By Natalie Gonzalez
Introduction
Over 6 million Floridians, representing 57.2% of voters, voted yes on Amendment 4; however, the results ultimately fell short. Since 2006, Florida’s Constitution has required a supermajority for any constitutional amendments, including those initiated by citizens. This blog explores a more recent obstacle beyond the supermajority: Governor Ron DeSantis. Among the various actions DeSantis and his administration have taken to hinder the passage of Amendment 4, this paper will focus on three primary issues: the intimidation of petition signers and voters, violations of Florida’s expenditure statute, and intentionally misleading voters in the financial impact statement. While these actions alone may not fully explain the demise of Amendment 4, their cumulative effect is likely responsible. This raises serious concerns about DeSantis’s unchecked authority to undermine the democratic process.
- Election Police
In 2022, DeSantis signed S.B. 524, creating a police force to “pursue voter fraud and other election crimes.” He has the authority to appoint “special officers” to investigate reported or potential election law violations. This law also creates an Office of Election Crimes and Security under the Florida Department of State to review fraud allegations and conduct preliminary investigations. While this bill may sound promising to some, opponents’ most significant fears became a reality this year.
In the final two months before the election, state police showed up at some Florida voters’ homes to question them about signing the petition that got Amendment 4 on the ballot. Some of these encounters were even posted on Facebook. DeSantis claims that police were investigating fraudulent petitions, explicitly stating that his team knows that petitions were submitted on “behalf of dead people.” There is no evidence to support DeSantis’s claims. It is even more troubling is that the state law deadline to challenge petition signatures has long passed. Additionally, a few weeks after police visited voters, the election crimes unit released a report accusing Floridians Protecting Freedom (FPF), a coalition working to pass Amendment 4, of “widespread” fraud and fining them $328,000, which FPF will contest. DeSantis has not provided evidence of the fraud, and the report makes sweeping generalizations. Most importantly, the state did not challenge the signatures when it had an opportunity in January.
- Spending State Funds
DeSantis and his administration have invested millions to oppose Amendment 4 through television advertisements, traveling throughout Florida with doctors, filing lawsuits against broadcasters showing pro-Amendment 4 ads, and improperly using funds from the Department of Education and the Agency for Health Care Administration. A closer examination of the spread of misinformation and the estimated total of $19 million in taxpayer funds spent to counter Amendment 4 (and Amendment 3) reveals that DeSantis and his administration have interfered with the people’s right to a fair and honest election.
Local and county officials are prohibited from using public funds for ads concerning ballot measures. Additionally, state officers and employees cannot leverage their titles and authority to comment on candidate elections. However, the spending statute 106.113 was revised in 2022, allowing DeSantis and his administration to evade liability. The exception now permits local and county officials to allocate public funds for ads about ballot measures as long as they report on official actions in an “accurate, fair, and impartial manner.” DeSantis made this argument in his defense of the advertising on the Agency for Health Care Administration’s website. Nonetheless, claims asserting that Amendment 4 “threatens women’s safety” and “will result in unregulated and unsafe abortions” are neither accurate nor impartial. Such statements are false and misleading, denying the reality of the current six-week ban and likely influencing the election outcome.
- Financial Impact Statement
A financial impact statement is required only for ballot initiatives brought by the people. This requirement is part of an extensive war that Florida’s legislature has waged against citizen initiatives. In 2020, the financial impact statement was enacted, requiring it to be printed in bold and capital letters on the ballot. The Financial Impact Estimating Conference (FIEC) must review the proposed amendment and analyze its financial impact on the local and state budgets, which the Florida Supreme Court must approve. While a financial impact statement should not be “inaccurate, ambiguous, misleading, unclear, [or] confusing,” as a Second Judicial Circuit Court in Leon County held regarding the initial draft that would accompany Amendment 4, one must wonder why it is even required in the first place, if not to cause confusion and prevent citizen initiatives from being enacted.
The version released by the FIEC was not a revision and disregarded the court’s directive. Instead, it was a wholly rewritten misrepresentation of the probable impacts of Amendment 4 on non-financial issues. Most troubling was the unlawful speculation regarding the potential outcomes of future litigation. Furthermore, the financial impact statement included claims that representatives from DeSantis’s office and the Florida House insisted on, which are entirely misleading. For example, it suggested that Medicaid-funded abortions could occur. Amendment 4’s initiative was aimed solely at ending Florida’s strict abortion ban and does not provide taxpayer funding for abortion. Despite this politically charged language meant to confuse and distract voters, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the revised statement. As noted by the dissent, this decision opens the possibility for future intervention by legislative leadership in the citizen initiated constitutional amendment process.
Conclusion
While the abovementioned actions violate Florida law and have generated litigation, the Florida courts have consistently denied claims. This has further authorized and enabled DeSantis and his administration to intimidate voters, misuse funds, spread falsehoods, and ultimately interfere with the right to a fair and honest election. DeSantis’s intentional weaponization of state agencies, the legislature, and arguably nearly every branch of state government to pursue his political agenda against Amendment 4 is not unprecedented and reflects a pattern of behavior seen on several fronts, such as his attack on Amendment 3 and against others who oppose his agenda. Therefore, we must do more to recognize and denounce DeSantis’s autocratic behavior if we want to preserve the remnants of democracy in Florida.
