News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[GoofGoof]

Eehhhhh No! Though some very outspoken and vocal people very much want it to appear the "masses" are trending in favor of Disney in the specific case of the now defunct RCID, that is not the case. Quite the opposite of what you stated. As for TWDC, the powers that be have moved on and are refocused on their primary function of making money, I mean providing entertainment.

The masses don’t care either way. A small vocal minority supports the position enough to change consumption, a small vocal minority opposes it enough to change consumption. The vast majority are in the middle. Most people have an opinion one way or the other but few actually care enough to act on it. Corporations cannot please everyone. I agree they are in business to make money and as a result they will generally take positions that they feel are best for business or at least won’t hurt their business.

As far as Disney goes, I missed where they said they no longer oppose the original bill or they support it. I missed where they agreed to change their diversity and inclusion programs or their work content. It seems they are continuing business as usual with the only change being they no longer have RCID. I guess what I’m saying is I don’t see how Disney has moved on from their woke agenda and refocused on making money….they were always focused on making money

 

[Tha Realest]

Eehhhhh No! Though some very outspoken and vocal people very much want it to appear the "masses" are trending in favor of Disney in the specific case of the now defunct RCID, that is not the case. Quite the opposite of what you stated. As for TWDC, the powers that be have moved on and are refocused on their primary function of making money, I mean providing entertainment.

Yep. Drew Taylor reported that Disney’s internal polling factored into their decision to relent on the RCID issue:

Why Disney Ceded Control of Its Florida Empire to Gov. Ron DeSantis (Exclusive)

Ron DeSantis and Disney's battle over their special privileges in Florida has reached a ceasefire and we have the details of why this happened.

www.thewrap.com

 

[LittleBuford]

I guess the $50K donation for his election campaign in 2018 about covers it….that seems a bit Ironic now.

I don’t understand why Disney makes political donations in the first place. Can someone explain it to me?

 

[flynnibus]

Yep. Drew Taylor reported that Disney’s internal polling factored into their decision to relent on the RCID issue:

Why Disney Ceded Control of Its Florida Empire to Gov. Ron DeSantis (Exclusive)

Ron DeSantis and Disney's battle over their special privileges in Florida has reached a ceasefire and we have the details of why this happened.

www.thewrap.com

ehh... to infer what they were polling over is a misleading representation though. The polling referred to isn't about RCID or the topics of contention - but rather polling over the customer demographics.

"Political pragmatism and even concern about how the dispute was affecting the theme parks played a role. According to internal polling obtained by TheWrap, Disney had been losing ground with two key demographics: families with young kids (due to the parks’ exorbitant pricing) and those over 50 (over perceptions of the company’s political stances).
As a result, Disney asked itself a huge question, according to an individual with knowledge of the situation: “Do we want to be DeSantis’ punching bag for the next two — or four — years? Is that worth whatever economic benefit comes from controlling the Reedy Creek Improvement District? The consensus was ‘No.’”

The only polling referred to was about the trends in their customer demographics and Disney decision makers drawing their own conclusions on how the fight could impact their business.

 

[LittleBuford]

Can we please stop with the right-wing dog whistle word "woke"?

The word is still used in its original positive sense in many circles.

I’m among those who consider being woke a good thing.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/americans-divided-whether-woke-compliment-or-insult

 

[Ayla]

The word is still used in its original positive sense in many circles.

I’m among those who consider being woke a good thing.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/americans-divided-whether-woke-compliment-or-insult

So do I, but it is always used derisively when referring to Disney.

 

[GoofGoof]

I don’t understand why Disney makes political donations in the first place. Can someone explain it to me?

I think there are a lot of people who agree….but it's how politics works in this country. Corporations can contribute directly and they also usually have PACs setup where execs donate money to the PAC that is then allocated to politicians who support legislation that is viewed as positive for business.

So let’s say Disney as a company in the past wanted an expansion of the Orlando Airport or better highways connecting the airport to their property they would donate money to politicians who favor these proposals. Same goes for expanding cruise ports. In the past Disney fought against legalized gambling in FL since it would be a direct competition for people’s entertainment dollars. Casinos often have hotels and restaurants and entertainment that would directly compete with Disney‘s convention and adult traveler business even if it didn’t directly impact the primary families with children demographic. While Disney was donating to politicians to push to block legalized gambling the gaming industry was donating to the other side so if they didn’t donate they would be at a disadvantage.

Especially at the state and local level politicians rely heavily on corporate donations to fund their campaigns. National candidates can possibly go more grass roots donations but for the little guys there aren’t enough dollars to go around.

 

[LittleBuford]

I think there are a lot of people who agree….but it's how politics works in this country. Corporations can contribute directly and they also usually have PACs setup where execs donate money to the PAC that is then allocated to politicians who support legislation that is viewed as positive for business.

So let’s say Disney as a company in the past wanted an expansion of the Orlando Airport or better highways connecting the airport to their property they would donate money to politicians who favor these proposals. Same goes for expanding cruise ports. In the past Disney fought against legalized gambling in FL since it would be a direct competition for people’s entertainment dollars. Casinos often have hotels and restaurants and entertainment that would directly compete with Disney‘s convention and adult traveler business even if it didn’t directly impact the primary families with children demographic. While Disney was donating to politicians to push to block legalized gambling the gaming industry was donating to the other side so if they didn’t donate they would be at a disadvantage.

Especially at the state and local level politicians rely heavily on corporate donations to fund their campaigns. National candidates can possibly go more grass roots donations but for the little guys there aren’t enough dollars to go around.

Thanks for this helpful explanation. It's a sad state of affairs.

 

[GoofGoof]

Before the recent DeSantis/Disney fiasco, many legal scholars viewed Bellotti and Citizens United as terrible decisions.

The real flip flop would not be a Supreme Court reversing those two decisions; it’s those who derided Citizens United yet now use it to defend Disney.

Pretty much every I knew at my Ivy League school back in the day hated Bellotti. They felt it was the antithesis of democracy. Some of those same associates are now serving on courts throughout the nation.

Prior to what happened last year, they would have celebrated overruling Bellotti.

I don’t disagree. I fell asleep and woke up and the real world turned into the Bizarro Seinfeld episode

 

[lazyboy97o]

it’s those who derided Citizens United yet now use it to defend Disney.

We are not discussing the merits of Citizens United. You don’t know people’s opinions of the case. The situations aren’t even close to the same so as to extrapolate a contradiction.

 

[peter11435]

I don’t understand why Disney makes political donations in the first place. Can someone explain it to me?

Same reason anyone else makes political donations.

 

[Lilofan]

I don’t understand why Disney makes political donations in the first place. Can someone explain it to me?

I help you, you help me..

 

[LittleBuford]

Same reason anyone else makes political donations.

Not really. Most people donate to a party or candidate they align with ideologically.

 

[GoofGoof]

Not really. Most people donate to a party or candidate they align with ideologically.

I think the same goes for a corporation. For example if you are an oil company and you want to drill in Alaska or build a pipeline through protected lands you support politicians that back those actions (AKA Republicans). If you are a renewable energy company you support politicians who oppose fossil fuels and support green initiatives and green energy tax breaks (AKA Democrats). Corporations are generally most concerned with regulatory issues and taxes which directly impact their bottom line, but they can also have other issues they support especially if they feel their customer base and/or employees strongly supports those issues.

 

[hopemax]

I don’t understand why Disney makes political donations in the first place. Can someone explain it to me?

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

Political donations have the intent of ensuring the donator ends up in the "more equal" column and their personal needs are considered in the drafting of legislation and access to the elected representative. For corporations, this is especially valuable for things like legislation concerning regulation, taxation, etc. A $50,000 donation is small vs. what an increased tax liability or greater regulatory environment that could total millions of dollars could be. The difference between receiving a form letter prepared by an aide, never actually viewed by the elected representative vs a personal meal or scheduled phone call between the elected representative and a representative of the corporation (CEO, regional President, etc).

 

[LittleBuford]

I think the same goes for a corporation. For example if you are an oil company and you want to drill in Alaska or build a pipeline through protected lands you support politicians that back those actions (AKA Republicans). If you are a renewable energy company you support politicians who oppose fossil fuels and support green initiatives and green energy tax breaks (AKA Democrats). Corporations are generally most concerned with regulatory issues and taxes which directly impact their bottom line, but they can also have other issues they support especially if they feel their customer base and/or employees strongly supports those issues.

My understanding of Disney’s approach is that they donate to both parties in the hope of currying favour across the board. I realise they’re not alone in this, and perhaps it’s very naive and idealistic of me to say so, but I wish they’d stop altogether.

 

[GoofGoof]

My understanding of Disney’s approach is that they donate to both parties in the hope of currying favour across the board. I realise they’re not alone in this, and perhaps it’s very naive and idealistic of me to say so, but I wish they’d stop altogether.

They do donate to candidates from both parties and most corporations do. In FL in particular Disney wanted to the ensure they had the most political pull possible so that meant supporting politicians from both parties. Some times it’s actually more important to support a candidate opposed to your position in an attempt to get them to back down or focus elsewhere. You also counteract money coming in from groups opposed to you.

 

[mkt]

I don’t understand why Disney makes political donations in the first place. Can someone explain it to me?

To ensure that when they call a politician for a favor, the politician answers the phone.

It's a corrupt and disgusting feature of the American political system.

 

[Willmark]

To ensure that when they call a politician for a favor, the politician answers the phone.

It's a corrupt and disgusting feature of the American political system.

Money in politics are universal features of almost any political system.

 

[Lilofan]

Money in politics are universal features of almost any political system.

A Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United case describes corporations can spend unlimited monies to give to politicians. Money in politics will never go away. That’s for sure. One can buy their way into getting what they want.