Like most Americans, Floridians kept a watchful eye on the U.S. Supreme Court over the last week, as the justices issued closely-divided and contentious decisions on the Voting Rights Act and gay marriage. But the impacts in Florida varied widely from those in other parts of the country.
Florida doesn't allow any kind of gay marriage or domestic partnerships, meaning that only a ruling far wider than anyone expected from the Supreme Court would make a difference in the Sunshine State. And the state is, unlike many others, at least partially covered by the Voting Rights Act, meaning any decision on that federal law was actually more significant in Florida than elsewhere in the country.
The difference in the impact of the rulings was clearly illustrated in the comments from the opponents of the courts' conclusions.
House Judiciary Chairman Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, a strong supporter of the state's ban on gay marriage: "In Florida, I think there's been a very clear statement with the marriage amendment, where we stand."
Deirdre Macnab, president of the League of Women Voters of Florida, which supports the VRA: "Today's decision undermines 40 years of fundamental protections against discriminatory voting laws and the League urges Congress to act quickly to restore the Voting Rights Act."
'OUR COUNTRY HAS CHANGED':
For supporters of the ruling in the Voting Rights Act case -- which struck down the formula used to figure out which state and local governments qualify for extra federal oversight of their voting laws -- the issue was relatively simple. No longer is the South the land of segregated water fountains and literacy tests, and a formula that was established back when those dark days were a fresh memory is no longer relevant.
"Our country has changed, and while any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the 5-4 majority.
Those who opposed the decision, though, saw the act as part of the reason that there were no longer literacy tests, poll taxes or several other devices that states came up with to try to keep black voters from casting ballots before the Civil Rights Movement.
"The sad irony of today's decision lies in its utter failure to grasp why the VRA has proven effective," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in a dissent.
For Florida, the implications were relatively clear. Unless and until Congress comes up with a new formula for which states qualify for "preclearance," and unless the state or one of its counties falls under that formula, state lawmakers are free to pass pretty much any change in voting laws they like. Any challenge would have to come after the fact, in a lawsuit.
"Any time we have the opportunity to make our own decisions, I think that's great for our state," Gov. Rick Scott told reporters Tuesday following the state Cabinet meeting.
As the week ended, there were not yet any indications about whether the state might try to push through any changes that would previously have been tripped up by preclearance. But that is clearly what opponents feared.
"It should be disturbing to every Florida voter that the Supreme Court seems not to have noticed what happened in Florida over the last two years, where we have battled the Legislature's partisan manipulation of our voting rights," Macnab said.
'WE'RE GOING TO BE A TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE STATE':
The decision on same-sex marriage was more of a mixed bag for those who support allowing gays and lesbians to tie the knot. The court threw out part of a federal law, called the Defense of Marriage Act, that denied federal benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married in states that approve their unions.
But Florida doesn't allow same-sex marriage. And the court's ruling on a California ban on gay marriage essentially invalidated that law, but was decided on procedural grounds and didn't find a constitutional right requiring states to give gays and lesbians access to marriage.
"The rulings out of the Supreme Court mean so much for so many people, but so much less for the people in Florida," said Rep. Joe Saunders, an Orlando Democrat and one of the first two openly gay lawmakers in the state.
That didn't seem likely to change any time soon.
"The voters in 2008 decided that we're going to be a traditional marriage state," said Gov. Rick Scott, noting that he's been married since he was 19. "That's what the voters decided, and it's my job as governor to uphold the law of the land."
The only path that looked like a possible route to same-sex marriage in Florida was Equality Florida's ballot initiative, "Get Engaged," which is trying to get a measure before voters in 2014. But University of South Florida political science professor Susan MacManus said the measure might do better in 2016, a presidential year when the electorate is likely to be younger and more supportive.
"But it's still a divided state on the issue," she said, "and if it were put on the ballot, much would depend on the turnout -- the demographic make-up of the voters who actually turn out to vote."
CLOSER TO HOME:
Not everything important happened in Washington, D.C. In fact, for the 1.26 million customers of Citizens Property Insurance Corp., the state-backed insurer, their wallets will likely feel more of a pinch from a Wednesday decision by that board than anything the Supreme Court did.
The Citizens board approved an average 7 percent increase in premiums, with the hike hitting 7.5 percent for those with sinkhole coverage. The increase is expected to generate another $178 million next year, but actuarial estimates say $505 million is needed in additional premium charges.
For single-family coverage, the average nonsinkhole rate will stand at $2,112 next year, up from $1,981 in the current year.
"We can't ignore the political consequences of what we do, but such interest must always yield to sound business judgment, fiduciary duty and the requirements of law," Chairman Carlos Lacasa said.
The rate proposal must still be approved by the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation.
Sean Shaw, a former state insurance consumer advocate and founder of Policyholders of Florida, criticized the increases.
"We only hear two things from Citizens Property Insurance -- either lack of self-control or rate hikes,'' Shaw said in a prepared statement. "Today it's rate hikes, and once again Tampa Bay is taking most of the punishment."
Meanwhile, Florida A&M University took another step in its attempt to recover from the 2011 death of drum major Robert Champion following a hazing ritual, as Interim President Larry Robinson announced the return of the school's iconic March 100 band.
Robinson highlighted the changes that have happened at FAMU since Champions' death, including a comprehensive anti-hazing plan, a revised student conducted code and the creation of two new positions aimed at preventing hazing.
"Part of changing behavior is ensuring that people understand --- those who might not quite get it --- that we're very serious about it," Robinson said. "When and if it rears its head, we will take the appropriate action."
STORY OF THE WEEK: Florida's elections laws are now easier to overhaul after a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court striking down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act.
QUOTE OF THE WEEK: "This governor and this Legislature have been walking advertisements for why federal oversight is needed." -- Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, on the decision striking down a portion of the Voting Rights Act that subjected Florida laws affecting five counties to federal scrutiny.
