie in Blue Crush, but what is Superman hiding from?

Face it: this is a myth created in a bygone era, when life was simpler and the moviegoing audience was, well, a radiogoing audience. Superman, for all his idealism, is a great figure. But his storytellers haven't done a good enough job explaining why we should visit Metropolis.

I'll stick with Gotham.

Poll madness

Quinnipiac University and Strategic Vision released Florida polls yesterday; note that the Q poll surveys registered voters, while the SV poll surveys "likely" voters.

Quinnipiac University Poll

Crist widens his lead over Gallagher; Davis and Crist remain dead even:
Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist has opened a 49 - 21 percent lead among Republican voters over State Chief Financial Officer Tom Gallagher, his opponent for the Republican gubernatorial nomination, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. Another 28 percent of Republicans are undecided. This compares to a 43 - 26 percent lead among Republicans May 24.

Crist also has inched ahead of U.S. Rep. Jim Davis, the leading Democrat in the governor's race, 41 - 39 percent. This compares to a 40 - 37 percent Davis lead in a May 24 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

Among Democrats, Davis leads State Sen. Rod Smith 32 - 16 percent, with 49 percent undecided, compared to 38 - 17 percent May 24. But 74 percent of Florida voters, including 69 percent of Democrats, don't know enough about Davis to form an opinion. For Smith, the "don't know enough" numbers are even higher." June 29, 2006 - Crist Edges Up In Florida Governor's Race, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds; President Gets No Bounce In Approval Ratings"

Strategic Vision Poll

"Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist has a taken a 22-point lead in a new statewide poll as the well known conservative continues to consolidate his support among Republicans 'likely' to vote in the upcoming Sept. 5 gubernatorial primary." "Crist Widens Lead To 22 Points As Gallagher Loses Support".

Strategic Vision poll of 1200 likely voters in Florida, aged 18+, and conducted June 23-25, 2006. The margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.
More results from the Strategic Vision poll released yesterday: If the election for Governor were between Charlie Crist, the Republican and Jim Davis, the Democrat, whom would you support?

Charlie Crist 49% Jim Davis 41% Undecided 10%

If the election for Governor were between Tom Gallagher, the Republican and Jim Davis, the Democrat, whom would you support? Tom Gallagher 40% Jim Davis 40% Undecided 20%

If the election for Governor were between Charlie Crist, the Republican and Rod Smith, the Democrat, whom would you support? Charlie Crist 49% Rod Smith 40% Undecided 11%

If the election for Governor were between Tom Gallagher, the Republican and Rod Smith, the Democrat, whom would you support? Tom Gallagher 41% Rod Smith 39% Undecided 20%

If the election for Chief Financial Officer were held today between State Senate President Tom Lee and State Representative Randy Johnson, whom would you support? (Republicans only) Tom Lee 39% Randy Johnson 26% Undecided 35%

If the election for Attorney General were held today between former Congressman Bill McCollum, State Representative Joe Negron, and State Representative Everett Rice, whom would you support? (Republicans only) Bill McCollum 47% Joe Negron 15% Everett Rice 10% Undecided 28%

If the election for the Republican nomination for United States Senator in 2006 were held today, whom would you support? (Republicans only) Katherine Harris 48% Leroy Collins, Jr. 11% William McBride 6% Peter Monroe 4% Undecided 31% Strategic Vision.

GOP boss DiMatteo endorses Bo Michael for Circuit Judge

Just got a letter in mail from judicial candidate Bo Michael. Looks like his first contributor is GOP boss Tony DiMatteo, who Michael writes has "personally endorsed" Bo in this race.

With that kind of GOP support, in addition to the $150K he has in camapign account, Bo is finally going to win himself a spot on the bench.

Susan Bedinghaus draws an opponent in County Judge race

Looks like St. Pete lawyer Nat Kidder does not believe that women have an advantage in local judicial races (they've won 17 of the last 19). Last week, he jumped into the Group 17 race opposite heavyweight -- yet still a nice person -- Susan Bedinghaus.

Dave Matthews: No Political Chicken

Here's an idea for those Bush-bashing Dixie Chicks, whose summer ticket sales have taken a licking in markets upset with their ranting. Stop whining about your country fans and do what you did in 2004: Give in to your political outrage by following the model of groups like the Dave Matthews Band. Because Dave Matthews isn't just talking the talk: During his summer concert swing, he is teaming up with other political rockers for the Midterms Matter Tour--a reference to the fall elections--to sign up new voters.

You didn't know the pop-rock bandleader played the beltway game? Well, that was him with the Dixie Chicks at Bruce Springsteen's 2004 concerts for Sen. John Kerry. And he's just as passionate today. "Both parties," he tells us, "are doing a pretty appalling job." His No. 1 issue: the environment. "Is terrorism and immigration really all there is?" he asks. "Global warming is obviously much more important." The more he talks, the hotter he gets. "It takes drowning polar bears to get our government to get their heads out of their asses and start to even maybe, on occasion, talk about global warming."

His is an educated, though liberal, view fed by his favorite media: the Washington Post and the New York Times. And, oh, the Nation. "I guess this throws me into the category of some raving lunatic lefty," he says of his favorite mag, "but it seems kind of moderate to me." (From Paul Bedard, US News and World Report, June 26, 2006.)

Photo of the Day from Crescent Lake

As some of you know, I live next to one of Saint Petersburg's most treasured natural resources -- Crescent Lake Park. I actually have the pleasure of living in an apartment with a 5-window-panel view of the Lake, so I am constantly getting photographs of the beautiful scenes that occur here. As a new feature of Saint Petersblog, I decided to add my own daily "moment of Zen" feature in which I will share a new photo from Crescent Lake. Whether it be the sunsets, the moonlit water, the wildlife, or the occassional hottie jogger, there is always something to see on the Lake. Enjoy and thank you for letting me share.

Today's photo is a recent shot of Crescent Lake at Twilight. In the shot, is the well-known Banyan Tree that sits on the Southeast corner of the Lake.

Memo to all candidates: Stop using Top 10 lists

The Buzz ruined my day by sharing Katherine Harris' Top 10 Reasons Katherine Harris Will Beat Bill Nelson. For once, Adam Smith and I are in total agreement: this message is not at all funny. It's actually kind of scary: Her #4 reason reads, "Katherine Harris is tested by fire." Um, when. By sitting in an office and misinterpreting Florida election law? That's being tested by fire?

Anyway, this is the second time this month a major candidate has used a Top 10 list in their media release. The first was Tom Gallagher's lame Top 10 Bus Tour Themes Rejected by Charlie Crist, which was a decidely unfunny attempt to deflect attention from Crist's statewide tour of the state. How bad was Gallagher's list? Just look at joke No. 6: "Hurricane Charlie: Cone of Uncertainty" Tour, which, I guess, attacks Crist's lack of leadership in insurance reform efforts.

Reding these lists is like watching outtakes from the King of Queens -- you know people are trying to be funny, which makes you feel all the worse because they are not.

I think it would be prudent for any candidate hoping to be taken seriously to avoid using a Top Ten list for the rest of the campaign. They're just not funny.

No Drilling! Beach Party

From an email I received:

Help us spell out N-O D-R-I-L-L-I-N-G in the sand for an aerial shot, wear an oil barrel costume, help with setting up pictures of oil spills, gathering signatures against offshore oil drilling- please RSVP so I know how many will be there!!! Saturday's event is coordinated with actions taking place on beaches across the country! We will have 100 "Clean Beaches-No Offshore Oil Drilling" beach balls - great visuals

DATE: Saturday, July 1, 2006
LOCATION: Pass-a-Grille Beach near the Hurricane Restaurant
TIME: 9am-11am: Mock Oil Spill, 10:00am: press conference, 11am-1pm: Beach Brigade - comb the beach gathering signatures
PLEASE RSVP to Darden @ 727-824-8813 ex. 303 or darden@alaskawild.org

Say hello to State of Sunshine

He's been such a frequent poster on this blog that I didn't even notice that Jim Johnson set up his own blog called State of Sunshine. Even if he didn't offer such compelling commentary, I would have to mention Jim's site, but since he does add a unique, intelligent voice, it is truly my pleasure to welcome him to the blogosphere.

Supreme Court rules Vermont campaign finance laws unconstitutional

The Supreme Court ruled today that a Vermont law restricting campaign donations and expenditures was unconstitutional. The court said that the law's limits on how much a candidate could spend violated a landmark 30-year-old ruling equating such spending with free speech and that its limits on donations to a campaign were far too stringent. From The New York Times.

On Endorsements

Are endorsements helpful in state legislative races? Of course they are. When one candidate earns a majority of endorsements, like Charles Gerdes has in the Democratic Primary for House District 53, then that has to count for something.

Often though, the slate of endorsements are spread out among each of the candidates in a race. The Realtors endorsed this candidate, the PBA endorsed that candidate and so on. Sometimes, a candidate wins all of the "Democratic" endorsements, like ones from the trial lawyers and teachers unions, while another candidate garners the support of the obvious "Republican" organizations, such as chambers of commerce. And, of course, there are natural endorsements, like when an organization's member runs for office and earns their endorsement, i.e., Nancy Riley winning the support of the Realtors.

It's only when a candidate earns the majority of the endorsements, a "cross-over" endorsement or a key early endorsement that the support really matters. I made the argument last week that the Firefighters endorsement of Democrat Liz McCallum was a major coup for her campaign because it is an example of a "cross-over" endorsement. The Firefighters have supported the GOP candidate in this race for at least the last eight years, but now they have switched their support to the Democrat. That, in and of itself, is news.

But I'd like to hear what you think: which organization's endorsement matters most around here? Is it the PBA or the Firefighters, whose support indicates a candidate's strength on law and order issues. Is it the PCTA (teachers), whose endorsement matters most when talking about education. Or is it the Realtors, with their high visibility and strong fundraising capability. Here's my list, from most important on down:

Firefighters -- polling indicates that their endorsement matters most to voters, at least since 9/11. Almost by definition, having the firefighters on your side, allows a candidate to boast about their public safety credentials. The local firefighters aren't viewed as highly partisan, so their objectivity boosts their credibility. The FFs also provide a lot of on-the-ground manpower, especially when it comes to distributing signs. The only downside of the firefighters endorsement is that it doesn't come with a lot of money attached. These are civil servants after all.

MDs -- just look what the MDs are doing in Kim Berfield's race, providing her with a $100K fundraising advantage over chiropractor Frank Farkas. That's the biggest advantage of their support: money. Although doctors are notoriously frugal, when they do decide to pull out their checkbooks, they can write a hefty sum. The MDs are represented well statewide by Sandy Mortham. Locally, they were stronger when John Hamilton was more involved, but they are still a force. Voters are increasingly sympathetic to general practitioners and so their support adds a lot in races where health care is an important issue. There are two disadvantages to having the doctors' support: they're not especially strong on the ground (don't expect an MD to walk door-to-door for you) and their support automatically earns a candidate the opposition of the trial lawyers.

Realtors -- You've got to give the Realtors credit for improving their game. They're strong on the ground because of their high visibility and they've improved their fundraising efforts. The reason why I like the Realtors so much is the leadership offered by local operative Mike Mayo, a former Crist staffer that has expanded the portfolio of the Realtors issues. Mayo commissioned a poll and brought attention to the teacher salary issue, which is, at first, not a natural issue for the real estate industry, but makes sense when he explains that education and quality of life issues matter increasingly to Realtors. The Realtors wholesale support of Nancy Riley in H-50 will give them a major voice in the Florida Legislature. Its the Realtors lack of a relatively strong statewide effort that diminishes their strength. Also, having the Realtors on your side doesn't lend itself to any credibility on the major issues.

Trial Lawyers -- What a double-edged sword it is to have the support of trial lawyers...to have their support means that you can be accused of having their support and we all know how popular trial lawyers are. Personally, I dig trial lawyers. In many cases, they are society's last defense against total corporate control. But so many of the trial lawyers are "political cowboys" or "one-man wrecking machines", acting on their own and, oftentimes, against each other. But their money is what matters. With a few academy members on your side, a candidate can finance an entire campaign. Just look out for the opposition you'll draw from every other major interest group. Locally, the trial lawyers need a few more wins before they move up the charts.

Teachers -- It used to mean so much to have the support of the teachers. This was when Jade Moore was a major force in political circles. He still has some juice, but even he'll tell you its hard to have much impact when most of the legislative delegation won't let you into their office. The teachers have backed some real losers over the last eight years, but that's only because the Democratic Party hasn't offered them better candidates to support. Having the PCTA's support gives any candidate instant credibility on education issues and provides a campaign with a large network of grassroots activists. They can even offer some money because the statewide network of teachers' unions, the TIGER PACs, coordinate their financial support. The teachers need a win in 2006 to regain their status.

Well, that's my Top 5. What's your's?

Is 'The Daily Show' bad for democracy?

This is not funny: Jon Stewart and his hit Comedy Central cable show may be poisoning democracy.

Two political scientists found that young people who watch Stewart's faux news program, "The Daily Show," develop cynical views about politics and politicians that could lead them to just say no to voting.

That's particularly dismaying news because the show is hugely popular among college students, many of whom already don't bother to cast ballots.

Jody Baumgartner and Jonathan S. Morris of East Carolina University said previous research found that nearly half -- 48 percent -- of this age group watched "The Daily Show" and only 23 percent of show viewers followed "hard news" programs closely.

To test for a "Daily Effect," Baumgartner and Morris showed video clips of coverage of the 2004 presidential candidates to one group of college students and campaign coverage from "The CBS Evening News" to another group. Then they measured the students' attitudes toward politics, President Bush and the Democratic presidential nominee, Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.).

The results showed that the participants rated both candidates more negatively after watching Stewart's program. Participants also expressed less trust in the electoral system and more cynical views of the news media, according to the researchers' article, in the latest issue of American Politics Research. (From Richard Morin, Washington Post, June 23, 2006)

"Ultimately, negative perceptions of candidates could have participation implications by keeping more youth from the polls," they wrote.

The first thing Charlie can do: improve the lobbyist disclosure law

If there is one aspect of Florida's campaign finance laws that does not benefit big business and its lapdogs in the Legislature, it is laws requiring the Division of Elections to provide an Internet-based disclosure system that details "who gives what."

By visiting the Division's site and scrolling down to the Candidates and Committees section, any Floridian with computer access can see who gave what to which candidate, and how much. You can pull up all the candidates for a particular race or a particular county. You can sort all of this information by a variety of fields. You can download the information directly to your computer where you investigate the information more thoroughly. There is literally a cornucopia of information to be obtained on this site, making it one of the few ways the public can hold candidates accountable for their campaign finance actions. The information on the site has been utilized by the media, researchers and students, if not opposing campaigns, to keep each candidate as honest as possible about who is funding their campaign.

Certainly, the system could be better (why not require contribution information in real-time during the final weeks of the election when campaigns receive large infusions of money?), but the system could be far worse.

How bad could it be? Just take a look -- not that there is much to see -- at what the Florida Legislature discloses concerning the compensation of legislative lobbyists.

State legislators enacted a sweeping ban last December on gifts from lobbyists and also required, for the first time, that lobbyists disclose how much their clients pay them. The first disclosures were due in May, but state officials waited until June 1 to send lobbyists a warning letter that gave them 30 days to comply or face fines or harsher penalties (Gary Fineout, Miami Herald, June 18, 2006).

Visit the websites of either the Florida House or the Florida Senate, click on Lobbyist Information, then Legislative Lobbyist Compensation Reports and you will taken into a black hole of files and PDFs so cumbersome to review that you will inevitably give up whatever search you had undertook.

Then again, isn't that the point? Not to provide due diligence, merely the appearance of it.

Look for yourself! Whoever "designed" this system has organized the site into a series of PDFs -- not Excel or Access based data. That means someone interested in finding out how much the NRA is paying Marion Hammer to influence the Legislature has to scroll through every single PDF to get the full picture. The PDFs, most of which appear to be handwritten documents scanned into a database, are organized by the date they were filed, as if that's a logical starting point. Then they're sorted alphabetically. That's like organizing your garage by the color of your tools.

Because everything on these forms is either handwritten or typed in, it is unrecognized by the search function in the latest version of Acrobat Reader. So to find information about Ronnie Book, for example, you'll need to look through every report just to make sure you didn't miss something.

(Not that these forms are that illuminating anyway. They merely indicate which firm was paid, and only in ten thousand dollar ranges.)

So let's recap, to comply with Senate President Tom Lee's most important piece of legislation, his own staff created a database of PDFs that is sorted in the most illogical way possible. If Tom Lee is serious about this law, he needs to instruct his staff to build a complete database of the lobbyists' compensation information. It needs to be as thorough as the Division of Elections campaign finance database, meaning the information needs to be data-entered so that it can be easily accessed and researched. Then the database should go one step further and match the compensation reports with the state's listing of lobbyists.

But that's only if the Florida Legislature is serious about restoring integrity to its body. Otherwise, we'll just keep plowing through these PDFs.