Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Disney World will no longer be a ‘special district.’ What does that mean?

Disney World will no longer be a ‘special district.’ What does that mean?

The Florida Legislature is back in session to finalize a congressional redistricting plan. But Gov. Ron DeSantis authorized lawmakers to also consider a bill revoking Disney World’s status as a “special district” operating outside of municipal jurisdictions, and they quickly passed it Thursday.

This unusual – but not unique – quirk of state and local government largely goes unnoticed in Florida and beyond, so most people have never even heard of it. But this week it has been dominating headlines, so we wanted to take a closer look.


Since 1967, Disney World has acted as a self-governing entity, exempt from some regulations and running its own municipal programs. Officially, the zone is known as the Reedy Creek Improvement District, and through it Disney World levies its own taxes, runs its own emergency response units and controls construction permits and planning.

For 55 years, legislators have allowed this arrangement to continue, easily approving renewals on a regular basis. And it is one of nearly 2,000 such zones in Florida. But after the private company came out against a new state law regulating discussion of sex and gender in schools (known as the “Don’t Say Gay Bill”), Republicans have changed their tune.

"What I would say as a matter of first principle is I don’t support special privileges in law just because a company is powerful and they’ve been able to wield a lot of power," DeSantis said last month.

In a clear signal that he is targeting Disney, DeSantis on Tuesday called for an end to special districts established prior to 1968, affecting just a handful of Florida’s special districts. (DeSantis made the announcement about his directive to lawmakers during a press conference held in The Villages – a heavily Republican community that is itself a special district established in 1922.)

The massive complex – approximately 40 square miles – straddles Osceola and Orange counties. If the special district is indeed dissolved, those counties and two very small towns would become responsible for municipal services. According to the Miami Herald, Reedy Creek has an annual budget of $355 million and nearly $1 billion in debt.

Residents would most likely see an increase in their taxes to cover the added government responsibility, University of Central Florida professor James Clark told The New York Times.

Florida isn’t the only state with special districts. In fact, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, every state has at least one.

In 2017, the Census Bureau catalogued every special district in every state. At the time, Florida had fewer than 1,200 – not even cracking the top 10.

Between 2012 and 2017, approximately 1,500 special districts were created and about 1,250 were dissolved, according to the agency.

“In some cases, states create them to provide services to newly-developed geographic areas,” the Census Bureau explained. “In other cases, the special purpose activity or services already exist, but residents expect a higher level of quality.”

While many only exist for a short period of time to accomplish specific goals, Disney World’s has been in operation for more than a century. The state Senate approved DeSantis’ bill Wednesday and the House did the same Thursday, sending it to DeSantis for his signature. Reedy Creek will continue to operate until the summer of 2023, allowing time for negotiations on a new agreement.


Read More

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

A memorial for Ashli Babbitt sits near the US Capitol during a Day of Remembrance and Action on the one year anniversary of the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

(John Lamparski/NurPhoto/AP)

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

In the wake of the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, President Donald Trump quickly took up the cause of a 35-year-old veteran named Ashli Babbitt.

“Who killed Ashli Babbitt?” he asked in a one-sentence statement on July 1, 2021.

Keep ReadingShow less
Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

Supreme Court, Allen v. Milligan Illegal Congressional Voting Map

Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

A wave of redistricting battles in early 2026 is reshaping the political map ahead of the midterm elections and intensifying long‑running fights over gerrymandering and democratic representation.

In California, a three‑judge federal panel on January 15 upheld the state’s new congressional districts created under Proposition 50, ruling 2–1 that the map—expected to strengthen Democratic advantages in several competitive seats—could be used in the 2026 elections. The following day, a separate federal court dismissed a Republican lawsuit arguing that the maps were unconstitutional, clearing the way for the state’s redistricting overhaul to stand. In Virginia, Democratic lawmakers have advanced a constitutional amendment that would allow mid‑decade redistricting, a move they describe as a response to aggressive Republican map‑drawing in other states; some legislators have openly discussed the possibility of a congressional map that could yield 10 Democratic‑leaning seats out of 11. In Missouri, the secretary of state has acknowledged in court that ballot language for a referendum on the state’s congressional map could mislead voters, a key development in ongoing litigation over the fairness of the state’s redistricting process. And in Utah, a state judge has ordered a new congressional map that includes one Democratic‑leaning district after years of litigation over the legislature’s earlier plan, prompting strong objections from Republican lawmakers who argue the court exceeded its authority.

Keep ReadingShow less
New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) (L) and Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX) lead a group of fellow Republicans through Statuary Hall on the way to a news conference on the 28th day of the federal government shutdown at the U.S. Capitol on October 28, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Every January 1st, many Americans face their failings and resolve to do better by making New Year’s Resolutions. Wouldn’t it be delightful if Congress would do the same? According to Gallup, half of all Americans currently have very little confidence in Congress. And while confidence in our government institutions is shrinking across the board, Congress is near rock bottom. With that in mind, here is a list of resolutions Congress could make and keep, which would help to rebuild public trust in Congress and our government institutions. Let’s start with:

1 – Working for the American people. We elect our senators and representatives to work on our behalf – not on their behalf or on behalf of the wealthiest donors, but on our behalf. There are many issues on which a large majority of Americans agree but Congress can’t. Congress should resolve to address those issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

From Episode to System

The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less