Opinions to go Online

            You would have thought that George H.W. Bush’s infamous “No new taxes” pledge in 1988 would have been forewarning enough. It eventually did what such expedient political promises typically do: run smack into unforeseen reality down the road. Bush de-pledged. He had rolled the rhetorical dice and hoped ensuing events – fiscal and political – wouldn’t require a recant.

            He was wrong. “Read-my-lips” wrong.         

            Which brings us to the upcoming Florida Legislature, which will have to address unprecedented, mushrooming-as-we-speak, budget deficits that could exceed $5 billion by 2010. The recessionary economy has already resulted in statewide job layoffs, critical service cuts and important infrastructure-improvement deferrals.

            Well, Strategy One should be pretty obvious, especially when deficit spending is prohibited: increase voluntary taxes such as tobacco, close unjustified sales-tax exemption (including services) loopholes and get proactive – finally – about Internet sales taxes.

            Except. There’s this pledge.

The Florida Legislature has provided yet another example of why political “pledges” should be seen for what they really are – blatant exercises in political expedience and pandering. Twenty-nine sitting legislators, including Senate President Jeff Atwater and incoming House Speaker Larry Cretul, have signed a no new taxes pledge that pre-dates “Read-my-lips” notoriety. Also signing: Gov. Charlie Crist and Attorney General Bill McCollum.

Now comes their truth-in-pledging Rubicon. They can stand by their “taxpayer protection” pledge, glibly nuance their words to accommodate economic adversity or fall on their ideological, no-tax swords.

Atwater acknowledges he may have to do some “revisiting.” Sen. Mike Fasano would consider raising “fees.” Others have used the “no net revenue” rationale that means increasing some taxes if they were counterbalanced by decreasing others. Which makes no net sense in times such as these. Still other signatories call for the relaxing of class-size-limits standards. Etc.

Best bet: Absolutely nobody denounces the cynical, self-serving ploy that is a political pledge. Some will keep their pledge, figuring stuff will still get done without their help, and they can remain unalienated from their conservative base. 

And enough will go the parse-farce route – and hope nobody notices.

They’ll probably be right. But sometimes the voters do read lips.

Those looking to take shots at Gov. Charlie Crist are not lacking for ammo. But they need to prioritize their bullet points.  

Property taxes continue to not “drop like a rock.” The state is still one major hurricane away from insurance implosion. There is no gubernatorial leadership when it comes to the manifestly obvious need for a revised revenue-raising formula, one that will expedite the closing of key sales-tax exemption loopholes and get serious about Internet (sales) taxes.

And if you want to go purely ad hominem, Crist can be easily characterized as an empty-suited opportunist seemingly looking out more for the next elective office than a state now in flatlined growth mode.

But accusing him of being a “sellout” because he’s supporting President Obama’s stimulus plan, one that will send more than $7 billion Florida’s way for, among other priorities, transportation, education and health care?  He’s a GOP Judas because he’s pragmatically trying to get all the federal help he can for Florida, a state steeped in home foreclosures and an unemployment rate of 8 per cent? He’s a Republican Benedict Arnold because he’s trying to maximize this state’s direct take at a time when state jobs and critical services are being cut and necessary infrastructure improvements deferred because deficit spending is not an option? 

And, notably enough, among those skewering Crist for “selling out”: Sen. Mel Martinez. An increasing number of Cuban-Americans must surely find that ironic.

These same critics underscore how much this Obamanation hurts Crist with the Republican base.

So what? The real Crist base is independents. What’s at stake far transcends the usual suspects given to the usual partisan political preening.

Moreover, if the GOP continues to marginalize itself with tax-cut orthodoxy, disingenuous talk of generational deficits and a pander fest, evangelical agenda, it will become the Palin party with no room for Crist anyhow.

 Yes, Crist is pragmatically supporting President Obama’s $787-billion stimulus plan and did, indeed, share a Fort Myers stage with him. What the governor is obviously trying to do is leverage this mega swing state and his GOP affiliation — at a time when bipartisanship is still foundering — to cut the best possible deal for Florida.

And it was refreshingly astute for Crist to literally position himself between Tampa’s Democratic Mayor Pam Iorio and St. Petersburg’s Republican Mayor Rick Baker last week to offer thanks to Congress for the stimulus help and to reinforce the rationale for its need.

Ironically, with so much attention lavished on Crist taking GOP heat, not nearly enough is being focused on the much more important question for Florida, now that its manifest destiny is no longer mega-growth forever. When will Crist start planning realistically for all those future, “unstimulated” budget years?

            Most teachers will tell you that former Gov. Jeb Bush missed the mark when he equated educational accountability with FCATs. They were right. Teaching to standardized tests inevitably results, and teaching to standardized tests is inherently flawed.

            Teachers will also tell you that Bush’s plan to end teacher tenure also was without merit. They were wrong.

            Teachers – after a three-year, annual-contract period – now get permanent “professional service” contracts. It’s unique. It’s supposed to be a buffer against “vindictive administrators.” As if bad bosses only gravitate to education.

The reality is this: Time and red tape make it almost impossible to fire a merely incompetent teacher. Too often they are transferred and become some other school’s and some other students’ problem. That’s inexcusable.

It’s a lot easier if they are sexual predators or drug dealers. The merely overwhelmed and underperforming are more the case – and likely to be tolerated.

The issue is packaged in a bill that will head to the Legislature next month. If passed, the end of tenure as we now know it, however, would only apply to those hired after July 2009. But that’s not consolation enough for the state teachers union that’s already braced for battle.

The loss of tenure, it will be argued, is yet another indignity – low salaries, lousy FCAT-related morale, budget cuts – being imposed upon teachers.                                          

Granted, these are especially challenging times for those presiding in Florida’s classrooms. But they are no less consequential for students. And whatever is done with the end of improving their learning environment, it won’t much matter if there’s not a quality teacher in front of them. That’s really what the tenure debate is about.