A Bad Deal

Citizens United

Citizens United v Federal Elections Commission was decided by the Supreme Court in 2010.   In a five to four decision, the Supreme Court ruled corporations had the same “free speech” rights as individuals when it came to supporting political campaigns.  Previous laws limiting how much corporate political action committees (PACs) spent were ruled unconstitutional.  It opened the floodgates to unlimited spending in political campaigns.   Money may “makes the world go-around”, and it most certainly is how you get elected.

I wasn’t in favor of the Citizens United decision.  The end result was foreseeable. Billions of dollars are spent every two years on political campaigns. The “noise” drowns out any reasonable debate of the real issues.  Donald Trump said it best:  why bother to have a national debate where candidates have to answer actual questions, when they can buy as much media time as they need?

But Citizens United did made a clear point:  corporations have “free speech” rights.  They can spend their money in politics, and they can take political stands. 

Free Speech

The First Amendment states: “Congress (and by extension, the government, federal, state or local) can make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”.  While I don’t think the Founding Fathers had Exxon-Mobil, Apple, or Disney in mind, the Supreme Court did.  And their opinion is the one that counts.  

So what does that mean?  When I taught senior government in high school, I used this example.  If I stood up in a school assembly and called the Principal of the school “dumb”, I’d be fired.  Even though I am exercising my “freedom of speech”, I can still face consequences in my employment (even though the school itself is an extension of the government).  

But if I went to a Trump Rally in Delaware, Ohio, and was on camera talking about how great a guy he is, my school board can’t fire me for that.  That’s a legitimate exercise of my free speech, outside of the school setting, and the school is government.   No matter who my employer is, I probably can’t face job consequences for my private political views.

So to clarify:  the First Amendment applies to what the government can do, not so much what private individuals do.  And the United States Supreme Court determined that the corporations have similar free speech rights as individuals.

Which brings us to Florida. 

Doing Business

State and local governments all over the United States give “special incentives” to corporations to come set up in their area.  The most recent example of that is the Intel Corporation building a multi-billion dollar “campus” in Central Ohio.  The State of Ohio is spending millions on infrastructure to support the “campus” (Cleveland). And local property taxes are abated  (waived) for a number of years (Bloomberg).  That’s part of what “lured” Intel to Central Ohio, the support and waivers lowers their cost of doing business.  In return, Intel will bring thousands of jobs and millions, perhaps billions of dollars to the area.  It’s the trade-off state and local communities make all over the United States, the “cost of getting business”.  

When Florida “lured” the Disney Corporation to Central Florida, they gave Disney an amazing incentive.  They allowed Disney to incorporate their massive site as a government entity, a city in Florida.  Disney has their own city services; police, fire, sewage, water.  And perhaps more alluring, Disney can issue municipal bonds to support the expansion of their “services”, bonds that are cheaper than other forms of corporate loans.  There really is a Mayor of Disney World (Renne Raper, Mayor of Lake Buena Vista).

Disney and Florida cut this deal back in the 1960’s, when the area south of Orlando was a mixture of orange groves and swamp. And the state and the “city” lived happily ever after, or at least, until Ron DeSantis became Governor of the state.

(Disney isn’t the only corporation to get this kind of arrangement in Florida.  The Villages, now an over-fifty-five community of more than 80,000, is also its own “private” government, along with more than a thousand other districts throughout the state).

Don’t Say Gay

Over the past several months, the Florida legislature debated what has become known as the “Don’t Say Gay” law.  It restricts what school teachers can say about gender and sex issues, particularly at the primary grade levels.  The law is one of those that “fixes” something that isn’t actually “broke”.  Primary teachers aren’t teaching units on sexuality.  What they do is try to explain, at an age appropriate level, why Johnny has a Mommy and Daddy, and Mary has a Mommy and Mommy.  

What it also does is require higher grade schools report to parents when their children express gender interests other than heterosexuality.  In short, the teachers have to “out” to parents kid who might be gay, or transgendered, regardless of the consequences to the child. 

The Disney corporation kept silent through most of the debate.  They are a “family” institution in Florida.  But they have also been a very inclusive institution, employing LGBTQ people and encouraging LGBTQ customers to come to Disney World.  And Disney is Disney, one of the largest media corporations in the world. ABC, ESPN, History Channel, A&E, and Marvel Studios and Lucasfilm, are all part of Disney.  There was intense pressure on management both from employees within, and the LGBTQ community without.

Disney finally came out against “Don’t Say Gay” right after it was passed.  They vowed to help repeal the law, and offered $5 million to LGBTQ organizations organizing for the effort (CNBC).  Disney Corporation,  exercised their First Amendment right to Freedom of Speech, guaranteed by the US Supreme Court in Citizens United.

Paybacks

In clear retribution, the state of Florida has passed a law revoking the “special status” of Disney World. They now require the county government to take over the municipal duties Disney has carried out since the 1960’s.  Oh, and the good people of Florida would be “stuck” covering the costs of the municipal bonds of the now defunct Disney “government”.  

The First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.  The Fourteenth Amendment applies those restrictions to the state government as well.  I’m sure Disney’s well-funded legal team will be in Federal District Court as soon as the ink dries on DeSantis’s signature.  

If Floridians in favor of “don’t say gay” want to boycott Disney, that’s their right.  If they want to put protestors in picket lines outside of Disney property (avoiding the public right-of-way) the First Amendment protects them.  But if the State of Florida writes a law specifically to muzzle Disney’s First Amendment right to free speech, it sets a dangerous and unconstitutional precedent.  It will likely fail, but regardless, it will cost Floridians a lot of money, in Court, or in assuming bond debts.  It’s a bad deal either way.