When Marco Rubio served as the majority whip in the Florida House of Representatives, he wrote a letter on his official statehouse stationery to the Florida Division of Real Estate recommending Orlando Cicilia for a real estate license "without reservation." As the Washington Post reported in December, Rubio didn't seem to think it was a problem that Cicilia was convicted in 1989 of drug trafficking, having distributed more than $15 million in cocaine. Nor did Rubio think it was important to mention that Cicilia was married to his sister, simply writing without elaboration that he had known Cicilia "for over 25 years."
It's difficult to say for sure, but Rubio's letter could easily have played a role in Cicilia being granted a real estate license. As the Post continued:
Cicilia's cocaine conviction presented a complication for his application. Unlike some states, Florida does not prohibit felons from holding real estate licenses. Their applications are considered on a "case-by-case basis" by seven members of the Florida Real Estate Commission, who are appointed by the governor. The governor, at that time, was Rubio's political mentor, Jeb Bush -- who is now running against the Florida senator for the Republican presidential nomination. The budget of the agency is controlled by the Florida legislature, where Rubio wielded considerable influence.
Rubio would later hire Cicilia as his real estate agent to help him buy a house.
The story is damaging enough for Rubio on its own merits, bolstering the narrative that Rubio's favorite part of being in politics is the money and power that come with it. However, it raises at least one policy question along with all of the obvious political questions: If Rubio thinks Florida should let his ex-felon brother-in-law to sell houses, does he also think Florida should let his ex-felon brother-in-law vote?
Because while Rubio seems to be fine with the government forgiving members of his family for past transgressions, Rubio hasn't been quite so clear about whether Floridians with whom he is not related should be given the same kind of consideration -- particularly when it comes to voting rights for ex-felons like his brother-in-law. While Rubio (falsely) attacked then-governor Charlie Crist during his 2010 Senate campaign for saying that he partnered with ACORN to expand voting rights for ex-felons in Florida, he has never quite taken a position on voting rights for ex-felons more generally.
For a politician from Florida, that's an odd issue on which to have never taken a clear position. Florida's process for ex-felons to have their voting rights restored is one of the strictest in the country, with applications submitted directly to the governor -- at least five years after the completion of the applicant's sentence -- for consideration on a case-by-case basis. Given Florida's size, incarceration rate and strict process for rights restoration, the state accounts for more than one in five disenfranchised ex-felons nationally, and nearly a quarter of Florida's black population is prohibited from voting due to their criminal records. Taken together, these factors make felon disenfranchisement, the origins of which date back to Reconstruction, a consistent and significant rightward force on the balance of power in Florida politics.
However, the email Rubio's campaign manager sent to the Post defending his involvement in Cicilia's real estate license sounds like a pretty solid argument for letting him vote, too. As it read, in part:
Orlando made some very big mistakes almost 30 years ago, served his time, and has paid his debt to society. Today he is a private citizen, husband and father, simply trying to make a living...Marco has recommended scores of Floridians for various professional positions and after Orlando paid his debt to society, Marco was happy to recommend him as well.
Here's the thing: It is entirely possible that Orlando Cicilia really is a changed man who's simply trying to make a decent, legitimate living. And maybe everything Rubio wrote about him being qualified to sell houses was true. But a real estate license is a privilege; voting is a right. It doesn't make any sense for Orlando Cicilia to have privileges restored -- especially given the possibility that he received special consideration -- while basic rights are denied to over 1.5 million of his fellow Floridians. If paying your debt to society and trying to move on with your life is a good enough reason for your powerful brother-in-law to pull a string in order to help you get a real estate license, it should be reason enough to exercise a basic civil right.
So, Senator Rubio, what do you think? If Orlando Cicilia should be allowed to sell houses, should he also be allowed to vote?
An earlier version of this post appeared on AMERICAblog.com.