Tax breaks flow to gun manufacturers, violent films and games

What do violent video games, gory movies and high-powered assault weapons have in common?

They have all been blamed for tragic mass shootings, including last month’s at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. — and are all subsidized by Florida taxpayers.

With Florida’s tax code more business-friendly in recent years, economic incentives and tax breaks have flowed to companies and industries currently under fire for their roles in America’s gun violence.

Meanwhile, the state has cut funding for mental healthcare and school safety programs, two areas at the forefront of the national gun-control debate.

While it has become more difficult and expensive to access mental healthcare in Florida, it is getting easier and cheaper to obtain high-powered weapons.

Read more here: 

WHO GETS WHAT

 

Guns
Colt Manufacturing	$1.6 million subsidy
Adams Arms	$208,8000
Kel Tec CNC	$14,675
Violent movies/TV
Pain & Gain	$4.2 million
Parker	$424,820
I am Number 4	Amount unknown
Spring Breakers	$814,695
Burn Notice	$11.4 million (2011/12)
Alguien te Mira	$1.1 million
Video games
Electronic Arts (Medal of Honor, other games)	$9.1 million
Digital Domain (Assassin’s Creed, Halo)	$135 million
n-Space (Call of Duty 3: Modern Warfare)	$126,206
Mental health funding vetoes
Seminole Behavioral Health	$350.000
345 8 Pinellas Receiving Facility	$250,000
Baptist Health Care Lakeview Center	$1.5 million
Manatee Glens County Crisis Stabilization	$750,000
Indigent Psychiatric Medication Program	$500,000

Related articles

Gun makers, violent film and video creators benefit aplenty from tax breaks in Florida

Florida gave subsidy to gun maker as part of job creation package

Politics of guns in Florida are complex

Missouri Lawmaker Wants Tax on Violent Video Games

Video: Marco Rubio on guns, immigration and why his plan isn't 'amnesty'

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio's latest immigration plan looks a lot like a President Obama plan, which looked a lot like a President George W. Bush plan. So while he whacks the president on guns in the video below, Rubio gives some measure of praise to the president for his position on legalizing the status of many illegal immigrants.

Rubio said his plan isn't "amnesty," though, because people would have to pay a penalty, back taxes and couldn't get welfare or many social services if they tried to have their status legalized.

"I define amnesty as a special pathway to citizenship. Our plan is not that," Rubio said.

The 'Rubio-Obama' immigration plan

by @MarcACaputo

The White House has said Florida Sen. Marco Rubio's immigration plans, which could legalize the status of some of those unlawfully in the country, "bode well for a productive, bipartisan debate."

A reason for that optimism: Rubio's ideas and comments closely mirror those of President Obama in a 2011 policy speech in El Paso Texas.

"This is the Rubio-Obama immigration plan," Mark Krikorian, head of the conservative Center for Immigration Studies, told Mother Jones.

"There's nothing substantive in Rubio's proposal that wouldn't immediately be agreed to by President Obama," he said, noting that President George W. Bush proposed a similar plan in 2006 that many Congressional Republicans helped kill.

With the Republican Party far more opposed to immigration reform than Democrats, conservative commentators have praised Rubio for his boldness. But they've also glossed over the fact that Obama proposed similar ideas.

Not only do Rubio and Obama's plans create a similar type of amnesty for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, the two politicians have used similar language.

Here's Obama unveiling his plan in May 2011, relatively little-reported at the time:

"Those who are here illegally, they have a responsibility as well.  So they broke the law, and that means they’ve got to pay their taxes, they’ve got to pay a fine, they’ve got to learn English.  And they’ve got to undergo background checks and a lengthy process before they get in line for legalization.  That’s not too much to ask."

Here's Rubio in the Wall Street Journal on the undocumented:

"They would have to come forward. They would have to undergo a background check...They would have to pay a fine, pay back taxes, maybe even do community service. They would have to prove they've been here for an extended period of time. They understand some English and are assimilated. Then most of them would get legal status and be allowed to stay in this country."

Neither Obama nor Rubio have issued bills. So it's unclear what the real specific policy differences would be on many of the finer details. Recent news reports say Obama wants a "pathway to citizenship."

But details about the latest Obama plan are even scarcer than details of Rubio's proposal. Rubio also doesn't believe his plan is a " blanket amnesty" because immigrants would have to pay penalties.

Rubio, Obama, Diaz-Balart, Ros-Lehtinen, Jeb -- oh my! Everyone's talking immigration now

The fiscal cliff debate is on hold. Now comes the demographic cliff debate: Immigration.

Former Gov. Jeb Bush hosted a Friday powwow about immigration reform. U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio and President Obama’s administration leaked details of their plans over the weekend that would give varying degrees of amnesty to those illegally in the country.

And on Monday in Doral, Miami U.S. Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen held a forum to gather ideas and, in Diaz-Balart’s words, give them “ammunition” to call on their colleagues to reform immigration.

With the exception of Obama, all are from Florida and are Republicans. Their party’s hard-line immigration stances helped drive Hispanics, the state and nation’s fastest-growing demographic group, to the Democratic Party this last election. Republicans don’t want a repeat in two years.

“Both parties have used immigration as a political wedge issue,” Diaz-Balart said. “The Democrats never wanted to get it done. They wanted to have it as a political issue. It worked very well for them.”

But, Diaz-Balart said, his party isn’t without fault.

“Republicans didn’t want to get it done — leadership — they wanted it as a wedge issue. It has worked poorly for them,” he said.

Diaz-Balart and Ros-Lehtinen say this is the year that Congress needs to pass immigration reform. A major fault-line: Whether to give illegal immigrants a pathway to citizenship or a pathway to residency.

Still, this is the time, Diaz-Balart said because it’s not an election year. So there’s less chance for hyper-partisan politics, Diaz-Balart said. It’s also a new Congress. And Republicans, who blocked major congressional immigration legislation in 2010 and 2006, might be more willing to vote for immigration-reform plans as the lessons of 2012’s elections are still fresh.

More here

Marco Rubio's amnesty-lite immigration plan vs. Obama's amnesty plan

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio has proposed a pragmatic amnesty-lite plan that would allow the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States to earn a pathway to legal residency (as opposed to a path to citizenship).

Rubio released some general points about his proposal Wednesday to the Wall Street Journal for a Saturday story -- a day after before Rubio spoke Thursday to the New York Times as it was reporting out a comprehensive immigration plan that President Obama plans to push. That Times story appeared Sunday.

Obama's plan would give illegal immigrants a pathway to citizenship. And it would be one big bill. Rubio, who says illegal immigrants should pay a fine and have clean criminal records, has called for a more piecemeal approach, although he told the Times that it's not a "line in the sand." He's working on at least three or four bills. Note: Rubio is not opposed to people earning citizenship once they're on the pathway to legal residency.

"Under Rubio's approach, qualifying undocumented immigrants would be given visas to stay in the US," spokesman Alex Conant said. "Then, after a certain amount of time and after doing a bunch of other stuff (like paying back taxes, etc.), they could then earn ability to apply for permanent residence, just like any other legal immigrant. They would have to get to back of line, but permanent residence is first step towards naturalization."

Just how this would all work is unclear. There's no legislation. That's a reflection of Washington's culture, which rewards talk more than action. Rubio is a good talker. Relative to that, Rubio's record as a doer is more wanting (but then he's in the minority and has been in the Senate for two years).

Meantime, Rubio has garnered favorable, national attention for his proposals in the past without having to provide anything on paper. So there's little incentive for him to change now. Also, putting something on paper before you build consensus is a good way to lose on an issue.

Gov. Scott pleads with Obama to help avoid ports strike

 Earlier this week, the National Retail Federation asked President Barack Obama to step in and help avoid a workers strike that could shut down ports along the East Coast, including Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Port Everglades. Now, Gov. Rick Scott is chiming in with his own letter to the president asking for action to prevent unions representing port workers from imposing a lockout on Dec. 29.

"As governor of Florida, I am deeply concerned about the economic well-being of my state," Scott wrote. "The predicted effects of a strike on the state of Florida would be devastating."

Scott writes that cargo-related activities in Florida's ports generate 550,000 jobs either directly or indirectly and contribute $66 billion to the economy. He said a strike could affect the supply chain nationwide and even could impede military operations.

The governor suggests that Obama use the powers vested under the Taft-Harley Act of 1947 to address the dispute. In 2002, President George W. Bush invoked the law, which restricts the power of labor unions, to end a strike that shuttered 29 West Coast ports for 11 days.

Here is a link to the letter: Download Scott to Obama on ports

Charlie Crist trashes Rick Scott in Sen. hearing for vote suppression, turning FL into a ‘late-night TV joke”

Former Gov. Charlie Crist bashed Gov. Rick Scott twice by name during a U.S. Senate hearing on Wednesday for signing an election law that helped suppress the vote and turn Florida into a “late-night TV joke.”

Crist’s Senate Judiciary Committee testimony came just hours after the release of a new poll showing he’s more popular than the current governor, who is preparing to face his predecessor – a Republican-turned Democrat -- in the 2014 elections.

Scott earlier Wednesday acknowledged on CNN that some fixes might be needed for the election law he signed in 2011. That law cut back the days of in-person early voting and helped make the ballot longer, which led to long lines.

More here

Politics of guns in Florida are complex

Underscoring the politics in the debate following the Connecticut school massacre, Florida officials offered divergent views Monday, from stricter gun laws to arming teachers to focusing instead on mental health.

Others, including Florida Gov. Rick Scott, said it was too early to react or remained mute against rising calls for action.

"We cannot tolerate this any longer. Congress has within its ability to bring up common sense gun regulation very quickly," said U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor of Tampa, echoing growing Democratic support for a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips.

She blamed paralysis on gun control across the political spectrum, including President Barack Obama, who signaled in a speech Sunday in Newtown, Conn., that he would take up the issue after four years of avoiding it.

"The president should have been stronger," Castor said. "But from what I heard in his voice and saw in his eyes last night, he is determined."

Getting there is not easy. Support for new gun laws has not risen after other mass shootings and the National Rifle Association spent more than 10 times as much on lobbying as gun control groups in 2011 and the first three quarters of 2012, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Story by Alex Leary and Michael Van Sickler here.

Florida will miss health exchange deadline, feds to step in

As expected, Florida will not be notifying the federal government today that it wants to run its own health exchange. And now that the deadline has passed, it is all but guaranteed that the federal government will run Florida's exchange, at least in the initial stages.

Gov. Rick Scott's office said he is in contact with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and it still hoping for the meeting he requested with Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to discuss concerns about implementing the health exchanges and Medicaid expansion outlined in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Since that hasn't happened yet, the state won't give the federal government an answer on what it plans to do.

"At this time we do not have sufficient information on the cost of implementing a state health care exchange to Florida taxpayers, Florida businesses or Florida health insurance purchasers," said Jackie Schutz, the governor's spokeswoman. "We are looking forward to getting more information from HHS and the president.”

No one was really expecting Florida to announce by today's deadline that it will set up a state-based health exchange. Last week, Sen. Aaron Bean said the federal government would likely run Florida's health exchange to start it off.

As many as 36 states have opted to let the funds run their exchanges. Thursday, a federal official told a U.S. House of Representative health oversight committee that the federal government will be ready to start enrolling eligible families into exchanges in October 2013, Reuters reported.

Florida, other state secession petitions due White House response

We told you last month about the state seccession petitions that popped up on the White House's "We the People" website shortly after President Barack Obama won re-election. The window to garner enough signatures to warrant a White House response passed this week for most of these petitions; Florida and other states met the mark.

Petitions must have at least 25,000 signatures within 30 days of their submission.  The New Yorker reported that petitions were filed on behalf of all 50 states, but only eight met the threshold needed for a response. Here is that list and the number of signatures the petitions have received as of this blog posting:

-Texas, 119, 617
-Louisiana, 37,430
-Florida, 35,310
-Georgia, 32, 448
-Tennessee, 31,479
-North Carolina, 30,808
-Alabama, 30,580
-South Carolina, 25,064