As former Gov. Charlie Crist tries to gain supporters in his quest to unseat Republican Gov. Rick Scott, he wants to portray himself as the hero of voter access and Scott as a leader who restricted voting.
Dan Gelber, a former state senator from Miami Beach and a Crist supporter, recently praised Crist for helping felons restore their civil rights, which includes the right to vote.
Gelber wrote that Crist, as governor, "sought for and got approved the automatic restoration of felon rights for nonviolent offenders for the first time in Florida history (since reversed by Governor Scott)."
Was Crist the first? Not really.
Restoring felons' civil rights can include the right to vote, serve on a jury and run for office.
In the 1970s, there was pressure from the Legislature on Gov. Reubin Askew, a Democrat, to make it easier to restore civil rights. Legislators passed a bill in 1974 that included automatic reinstatement, but the Florida Supreme Court declared that unconstitutional because it bypassed the governor's clemency power.
Askew then persuaded the Cabinet to amend the clemency rules to make restoration easier.
Randall Berg, a civil rights attorney at the Florida Justice Institute, told PolitiFact that Askew was motivated by a personal belief that "after one had served their time, they had paid their debt and ought to start with a clean slate so they might become productive members of society."
Askew also wanted to speed up the process. The Cabinet restored rights in its role as the Executive Clemency Review Board, but meetings were only held quarterly, and the process was slow.
"There were simply too many people to determine who got their civil rights restored and who did not," Berg said.
The 1975 rule that Askew promoted included automatic reinstatement after a person was released from prison or parole, with the exception of the right to own or possess firearms.
Each month, the Cabinet signed orders to grant restoration of civil rights.
In 1977, the wording was changed to allow members of the Clemency Board to object to restoring a particular individual's rights.
A timeline from the state's Parole Commission explains how the rules changed after Askew. In the early 1990s, Gov. Lawton Chiles tightened the rules, which made it harder for ex-felons to regain their rights. (That happened amid the backdrop of prison overcrowding, which led the state to release prisoners early.) Gov. Jeb Bush then took steps to simplify the process. (For example, the application shrank from 12 pages to one.) But advocates said there was more to be done.
In April 2007, Crist persuaded the Cabinet to streamline the process.
"Some who favor the current system argue that restoring civil rights is somehow 'weak on crime,' as if restoring the right to vote, to serve on a jury or to work lessens the punishment or encourages a person to commit new crimes. In fact, the opposite should be true," Crist wrote in a Miami Herald op-ed. "Giving a person a meaningful way to re-enter society, make a living and participate in our democracy will encourage good behavior."
Under Crist, ex-offenders convicted of less serious offenses could regain their rights without a hearing, while those convicted of crimes such as murder required a more thorough investigation and a hearing.
Though some news articles used the word "automatic" to describe this process, that's an oversimplification, because the Parole Commission had to approve it.
Under Crist, there were more than 150,000 restorations.
In February 2011, newly elected Republican Attorney General Pam Bondi argued that the process was too easy for released felons. One month later, Bondi, Scott and the rest of the Cabinet scrapped the process and set a minimum of a five-year waiting period.
We contacted Gelber and told him our research showed Askew sought restoration of felons' voting rights before Crist did. Gelber told PolitiFact that he was unaware of Askew's actions.
"While there are some debatable distinctions, I think my statement unfairly diminishes Gov. Askew's efforts," Gelber told PolitiFact "The truth is, both men deserve high praise for what they did because the position they advocated is often unpopular and requires a measure of political courage."
We give props to people who admit errors and correct them, but that doesn't change our analysis of the original claim.
We rate this claim False.
Edited for print. Read the full version at PolitiFact.com/Florida.