Let us, for just a moment, pretend that Florida state Sen. Blaise Ingoglia is a serious man. On Tuesday, the Republican lawmaker filed a bill that would, if signed into law, ban the Florida Democratic Party. That is, at least, the overall effect of his bill, which targets any party whose platform had “previously advocated for, or been in support of, slavery or involuntary servitude.”
The combative, hyperpartisan, single-minded focus on trolling — or “owning the libs” — that Ingoglia’s bill represents has become the Republican Party’s guiding ethos, if one can call it such a thing. This post-policy method of politicking is focused more on narrative than outcome. Bills are drafted not to become law but to get a rise out of the enemy and applause from the base at how thoroughly the opposition has been put into their place. It is a contemptible way of going about life, one that makes me feel a faint sadness for the GOP elected officials who are so damned, condemned to debase themselves in favor of spouting incendiary nonsense.
This is not a bill crafted by an idiot.
Every once in a while, though, one of their attempts at salience breaks through, and I find myself almost impressed. Such is the case with the framing of the bill that Ingoglia puts forward, called SB 1248. This is not a bill crafted by an idiot. The text does not mention the Democratic Party directly. That would be likely found unconstitutional as a bill of attainder, a technical term for a law that targets a specific person or group for punishment. A federal court in 1973 tossed out an Arizona state law that blocked the Communist Party from organizing, as well as a related federal statute, on those grounds.
And yet it is clearly intended to target the Democratic Party by singling out advocacy of slavery in its platform. The 1848 party platform, for example, stated “that all efforts of the Abolitionists or others made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences.” And as the Tallahassee Democrat noted, of Florida’s 13 political parties, “11 of the parties (other than the GOP and Democrats) organized after 1985.”
Nor does Ingoglia’s bill bar Florida Democrats from voting — that would be a clear violation of their civil liberties. It would simply update their voting registration to reflect “No Party Affiliation.” They would also be able to form a new party, though the “name of the organization must be substantially different from the name of any other party previously registered” with the state.
Someone on Ingoglia’s staff spent no small amount of time thinking through the structure and crafting of this bill. Whoever is behind it should get marks for creativity, even if applied to such a pointless undertaking. But if the framing is fascinating for its calculation, his explanation for its purpose drags it back into the realm of the most boring and frequent attempts to own the left.
“For years now, leftist activists have been trying to ‘cancel’ people and companies for things they have said or done in the past,” Ingoglia said in a statement. “This includes the removal of statues and memorials, and the renaming of buildings. Using this standard, it would be hypocritical not to cancel the Democrat Party itself for the same reason.”
Yawn.








