Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has dedicated significant efforts to opposing Amendment 4, a citizen-led initiative in Florida seeking to establish the right to an abortion “before viability” in the state constitution.
DeSantis’s resistance to the amendment is not unexpected, as its approval by voters in the upcoming election would essentially nullify a six-week abortion ban he previously enacted, which took effect in May. However, his actions have raised concerns, even within his own administration. Recently, the general counsel for the Florida Department of Health resigned in protest over cease-and-desist letters he was instructed to send to television stations that aired an ad supporting the proposed amendment.
These letters are just one of many drastic measures the governor has taken to interfere with direct democracy this election season. DeSantis’s administration has turned to the courts to block not only the abortion amendment, which garnered support from 1 million Floridians to reach the ballot, but also another citizen-led campaign to legalize marijuana. The governor has utilized state resources to spread misinformation about both amendments and has reportedly spent over $19 million of public funds in the process.
Experts in democracy and voting rights see DeSantis’s actions as part of a larger anti-democratic strategy, citing voter restrictions he and his allies have implemented, including the creation of an office focused on investigating alleged election crimes. If DeSantis succeeds in quashing these amendments, critics fear he will continue unchecked. DeSantis’s office did not provide a comment when requested.
“There’s been a deliberate use of every state agency to advance his political agenda,” remarked Florida state Rep. Anna Eskamani, a Democrat from Orlando. “While the focus has been on Amendment 4, this behavior has been consistent across various fronts.”
Photo: Lynne Sladky/AP
Legal Challenges
The DeSantis administration and its allies have heavily relied on the legal system and courts to impede both the abortion ballot measure and the separate initiative to legalize marijuana, Amendment 3.
State law mandates that the attorney general seek approval from the Florida Supreme Court regarding the legal compliance of proposed constitutional amendments. In this process, the attorney general can also present arguments for or against the amendments. Attorney General Ashley Moody contended that both amendments did not meet legal standards and attempted to prevent them from appearing on the ballot. However, the court dismissed her claims. In April, the courtrejected Moody’s assertion that Amendment 3 was unclear and improperly drafted given its dual purpose of decriminalizing and commercializing recreational marijuana.
In another ruling that same month, the courtrejected Moody’s argument that voters might be confused by the scope of Amendment 4. The court emphasized that the proposed amendment’s broad language was clear in its summary. State law also mandates the inclusion of a financial impact statement alongside citizen-led initiatives on the ballot. Last year, a panel dominated by DeSantis loyalists produced a financial impact statement for Amendment 4, stating that the financial impact was “indeterminate,” as is customary.
This was the initial stance taken by the panel regarding Amendment 4.
The Florida Supreme Court allowed the six-week abortion ban to go into effect, prompting a judge to order a revision of the financial impact statement. The panel, consisting of representatives selected by DeSantis and other officials, released a revised statement in July. The new statement highlighted that the proposed amendment could lead to an increase in abortions, fewer live births, and additional costs to the state government and courts. Baker was the only dissenting member of the panel.
Advocates for Amendment 4 criticized the misleading language in the statement and accused DeSantis of manipulating the process for political gain. The ACLU of Florida condemned the statement and challenged it in court, arguing that it should have been a neutral explanation of the amendment’s impact on the budget.
Following the release of the revised statement, voters who signed the petition for Amendment 4 were visited by police, raising concerns about intimidation tactics. The Office of Election Crimes and Security opened over 40 investigations into petition gatherers, accusing them of fraud. The organization working to pass Amendment 4 was fined $328,000, leading to a series of lawsuits to contest the fine and challenge the validity of the ballot measure.
Despite the legal challenges, experts believe it is unlikely for a judge to remove the amendment from the ballot at this stage, as many people have already voted on it. The focus now is on ensuring the integrity of the democratic process and addressing concerns about voter intimidation and fraud allegations.
Photo: Ricardo Ramirez Buxeda/Orlando Sentinel/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
Unprecedented Ad Blitz
In addition to the legal challenges, the DeSantis administration has funneled millions of dollars from at least six state agencies’ budgets against the abortion and marijuana amendments. The state has racked up an estimated $19.3 million in bills, as documented in detail by Orlando-based investigative reporter Jason Garcia, based on recent contracts and purchase orders.
“We have never seen a governor direct state agencies to aggressively oppose a ballot measure that has qualified for the ballot,” said Daniel Smith, a University of Florida political scientist who studies ballot initiatives.
The administration has spent much of this money on advertisements — and in doing so, is benefiting from an ambiguity in Florida law, according to Morley. There is a clear prohibition on local and county officials spending public funds on ads about ballot measures, and another law against state officers and employees using their titles and authority to weigh in on candidate elections.
“But for political appointees at the state level on ballot initiatives? That’s a gray area,” Morley said.
The governor is taking full advantage of that grayness to pump out advertisements and other materials opposing Amendment 4, both explicitly and in ads that defend the current ban without mentioning the ballot initiative. In one recent ad, which was sponsored by four state agencies, an anti-abortion doctor who was appointed by DeSantis to Florida’s medical board tries to soften the state’s ban, which is one of the strictest in the country.
The ad is part of a “Florida Cares” campaign spearheaded by the Agency for Health Care Administration, which set up a website that explicitly opposes Amendment 4 and decries its supporters as deceptive “fearmongers.” In September, AHCA took out TV and radio ads defending the current ban, then launched paid ads on Facebook and Instagram in early October. AHCA’s social media ads on those platforms have been co-sponsored by the state departments of Children and Families, or DCF; Education; and Health.
In September, Floridians Protecting Freedom and the ACLU of Florida tried tochallenge the legality of AHCA’s media campaign, but a judgequickly tossed the lawsuit. In October, the Florida Supreme Court rejected a similar challenge.
Other departments are running anti-marijuana ads, which are styled as public service announcements and were rolled out as early voting started on Amendment 3. On Monday, DCF posted one such ad to X, which was co-sponsored by the Department of Health. On October 23, DCF, with the backing of the Health and Education departments, started running one such ad on Facebook and Instagram. The three departments co-sponsored another ad that was posted online on October 20, and the state Department of Transportation put out its own in mid-October.
Like AHCA, DCF has used its website and official social media presence to amplify DeSantis’s campaign against the two ballot measures, including bysharing videos of the governor railing against the proposed amendments at press conferences.
“We could sit here and have an entire article on all of the things that the government could be spending that money on that we actually need in the third most populous state in the country.”
The administration’s ad blitz has laid bare the state’s spending priorities. As Garcia reported, almost $3.9 million for recent DCF ads apparently came from the state’s opioid settlement fund, which by law is meant for programs that curb the opioid epidemic. (DCF did not respond to The Intercept’s questions about the ads or their funding source.)
“Honestly, we could sit here,” Sutherland said, “and have an entire article on all of the things that the government could be spending that money on that we actually need in the third most populous state in the country, and fighting to keep an abortion ban isn’t one of them.”
In addition to funding its own ad campaign, the DeSantis administration has also gone on the offensive against pro-Amendment 4 advertisements. In early October, the state Department of Health sent threatening letters to dozens of TV stations that carried a pro-Amendment 4 ad. The letter alleged that Floridians Protecting Freedom’s advertisement posed a “sanitary nuisance” because it supposedly misrepresented the state’s abortion ban. The Department of Health threatened the stations with criminal proceedings over the ad.
The amendment campaign sued to stop the DeSantis administration from blocking political speech through threats and the thin pretense of public health. It was in that litigation that the Department of Health’s former top lawyer filed an affidavit revealing that DeSantis’s closest legal advisers had drafted the letters without his input.
The Federal Communications Commission condemned the letters, and a federal judge quickly ordered the DeSantis administration to stop using the state’s legal apparatus to chill political speech. But Moody continued to defend the state’s authority to send similar threats, and the health department signed contracts worth up to $1.4 million with two law firms to represent the state regarding “false political advertisements.” On Tuesday, the judge extended the temporary order until after Election Day.
The ballot question known as “Amendment 4” in Florida seeks to restore the right to terminate pregnancies until the point of viability. This amendment will be on the same ballot as the US presidential vote in the state, which has enforced a ban on abortions after six weeks since May. This ban occurs before many women even realize they are pregnant.
Ashley Green, an organizer with Dream Defenders in Florida, has highlighted Governor DeSantis’s anti-democratic actions, which have been evident since his gubernatorial campaign six years ago. DeSantis has rigged the game at every level, according to Green.
In 2018, Green worked on a campaign to pass a constitutional amendment restoring voting rights to around 1.4 million Floridians with previous felony convictions. Despite winning the fight to pass the amendment, DeSantis’s victory tainted it, as the Republican-controlled state legislature passed laws diluting its effects in 2019.
DeSantis also established the Office of Election Crimes and Security in 2022, leading to concerns about voter intimidation and a culture of fear, particularly among newly enfranchised voters. The targeting of returning citizens for alleged voter fraud further exacerbated these fears.
Several new statutes impacting the voting process, including Senate Bill 7050, have disproportionately affected the voting rights of people of color in Florida. These laws have made voter registration drives essential for full participation in democracy, with organizations facing legal threats for their registration work.
Despite the challenges posed by DeSantis, it is crucial for people to show up and vote to prevent the erosion of democracy. The article was updated to mention a court order extending a temporary restraining order against the DeSantis administration until after Election Day. Can you please rewrite this sentence?
Source link
