Make us your home page

Today’s top headlines delivered to you daily.

(View our Privacy Policy)

Is Crist's drilling ban necessary, or a 'political stunt'?

Okay, just to keep score:

It's a "political stunt" for Gov. Charlie Crist to call a special session of the Legislature this week to propose a constitutional ban on oil drilling in Florida waters.

It's "smoke and mirrors."

It's a wasteful abuse of the amendment process and a squandering of tax dollars. It's a gimmick for Crist's U.S. Senate campaign.

This is according to the Republican leaders of the Legislature.

They have to show up in Tallahassee at the governor's command. But they don't have to pass anything. They can convene just long enough to say howdy and then adjourn.

As House Speaker Larry Cretul said in a letter to his members, "You can expect your stay to be very short."

And that is the Legislature's discretion. If the Legislature really thinks the right thing to do about the oil spill is "nothing," then by all means, do it.

Of course, doing nothing this week means no immediate help for the Panhandle and Floridians already hurt by the spill. Maybe later, the Legislature says.

It also means not using the opportunity to talk about alternative energy or Florida's energy future. We have been bizarrely paralyzed on this subject for years.

Most of all, it means Florida voters will not get to vote in November on whether to amend our state Constitution to ban drilling in Florida waters.

Because that would be "smoke and mirrors," and a waste of time, and all that.

One House member, a Republican from Oviedo named Sandy Adams, even announced she is filing a motion to censure (that is, formally reprimand) Crist for calling the session. Her idea was trumpeted by the House Republican office via a news release.

Adams (who, as it happens, is running for Congress) wants Crist rebuked for "the unnecessary spending of taxpayer dollars for a special session set solely to enact a redundant constitutional amendment banning an activity already banned by Florida law," the GOP statement said.


As long as we're talking about wasting people's time, we should remember a couple of things that the Legislature has already put on the November ballot.

There's Amendment 9, for one. That's the one that declares that laws such as the big federal health-care reform, often called "Obamacare," will not count in Florida.

Not only is Amendment 9 constitutionally dubious, it is an entirely political gesture, intended to whip up the faithful in November.

Also, the Legislature is using this November's ballot to hold an unusual, non-binding, "advisory" referendum to ask Floridians …

Do you think the federal budget should be balanced?

I am pretty sure the answer is going to be "yes." Did they need to call a statewide election for it? Or were they just slapping another bumper sticker on the ballot?

One of the arguments against Crist's drilling amendment is that we don't need it, because it is already banned in Florida law. And yet, some of the same people who say this were arguing, back in 2008, that we absolutely had to put a ban on same-sex marriage in the Constitution, even though it was illegal.

Yet as recently as a few months ago, some leaders of the Legislature were perfectly willing, even eager, to throw open Florida's waters to drilling. If there ever were a case that a mere ban in state law is not enough, this is it.

Last point: They ought to at least vote on it.

That is not the Tallahassee way, of course. As with the recent gutting of the Public Service Commission, the Legislature often sets things up so that a deed is done by a few, and everybody else walks away whistling, trying to look innocent.

But if the right thing to do is refuse the governor's short-term, finger-in-the-wind demand, then the Legislature should have the guts to do it with honor, in public.

Is Crist's drilling ban necessary, or a 'political stunt'? 07/17/10 [Last modified: Sunday, July 18, 2010 11:05am]
Photo reprints | Article reprints

© 2017 Tampa Bay Times


Join the discussion: Click to view comments, add yours

  1. Culpepper falls just short on 'Survivor' finale

    Human Interest

    In the end, Tampa lawyer Brad Culpepper fell just short, and the ex-Tampa Bay Buccaneer lost Survivor: Game Changers and the $1 million prize to Sarah Lacina, a police officer from Iowa.

  2. Families dispute claims that slain Tampa Palms roommates shared neo-Nazi beliefs


    TAMPA — Andrew Oneschuk never liked making small talk on the phone, his father said, but the last time the two spoke, something seemed off.

    Andrew Oneschuk and Jeremy Himmelman lived in a Tampa Palms apartment with Devon Arthurs and Brandon Russell. Oneschuk and Himmelman reportedly planned to move out.
  3. Brad Culpepper makes it to final 3 on Survivor, but jury picks Sarah

    The Feed

    UPDATE, WEDNESDAY NIGHT: Tampa's Brad Culpepper make it to the final 3 on Survivor, but jurors chose Sarah as the winner of the $1 million.

    Original report follows:

    "The Tables Have Turned" - Brad Culpepper, Tai Trang and Hali Ford on the fourth episode of SURVIVOR: Game Changers on the CBS Television Network. Photo: Jeffrey Neira/CBS Entertainment
  4. Steven Souza Jr. snaps out of slump as Rays defeat Angels (w/video)

    The Heater

    ST. PETERSBURG — After Tuesday's shutout loss to the Angels, Steven Souza Jr. stood in front of his locker and talked about his need to contribute to the offense.

    Tampa Bay Rays catcher Jesus Sucre (45) hugs right fielder Steven Souza Jr. (20) in the dugout after his two run home run in the second inning of the game between the Tampa Bay Rays and the Los Angeles Angels at Tropicana Field in St. Petersburg, Fla. on Wednesday, May 24, 2017.
  5. Tom Jones: Rays made right move sending Blake Snell to minors

    The Heater

    tom jones' two cents


    Blake Snell’s struggles on the mound were only one of the reasons the Rays sent him to the minors; some other red flags existed. [WILL VRAGOVIC   |   Times]