SHARE:
What Might Be ...
Like most Floridians I have met during my three years here, those on hand seemed generally optimistic and upbeat about being here. They like the climate, the pace, the feeling of somehow being on the leading edge of America's future in demographics, cultural mixes and linguistics. It's lucky for Florida that there's that strong glue, because once discussions at the Askew Institute and other such gatherings turn to specifics, one has the feeling that if it weren't holding these intelligent and thoughtful people here, they'd be long gone. Indeed, there's a sort of sad frustration that hangs over such discussions - of opportunities lost, of dreams that will never be realized, of what this state might have been but never will be.
At one session, former Gov. Askew wandered in, and I took the opportunity to ask if he didn't think that one of the problems with the state is that it lured people here for the wrong reasons. Clearly, Askew already had thought a lot about this subject:
"We started giving away the land to get people to come here," he said. "As we moved into the 20th century, we eliminated income taxes and inheritance taxes. We gave a $25,000 homestead exemption. We made Florida a tax haven. In sum, we have given away the state, and now we have the problem of too many people wanting to come."
Strong feelings from one of Florida's most admired public figures. But those same kinds of sentiments were echoed by conference participants of varying political stripes throughout the sessions on a whole raft of subjects: schools, the state's creaky infrastructure (roads, water quality and quantity, sewers), crime and punishment, race relations, teenage pregnancy, the inadequate and inane tax system. I've heard these opinions voiced before many times. One of the most rewarding aspects of this job is that I get to travel around the state to conferences such as the one in Gainesville. And at these conferences, I've begun to notice something. I keep seeing many of the same people over and over again. They're almost always there - at the Council of 100, at the Governor's Education Summit, at the Economic Summits put on by Enterprise Florida, at Leadership Florida meetings, at various Florida Chamber of Commerce functions, and on and on.
There are more than 14 million people in the state, and I would guess that the hard-core group of conference-goers numbers about 100. And that's probably too high a figure.
What goes on here? Is this group a kind of power elite that secretly pushes the levers that run the state? Are they puppeteers deftly manipulating the politicians from their lofty climes? Are they business people who seek personal or corporate gains from hobnobbing with the members of the executive and legislative branches? In fact, many of the conference-goers are rich and powerful and ambitious, but so far as I can tell, their motives seem to be mostly a concern for the future of the state where they and their children will live. On the other hand, I know lobbyists and power brokers who operate mainly in Tallahassee and who never show up at conferences to discuss the future of Florida. It may be that they're simply too realistic to deal with visions about what Florida could be; their meat and potatoes are keeping Florida the way it is.
So we gathered at the Askew conference and worked for hours. Yet even as we discussed what might be, I kept thinking about what will be when legislators convene. No matter how long we and other conference-goers ponder the fate of our state, the Legislature will meet for a matter of weeks and cast most of their deciding votes on the very last night of the session, giving scant reflection to the consequences of their acts.
It brought to mind a short piece we ran a few months ago by Lance deHaven-Smith, who teaches public policy at Florida State University. It was based on a poll he conducted whose findings seemed to me at the time to be uncomfortably elitist. Now I wonder. In sum, Smith wrote that the findings showed the Florida electorate as "uneducated, rootless and in search of a free lunch," while Florida's business and civic leaders came across as "reasonable and informed ... with their eyes on the state's future, not merely its immediate circumstances."
Clearly, the conference-goers fall into the latter category - but their recommendations never seem to make a difference to the legislators, who respond to the large number of voters who fall into the former group described by Smith.
That's the sad truth about Florida. It reflects what Gov. Askew said about selling the wrong Florida: Too many people who answered Florida's sales pitch came here to get away from something - taxes, responsibility, demanding employers, education requirements, weather - not to get to somewhere. Sad to say, they're the ones the legislators listen to, not to the conference-goers whose elevated vision for Florida makes politicians nervous.
