State Senator: Thad Altman

We are living in an era when the government is either viewed in almost messianic terms – able to solve all of society’s problems if the citizens will simply surrender more and more of their resources – or it is seen as a malignancy, gobbling up ever-increasing portions of the private sector or extending its control to the point of micro-management.  Finding the balance between these extremes, State Senator Thad Altman (Republican – District 24) has spent his political career doing his best to limit government to its proper roles, while championing the benefits that public/private partnerships have brought to our community and the state.

SCB: Do you consider yourself to be a native of East Central Florida?

TA: Yes, I’ve lived here more than fifty years, went to area primary and secondary schools and to Rollins College.  I suppose that is one of the reasons why our unparalleled quality of life – economically, socially and environmentally – has been important to me.  I watched magical places, where we played as kids and experienced the wonder of natural Florida, turn into parking lots.

SCB: That sense of environmental stewardship has followed you throughout your political career.  In 2009, you were recognized by the Florida Wildlife Federation as the Conservation Legislator of the Year.

TA: I suppose that awareness and responsibility has been with me since I was young.  As we watched Brevard County, particularly in the 80’s, move from a rural community to a more urban environment, I knew it was vital that we ensure that the things which made this community unique weren’t lost.  Some of the most rewarding work I have done happened while serving on the County Commission; we ensured our beaches and the access to them were maintained with the Beach and Riverfront Acquisition Program.  Also we limited the density of development along the coast from Melbourne Beach south.

SCB: You have seemed to champion managed growth and planned development verses anti-growth.

TA: Absolutely.  Probably the best and most beneficial example is Viera.  It is easy to forget just how controversial that project was and how close it came to being defeated.  They had a DRI (Development of Regional Impact) which conceptualized the plan and how it was going to be managed; it was the most obvious win/win scenario I had ever seen.  As a part of the development the Dudas were going to build a new centralized government center, which addressed a major problem, as at the time, we were spread out in eleven different locations.  They would lease these buildings to the County for twenty years, at a very competitive rate.  Then, at the end of the lease, the building and the land was ours.

SCB: What was the objection?

AT: Titusville was afraid they would lose their historic position as County Seat, but we made considerable investment in upgrading our building there.  But some people thought a situation that looked too good to be true had to be a ruse.  But I suppose there were those who thought the Louisiana Purchase was useless expansionism and a conspiracy to aid the French and the purchase of Alaska was a waste of federal funds on frozen tundra.

SCB: It’s never simple.  So what sparked your interest and involvement in public life?

TA: My father inspired me to be an active participant not just an observer.  He never ran for office or was a grandstander, but he felt it was his duty to be involved and to serve the candidates that represented his values.  The more I took part, the more I became captivated by the process.  In junior high I read Plato’s Republic and that also provided a historic perspective on the nature and purpose of government.

SCB: Is there an entrepreneurial side to politics?

TA: Yes, ideally government should work creatively to partner with the citizens to solve the problems and capitalize on the opportunities facing us.  Political leaders have a great opportunity to bring good ideas to the forefront and to ensure that competition is maintained in the marketplace so that individual initiative and small business innovation isn’t crushed.  Many people don’t realize that one of the groups that does more to stifle new business development and innovation is other larger or well-established businesses.  In an effort to protect their market share they often are the unseen partners behind the labyrinth of regulations or restrictive legislation, which because of their size and entrenched position they are able to easily navigate.  This is one of the areas that I am intent on addressing.

SCB: I would think that energy development would be an example of that tension.

TA: Even with all the attention on alternative energy, we have monoliths like FPL which have a virtual monopoly on providing electricity to consumers.  I understand that they are regulated and they make tremendous capital investment, deserving some guarantees so they have a return on investment.  However, we need to explore ways to implement the Smart Grid concept, so that the energy produced is used efficiently.  Because electricity has to be available at all times, a measurable percentage of the electricity generated is not utilized, this cost is passed on to consumers and results in over-production.  Also, if someone can produce and put energy on the grid, they should be compensated for doing that.

SCB: What do you think the government’s role should be?

TA: The government has to be the referee ensuring competition is not stifled and the interests of the consumer are maintained.  For instance, the cost of wind storm insurance is partly a man-made crisis.  Building codes were not adequate to ensure buildings could withstand certain hurricane conditions.  Thus, the lack of adequate standards led to a devastating spike in everyone’s premiums.  Secondly, the government can stimulate innovation and development through tax and regulatory strategies that benefit everyone.  We have to remember that the discovery of America and landing the first men on the moon were public/private partnerships.  The government didn’t invent aviation, but the aviation industry, as we know it today, wouldn’t exist without the role the government played in its development.  It is a balance of keeping the impediments out of the way, partnering where it is appropriate for everyone’s mutual benefit, while at the same time we are not allowing a lack of oversight to set the stage for a larger problem.

SCB: Like the crisis in the Gulf?

TA: The technology was available, as I understand it, to prevent that disaster.  However, it was left to the exploration and production companies to make certain calls about using those technologies.  There was a regulatory breakdown somewhere in the chain of events.

SCB: What about health care; how should that be handled?

TA: I don’t think the government should do what free enterprise and private companies can do.  If the government gets into the health insurance business, the private sector will not be able to compete.  However, our senior population is continuing to grow, both by relocation and by an aging population.  Therefore the cost of Medicare and Medicaid are going to expand to crisis proportions in the near future.  This has to be addressed at a Federal level, because the burden on the states is continuing to take more and more of their budgets.  What is more, the uninsured are using the very expensive emergency room facilities, which are designed for acute care, basically for what should be managed care.

Related Articles:

• No Related Articles