Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

Report From the Annette Taddeo Campaign Office Opening Party

taddeo.jpgThe Taddeo for Congress (Florida's 18th District) campaign had a party yesterday evening to celebrate the opening of its new headquarters and I went along to see … partly because they invited local bloggers, partly from nostalgia — back in the day I worked on three different Congressional campaigns, topping out as the press secretary for one in Northern Virginia.

It was a good event, and marks a hopeful start for what must be, despite everything going for it, an uphill campaign. The Taddeo for Congress office is located at 11509 S. Dixie Highway, in the Suniland Shopping Center. It's not visible from the street as it is tucked behind a giant Starbucks. (Back in the day, you sited your campaign HQ near donuts so you could feed the volunteers. Now I guess they buy their own lattes.) The offices occupy a space bifurcated by the pleasant pedestrian alley that runs down the side of the Starbucks. They've set up one side for volunteers, and the other side is for the staff offices. (The volunteer side used to be occupied by my favorite local computer repair shop, Get Your PC Back, which has moved inconveniently further south.)

So far there are six paid staff members on the Taddeo campaign: Anastasia Apa, the campaign manager, who I gather grew up in the area and has done political work in Florida and elsewhere; Ross Cohen, the Deputy Campaign Manger, a recent veteran of Afghanistan but still very young-looking, two finance people who seemed on the ball, a PA for the candidate, and Mario, the first campaign intern. They've also got some energized volunteers, including one formidable young lady who Taddeo in her speech recognized as being almost full time and who indeed had an admirably proprietorial air towards the HQ.

I saw a lot of good things: the crowd was enthused, the Herald and one TV station showed up, the candidate did well (more on this below), the offices seem usable, and the location is as good as anything for this unbelievably spread out gerrymander of a district that runs from the southernmost tip of the Florida Keys, up through Homestead, a bit of Kendall, some Pinecrest, grabs my neighborhood near the University of Miami, keeps running north to hit some of the more traditional Cuban blocks to north of the Tamiami Trail, and then zooms east to include some of Miami Beach.

I also saw some signs of an office that is still teething: they have stickers but not buttons or yard signs (I want a yard sign!) and they don't have a press person, so the TV camera filmed the candidate against a blank background instead of one with a flag and/or a big campaign sign. (And all you find under the “issues” tab on their web page is “coming soon” — couldn't we have at least a set of bullet points? I'll even offer to write them.)

The race has to be the most uphill of the three South Florida Congressional races in which serious Democratic challengers are taking on Republican incumbents. Joe Garcia — who turned up to lend his support — has the most national glitz, and maybe the best chance of the three given the limited popularity of his opponent in FL-25. Raul Martinez (FL-21) has his machine. What does the Annette Taddeo campaign have? It's got the American Dream, the idea that there comes a time when regular folks stand up and run for Congress because the nation is running in the wrong direction. And it has a photogenic candidate with a great personal story.

Taddeo's speech was pretty good, and perhaps more affecting for seeming a little unscripted. It started strange to my campaign-practiced ear — rather than launching right in, Taddeo sounded almost tentative at first, saying that the decision to run had not been easy. She had wondered about whether “to go against someone who has, in some cases, done a good job”. (What's this, praising the arch-villain?) But, Taddeo said, “I saw some things that were just not going in the right direction.” As a businesswoman, she became concerned about the economy; and then there was the war — and here's where Taddeo energized the crowd. Ros-Lehtinen, she said sadly, supported the war every step of the way. Then, her voice emotional rather than angry, Taddeo said “we need to get out of Iraq and get our soldiers out of Iraq.” The crowd clapped loudly.

Any Democrat running against a die-hard Bush supporter like Ros-Lehtinen can expect to be pilloried by the right wing for urging a pullout. But Taddeo has a pretty good comeback: her late father, she said, fought in WW2 and Korea. “I recall how angry and upset” he was about the war and about the use of WMDs as an excuse for the invasion. “I'm sure he would be proud of me now” for stepping up to oppose this war. “I know he is watching me.”

Anyone who tries to wrap themselves in the flag against this woman will have to contend with her father's approval beaming down from Heaven. It could work.

Sounding angry for the first time, Taddeo said that the thing that ultimately convinced her it was her turn to try to give something back to the country was “when my opponent voted against children.” (Note to the campaign: this is a good line. Use it often. Find a half dozen other sound bites like it.) This third issue is — or should be — a major one for this district which, while it has a few rich neighborhoods also has more poor ones. Ros-Lehtinen voted again and again against SCHIP. How can we spend $250 million a day for the war and not provide health care for poor children, Taddeo asked. How can a rich country like ours put parents to the choice of paying the rent or buying medicine, or paying for their child's hospital bill.

Here again, Taddeo had a good personal story: she was born with a cleft palate. Her parents cared for her; and she can feel what it must be like for a parent to not be able to help a child. (It didn't hurt that a very pretty little girl of two or three, who I took to be Taddeo's daughter, had been upstaging the candidate earlier as she chatted with attendees.)

Then we got the pitch. And while this candidate may be a beginner, she's got that part down very well. The current gimmick is to ask 209 people to give $20.09 — to show that people who can't afford more still care about the campaign for the country's future. And, of course, those who could Contribute $2009 or even to max out were encouraged to do that too.

Joe Garcia said something about how he envied the nice offices, and Taddeo shot back, “That's what happens when you put a businesswoman in charge!” It was nice to see a hint of steel. Dave Patlak, who ran in 2006, was there (sporting an Obama pin), and he led the crowd in chants of “Taddeo Today, Taddeo Tomorrow” which got a laugh at first, then had everyone joining in.

The Taddeo campaign officially kicked off on February 26th, and in less than five weeks it took in more than $325,000 — although looking at the numbers, I have to think that a serious chunk of that came from the candidate herself rather than donations. For comparison, Raul Martinez , who got an earlier start, raised $615,000; Joe Garcia raised about a third of a million from donations.)

Unfortunately, at the close of the most recent reporting period, Ros-Lehtinen reported $1.72 million cash on hand after raising $880,000 since the last election. That's a cash mountain. Make her spend it all, Annette!

The 18th is reputed to be a safe seat for the GOP; it was certainly drawn that way. But is it really so safe any more? Our district has changed in the last decade. The Cuban vote is not monolithic, generationally or attitudinally. My Cuban neighbors hate the war. Ros-Lehtinen has an opponent who is articulate, passionate without being hostile, Hispanic, female, and raised six figures in four weeks. Uphill, yes, but a real contest to look forward to.

Posted in Politics: FL-18 | 4 Comments

They Really Really Don’t Care About New Orleans — US Accepts Repairs to Floodwalls Made of Used Newspaper

The tragedy of New Orleans continues.

4 Investigates: Floodwalls stuffed with newspaper?

the witness says two years ago, he saw the contractor filling the expansion joint or opening between the floodwalls with newspaper.

“The whole length of the wall was stuffed with newspaper.”

And when he confronted the contractor, the contractor blamed Washington for the substandard work.

“He basically told me when Congress sent down the money, it would be repaired the proper way.”

But during a recent trip to the area, two years later, it was apparent that didn't happen. Much of the newspaper had deteriorated or been eaten by bugs, but some still remained.

And, by the way, Congress had sent the money, and the contract called for a proper rubber joint. The Army Corps of Engineers, which is supposed to supervise the construction, says everything is just fine, nothing to see, move along now.

Does anyone in DC care about this stuff? Or have they just written New Orleans off?

How does an administration get away with presiding over the destruction of a major American city, botching the emergency rescue and then not fixing it afterwards? Sorry — silly question: they do it the same way they get away with a war of choice based on lies, torture, stealing an election, refusals to appear before Congress, signing statements that announce their plans to ignore the laws, and siphoning of several fortunes to their friends.


“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

ATTRIBUTION: The response is attributed to BENJAMIN FRANKLIN—at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation—in the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention.


Still a Republic, or devolved to a revolving monarchy? The next few years may decide it.

Posted in Unspeakably Awful (Katrina) | 8 Comments

Ave Maria Updates

It seems that Ave Maria law school is having some money woes, so it won't build a building it its company town, but will locate in Naples, at least for now. More at Law.com – Ave Maria to Relocate Law School Once Again and at Law Blog – WSJ.com : Ave Maria! Unable to Raise Cash, Law School Scraps New Building Plan.

Meanwhile, some kindly soul has posted the transcript of what must be one of the Truly Weird Depositions of All Time, the testimony of Ave Maria Board Chairman (and general supremo) Tom Monaghan in a lawsuit brought by three former Ave Maria professors. The professors allege that they were fired in retaliation for reporting illegal conduct by Monaghan, and for refusing to acquiesce to what they say were Monaghan's attempts to make the Board move the school from Michigan to Florida — to property he himself owns.

Summaries of the key weirdnesses at Avewatch, Monaghan Deposition #1: “I don’t know” and Fumare, Observations on Monaghan Deposition #1.

Watch those blogs for sequels.

Posted in Law School | 1 Comment

Civil Liberties Blog: ‘Don’t Tase Me, Bro!’

I may be the last to know of it, but Don't Tase Me, Bro! is a nifty web site with lots of depressing anecdotes about regular folks having their civil liberties trampled.

Today's is 7 Year Old Boy Removed from Father and Placed in State Custody Over mistaken Order of Hard Lemondade.

If you watch much television, you've probably heard of a product called Mike's Hard Lemonade.

And if you ask Christopher Ratte and his wife how they lost custody of their 7-year-old son, the short version is that nobody in the Ratte family watches much television.

The way police and child protection workers figure it, Ratte should have known that what a Comerica Park vendor handed over when Ratte ordered a lemonade for his boy three Saturdays ago contained alcohol, and Ratte's ignorance justified placing young Leo in foster care …
The 47-year-old academic says he wasn't even aware alcoholic lemonade existed when he and Leo stopped at a concession stand on the way to their seats in Section 114.

“I'd never drunk it, never purchased it, never heard of it,” Ratte of Ann Arbor told me sheepishly last week. “And it's certainly not what I expected when I ordered a lemonade for my 7-year-old.”

But it wasn't until the top of the ninth inning that a Comerica Park security guard noticed the bottle in young Leo's hand.

“You know this is an alcoholic beverage?” the guard asked the professor.

“You've got to be kidding,” Ratte replied. He asked for the bottle, but the security guard snatched it before Ratte could examine the label. …

But it would be two days before the state of Michigan allowed Ratte's wife, U-M architecture professor Claire Zimmerman, to take their son home, and nearly a week before Ratte was permitted to move back into his own house.

As an academic (at a different UM), a parent, and non-TV person, I sympathize. That said, I was not only aware of hard lemonade, I've even tried it once. It's not very nice.

If I'm going to have hard fruit juice, I very much prefer dry cider. But the kids are sticking to Izzes for now.

Posted in Civil Liberties | 1 Comment

Crawford, Continued

It is relatively rare that I find myself agreeing with anything coming out of the Washington Legal Foundation, but it does happen.

And WLF Chief Counsel Richard Samp's analysis in More on Crawford: The Court Steps Back From Electoral Refereeing, which is published at SCOTUSblog, has a lot I agree with, especially this part, some of which is a more elegant version of what I said yesterday,

I disagree with those who suggest that the Crawford shuts the courthouse door entirely, even to discrete groups of voters who can demonstrate that a nondiscriminatory election regulation imposes a disproportion impact on their groups. While Justice Scalia’s opinion provides little comfort to such groups, Justice Stevens seems quite receptive – suggesting that there are as many as six justices who would allow such suits. Indeed, Justice Stevens virtually invites a follow-on lawsuit by one group of voters: those who have a religious objection to being photographed. He makes clear that while it may be an acceptable burden to require provisional voters to make a single trip to the county courthouse to validate their ballots, the burden becomes unreasonable if a voter is required to make the trip election after election, as Indiana law apparently would require of those with a religious objection to being photographed. Perhaps Justice Stevens calculated that such suits would be relatively uncommon and thus minimally intrusive. Political parties might well be less interested in financing a challenge to a voter ID law if the end result would be to ease ID requirements for a very small group of voters.

Justice Stevens also indicated that a voter ID law is likely unconstitutional if a State charges a fee to provide the mandated ID. Indiana avoided that problem by eliminating its fee for non-driver IDs at the same time that it adopted the voter ID law. Justice Stevens apparently took a stand against ID fees in order to remain consistent with Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, the 1966 decision that struck down a $1.50 nondiscriminatory poll tax. But the distinction he makes between prohibited ID fees and the other financial burdens imposed by voting regulations is never made clear. It is not at all self-evident why a fee to obtain an ID is any more burdensome than is the cost of transporting oneself to the county courthouse to validate a provisional ballot.

Posted in ID Cards and Identification | 3 Comments

RNC Whining About DNC McCain Ad

There is a country in which the ruling party has made a concerted effort to keep a factually accurate advertisement by the largest opposition party off TV by appealing to the owners of TV stations to prevent the ad from airing.

No, not Zimbabwe. The USA.

Today the RNC sought to prevent the DNC from airing its anti-McCain ad by calling on TV stations not to air it. The DNC responded immediately.

Gov. Howard Dean and Joe Sandler, the DNC's General Counsel, held a telephone press conference a few minutes ago. (As it was a last-minute deal, even I got to listen in.) They started by categorically denying the RNC's charge that the DNC's ad was in any way coordinated with either the Clinton or Obama campaigns. Dean said “I know of no conversations of any kind that have taken place with the campaigns” about the ad. (Had the ad been coordinated, it would count as an in-kind contribution which would have legal consequences; if it's fully arms-length, it's a legal independent expenditure.)

Sandler said that so far none of the networks running it (MS-NBC and CNN) have said they will pull the ad. So far, the ad is slated for cable only. From which I deduce this isn't a hugely expensive ad buy. Ordinarily you would not expect the RNC to add oxygen to such a small flame; tying McCain to his own remarks about Iraq must really hurt.

The RNC also claimed in its publicity blitz that the ad is false, and thus could expose stations that run it to some sort of liability. That's a weak argument, since the ad uses McCain's own words, and DNC Chairman Dean made hay with it. “I understand the RNC thinks it is illegal to criticize Sen. McCain,” Dean said, and he basically invited them to sue.

Here's one bet that they won't: this is just scare tactics. And if they do sue, they'll lose. (Outside Zimbabwe.)

Posted in Politics: McCain | 2 Comments