Florida Amendment 1, Repeal of Public Financing for Statewide Campaigns Amendment (2010)

Florida Amendment 1
Election date November 2, 2010
Topic Campaign finance
Status Defeated
Type Legislatively referred constitutional amendment	Origin State legislature

Florida Amendment 1 was on the ballot as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in Florida on November 2, 2010. It was defeated.

A “yes” vote supported repealing the state constitutional provision that provides for public financing of campaigns for those running for elective statewide office who agree to campaign spending limits.

A “no” vote opposed repealing the state constitutional provision that provides for public financing of campaigns for those running for elective statewide office who agree to campaign spending limits.

Supermajority requirement: A 60% vote was required for the approval of the amendment

Election results

Florida Amendment 1
Result		Votes	Prozentualer Anteil
Yes		2,587,543	52.49%
No		2,342,137	47.51%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Amendment 1 was as follows:

"

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

”

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.

Constitutional changes

The measure would have repealed Article 6 Section 7 of the Florida Constitution. The following text would have been repealed:

Campaign Spending Limits and Funding of Campaigns for Elective State-Wide Office It is the policy of this state to provide for state-wide elections in which all qualified candidates may compete effectively. A method of public financing for campaigns for state-wide office shall be established by law. Spending limits shall be established for such campaigns for candidates who use public funds in their campaigns. The legislature shall provide funding for this provision. General law implementing this paragraph shall be at least as protective of effective competition by a candidate who uses public funds as the general law in effect on January 1, 1998.

Media editorial positions

Support

• The Northwest Daily News: "The public financing requirement was a bad idea all along. The Daily News recommends a yes vote to repeal it...The public money spent on individual races may not sound like much, but cumulatively it’s quite a bit... That’s the practical problem with public campaign financing. There’s a moral problem as well. Florida taxpayers are free to support the political candidates of their choice by donating money, volunteering to canvass neighborhoods and so on. They should not be required to support, with their taxes, the campaigns of candidates they don’t like or know nothing about," said the editorial board.

• The Gainesville Sun: "State Constitutional Amendment 1, on the Nov. 2 ballot, will repeal public campaign financing. We recommend voters do just that and end this expensive, failed experiment."

• The Panama City News Herald: "According to the Collins Center on Public Policy in Tallahassee, Florida since 1994 has spent more than $27 million of public money on campaigns for governor and other statewide offices. That’s money that could have been better spent than on politics. We have a fundamental philosophical argument against public financing of campaigns: Taxpayers should not be forced to financially support candidates not of their choosing."

• The Naples Daily News: "Campaign donations are a form of free speech. Bring on the donors — and let public records show voters who they are and how much they give. Also, let voters know which candidates are willing to accept gifts from which donors."

• The Florida Times-Union: "This amendment wouldn’t require lawmakers to cut off public financing. It would merely allow the Legislature to stop giving money to politicians any time it determines the state has more pressing needs. What’s wrong with that?"

Opposition

• The St. Petersburg Times: "Until there is clarity from the U.S. Supreme Court, there is no reason for Florida to take campaign financing out of its Constitution. The campaign finance system is broken, but this is not the way to fix it. The Times recommends a "no vote on Amendment 1."

• The Palm Beach Post: "The public put public financing into the Florida Constitution in 1998 to keep political power from being sold to whoever has the deepest pockets. For the same reason, the public on Nov. 2 should keep public financing in the Constitution by voting NO on Amendment 1."

• The Bradenton Herald: "We recommend a no vote on Amendment 1. Higher courts should decide the fate of this significant campaign finance reform."

• The Pensacola News Journal: "With the growing flood of special interest campaign cash, it might be quixotic to hold out hope for candidates who will take public money in return for agreeing to limit their campaign spending. We can always hope."

• Florida Today: "Vote “no” on Amendment 1, keeping it on the books and demanding lawmakers roll back the spending limits and enact bolder campaign finance reforms to keep elections open and transparent."

• The Orlando Sentinel: "We like the idea of leveling the playing field to help candidates who aren't as beholden to big money. We recommend a NO vote on Amendment 1, which would keep public campaign financing in the constitution," said the editorial board.

• The South Florida Sun-Sentinel: "Public campaign finance may turn out to be a waste of taxpayer money. Or, it may prove to be the one thing that offers a fair chance at a run for office to good candidates who otherwise would have no chance because they do not have huge personal fortunes. If need be, this issue can easily be returned to the ballot, perhaps in two years. For now, let's give it more time."

• The Ledger: "Public campaign funding is a system that should be reformed, not repealed. The Ledger recommends a No vote on Amendment 1."

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the Florida Constitution

A 60% vote is required during one legislative session for the Florida State Legislature to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. That amounts to a minimum of 51 votes in the Florida House of Representatives and 18 votes in the Florida State Senate, assuming no vacancies. Amendments do not require the governor's signature to be referred to the ballot. Amendments on the ballot must be approved by 60% of voters to pass.

See also

2010 Measures

• 2010 Measures
• Campaign finance on the ballot
• 2010 legislative sessions

Florida

• Florida ballot measures
• Florida ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Florida Division of Elections, "Initiatives / Amendments / Revisions Database"