Group, known as Florida Freedom Fund, launched in May and will also be involved in school board races

The Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, has launched a political action committee that is targeting popular ballot amendments on abortion access and marijuana legalization that will be voted on in November.

The group, known as the Florida Freedom Fund, launched in May, Politico first reported. The committee is chaired by James Uthmeier, DeSantis’s chief of staff who was previously the Republican’s campaign manager during his unsuccessful presidential primary run.

In addition to targeting ballot initiatives, the committee will get involved in school board races, Politico reported, citing an individual who is familiar with the group’s plans.

Florida Republicans have attempted to maximize their political control of local school boards, especially amid book bans and far-right education laws banning discussions of race and sexual identity being passed in the state, WUFT reported.

    • clover@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 month ago

      From the man who ran the “Never Back Down” campaign and was nearly the first to do so…

    • bitwolf@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 month ago

      Ive noticed that almost every “freedom”, or “patriot”, named thing related to politics do just the opposite

      • davidagain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        29 days ago

        It’s definitely freedom. Freedom for Conservatives to tell everyone what they can and can’t do in their own homes.

      • AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        29 days ago

        Same with “War on Drugs” or “War on Terror”. I would like to congratulate both Drugs and Terror for their victories. I bet if they declared a War on Housing the homeless population in the US would plummet.

    • dmtalon@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      Came in to say exactly that… The Irony is thick, and likely unfortunately lost on people that will approve it.

    • P1nkman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      This just in: DeSantis is changing the official words prisons and jails to Freedom Centers. Their slogan is “Where Freedom meets people”

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    1 month ago

    As we all know, legal weed is super unpopular and every ballot initiative to legalize it fails because of that and Republicans never have to do any sort of legal tricks to cancel that out, so this will work for sure.

    • Curious Canid@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      I was thinking the same thing.

      The problem is that honest names, like repression fund or authoritarianism fund, don’t score well in marketing research.

  • TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 month ago

    Don’t understand why it’s legal to make a PAC and have your chief of staff head it.

    To be fair I don’t understand why PACs are legal at all, but whatever.

    • Phegan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I can tell you one legit reason for a PAC. Public employees can not take campaign funds directly, so if a teacher wanted to run for local office, it’s a campaign finance violation for them to accept money directly. That means they need a PAC to accept donations for them, and the candidates can use that money for campaign related things.

      PACs at their core are not bad. How they are used to influence our elections by the wealthy is.

      • IamSparticles@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Public employees can not take campaign funds directly, so if a teacher wanted to run for local office, it’s a campaign finance violation for them to accept money directly.

        I don’t think that’s right. The main issue that PACs address is individual limits on campaign contributions. You, as an individual, can only legally give a candidate $X towards their campaign. X varies depending on the race. But you can give as much as you want to a PAC. They just have to disclose your name if you give more than $10K in a calendar year. The thing is, the FEC act used to make it illegal for a PAC to directly campaign for or against a federal candidate. The Citizens United decision overturned that clause and opened the doors to unlimited campaign contributions. Candidates aren’t supposed to coordinate with a PAC, but there’s a lot of nodding and winking going on.

        • Phegan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          30 days ago

          I can confirm it is right because I am the chair of a small PAC for a public employee. They needed to form it to fund raise. It functions very differently than how national level PACs function. but it’s a legitimate use for them.

          • IamSparticles@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            29 days ago

            Interesting. What state is this in? We don’t have any restrictions like that in my state and I’m a little curious about what the justification is.

            • Phegan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              29 days ago

              I guess I should rephrase slightly. Public employees are not allowed to take gifts / money from individuals in any capacity, this relates to bribe and corruption laws. As a result, this makes it so they can not accept campaign finance donations, which requires an entity to act on their behalf, a PAC. Sorry if my explanation was a bit unclear. This is due to blanket corruption laws and not specific campaign finance laws.

              • IamSparticles@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                29 days ago

                Ah, I think I understand. The potential problem here is that even a donation to a campaign fund could be seen as a bribe if the person running for office is a public official. “Sorry, I can’t accept your generous gift, but you cold contribute to my campaign for mayor!” Interesting, I’ve honestly never run across that info, but it makes sense. Thanks!

  • nnullzz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    Let’s see the mental gymnastics on this one, because I know quite a few hardcore republicans that loooove themselves some weed.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Let’s see the mental gymnastics on this one, because I know quite a few hardcore republicans that loooove themselves some weed.

      “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” - Frank Wilhoit

      So those hardcore week smoking republicans want to be in the first group, and want everyone else to be in the second. If weed was legal it would collapse both into a single group. Republicans don’t want that.

  • MehBlah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    29 days ago

    Its nice to know that rule about republican names holds true. If it has freedom in its name. It is trying to take freedoms away from someone they don’t like.

  • Bell@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    A small man screaming “I’m still relevant!” as the doors begin to close on him

  • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    women’s rights and cannabis are shunned by both parties

    democrats chose a catholic who is on record stating he lives by the good Catholic book which includes no contraception and a prosecutor who has used Biden’s laws and policies from his time as a career politician to lock away cannabis users

    the Demopublicans will win this election no matter which party wins and the losers as always will be the people

    And the one thing they say about Catholics is: They’ll take you as soon as you’re warm