Critics of Chief Financial Officer Blaise Ingoglia are no doubt guffawing over news he is using taxpayer resources to travel to big-ticket sporting events and for protection while he’s there, as first reported by the Orlando Sentinel.
The Sentinel got the easy part right. The optics appear terrible. Ingoglia isn’t loving this news cycle, but the outlet got something else really, really, dangerously wrong.
We must stop treating politicians asking for security as some sort of scandal. In today’s political climate, being wrong about the need for security isn’t saving taxpayers money, it’s costing them a funeral.
To be clear, I am not carrying water for Ingoglia. I have been openly critical of his policies as CFO, including of his “FAFO” tour blasting cities across the state for what he has unilaterally decided is wasteful spending.
That includes in January, when I called the CFO out for crying “waste” among cities and counties while also cheering for state funding for a new Tampa Bay Rays stadium, something critics gleefully describe as corporate welfare.
Not enough? See critiques here, here, here and here.
The bottom line is, Ingoglia has long considered himself a fiscal hawk, cracking down on a “government gone wild,” yet he doesn’t always apply the same rules to himself. I’ve said as much, and I’ll say it again.
The difference here is, while I’ve been skeptical, and even critical, of his policies and tactics, I have NOT been critical of his security. There is a big, big difference.
Using his office’s Criminal Investigations Division agents to transport him to sporting events at the University of Florida, and to Dolphins and Lightning games, among others looks like using perks of his Office. And if this were just about him using his Office to travel around catching various big games, that would be worth plenty of critique, and an even bigger dose of oversight.
We’re looking at you, Kash Patel.
It’s also fair to ask whether use of fraud detectives is the right approach to elected official security. And yes, let’s ask that question.
But the Sentinel’s piece implies that merely asking for security at all is a bridge too far. This is becoming somewhat of a reporting formula for outlets: identify a security request, assume grift, highlight a perk, tally the cost and imply the worst.
While some will scream this is the fourth estate holding elected officials accountable for how they spend taxpayer dollars, it’s dangerous given recent events.
In October, a man scaled the fence at Gov. Josh Shapiro’s official residence, used a hammer to break windows, and threw Molotov cocktails while Shapiro and his family were asleep inside, setting the home ablaze. The attacker later admitted he would have beaten Shapiro with the hammer had he had the choice.
In Minnesota, House Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and her husband (and their dog!) were assassinated by a gunman dressed as a police officer. The gunman had a list of more Democratic officials to target.
In Michigan, three men plotted to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
Famously, an attacker pummeled former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul Pelosi, after he answered the door to the couple’s California home to an intruder who wound up fracturing his skull with a hammer. He was looking for Nancy Pelosi.
And let us not forget the three assassination attempts on President Donald Trump, one of which resulted in an actual bullet wound.
Ingoglia’s spokeswoman, Sydney Booker, correctly defended her boss, noting that he needed security at high-profile events “to keep himself and those around him safe in the current heightened political climate.”
Security concerns, she reminded, “don’t clock out at 5 p.m.”
What’s more, the Sentinel article referred to Ingoglia’s travel party as an “entourage,” which sounds more like a Jay-Z posse than what it actually is: Ingoglia’s wife and a small contingent of staff. If that’s a scandal, a lot of us are in big trouble.
None of this absolves Ingoglia of policy decisions and governing tactics that are absolutely worthy of skepticism. I will continue to call him or anyone else out when their arithmetic goes awry. If there are less expensive ways to protect our elected officials — who need protecting — while still effectively protecting them, let’s ask those questions and try to find better solutions.
But we have to stop demonizing protection on its face, whether it’s for a Republican or a Democrat.
And the next time you find yourself scoffing at security costs, just imagine Shapiro’s scorched dining room, dead politicians lying in the same home as their slain dog, Whitmer’s vacation home that no longer feels like a sanctuary, or Paul Pelosi’s battered skull. Imagine those and then ask whether it’s a scandal when another elected official asks for that to not happen to them.
