logo
How a controversy over Medicaid funds and marijuana complicates Casey DeSantis' potential run for governor

How a controversy over Medicaid funds and marijuana complicates Casey DeSantis' potential run for governor

Yahoo25-04-2025

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — One of the biggest potential hurdles to Casey DeSantis running for Florida governor in 2026 may have just been knocked down — for now.
For weeks, Republicans in the Florida state House of Representatives have been investigating whether Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration illegally used $10 million tied to a federal Medicaid settlement to help defeat a 2024 ballot measure legalizing recreational marijuana in the state.Those leading the investigation suggested that DeSantis and his top allies broke the law by transferring the money to a political organization helmed by James Uthmeier, the governor's former chief of staff and current state attorney general, saying it represented 'wire fraud and money laundering.'
One of the groups the money flowed through along the way was an organization tied to Florida's first lady.
But the main subcommittee leading the probe abruptly said it was ending its investigation Thursday after key figures declined to offer testimony.
'The House might continue investigating in a different venue than my subcommittee,' Republican state Rep. Alex Andrade, the chairman of the subcommittee, told NBC News. 'As far as my role, I have the information I need to confirm that James Uthmeier engaged in wire fraud and money laundering. I'll be coming back next [legislative] session with proposals to address the corruption within the DeSantis administration.'
Even though Casey DeSantis has statewide recognition as Florida's first lady, she would be something of an underdog if she were to run for governor — especially facing a Trump-backed candidate. The Hope Florida investigation simmered down significantly this week, but the scrutiny it brought to the DeSantis administration, and Casey DeSantis in particular, may continue to cast a shadow over the race.
The investigation, first reported by the Tampa Bay Times/Miami Herald, centered on what the DeSantis administration did with money from a $67 million settlement with Medicaid contractor Centene, which inked the deal after overbilling the state for prescription drugs. As part of that settlement, Desantis administration officials 'directed' $10 million from that pot of money to the Hope Florida Foundation, the nonprofit arm of an organization led by Casey DeSantis, according to records the group had to file as part of its nonprofit status.
Of that money, $5 million was then sent to a group aligned with the Florida Chamber of Commerce, and another $5 million to a group called Save Our Society from Drugs. Those groups then sent a total of $8.5 million toward a political committee led by Uthmeier that was working to defeat the recreational marijuana amendment. It's not clear how much of the $10 million went directly to the PAC. The ballot measure received 57% of the vote but it needed 60% to pass.
Andrade and House Republicans said the money represented an illegal use of public funds for political purposes. He requested testimony this week from Florida Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Mark Wilson and Hope Florida attorney Jeff Aaron, both of whom declined to testify before Andrade's committee.
On Thursday morning, Andrade told reporters that the GOP-led Florida House would end its investigation, his focus on Hope Florida concluded after the two men declined to appear before his committee.
The Hope Florida saga is shaping up to be among the most contentious political fights for the DeSantis family as Casey DeSantis openly mulls a run against Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., who has already jumped in and been endorsed by President Donald Trump.
Casey DeSantis was the public face of the organization, which aimed to offer grants to help low-income state residents become more financially self-sufficient.
Both Ron and Casey DeSantis have said that the settlement money was a 'cherry on top' — funds negotiated as part of the settlement, but that the money that went to Hope Florida was separate from the Medicaid portion of the agreement. They have argued the probe was politically motivated, and defended the program throughout the investigation, including as recently as Thursday morning.
Critics of the arrangement, however, contend that all the money should have gone back to taxpayers.
'Hope Florida is not a program. Hope Florida is an idea,' Casey DeSantis told reporters during a Thursday morning news conference. 'Hope Florida is a philosophy. It is: How can we help people in need and do better legitimately? It's not about just giving somebody a check and hoping it goes well,' the first lady said.
It's not entirely clear what the political fallout on the governor's race will be now that the Legislature's investigation appears to be stalled, at least for now. There are some DeSantis allies who believe the end of the probe is helpful to her potential run, while others say that the damage has already been done.
'Can you imagine millions of dollars in ads being put behind that?' said a person supportive of a Casey DeSantis gubernatorial bid. 'She has not really, in a serious way, had to answer for any of this. That's going to change if she actually runs.'
Andrade said that there is no indication that Casey DeSantis herself broke any laws but that the entire saga is a stain on her resume.
'I don't know if she committed any crimes, but she certainly looks incompetent at running a small charitable organization,' he said.
After Andrade announced he was ending his subcommittee's investigation, DeSantis allies said the entire Hope Florida issue was 'debunked.'
'It was clearly all a public student to get sound bites,' a DeSantis ally familiar with the governor's thinking said.
While the Hope Florida investigation seems likely to be coming to an end, Casey DeSantis still would face an uphill battle if she were to run for governor. Not only does Donalds have Trump's endorsement in a state he won by 13 percentage points in 2024, but he also has already raised more than $12 million and a political operation in place, something that is lacking for the DeSantis family.
The only political staffer currently working for the governor and likely political team for Casey DeSantis is Taryn Fenske, a longtime DeSantis adviser and Republican communications veteran. A handful of former DeSantis political staffers — including Ryan Tyson, who helped helm Ron DeSantis 2024 presidential race; Makenzi Mahler, a top former DeSantis fundraiser; and Alex Valdes, also a fundraiser for DeSantis — have left the operation and would not work for Casey DeSantis if she ran in 2026, three people familiar with the matter said.
'I don't know who her team is, or who would work for her at this point,' said a person familiar with Casey DeSantis' attempt to build a political operation. 'If she runs, I assume people will come, but for the most part those who have helped the DeSantises in the past are gone.'
Casey DeSantis does continue to enjoy significant support from Florida Republicans. A February poll conducted by the University of North Florida showed 57% have a favorable opinion of the first lady, compared to 27% for Donalds.
'She likely enjoys some favorability by association as Florida's first lady,' UNF political science professor Michael Binder said. 'But most of these potential candidates suffer from a lack of recognition, some suffering more than others.'
'That said, I expect we'll see a few of them become household names by the time the August 2026 primary rolls around,' he added.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Republicans, some Democrats and even ex-Gov. Rod Blagojevich weigh in on ex-Speaker Michael Madigan's sentence
Republicans, some Democrats and even ex-Gov. Rod Blagojevich weigh in on ex-Speaker Michael Madigan's sentence

Yahoo

time7 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Republicans, some Democrats and even ex-Gov. Rod Blagojevich weigh in on ex-Speaker Michael Madigan's sentence

In what's become somewhat customary once an Illinois political titan falls, leaders throughout the state responded with condemnation and called for reforms upon hearing Friday that ex-Speaker Michael Madigan was sentenced to seven and a half years in federal prison and fined $2.5 million on federal corruption charges. House Republican leader Tony McCombie of Savanna and Senate Republican leader John Curran of Downers Grove called for bipartisan ethics reforms in the wake of the sentencing, with Curran specifically requesting committee hearings and votes on potential changes — something that didn't happen this session. Madigan's sentencing was 'a stark and shameful reminder of the corruption that has plagued Illinois government for far too long,' McCombie said in a statement. 'Justice was served — but the damage to public trust runs deep.' But Illinois' last prominent statewide politician who went to federal prison, former Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich, held back on the chance to take a swipe at a bitter nemesis when Madigan was sentenced. Though the two were Democrats, they feuded for nearly all six years Blagojevich was in office between 2003 and 2009. 'When that guy, Madigan, was on the top of the mountain, they were all kissing his ass,' Blagojevich said. 'Now they're going to be stomping all over his grave. And it's really, it's really sort of an unappealing side of human nature.' Blagojevich said Madigan's conviction underscores the systemic problems in politics and government in the state Capitol. 'Is the system in Springfield corrupt, in many ways, absolutely,' Blagojevich said in an interview with the Tribune while insisting he didn't break the law. 'It's a system, I've been saying this from the beginning, it all too often works for itself on the backs of the people.' Blagojevich — whose 14-year federal prison sentence for corruption was commuted by President Donald Trump, who ultimately also pardoned Blagojevich — didn't want to celebrate Madigan's prison sentence despite the two's often-tense relationship. 'I just don't think it's right for me to kick a man when he's down,' Blagojevich said. 'What's happening now to him, I know what it's like. And it's really easy for these politicians to get on their high horses and start kicking someone, stomping on someone.' Senate President Don Harmon, a Democrat from Oak Park who is facing a potential fine of nearly $10 million from the Illinois State Board of Elections for improper political fundraising, said Friday's sentence represented 'a solemn reminder' that the duty of public office holders is to serve 'and that there is accountability for those who do not.'

Column: Will Tesla suffer if Musk alienates both political wings?
Column: Will Tesla suffer if Musk alienates both political wings?

Yahoo

time8 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Column: Will Tesla suffer if Musk alienates both political wings?

Donald Trump and Elon Musk — two epic disrupters of U.S. politics and the automotive industry, respectively and vice versa. Over the past year, they united over the election and efforts to cut government spending. They parted ways amicably … and then started trashing each other. It escalated quickly with Musk suggesting that the president be impeached and that he is implicated in the Jeffrey Epstein child-prostitution scandal. Musk later reportedly called the president before posting that he regretted some of his words: 'They went too far.' It was a remarkable breakup — incredible drama between the world's most powerful man and the world's richest man, who had been the closest of allies for hundreds of days of campaigning and governing. To the extent that it was a reality TV train wreck, I'd just as soon leave it be. But since the primary business in Musk's remarkable portfolio is nominally an automaker, it actually matters in this industry we cover. Sign up for Automotive Views, Automotive News' weekly showcase of opinions, insights, ideas and thought leadership. Love it or hate it, this disruptive era in which we live is providing us all with some real-life experiments in economics — the likes of which we probably thought we would never see. For decades, basically everyone who went to college was taught in an economics or history class that widespread tariffs would do more harm than good. Trump argues for a different approach, and he's pursuing it. Or he's pursuing it to negotiate for something else. In either case, we're now seeing how that works: So far, there's been a lot of paralysis, especially among suppliers and foreign automakers, but also a big investment announced recently by General Motors. His political strategy has been unorthodox, yet he's won two electoral colleges and one popular vote. He's only the 21st president to win two elections. So he's had success, whether some people like it or not. Same for Musk, of course: He approached the auto industry unlike anyone else — with an expensive electric car — had a couple of near-total collapses, and came out as the world's richest man and CEO of the world's most valuable automaker. That success helped propel his rocket business SpaceX and other ventures such as Starlink satellites and Twitter, which he bought and renamed X. But the disruptive move I'm watching was his decision to be an automaker CEO who got personally and financially involved in partisan politics. While new-vehicle sales skew to the affluent, when you sell something in the millions or tens of millions, a brand or model has to connect with a broad swath of people. And while there can be success with, say, a polarizing design, mass-market brands generally try to avoid alienating large chunks of their potential customer base. I've cited here before the story about Michael Jordan saying he didn't speak out on politics because 'Republicans buy sneakers, too.' In retrospect, he said it was just a funny line among friends. But the thing is that he wasn't wrong, and every business school graduate knows it. Musk, however, is not your typical MBA type. So out of his frustration with former President Joe Biden — who habitually sided with the UAW and its automakers against the U.S.-based global leader in EVs, even as he advocated for a carbon-neutral future — Musk threw an estimated quarter of a billion dollars behind the Trump campaign. That's an unbelievable sum of money to many of us, but when Trump won, it looked like the greatest bet ever. From late October to late December, Tesla stock more than doubled and its market cap approached $1.5 trillion. While Musk's political activism may have upset many of his loyal, environmentally motivated customers, there were a lot of reasons to be bullish on Tesla under Trump. It seemed likely that NHTSA and the SEC would take a more sympathetic view of the company's issues. Beyond that, Musk has refocused the company's future on artificial intelligence, humanoid robots and robotaxis. (Tesla said it plans to launch its service in Austin, Texas, on June 22.) A new administration with a deregulatory inclination toward self-driving cars was a significant tailwind. Now, those advantages for Tesla are gone or at least seemingly diminished. Structures that have legacy automakers paying to buy Tesla's credits for selling emission-free, fuel-efficient vehicles could be eliminated. (And let's not forget that Trump hinted at ending federal contracts with other Musk-affiliated companies.) Turning back to the auto business: The conventional wisdom is that Musk has now alienated all but the most apolitical consumers. Environmentally minded liberals might like EVs, but Musk's support of Trump (and the far-right Alternative for Deutschland party in Germany) has them seeking out other brands' offerings. There might have been an opportunity to become the preferred electric brand of the president's Make America Great Again movement — especially the tech-forward, high-income types and those motivated by the president's endorsement of the brand on the White House grounds. But after this month's blowup — with longtime Trump adviser Steve Bannon arguing to deport Musk — that notion seemed ever more remote. No fans on the left, no fans on the right. Is Elon out in deep water in an electric boat surrounded by sharks with no friends to bail him out? Maybe not. There is significant animus against Musk on the EV-inclined left, especially in the wake of his DOGE team's deep and sometimes chaotic cuts to government entities and programs. Certainly, protests at auto retail outlets are rare. The damage to stores is not acceptable, but it shows the intensity of the situation. But I still have to wonder how far consumers will follow those kinds of feelings. Michiganders, for instance, often assume that Americans prefer to buy American cars made by American (union) workers. But I've been to America, and most of them don't care. They want the best car for their money, whether it's American, German, Japanese or Korean. Some are clamoring for cheap Chinese cars: If Xi Jinping wants to pay for half of their EV, they ask, why not let him? So maybe they won't care about Elon's politics. Tesla sales are down a little this year, but some of that might be attributable to production hiccups. If the Model Y — the bestselling model in the world last year — provides a great value, they'll probably buy it regardless of what they think of the CEO. And now we get to find out. Have an opinion about this story? Tell us about it and we may publish it in print. Click here to submit a letter to the editor. Sign in to access your portfolio

Trump signs resolutions killing California's zero-emissions rules
Trump signs resolutions killing California's zero-emissions rules

Yahoo

time8 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump signs resolutions killing California's zero-emissions rules

This story was originally published on Trucking Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Trucking Dive newsletter. President Donald Trump moved to sever California's EPA waivers by signing a series of joint resolutions Thursday, rolling back the Golden State's strict truck and auto emissions policies. The president's signing of joint resolutions under the Congressional Review Act reverses the Biden administration's approval of California's Advanced Clean Trucks rule. That earlier rule called for requiring 75% of Class 8 trucks sold in the state to be zero-emissions vehicles by 2035. Another resolution also prevents the state's low-nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions rule for heavy-duty trucks from being implemented, per a statement by the president. The NOx rule intended to regulate emissions from manufacturers by cutting heavy-duty NOx emissions by 90% and overhaul engine testing procedures. The Trump administration has described his predecessor's environmental policies as overreach and unjustified mandates. Trump said the congressional moves he signed further restrict California from implementing a similar policy in the future. "Under the Congressional Review Act, the EPA cannot approve any future waivers that are 'substantially the same' as those disapproved in the joint resolutions," Trump said in a statement. "Accordingly, the joint resolutions prohibit the EPA from approving future waivers for California that would impose California's policy goals across the entire country and violate fundamental constitutional principles of federalism, ending the electric vehicle mandate for good," the statement said. In response, California Gov. Gavin Newsom declared the federal measures illegal and moved to sue the federal government, seeking to pursue the state's zero-emission vehicle policy. Newsom signed an executive order on Thursday for the state to continue regulation requiring that 100% of sales of new vehicles be zero emission by 2035 for cars, pickup trucks and drayage trucks and by 2045 for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. Trucking leaders applauded Trump for the measures. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association said the news was a big win for both men and women behind the wheel. 'Our 150,000 small-business members have been saying it all along—electric trucks just aren't a realistic option right now. They're too expensive, the charging infrastructure isn't there,' OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in an emailed press release to Trucking Dive. Industry advocates, including the American Trucking Associations and the Washington Trucking Associations, also warned that electric truck technology and charging infrastructure were not caught up to accommodate California's ambitious EV policies. 'We've done our part to reduce carbon emissions while keeping America's economy moving,' ATA President and CEO Chris Spear said in a press release. 'But what we need is federal leadership to set realistic and achievable national emissions standards. And today brings us one step closer toward that goal,' he added. Werner Enterprises truck driver Gina Jones shared a similar sentiment, speaking as part of the signing ceremony at the White House. 'We cannot allow one state's regulations to disrupt our entire nation's supply chain,' Jones said. 'Allowing California to do so would have [negatively] impacted the hundreds of thousands of truck drivers who deliver critical goods across the country each and every day.' Recommended Reading Congress revokes Advanced Clean Trucks waiver, creating ambiguity for refuse fleets Inicia sesión para acceder a tu portafolio

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store