Algae isn't a partisan issue — but could be | Trending

In one respect, it's ludicrous to claim blue-green algae blooms are either "blue" or "red" in the political sense.

Yet last week the Democratic Party gave in to election-year temptation, claiming recent toxic blooms in Lake Okeechobee and the St. Lucie River are the fault of Florida Gov. Rick Scott, the Republican trying to unseat Democratic U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson this fall.

The blooms are "squarely on (Scott's) shoulders," said St. Lucie County Commissioner Chris Dzadovsky, who cited Scott's drastic cuts to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

Less enforcement, Democrats say, means more nutrients in our waters, and more algae.

MORE: Army Corps listens to Rubio, temporarily suspends discharges

MORE: Dems blame Rick Scott for algae

There's something to that, and certainly Scott's policies did little to solve our algae problem. They might have exacerbated it.

Yet algae was a problem here long before Rick Scott showed up.

In the TCPalm archives, the first mention of blue-green algae in the St. Lucie River was in August 1996.

Democrat Lawton Chiles sat in the Governor's Office.

Since then algae has been a periodic concern — under Republican Jeb Bush, then Charlie Crist (a Republican who while still in office became an independent, then a Democrat), now Scott.

Democrat Nelson's time in office has seen the blooms get progressively worse.

Bottom line, it's not so much the party that's the problem, it's the policies. Too often, both Republicans and Democrats have been beholden to the special interests that seek to perpetuate the status quo.

There's a lot of talk, often in an election year, but precious little action.

That's what made Sen. Marco Rubio's Sunday letter to President Donald Trump so striking.

Rubio, long derided for his lack of urgency on our algae problems, asked Trump to order the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to consider the "impacts of harmful algal blooms and poor water quality" on downstream communities as a "major factor" when planning and conducting discharges.

He also called on the Corps to hold off on the new round of discharges into the St. Lucie River scheduled to begin Monday.

Lo and behold, the Corps agreed to temporarily hold back on the discharges. We dodged a bullet, though only temporarily.

In his letter, Rubio cited the "nightmarish summer" we face, the "alluring coastal resources" that must be protected.

Yet the letter might also be seen as an attempt to make the algae into a partisan issue, or rather to flip the existing partisan narrative on its head.

Rubio and the GOP realize how vulnerable Scott is on the water issue.

By buying some time; by characterizing a federal government run by Republicans as "newly responsive"; and by requesting the Trump administration double the amount of money going to Everglades infrastructure projects, including the Everglades Agriculture Area reservoir, Rubio — with the literal stroke of a pen — seeks to recast the GOP as the party of environmental solutions.

And if that's the case, goes the argument, voters would be wise to elect even more Republicans — like Scott.

Cynical? You bet. Why didn't Rubio send this letter in 2013 or 2016?

Yet by forestalling the next round of discharges, Rubio's letter delivered temporary yet tangible benefits here. Should the Trump administration follow through on his funding recommendations, the benefits could be huge.

It might not "solve" the problem entirely, but it would go a long way toward upending the political narrative about Republicans and the environment.

The discharges and algae indeed represent a decades-long bipartisan failure. But here's the great secret: They also represent a tremendous political opportunity for anyone astute enough to seize it and ultimately reshape political loyalties — this year, and well beyond.