Democratic Attorney General candidate José Javier Rodríguez visited Pensacola this week, pitching Northwest Florida voters on a campaign built around what he calls the “three Cs”: Crime, Cost and Corruption.
- Rodríguez, a Cuban-American attorney and former state senator who represented Miami from 2016 to 2020, is a Harvard Law graduate and 20-year trial attorney who has spent his career, in his words, fighting for “the little guy”—workers, low-income homeowners and consumers. He most recently served as U.S. Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment and Training under the Biden administration.
Returning the office to the people
Rodríguez said his run is about restoring the Attorney General’s office to its historic role as a consumer watchdog rather than what he described as a political extension of the governor’s office. He pointed to former AG Bob Butterworth as his model, recalling an era when Florida led the way on consumer protection instead of, as he put it, squandering resources on national political theater.
“The agenda I have is crime costs corruption. Focus on public safety, not all this political theater. We’re squandering massive amounts on things that are not keeping us safe, all of — just for entertainment in DC.”
On cost. Rodríguez pledged to target utility companies, insurance practices and corporate landlords he says are driving up rents and rates — including new scrutiny of data centers, which he argued fits the same pattern of rising electric bills and rising Tallahassee profits. He also cited local control over data center regulation and water protection as priorities, criticizing the Legislature for loosening the shackles on local governments without meaningful additional oversight.
The “ghost candidate” scandal
Rodríguez leaned heavily on the 2020 episode in which Florida Power & Light secretly backed a spoiler candidate against him.
Background: In the 2020 Florida State Senate District 37 race, Democratic incumbent Rodríguez faced Republican challenger Ileana García. A little-known auto/heavy-equipment salesman named Alex (Alexis) Rodríguez filed to run as a no-party, independent candidate. He never campaigned, didn’t live in the district, and didn’t even meet his own campaign manager in person, but he received more than 6,000 votes — about 3% of the total. García beat Rodríguez by just 32-34 votes, meaning the “ghost” candidate’s shared surname almost certainly tipped the race.
- Investigators found former Republican state Senator Frank Artiles paid Alex Rodríguez roughly $44,000-$45,000 to run, guiding him through the ballot paperwork. The money reportedly traced back to Florida Power & Light (FPL) and its political consultants
“The CEO personally wrote an email saying, ‘Make JJR’s life a living hell.’ And so when I launched my campaign a little over a year ago, I said, ‘Well, we’re gonna give them hell right back,’ because that’s exactly what we need in Tallahassee.”
Targeting Uthmeier
Rodríguez reserved his sharpest criticism for incumbent Attorney General James Uthmeier, accusing him of running what he called a “weak cabinet position” that follows the governor’s lead rather than checking it.
“With Uthmeier, he’s doing the opposite of what the job commands. He was literally put there by the governor to cover up his administration’s corruption. … He’s literally the corruption. He isn’t rooting it out. He’s the root of it.”
He alleged pay-to-play dynamics in the office, citing a $25,000 contribution linked to Tesla followed by amicus filings favorable to the company.
The Three Cs:
- Crime — refocus the office on public safety and support for local prosecutors
- Cost — go after utilities, insurers and corporate landlords driving up bills and rent
- Corruption — address both criminal schemes and institutional corruption in Tallahassee
A crossover appeal. Rodríguez said he’s drawing some Republican support from voters who disagree with him on policy but want an Attorney General who understands the office’s proper role rather than one chasing headlines. He described one such Republican voter’s reasoning: someone who could vote for a candidate who understands what the office does and doesn’t do, even while disagreeing on policy, but couldn’t vote for someone who “doesn’t care” about the function of the office, so long as it generates headlines.
