It seems like House Speaker Will Weatherford is acting like many a legislative leader by demanding the opposite chamber vote on his priority bills, in this case a measure changing public pensions.
But fellow Tampa Bay Republican Sen. Jack Latvala appears to think otherwise.
“We pass our bills, they have ours. It would be fairly unprecedented for him to do this. We don’t do things like that around here," Latvala said.
Unprecedented? Like when one-time House Speaker Marco Rubio in 2007 demanded that the state Senate take up his doomed property-tax swap proposal?
Well, Latvala wasn't in the Senate then (it was both after his first stint and before his current one). So perhaps things were different back in the day. So we consulted the Nexis machine to find out what the deal was back then.
Here's a 2001 article quoting some Senator named Jack Latvala about another tax plan, pushed by then-Senate President John McKay, who wanted to force a House vote:
Senate Republicans such as Jack Latvala of Palm Harbor hope to persuade the House to let the voters decide the question. 'All we're saying is, give the public an opportunity to vote. That's a fairly Republican principle in years gone by,' Latvala said.
Well, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Or unprecedented. What's the difference?