Florida turnout on primary election day was about 20%, the lowest in over a decade. What was surprising was that for both the Governor and U.S. Senate Republican elections, there were over 1,200,000 Republican votes. The Democratic votes for governor were 863,000 and for the U.S. Senate candidates 909,000. Yet, Florida has 41% active registered Democrats and 36% active registered Republicans. What happened to the Obama Democrats on August 24?

Florida ranks 46th among states in its civic health, taking into account voter participation in elections, volunteerism, charitable contributions and civic participation in solving community problems (Florida Civic Health Index-2009, National Conference of Citizenship).

The low turnout in the Democratic Party elections on August 24 was a clear indication that things are getting worse.

• Unemployment in Florida is really over 1,500,000, if one takes into account those who gave up looking for work or are severely under employed.
• 54% of working Floridians make wages and salaries at 150% or less, of Federal standard for poverty.
• 12.4% of Florida mortgages are or will be in foreclosure by the end of 2010.
• Educational funding, currently 48th out of 50 states of the Union, keeps proportionately decreasing in Florida.

To boot, Florida seems to get political candidates that are experts at gaming the system.

Rick Scott, the Republican gubernatorial candidate and multimillionaire former CEO whose company paid a whopping $ 1.7 billion fine for Medicare fraud promised to hold government accountable. Carl Hiaasen of the Miami Herald wrote that “Rick Scott, whose singular claim to fame was building Columbia/HCA into a healthcare conglomerate that perpetrated the largest Medicare fraud in the history of Medicare. Only in the rancid political swamp of Florida would a guy like Scott have the gall to run for office, bankrolling his run for the governorship with the fortune he accumulated while his empire soaked U.S. taxpayers for hundreds of millions of dollars.” His campaign mantra, slightly paraphrased: “Hey, lighten up! I never got indicted!”

Billionaire, Jeff Greene, Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate, called his opponent Kendrick Meek every imaginable negative adjective, from “corrupt” on down. In the next breath he said he would endorse and support whomever the Democratic Senate nominee was.

Former Republican candidate for governor, Florida Attorney General, Bill McCollum still hasn’t cleared up his relationship with Florida Republican indicted party boss Jim Greer, in the still brewing GOP scandal. Charlie Crist, now running for the U.S. Senate as an independent, has even more Florida Republican Party issues to clear-up.

Interestingly, Green lost, but Scott won. Do Republicans have more tolerance for sleaze or more hunger to win?

Republican U.S. Senate candidate, Marco Rubio had the longest indictment in the CREW blast, “Crooked Candidates 2010”. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington is a respected watchdog organization (www.citizensforethics.org/crookedcandidates2010). Of the twelve “CREW crooks” running for Congress, five were from Florida, four were running for the U.S. Senate: Rubio, Crist, Meek and Greene. There are many unanswered questions about Rubio’s ethics. The one that he has yet to clearly explain is the misuse of the Florida Republican Party, American Express card, for multiple personal uses and the close to $30,000 double billing (to the Florida taxpayers and to Republican donors). Rubio returned the $30,000 to the State of Florida.

In a conversation with an influential Florida Republican, after admitting that now Governor Charlie Crist is duplicitous and flip-flops to changing opinions, he said “There are few people in Florida closer to Charlie Crist than me. I am disappointed in Charlie, but I can assure you he has never taken an illegal dollar in his life.” My answer was “Yes, but there is a difference between being honest and being honorable.”

Having an Atticus Finch moment in Florida, means having candidates for governor and the U.S. Senate that are both honest and honorable.

The unusually low voter turnout in the Florida Democratic Party this August 24th was not caused by heavy summer rain. It was due to voter turnoff based on duplicity and the sleaze factor; due to so many players who were gaming the system. This is why in the past two years of newly registered voters almost as many have registered as Independents, as have registered Democratic or Republican. Floridians increasingly don’t like their political parties.

Floridians need to not only look to see who is right, but who is on the right side of history. Florida and America need Atticus Finch candidates for office.

The last candidate in this roundup, Maurice Ferre, has, by far, the most comprehensive plan on energy and environmental issues. Ferre clearly states that he favors the now-defunct plan for capping emissions offered by Sens. John Kerry and Joe Lieberman. Ferre calls for an “extreme makeover” for the nation’s power grid. He offers a pathway for developing liquefied natural gas power, solar power,wind power and biodiesel fuels. He also calls for the development of micro-nuclear technology. Ferre’s specifics on energy don’t seem to be resonating with voters, however, as the latest Quinnipiac University poll shows he has about 3 percent of voters committed. But, that same poll says 28 percent of voters are undecided. So there’s at least a chance. Perhaps if he were to be a bit more vague he would do better.

Ferre plans to tackle the issue of illegal immigration by having reasonable reform that is humane while securing U.S. borders.

He also supports a universal health system. Ferre’s health ideals include government controlling costs by setting prices for medical procedures and capping expenditures based on age and medical condition.

Ferre is considered by many to have been a catalyst of growth in Miami, as it evolved from a frontier town to the post-modern cultural and economic capitol city of South America and the Caribbean. Miami’s world class metrorail, central business district, and urban waterfront all have their roots in Ferre’s mayoral policies. Peñalosa’s term as mayor of Bogota saw the integration of ecological parks and urban transport with socially responsible development; improvements that have been credited with converting the war-torn Colombian capitol into the peaceful and sophisticated city of bikers, walkers, and readers. Bogota is now in the midst of an economic boom, despite the global market bust. Conde invested heavily in the violent favela ghettos of Rio with public parks, infrastructure, libraries and academic amenities that helped bring civility and upward mobility to the least represented parts of the city.

During the University-funded symposium, Ferre inspired students and professors alike with discussion of methods of environmental and economically-balanced city making. Professor and former Urban Design Department Chair Alex Krieger lauded Ferre’s contribution to academia, and Ferre was later invited to teach at Princeton University on the topic of local government.

In a city characterized by political extremes, Ferre has risen as a centrist with a diverse base of support. Maurice’s charisma, intellectual rigor, and care for the common good of the city have afforded him several lifetimes of political experience with a proven rate of political efficiency and without a single scandal.

Maurice is a true statesman from a long lineage of civic-minded leaders who understand caring for their constituents in the most personal and human terms. Compassion, leadership, and a creative approach to problem-solving have been handed down to him from his aunt, Sor. Isolina Ferre, a Puerto Rican humanitarian who has been compared to Mother Theresa; his late uncle, Luis Ferre, the pro-statehood former Governor of Puerto Rico; and his cousin, magical realist author Rosario Ferre. We will all gain as a nation from this great politician performing at the national level for Florida in the United States Senate race.

Walter Meyer, ASLA, LEED-AP

Founding Principal

Local Office Landscape Architecture

www.localofficelandscape.com

Our economy is also based on fossil fuel energy.  Today we import 68% of our oil products from foreign producers, mostly hostile to U.S. interests.

Then there is the financialisation of our economy.  Big banks run this economy, inducing more and more consumption based on debt.  Big American financial companies are our largest speculators.  Banks are no longer “banks”, they are large financial casinos, making 25% of profits on hedges; but they speculate not with their money, but that of their depositors.  Our five super banks are too large to fail.  If they do, the world goes into depression.  The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, that regulated banks from being insurers, brokers and investment banks, was abandoned 12 years ago.  The deregulation drive of the past 30 years culminated with Senator Phil Gramm’s (R-Tex) 1998 series of Regan induced, Republican deregulation bills, signed by President Bill Clinton, at the urging of then Treasury Secretary Larry Summers and a long series of Goldman Sachs investment bankers.  Collectively they brought us the Great Recession. Lastly, from a balanced budget, creditor nation, in ten years we have become, the largest debtor nation in history.  Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush took us from a $2 Trillion to a $6 Trillion national debt and George W. Bush from a $7 Trillion debt to a $12 Trillion national debt.  Of the past 30 years, 20 years were with Republican Presidents who brought us an additional $9 Trillion of national debt.  So much for Republican fiscal frugality.

Now, the U.S. is on its way, in 2011/2012, to owe more than our yearly GNP, a dangerous place indeed, but there are worse scenarios if Washington is not practical, intelligent and bold.

In Florida the situation is even worse.  Unemployment that in the end of July 2010, nationally was 9.5% was 11.4% in Florida; 12.74% of house/condo mortgages in Florida, sometime during 2010, will be in foreclosure.  Close to 50% of employment in Florida is at 150% of Poverty Level; that signifies that besides the almost 1,500,000 unemployed, under employed or just gave up looking for work Floridians, the 9.3 million working here, half at under 150% U.S. poverty level, can’t afford a mortgage, a new car or to send their kids to college, now that Pell Grants only cover 32% of university costs.  Pell Grants covered 50% + of university studies 20 years ago.  Florida is ironically the second State in the Union for the wealthy (the top 5% of Floridians make over $220,000; the gap between Florida’s richest and poorest families is the15th largest in the U.S.; and those top 5% moneymakers here gained over 22% in income over the past decade.  The middle class purchasing power decreased in that same decade.  The average income of a Floridian is $38,500.00, significantly less than the average American ($43,500).  But, Florida has one of the lowest state and local tax levels of the 50 states (7% of Florida GDP), we are 49th in local taxation. This explains why Florida only spends $9,000+ per Florida student vs. N.J. $21,000; Florida is 47th in per capita expenditures in education in the nation.  To make matters worse Tallahassee, who used to fund 57% of Florida’s education, has been pushing funding to local government and is now down to only paying 39% of the cost of K-12 education in Florida.  So much for responsible Republican State Government!  As a consequence, according to PEW Charitable Foundation figures in 2009, Florida only graduated 63% of high school students.  Again we were 49th, out of 50 states in the U.S.   There are 418 Florida high schools that graduate below the national average.

But Florida has one of the largest prison systems in America.  Only two states spend more than Florida (proportionately) on incarcerated criminals; and we are currently building 6 privatized new prisons.  But the good news is that the private sector will run these prisons cheaper and better.  So we spend $9,000/yr. to school a child and then spend $25,000+ per prisoner a year when they can’t get work, go bad, become criminals and go to prison.

We all think of Florida as mainly a tourism economy.  True, tourism is important at 12% ($62 Billion) of Florida GDP.  Almost as important in Florida’s economy was growth.  Florida grew an average of 2.5% per year during the 90’s and early 2000’s.  Those 350,000 + new people moving to Florida every year and their purchases of housing, clothes, food, insurance, banking and other expenses impacted the Florida economy in a large way.  Transfer payments have always been an important part of our economy.  Well, Florida stopped growing in 2008, when 62,000 people moved away from our state.  The first time this happened since World War II.

Florida has not been severely hurt in tourism during the Great Recession. Travel at Miami International Airport is up in 2010.  And growth will eventually return to Florida, but that will not be enough to return Florida to prosperity.

But here is the BIG ISSUE: our economic problems are not only cyclical, but structural.  America needs a new economy and the change must be structural.   If we define the what, American ingenuity and drive will define the how.

In his most recent syndicated commentary, highly respected Israeli economist Nouriel Roubini (N.Y.U. – Stern School) said Gordon Gekko is back.  In the 1987 film “Wall Street”, Gekko famously declared “Greed is Good.” Roubini says that in economics, treating morality and values does not work.  Relying on regulation and supervision alone, doesn’t work either.  Greed can only be controlled, says Roubini, by fear of loss, which will come from certain knowledge that reckless investing will not be bailed out by taxpayer money.  Now that these U.S.  financial institutions have grown even bigger, Roubini concludes “If an institution is too big to fail, it is too big and should be broken up.”  My question to Roubini is, how? Those financial institutions spent over $1 billion lobbying against the Volcker Rule and other needed reforms, and they succeeded.  We still don’t know how much teeth remain in the Dodd-Frank, Financial Reform Act; for America’s sake, we hope that there is enough financial regulation of Wall Street to prevent another Great Depression.  How much have the lobbyists of K Street been regulated?

Unfortunately, the stimulus (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) did not work as well as the Obama administration expected, according to most recognized economists.  We are on the verge of a double dip recession, or worse.  Adding to this economic slump, we are quickly being outpaced by China, which has now officially become the world’s second largest economy.  Although it is currently still 1/3 of the U.S. economy, China is projected to pass our economy in the next 20 years.  China is already the world’s number one manufacturer and number one exporter and is projected to house the largest banking community within the next decade.  In addition, the U.S. continues borrowing from China, which further exacerbates our debt crisis.   Most recently the House passed the $28 billion stimulus to ward off the layoff of police, firefighters, teachers and other local employees.  This new stimulus to help State Governments adds to the growing budget deficits, now projected at $1.4 trillion this year.

On the brighter side, the U.S. economy grew at 2.4 % (annualized) the second quarter of 2010.  China continued to grow at double digits and Germany’s growth exceeded 9%, while the rest of Europe floundered at less than 1% growth.  What now?

My economic positions in the U.S. Senate would follow the leading Keynesian modern U.S. economists.  But, I also agree with both former chairmen of the FRB, Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan. I mostly agree with NYU economist Nouriel Roubini, one of the few economists who predicted this Great Recession:  I will greatly simplify their published opinions:

• Paul Krugman (Princeton University – Nobel Prize Laureate, Economics) like Dr. Christina Romer (former White House Chief Economic Advisor) said we needed a $1.3 trillion stimulus (less than 10% of U.S. – GDP).
• Joseph Stiglitz (Nobel Prize Laureate, Economics) believes the stimulus must be used in rebuilding our seriously defective infrastructure, roads, rail, water, electric grid, etc.
• Thomas Friedman (columnist NYT) says we need to get away from fossil fuels into renewable energy and a new economy based on innovation.
• T. Boone Pickens (oil, gas and energy investor) says that before we go to expensive alternatives to develop renewable fuels and energy, go first to Liquid Natural Gas, the U.S. has available  a 200 year supply of natural gas.  Change all cars, trucks and busses to LNG fuel usage over the next 10 years, then go to renewable energy.
• Jeffrey Sachs (Columbia University – economist)  The U.S., along with Japan, has lowest tax structure of the 1st world, currently of 28% of GDP, we need to go to lowest next level, 35%, to sustain our standard of living. National debt is now a problem.  We need to move quickly to not only get economy moving, but to control U.S. deficits.
• Paul Volcker – Since we cannot go back to Glass-Steagall Act (1933), but since 1998 deregulation has been such a disaster, we need to go to Volcker Rule, which more stringently separates the role of commercial from investment banking, prohibiting the commercial banks from investing in derivatives and debt swapping.  The Volcker Rule was not fully enacted in the recent Dodd-Frank, Financial Regulation Act.
• Alan Greenspan – Is strongly against the maintaining of the Bush Tax roll back, unless it is paid for, i.e. no national borrowing to accommodate the $3.7 trillion cost off the tax roll back over the next 10 years.

Franklin D. Roosevelt’s big miscalculation during the Great Depression was the mistaken belief that the worst was over and the subsequent tightening of the budget belt in 1937.  As a consequence, by 1938 the Great Depression was back in full swing.  We must proceed to fix our economy very carefully, but with common sense.

As a U.S. Senator I will:

• Move for an increased financial stimulus, but only to be spent in infrastructure, new energy and Research and Development (innovation).
• The Oberstar Bill ($500 billion in five years) should be increased to $750 billion, with an emphasis on High Speed Rail and new technology, local transportation, such as Bus Rapid Transit.
• Taxes should not be changed until we are safely out of the Great Recession, then when unemployment is down to under 8%, gradually drop the Bush tax cuts , from top to bottom over a few year period (3 to 5 years).
• Follow Defense Secretary Robert Gate’s lead of reducing military expenditures $100 billion over 5 years.  U.S. military expenditures are still higher than the rest of the worlds’ military expenditures TOGETHER, and use 54% of U.S. disposable income. During the next five years the Pentagon will spend $3.5 trillion. The U.S. cannot police the world alone.
• Entitlements must slowly be reduced over a twenty year period.  This must be done carefully and modestly, with trial and error. For example: in 2015 increase retirement age by six months, again in 2020, and so on to 2030 where retirement would be at age 67.  That is already legislated, but the change must be more gradual.
• The U.S. must reduce medical care costs from currently almost 18% of GDP to Switzerland’s 12%.  That can only be done by universal health care and capitation.  I used the example of Switzerland because there the private sector runs all medical systems, everyone has choice of doctors, specialists and open visits; the government establishes all costs and the Swiss medical indices are as good, and many better, than the U.S.  Japan has a non socialist universal health care system, including illegal aliens, see doctors three times more than Americans, live longer than we do, yet spend $3500 per person on health care vs. the U.S. cost of $7500/per person, per year, with millions of persons not covered here.  But in Japan the government decides fee schedules and they are the same for everyone, everywhere.   An open market with capitation of costs.
• The U.S. must get away from dependency on fossil fuels.  There is enough natural gas in the U.S. and Canada, without going to shale cracking, to supply North America with fuel for all cars, busses and trucks, plus heat in winter, for over 100 years.  The beauty of the T. Boone Pickens plan is that the big oil companies are also quickly becoming the big gas companies.  Thus, big oil and their billions in lobbying would not work against LNG as they would against renewable fuels.  That would buy the U.S. enough time, once away from 68% foreign oil dependency to a 100% U.S. fuel dependency, to develop new energy sources, such as hydrogen, safe atomic, wind, sun,  electric batteries that are stronger and last longer, a better high tension electric grid system, etc.
• The U.S. must go back, as much as possible, to a new version of the Glass-Steagall Act, where banks are not permitted to use depositors’ money to speculate in the market and there is a clear division between commercial banking and investment banking.
• Most important; the new economy besides new energy, must have a manufacturing revival.

At the turn of the last century and for close to a hundred years, the U.S. was the number one manufacturing nation of the world. Now it is China.  U.S. manufacturing is down to 12% of our GDP, an all time, historic low.  We must not only remain the number one economy, we must again become the number one manufacturing power.  How? Innovation and technology: the new science based world we are quickly moving into must be led by the U.S.

The U.S. cannot go back to dominating the industrialized world in steel, aluminum, coal, shipbuilding, oil and cars.  That world is gone for us.  We need to keep dominance in medicine, aviation, new energy, space, computer and communications technology.  But, we cannot depend for our economy to be 70% based on consumption, especially on Chinese produced products.  We are back to heartbreaking trade imbalances of over $50 billion a month, of which almost half is our trade deficit with China.   Nor can we depend on the Chinese being reasonable; keeping their currency at lower values; investing more internally; not over dependent on exports or continuing to buy our Treasury Bills.  We must become an export nation and join the global market by our essential products and technology superiority.

The U.S. must lead the world in nanotechnology, genome and gene altering know how, microbiology, applied life sciences, health sciences, electronics, robotics and all the other new sciences that will change the way the world functions in the next ten years.  To accomplish this we must change our immigration laws to include more scientist and skilled workers, incentivize small businesses, subsidize large scale research and development and, most important, prioritize U.S. education.

• Education – must be the cornerstone of our new economy; preschool, K-12, university and post graduate education must be what everything that the U.S. future must be based on.  (Please see my Education Position Paper, www.Ferre2010.com.)

Obama’s education secretary, Arne Duncan said “The country that out-educates us today will out-compete us tomorrow.” Newsweek highlighted in its August 23 issue that a report by the U.S. College Board showed an “alarming” decline in young American adults who have completed college; once a global leader in college education, the U.S. now ranks twelfth.  The U.S.  was ahead in most metrics 10 years ago.  Now China graduates more engineers than we do and now has a much higher rate of patent creation than the United States.  Fortunately for the free world, nobody wants to copy China’s, model of autocratic capitalism.  It is to be seen if communism is compatible with a free market, without personal freedom and 600 million impoverished Chinese.

The U.S. is now in the bottom quartile of countries in expenditures in Research and Development.  We must return to having the “basics” right, that economic dynamism is built from the ground up.  America has always been an exceptional country, and it has been built from the ground up.

The U.S. must again be number one in education, R & D, innovation and, entrepreneurship.  To return to global and historic leadership, we must not resist change.  Democratic capitalism is an evolutionary process.  We must learn from history, again.  If the U.S. is not to follow the demise of the Roman and British Empires, we can no longer be the enforcer of the international system, nor be responsible for nation building of less developed countries.  America must rebuild America in America’s image.

Maurice Ferre

Florida Candidate, U.S. Senate, Democrat 2010

It is unfortunate that we met under an unfriendly environment. I appreciate your offer to meet with me to discuss ways that Leadership Florida can improve the debate rules so that future statewide campaigns will be more open to ideas and issues than this 2010 U.S. Senate election has been.

I do not subscribe to conspiracy theories. The rules of political engagement in America, however, are degenerating due to the exorbitant influence of money. In the 2010 U.S. Senate Democratic Party campaign, where the exclusion began, in the Annual Meeting in October at Disney World, Florida Chair Karen Thurman and the Florida Democratic Executive Committee, before the end of qualification in April, openly and formally declared themselves in favor of candidate Kendrick Meek. This Florida Democratic Party partiality is against our party’s neutrality regulations. On several occasions, members of the State Committee told me, confidentially, that Ms. Thurman was threatening them with retribution if they broke ranks with her. And so that undemocratic act began the political roller coaster for the 2010 election cycle in Florida.

Former President Bill Clinton and his political team, including James Carville, are of course entitled to play hardball politics. Time and again, traditional political supporters of my past apologized for “no contribution” because they were “Friends of Bill” and Bill said “No”. As you know Kendrick Meek has raised over $6.5 million with every major lobbying group, locally and in Washington, raising substantial funds for the Meek campaign.

Patrick Gaspard and other White House staff, is another matter. They have played many and varied political cards; against Meek, for Meek and recently, helping Independent candidate Charlie Crist. The White House’s worst Florida nightmare is if candidate Jeff Greene wins the Democratic Senate nomination, because he will attack Crist as mercilessly as he has attacked Meek. Crist is, of course, very vulnerable to multi million dollar personal and public policy attacks. Greene’s attacks on Crist could work to elect Republican Marco Rubio. Naturally, the President’s staff has to worry about election 2010 and especially 2012. But Gaspard and company’s, Chicago style politics in this U.S. Senate campaign will inevitably impact Obama’s Hispanic Democratic base in Florida (Obama won Florida by 236,000 votes. Sergio Bendixen and David Beattie, both Democratic pollsters, claim that between the 2004 and the 2008 election, there were 300,000+ additional Hispanic Democratic votes.)

Then, Florida newspapers published poll numbers that had Crist, Rubio, Meek and me, an impossible combination. In some early polls my name was excluded.

The June 9, Editorial Board interview at The Palm Beach Post was a clear harbinger of what was to come. Editor Randy Shultz was rude and harsh, only he had a copy of my questionnaire responses in front of him and only he asked questions; the other four journalists present looked bored and distracted. Sure enough, The Palm Beach Post did not invite me to their debate. The result of my editorial interview was an article that candidate Ferre was in favor of “Death Panels”, which of course, was not and is not true. The article was prominently displayed, my acclaratory letter was in the Opinion Page, inside. And so my campaign spiraled down.

The most amazing part of this negative political cycle of 2010 was the entrance in April of Jeff Greene; the $10 million in attack adds against Meek and the fall in less than 60 days of Kendrick Meek, from 47% in the polls, to 10% bellow Greene. Yes, Greene has 1st Amendment rights to spend as much money as he wishes from his own bank account into his Senate campaign. Meek has a right to accept as much special interest money as is offered him. But, does that signify that money can determine an election in America? More important, is that good for the moral and ethical health of our Republic? Should Leadership Florida and its partner, the Florida Press Association add to this democratic imbalance and uneven playing field with unfair or exclusionary debate rules?

The difference between Karen Thurman, Bill Clinton, James Carville, Patrick Gaspard and other political operatives, however, and Leadership Florida, and especially, the Florida Press Association is notable. I do believe you need to have a higher standard.

I attach an August 2nd letter that outlines the 2008 adopted criteria for the League of Women Voters of Florida (LWVF) debates. Please note the last bullet point (Page 2) “The League may consider other factors that, in the League’s good faith judgment, demonstrate the Candidates viability —”

Leadership Florida has a distinguished board that, should you adopt more flexible rules, could certainly deliberate, weigh “other factors” and rule fairly.

In your testimony yesterday you said “having six or so people in the 55 minutes debate —”, knowing full well that there are only four Democratic candidates for the U.S. Senate this year. I would argue that instead of personal accusations and insults, I would only speak to the issues and answer the questions. This is not new for me. In twenty-five years of public service in campaigns, I have debated my opponents on substance. That’s my record. So, four candidates, or three, answering issue questions certainly serves public information and Florida voters better than the majority of the time dedicated to vicious personal attacks between two candidates, as happened in your August 10 debate. We are hearing that the traditional media and the new media have received a rash of comments from Democratic and Independent voters who have been turned off to this vital election after watching your televised debate.

The professionals, whose job it is to inform and educate the voters of Florida, did a terrible disservice last night. The American people deserve better. I look forward to our future discussion on this important subject.

With all best wishes, sincerely,

Maurice A. Ferre
U.S. Senate Candidate 2010

The Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate has been brutal. Since Jeff Greene entered the race, Rep. Kendrick Meek has gone from ignored candidate for more than a year, to the protagonist in one of the election season’s bloodiest battles; one that has turned some Democrats off both major candidates. That’s where Maurice Ferre hopes to come in.

Ferre, the septugenarian former (and in his time, quite popular) mayor of Miami, got into the race last October. In a four-man field (the fourth being nutritional consultant Glenn Burkett) Ferre places a consistent third in the polls, taking 8 percent of the vote in a recent Mason Dixon poll, and 4 percent in recent Quinnipiac polls. But without a fundraising base, he has struggled to get attention.

Undeterred, Ferre says he got into the race to preserve the small-D democratic process, which he says has been undermined by his party.

“I think that the original mistake in this whole thing is the (Florida) Democratic Party and (party chairwoman) Karen Thurman,” Ferre told me by phone on Friday. He says he decided to get into the race after former State Sen. Dan Gelber dropped out; in his opinion, because Gelber felt he couldn’t beat Gov. Charlie Crist, who announced his candidacy in May and instantly became the GOP front runner, in what seems like another age. Gelber exited the race that same month. Ferre says he was disappointed.

“Gelber is a stand up Democrat who would have defended Democratic values and principals. Kendrick Meek is not. When Gelber got out, I waited, and waited, and nobody ran, so I said there’s got to be somebody in that (Senate) race who represents the Democratic Party values.”

Ferre is unsparing in his criticism of Meek, and of Meek’s friend and patron, former president Bill Clinton.

“I think the major player in this thing is Bill Clinton,” Ferre said. “Bill Clinton seems to havea strong afiinity for Kendrick Meek and that’s fine. Kendrick Meek was very loyal to Hilary. He stayed with Hillary beyond South Carolina when Bill undoubtedly made a mistake by using the race card, which caused a major abandonment of the Hillary Clinton campaign by African-Americans. After New Hampshire, nobody was quite sure what was going to happen (in the primary) so South Carolina was it.”

Ferre is, to put it mildly, not moved by Meek’s loyalty to his friends, the Clintons, and he voices many of the grievances Obama loyalists expressed during the primary.

“After (Bill Clinton) pulled that race card, Kendrick stuck with Hillary; but not only did he stick with Hillary, he was anti-Obama — and pretty openly and vociferously anti-Obama, until the end.”

Ferre, who hails from Puerto Rico, cites the island’s June 1, 2008 primary as an example of what he sees as what he sees as Clintonite overkill. “Bill and Hillary and even Chelsea (traveled to the island) … Puerto Rico has never had so much attention. I think they spent over 100 days between the three of them. They raised a ton of money in Puerto Rico and beat Barack Obama, but it was a futile attempt because by then it was clear that Obama was the nominee.”

Ferre seems to be speaking for himself when he says the Clinton hanging on past the time it was clear she wouldn’t win caused resentment within the Obama camp. And his indictment of Meek goes beyond the then-Senator from Illinois.

“You’ve got to remember that Kendrick is the same guy who supported Mario Diaz Balart and Lincoln Diaz Balart over Raul Martinez and Joe Garcia, who were the Democrats running against these two Republicans. Meek and (Congresswoman) Debbie Wasserman Schultz were openly defiant of the Democratic Party in their support.”

Indeed, the three Republican and three Democratic members of congress from South Florida have long observed a political non-aggression pact, though the refusal of Wasserman-Schultz and Meek to campaign against their GOP allies, the Diaz Balart brothers and Ileana Ros Lehtinen, rankled lots of Democrats. Ferre, however, says it didn’t turn off the ones that counted.

“That sets a backdrop to what occurs, and what occurs is that (party chair Karen) Thurman and the Democratic establishment decided to give preferential treatment and support, openly, to Kendrick Meek,” he said. “Whether that happens because of Bill Clinton or not, that is against the rules and regulations of the party, which says that as long as there is more than one Democrat (in the race,) the party stays neutral.”

Ferre is a man who respects rules and process. He filed suit on Friday against the non-profit organizations hosting a Tuesday debate between his better known, better funded opponents, saying Leadership Florida and the Florida Press Association violated their own rules in excluding him from the dais.

“I don’t know how we (Democrats) can violate rules and expect the other party to abide by rules. How can we complain about Michael Steele or about Jim Greer; which are very different situations, but the principle is the same. In other words, we live by rules and by laws and we can’t violate them with impunity on one side and then demand that somebody else do what I say and not as I do. It establishes an inconsistency that weakens the party, and who pays the price for that? Alex Sink does. We all do as Americans. This thing that smells bad begins with the Democratic Party.”

Ferre’s beef is not just with Meek and with his party. He also sleights the news media for fixating on polls and finances, rather than on the substance of the candidates.

“The editorial departments at the Herald, the New York Times, Washington Post, Tribune, you name it — everybody’s always concerned about the impact of money in politics,” he said. “We get distresed when the Supreme Court says that corporations are persons and spend unlimited money under the First Amendment in the political process, and we get all upset when the trial lawyers spend money and can buy influence, or the oil lobby or big sugar… we get all upset about the undue influence of money. Then along comes Kendrick Meek, who raised $8 million and there’s not one major economic interest that is not represented in that campaign, whether it’s big oil or the insurance companies, or Diageo, which is moving a factory out of Puerto Rico because they’re getting a tax break form the Virgin Islands…”

In the end, Ferre says what should be important is that the candidates and campaigns are both “honest and honorable.” On that score, Ferre says Meek, Crist and Greene earn failing grades. Ferre says he believes Crist is honest, but neither honorable or a “statesman.” As for Greene, he calls him “a tough businessman” and “a guy who gets his way,” but says while he doesn’t know enough about him personally to pass judgment on his honesty, Greene’s wobbly explanation of his yacht trip to Cuba, and his flimsy record as a Democrat raise questions.

“Here’s a man who by his own admission has voted five times in his lifetime,” he said of Greene. “The last time he ran he ran a a right wing Republican. Now, he’s lived in Florida for two years and all of a sudden he represents the Democratic Party and its values? I don’t know how you can square that.”

As for Meek, Ferre says the White House knows he can’t win, and he believes the Obama political operation has already begun helping Crist. Ferre even claims that White House political director Patrick Gaspard put Crist on a conference call “with 30 of the biggest fundraisers for the Democratic Party to answer questions,” something I have not been able to substantiate.

Ferre may be speculating, but he believes, as many Democrats do, that the White House has an “obsession with bipartisanship.”

“And I think they’re right,” he sad. “That’s how we can progress.” But he adds that the Obama team is “desperately looking to have more than Sen. Lindsey Graham from South Carolina” with whom they can cut deals.

“Unfortunately, there are not that many like Lindsey Graham. and there’s an awful lot of Senators (Jim) DeMint.”

But while he believes Crist may have cut a deal with the Democrats, Ferre believes the governor never stopped being a Republican. He read from an old Crist campaign flier.

“Crist lists as priorities, reduced taxes, less spending, cut the deficit, reduce healthcare costs, secure borders, defend Second Amendment rights, uphold conservative values, protect personal freedoms and family values… tough on crime. Where’s education, where’s save the Everglades? Where’s a new energy plan? How can this guy be getting 38 percent of the Democratic vote? Because they don’t want Marco Rubio to win. Seems like flawed logic, but its correct logic if you have a Jeff Greene who doesn’t represent the democratic Party, or a Kendcrick Meek.

The debate organizers publicly stated that they would invite candidates based on the results of a Mason-Dixon poll conducted within a narrow time period, 45-50 days prior to the Primary date.  Rather than abide by that, the organizers never commissioned a poll and instead invited some candidates while excluding Ferre.  Questioned by the Ferre campaign, the organizers amended the rules and quickly held a poll which was released on August 3, 2010 justifying the exclusion.  The Ferre campaign gave the debate sponsors an opportunity to include him prior to filing suit, but they declined.

According to Maurice Ferre, “The press is the fourth power that keeps us a free country. How can you exclude someone and say that is serving the public?”