Florida Senate confirms 189 gubernatorial appointees — some barely
Not without conflict, the Florida Senate took up 189 of Gov. Ron DeSantis' appointees for boards and commissions across the state and approved all of them.
Among the confirmations was former House Speaker Paul Renner to the State University System Board of Governors, former Lt. Gov. Jeanette Nuñez as chair of Space Florida, and former Sen. Rob Bradley to the St. Johns River Water Management District board.
Two appointees, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Chair Rodney Barreto and Board of Education member Daniel Foganholi, received pushback but ultimately were confirmed.
Senators approved Foganholi by a three-vote margin, 20-17.
Foganholi has been appointed to four positions by DeSantis, including two times to the Broward School District board. In November, he ran to keep his spot on that board and lost, receiving 20% of the vote.
New Board of Education member thanks God, DeSantis for fourth appointment
After the loss, DeSantis appointed him to the state board.
'The people of Broward County did not trust Mr. Foganholi to represent them and he should not be rewarded for his failure to win the confidence of his community with a higher appointment to the State Board of Education,' Sen. Tina Polsky said on the floor.
Foganholi, a first-generation American born to parents who came to the United States from Brazil, is a member of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission, to which DeSantis appointed him.
Miami New Times reported in August that Foganholi used to be a rapper. He told the outlet that he is proud of his music venture, but not of the music itself, which includes him 'spitting bars about everything from getting women to getting high,' according to the New Times.
Foganholi appeared in a music video that includes a depiction of him robbing a convenience store with a gun, the outlet reported, and published a screenshot of the YouTube video. The video linked in the article has since been deleted.
Polsky brought his rap career up on the floor.
'This is not the influence we need on our State Board of Education. We owe our children better,' Polsky said.
Foganholi wrote an op-ed in support of gun open carry on campus following the shooting at Florida State University that killed two and injured six.
'At FSU, the shooter used his mother's legally-owned service weapon,' Foganholi wrote in The Spectator. 'No law could have stopped him. But, had even one trained professor, staff member or responsible student been armed, this tragedy might have ended differently.'
He went on to write a similar sentiment about the 2017 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. Polsky, who represents Parkland, site of the high school, said Foganholi misrepresented what happened that day in his op-ed, adding that he is 'either so ignorant on our state's tragedies or so willing to deliberately misrepresent them to promote his own agenda.'
'The students of Florida, of Parkland, and now of Florida State, continue to come to us, asking us to listen and prioritize their safety,' Polsky said. 'How do we justify them appointing someone with such a poor understanding of safety on the Board of Education.'
Sen. Carlos Guillermo Smith requested that Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Chair Rodney Barreto be removed from the consent list.
Barreto, a Coral Gables resident, has been appointed to the commission by three different governors — Jeb Bush, Charlie Crist, and DeSantis. Barreto is a millionaire who owns property in four states and chaired the Miami Super Bowl Host Committee three times.
Smith said his and other senators' email inboxes 'have been blown up' by constituents concerned about Barreto.
During his Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources confirmation hearing earlier this year, Barreto was asked about submerged land he owns at Singer Island and the potential sale of the environmentally sensitive land.
'I'm not in the business of buying land and giving it to people,' he said at the time when asked about the sale. 'I'm in the business of making money.'
Smith recalled that testimony on the Senate floor Tuesday.
'Of course, there's nothing wrong with making money. It's not a crime or a bad thing. It's what makes our capitalist economic system work. But he didn't strike me as an environmental advocate, certainly not someone who should be the chair of the Florida Wildlife Commission.
'In my opinion, Mr. Barreto's personal financial and development interests directly conflict with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's mission,' Smith said.
But Sens. Ana Maria Rodriguez and Bryan Avila defended Barreto.
'I know that there's a lot of noise and I think it's important for us to sometimes put the noise aside and look at the accomplishments and look at the individual who has been leading the effort not just on Biscayne Bay not just on the Everglades but on preserving a lot of land in our state for conservation,' Avila said.
The Senate voted 31-7 to confirm Barreto.
The Senate did not vote on all of DeSantis appointees.
Agency for Health Care Administration Secretary Shevaun Harris or Department of Children and Families Secretary Taylor Hatch were not confirmed. The Florida Phoenix was the first to report that the Senate wouldn't confirm them. Both Harris and Hatch testified during the House of Representatives investigation into a $10 million payment to the Hope Florida Foundation by health care giant Centene. The payment was part of a Medicaid overpayment settlement Centene reached with the state.
One University of West Florida trustee, Adam Kissel, was rejected in committee.
If the governor wants Harris, Hatch, or Kissel to continue to serve, he must reappoint them to that post within days of the end of session. They can continue to serve until the next legislative session. Appointees who fail to win confirmation a second time must leave their positions.
Two other gubernatorial appointees to the UWF board resigned after senators showed hesitancy about DeSantis' desired conservative makeover of the Pensacola institution.
The process the Senate followed for confirmations this year and next was outlined in a memo by Senate Ethics and Committee Chair Don Gaetz, himself a former Senate president, and committee vice chair Mack Bernard, a Democrat.
The memo explains that every gubernatorial appointee will be considered by their substantive committee as well as the Ethics and Elections Committee.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
13 minutes ago
- Newsweek
The Bulletin August 14, 2025
The rundown: A ceasefire in Ukraine will be the focus for Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump when they meet in Alaska, but cooperation between Russia and the United States in the Arctic would also be a salient topic for discussion, a regional expert has told Newsweek. Find out more. Why it matters: The Russian and American presidents will meet at the Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage on Friday, during which the Trump administration will hope for a breakthrough in the Russia-Ukraine war. Andreas Østhagen, from the Fridtjof Nansen Institute in Oslo, said Anchorage is the natural location for the presidents to discuss the surrounding strategic region, which is drawing increasing attention from both countries. He said that oil and gas exploration, developing the Northern Sea route, and fishing are areas of mutual interest that could be discussed. Read more in-depth coverage: Map Shows US Tracking Chinese Ships Near Alaska TL/DR: Both Russia and the U.S. have prioritized the Arctic, making it a natural topic for a summit held in Alaska, which is the gateway to the region where the Bering Strait is a direct maritime passage between the Pacific and Arctic Oceans. What happens now? The White House has described Friday's summit in Anchorage as a "listening exercise," for Trump. Before then, European leaders are likely to push for the U.S. to keep Ukraine's interests in mind. Deeper reading How Arctic Could Form Key Part of Ukraine Ceasefire Talks
Vox
28 minutes ago
- Vox
How conservatives help their young thinkers — and why liberals don't
is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers ideology and challenges to democracy, both at home and abroad. His book on democracy,, was published 0n July 16. You can purchase it here. Attendees look on during Turning Point USA's Culture War event at the Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio, on October 29, 2019. Megan Jelinger/AFP via Getty Images Last week, two young liberals asked for help finding a job in the ideas industry. And I didn't have a great answer. It made sense that they were asking: We were at a conference for liberals, dedicated to building a version of the doctrine that works in the 21st century. They were interested in studying ideas professionally, and I was there to moderate a panel about political philosophy. Yet I found myself struggling to give good advice. Sure, they could try for an internship at a liberal publication or think tank, but those are fiercely competitive and don't pay much. They could apply for a PhD program, but teaching jobs were scarce even before President Donald Trump took a hammer to American academia. What's really missing are programs of a specific kind — ones that help college students and recent grads engage with Big Ideas and connect with Important People. If my young acquaintances were right-wing, I might have told them to apply for National Review's Buckley and Rhodes journalism fellowships — multiyear paid opportunities to write for a national audience straight out of college. For a lesser commitment, they could have tried for the Claremont Institute's Publius Fellowship — a three-week program where you receive $1,500, a $700 travel stipend, free housing, paid meals, and an opportunity to study with some of the most influential (and radical) figures of the Trump era. On the Right The ideas and trends driving the conservative movement, from senior correspondent Zack Beauchamp. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Those are two examples of numerous well-funded programs explicitly designed to usher as many bright young people into the institutional conservative world as possible. If you're an ambitious young college grad, and anywhere on the spectrum from libertarian to hardcore Trumpist, you've got tons of options to get into the ideas game. My young acquaintances really wanted a liberal version of such a thing. But as far as I can tell, it doesn't seem to exist. Where there should be a talent pipeline from universities to liberal public intellectualism, there is a giant sucking sound instead. And, increasingly, it's giving the right a leg up in winning the future. The right's winning formula for training youth It is true, as conservatives have long alleged, that America's intellectual institutions are pretty left-leaning places. They often overstate the case — professors are more likely to be Elizabeth Warren Dems than 'globalize the intifada' socialist revolutionaries — but data confirms that liberals outnumber conservatives in academia and the media by pretty significant margins. This is, of course, not at all new. One of the founding texts of the postwar conservative movement, William F. Buckley's God and Man at Yale, is all about how academia is full of socialists who are chipping away at the eternal truths of capitalism and Christianity. Buckley founded National Review as an antidote to what he saw as the liberal tilt of the mainstream American press. The legacy of Buckley-style thinking is the rise of a conservative ideas industry. A young person nowadays could attend college at right-wing Hillsdale, build their law school life around membership in the Federalist Society, and then get a job writing right-wing papers for the Heritage Foundation — all while getting their news from Fox News and Mark Levin's radio show. As part of these pipeline programs, older right-wingers get to know young up-and-comers as people, and thus develop a personal stake in their success. At the same time, the right also invested in the kinds of 'pipeline' programs our young liberals are desperate for. These aren't designed to replace traditional education or media institutions, but rather to identify young people interested in ideas and expose them to the right-wing alternatives. These work, in large part, by being intellectually exciting. It's not just that you get to go on all-expenses-paid trips with nice meals; it's that you are put in an environment where you're reading and debating classic works of political thought and literature with other people who share those interests. If you're the kind of nerd who wants to debate the finer points of Locke and Hamilton during undergrad summers, you're the kind of nerd who might one day be someone who matters in US politics — and the right's fellowships are there to help make sure you're mattering on their side. The people these young people are meeting are important and famous (well, DC famous). In a 2021 episode of the Know Your Enemy podcast, Nate Hochman — a radical young conservative writer who later staffed both Gov. Ron DeSantis and Sen. Eric Schmitt — talks at length about 'the masterful things the conservative movement institutionally has done in terms of mentorship.' Hochman, who was raised in a liberal household and moved to the right in college, describes how the movement's fellowship programs brought him in direct and meaningful contact with conservatism's leading lights. 'All of a sudden, you're at dinner with people you've looked up to for years, staying up until 1 am drinking wine with them and asking them questions and getting to talk to them. And they're taking you seriously,' Hochman says. As part of these pipeline programs, older right-wingers get to know young up-and-comers as people, and thus develop a personal stake in their success. When you stay up late drinking with someone, talking about shared ideas, you come to care about them in a way you don't if they sent you a cold email. When they come looking for help getting a job writing about conservative ideas, you'll work that much harder to place them in one. And the right has built its institutions to ensure that such positions are available. Right-wing publications and think tanks are much more open to debating big-picture questions — say, what kind of a nation is America? — than their left-wing peers (more on that in a second). Claremont, for example, was founded by students of conservative political philosopher Harry Jaffa, and it shows in the kind of work they put out (even when it strikes me as substantively ridiculous). Liberals are suffering from success There is no parallel culture in American liberalism — a function, in part, of liberalism's longtime intellectual dominance. There wasn't much of a need for liberal donors to create programs to cultivate liberal thought, as people interested could simply go get a PhD or an entry-level reporting job. However, these institutions were not avowedly liberal in character. They styled themselves as politically neutral, focused more on quality research and reporting, than as contributing to a particular ideological cause. This means that while liberals in such fields were in left-leaning environments, many were trained to see themselves primarily as professionals working a craft. So while there are plenty of internships available to young liberals, they're mostly focused on professional training (or coffee-fetching) rather than staying up late swapping ideas with big names. More broadly, the liberal professional approach also produced a kind of intellectual siloing. If you were a young liberal interested in political philosophy, odds are that you end up going to a PhD program and pursuing a career in academia. If you're interested in policy, odds are that you ended up studying a set of applied skills (like law or economics) that prepared you for very specific policy discussions in your area of expertise. But the conservative intellectual model bridges the philosophy-policy gap. It trains young people in the big-picture ideas, like conservative visions of political morality and religion, and teaches them to connect those things to everyday policy discussions. You aren't learning about abstract ideas or concrete policy, but rather learning a comprehensive worldview that treats policy issues as downstream of specific values. You are, in short, learning an ideology. Liberalism has plenty of brilliant theorists who work at a largely abstract level, and policy wonks who work on the most applied issues. But in the middle area of ideology, one bridging the gap between principle and policy, they've basically ceded the field to conservatism. The pipeline problem for young people is a symptom of the movement's blind spot: liberals, as a collective, don't care to cultivate a youth ideological cadre. This might not have been a problem in the past — and maybe even a benefit. Ideological thinking tends to produce rigidity, an unwillingness to adjust one's policy thinking based on new evidence. The right's longtime insistence that tax cuts can reduce deficits, or addiction to proposing military solutions to foreign policy problems, are two examples of curdled ideology. But we're at a moment where liberalism is in a particular kind of crisis: under threat from new ideologies that challenge not specific liberal policy ideas, but the basic premises of a liberal political system. Liberals need a new and compelling vision: one that explains why our ideas are not merely a defense of an unpopular status quo, but a broader politics that can be used to address cardinal problems of the 21st century. At this moment, liberals lack the personnel to articulate such a vision — while the right's radical thinkers, at places like Claremont, seize the field.
San Francisco Chronicle
30 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: Recall of Supervisor Joel Engardio is a warning shot to other S.F. politicians
Regarding 'Endorsement: No on Joel Engardio recall. Yes on charter reform' (Editorials, Aug. 16): The editorial board disagrees with over 10,000 District 4 voters who signed the recall petition: San Francisco Supervisor Joel Engardio's offenses warrant an immediate vote rather than waiting until the 2026 election to remove him from office. The disconnect is not surprising: For months, the thrust of the Chronicle's news reporting and opinion writers has been that the reason for the recall is that Engardio championed Proposition K to turn the Great Highway into a park. He did not notify District 4 voters about plans to introduce Prop K. Months before submitting Prop K, he met with groups supporting the highway closure, but gave no opportunity to those opposed to lobby or argue through public meetings or other venues. He submitted Prop K at the last minute, so that no competing proposition could be placed on the ballot. He promised traffic issues would be addressed before the Great Highway was closed. Many District 4 voters disagree with the editorial board and view Engardio's 'insufficient outreach' not as a 'political misstep' but as a callous disregard for basic democratic processes. A successful recall sends a warning to politicians: They ignore and disrespect their constituents at their political peril. John Higgins, San Francisco Have hybrid elections Before the city first switched to district elections in 1977, supervisors were concentrated in a few wealthy neighborhoods. The first district elections corrected that, but without a high voter turnout, it resulted in more fringe candidates. Maybe now is the time to retain residency diversity for selecting the top two candidates per district, but make them accountable to all the city voters in a runoff. To me, this is better than adding new at-large supervisors Ann Carberry, Sacramento Trump's claims are baseless Regarding 'Oakland leaders should listen to what Trump's criticism gets right about city' (Letters to the Editor, Aug. 19): While Oakland has problems — like most cities — the headline for the letter in the print edition ('Trump's criticisms are based on reality') is wrong. For one thing, President Donald Trump did not mention and does not pretend to address the issues the letter raises — businesses closing and underfunding of schools — issues that the city government is addressing and that the president's policies are exacerbating. Trump just talks about crime, when the reality is that crime is down in Oakland. So his criticism is not based on reality at all; rather, it is based on his desire to sow fear and to establish what he hopes will be a police state through the deployment of military force in American cities. Trump doesn't care about Oakland; he cares about power. That is reality. Clyde Leland, Berkeley Penalize Sen. Schiff Regarding 'Trump's motivation for accusing Adam Schiff of fraud is clear. But the legal case is not' (Politics, Aug. 15): As the law states, you can have only one primary residence, it has zero exemptions, and the language is quite simple. You can have only one and meeting the requirements is clearly spelled out. Sen. Adam Schiff has zero special status, just like the other 534 members of the House and Senate, nor do the head of any corporation, legal firm, state, local or city government. The story's attempt to present Schiff's side on a clear violation of tax law falls on deaf ears. Schiff should pay all back taxes, penalties and be happy he's not expelled from the Senate. James Sandler, Pleasanton
