Amendment #6 Repeal of Public Campaign Financing Requirement

October 16, 2024

Ballot Language:

Proposing the repeal of the provision in the State Constitution which requires public financing for campaigns of candidates for elective statewide office who agree to campaign spending limits.

 

Synopsis:

Presently, there is a right to public financing under Section 7 of Article VI of the Florida Constitution, which requires that the state provide a public campaign financing program for candidates for statewide office (Governor and Cabinet).

 

If proposed Amendment 6 passes, it would repeal the right to public financing for candidates running for state-wide offices. Implementing legislation would also come into effect to repeal the Florida Election Campaign Financing Act.

 

Florida enacted a public campaign financing law in 1986 and in 1998 Floridians added it to the state constitution with 64% of the vote. The constitution currently requires that candidates for governor, attorney general, chief financial officer, and commissioner of agriculture are able to access public campaign financing if they agree to spending limits. Presently, Florida law (106.31 F.S.), provides for public financing for campaigns and the stated “purpose of public campaign financing is to make candidates more responsive to the voters of the State of Florida and as insulated as possible from special interest groups.” This statute would be repealed if this amendment passes.

 

More specifically, under the current public campaign financing program, candidates can access matching funds for contributions made by individual Florida residents who are contributing $250 or less. To qualify for these matching funds, a candidate must:

●      not be running unopposed

●      agree to limit their total spending to $2.00 for each registered Florida voter (for gubernatorial candidates) or $1.00 for each registered Florida voter (for cabinet candidates)

●      raise $150,000 (for gubernatorial candidates) or $100,000 (for cabinet candidates)

●      limit loans or contributions from the candidate’s personal funds to $25,000 and limit contributions from political parties to $250,000

●      report campaign financing data to the division of elections and submit to a post-election financial audit.

 

In 2022, the spending limit for gubernatorial candidates receiving public campaign financing was $30.29 million ($2.00 per registered voter) and the limit for cabinet candidates was $15.14 million ($1.00 per registered voter). This amendment would remove these spending limits. Actual spending in 2022 for public campaign financing was $13 million, roughly equivalent to 0.01% of the state’s $109.9 billion 2022-2023 budget.

 

This amendment was referred to the ballot by the 2024 Florida Legislature (Senate: 85 Yes to 15 No; House: 82 Yes to 29 No). In 2010, the Legislature referred this same amendment to the ballot and it received 52.49% of the vote, falling short of the 60% required for passage.

 

Opponents of this amendment, including Common Cause and the League of Women Voters of Florida, state that the matching fund program gives small-dollar donors a greater voice and encourages candidates to seek support from broad groups of voters. Further, if the program is repealed, wealthy donors and special interest groups would no longer be limited in the amounts they can contribute to these candidates. In addition, public financing enables candidates who are not wealthy or who have more limited access to financing to be able to run for office, leading to a more diverse pool of candidates. 

 

Supporters of this amendment, including the majority of the Florida Legislature, state that this financing, which comes from Florida’s general fund, could be used for other programs such as education, health care or housing.

 

A Yes Vote Would...: Repeal Section 7, Article VI from the Florida Constitution (passed in 1998) and repeal the Florida Election Campaign Financing Act, ending Florida’s public campaign financing program and spending limits for publicly-funded candidates for Governor, Attorney General, Chief Financial Officer, and Commissioner of Agriculture. 

 

A No Vote Would...: Leave the current public campaign financing program, including spending limits for publicly-funded candidates, in place.

Feb 26 Rivers Coalition Meeting

March 2, 2026
Gil Smart (VoteWater) and Eve Samples (Friends of the Everglades) updated the February 26th Rivers Coalition meeting on how this year’s legislative session in Tallahassee was going as far as environmental issues are concerned. It wasn’t good news. Gil warned us last month: “If last year’s legislative session’s theme was facilitating sprawl, this year’s is sprawl on steroids.” And since the Republican-controlled legislature can pass anything it wants, at this point the only possible changes in the disturbingly-large number of bad bills in the pipeline are tweaks to the bills. With one possible exception. Some North Florida Republican legislators have voiced concerns about the Everglades water management process. South Florida Republicans haven’t yet, but if they notice the desertions they may be persuadable. The bills are HB 701 and SB 1120. Gil’s bottom line: “Right now the worst bills are all the pro-growth bills like ‘Blue Ribbon Projects’; House Bill 299 is on the House floor but Senate Bill 354 still has to clear the Rules Committee this week, and in both cases it would be helpful for people to reach out to our local legislators and tell them to oppose these bills.” The bad news from Tallahassee doesn’t stop there. Florida Forever, the state’s conservation and recreation land acquisition program which is funded by doc stamps, started in 2001 at $300 million/year. Funding was cut to zero during the Great Recession but rebounded to $100 million in 2018-2023 and then came all the way back up to $270 million last year. Alas; this year the Governor requested only $115 million. Even worse, the Senate wants to appropriate just $35 million for Florida Forever. The House’s number: A Big Fat Zero. Meanwhile, Lake Okeechobee hasn’t seen any serious effects from the drought thus far. It’s currently at 12.26 feet, and it would have to drop below 11 feet for 80 days before triggering any real concerns. The main problem with the lake right now Is actually to the west: The Caloosahatchee River needs fresh water, but the low lake level is preventing it from getting enough. At least the drought is giving the St. Lucie Estuary a breather from discharge threats. -- Walter Deemer, LWVMC Rivers Coalition Representative

January Meeting

February 2, 2026
The featured presenter at the January 22nd Rivers Coalition meeting was Army Corps of Engineers Jacksonville District Commander Col. Brandon Bowman. He reported: * The Lake Okeechobee management effort is going well. The lake level is currently a near-ideal 13.01 feet. In addition, following last summer’s Lake Recovery Operation, Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (“sea grass”) now covers 20,000 acres of the lake bottom compared with just 3000 acres beforehand. * All stakeholders but one are having their needs met at the present time: The Caloosahatchee River west of the lake isn’t receiving nearly as much fresh water as it needs. * The biggest threat to the St. Lucie Estuary right now isn’t discharges from Lake Okeechobee; it’s polluted runoff flowing into the headwaters of the North Fork. The Corps has several projects underway to address that issue. * The Everglades restoration effort continues moving forward, albeit at a seemingly-glacial pace. To wit: Col. Bowman was happy to announce that the Everglades Agricultural Area projects would be completed five years ahead of schedule – but that still won’t be until the end of 2029. * The big C-44 Reservoir, just north of the St. Lucie Canal in western Martin County, is a key part of the management plan. The reservoir will store runoff and remove phosphorus before discharging the water. Unfortunately, it hasn’t been able to operate at capacity; there’s a seepage issue at one end, and it can only be filled to ten feet compared with its designed fifteen-foot level. The Corps doesn’t think the reservoir will be able to be filled to capacity until 2032. * Finally, Coalition members expressed a great deal of alarm about the Corps’ Engineering Research and Development Center’s plan to develop treatments to remove peroxide and phosphorus from the water. The concern stems from the ERDC’s need to test those treatments, and they have to do the testing in the St. Lucie Canal. There was widespread fear that this could produce harmful results in our canal and our estuary. On the legislative front, Gil Smart, the Friends of the Everglades monitor of the goings-on in Tallahassee, shook his head: “If last year’s legislative session’s theme was facilitating sprawl, this year’s is sprawl on steroids.” A disturbingly large number of bills have been filed that will allow more and more development projects to be subject only to administrative approval rather than, as now, being required to go through a public review process. If these bills pass they will drastically reduce public input on some very big and impactful development proposals -- and completely eliminate it in some cases. As these and other really bad bills get rammed towards the finish line, you will undoubtably be receiving calls for action from your favorite environmental organization. Keep an eye on your inbox. -- Walter Deemer, LWVMC Rivers Coalition Representative

September 2025

September 28, 2025
The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.