Peter Schorsch
With just over two weeks left in the regular 2015 Legislative Session, former state Rep. James “Jamie” Grant is finally returning to House District 64.
In what the Tampa Tribune called an “unnecessary and costly special general election,” Grant, 32, easily defeated write-in candidate Daniel Matthews to reclaim his place in Tallahassee.
With absentee and early voting tabulated soon after polls closed at 7 p.m., Grant had more than 92% of the vote.
“Although the journey was long, and despite the fact that our team had to vote early and often (legally),” said Grant, “I’m honored to have been sent back to Tallahassee to ensure that the best district in the state again has representation.”
The first to congratulate Grant was House Speaker Steve Crisafulli, who tweeted “Welcome back to the Florida House, Representative @JamesGrantFL! We saved 70 bills to vote on tomorrow just for you!”
Crisafulli also said, “With Representative Grant’s return, our Republican Majority is complete with 81 members.”
Grant told FloridaPolitics.com that he bypassed a victory party Tuesday night so he could immediately return to Tallahassee.
What has kept the Tampa Republican out of state government was an aberration in Florida election law, which forced him to face Matthews, a write-in candidate who did not live in the district at the time of qualification.
For his part, Matthews failed to raise any money or even campaign for the seat.
Estimates put taxpayer costs of the District 64 special election as much as $400,000.
District 64 covers a northwestern section of Hillsborough and some of eastern Pinellas County. Grant first won the district in 2010. He defeated Republican Miriam Steinberg in the August primary last year.
However, what delayed the November election until tonight was a legal challenge against Matthew’s residency, one that prevented the House from seating Grant when Session began in March and calling for the special election.
As for Grant, the once-and-future lawmaker says he will continue pushing the issues, even as Session winds down. One such priority is a measure protecting condominium owners; another clears up the rules on ridesharing tech companies Uber and Lyft.
Florida’s election law allows a write-in to qualify by just submitting paperwork, without paying a fee or gathering signatures as required of major party candidates. In the case of District 64, instead of settling the race with a primary and be done with it, presence of a write-in – lacking a candidate from the opposing party — sets off general election.
Without Matthew in the race, Grant would have won in August, and seated when the session began — without the need and cost of an election (special or otherwise).
One possible (and simple) fix is including write-in candidates in a universal primary. But that is unpopular with major political parties, which support entering sometimes bogus write-in candidates to close a primary. Closed primaries mean only party members – not independents and opposing party members — can ultimately decide an election.
Lawmakers are looking to amend the law and avoid the legal confusion that led to postponing Grant’s eventual selection. But even if the law changes — and write-ins can live in the district at the time of the election — there are no assurances that a situation like District 64 (a unneccessary and expensive election) will never occur again.
