Eleanor Finch
On November 5, 2024, Florida voters will decide on six proposed constitutional amendments, in addition to electing a U.S. President, 29 members of Congress, 120 members of the State House, and 20 of the 40-member Florida Senate. The six proposed constitutional amendments include legislatively proposed amendments and citizen-initiated amendments. Each amendment requires 60% of voter approval to pass.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Number of proposed constitutional amendments | 6 |
| Amendment 1 | Partisan Election of Members of District School Boards |
| Amendment 3 | Adult Personal Use of Marijuana |
| Amendment 4 | Supported by ACLU of Florida |
| Amendment 5 | Annual adjustment for inflation to the value of the homestead property tax exemption |
| Amendment 6 | Repeal a constitutional provision stating that “it is the policy of this state to provide for state-wide elections in which all qualified candidates may compete effectively” |
| Voting majority required for an amendment to pass | 60% |
| Election date | November 5, 2024 |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Legalising marijuana for adult recreational use
Florida voters rejected Amendment 3, which would have legalised marijuana for adult recreational use, in the November 2024 ballot. The amendment fell short of the required 60% supermajority vote for approval, receiving only 55.8% support.
History of Cannabis Legalisation in Florida
In 2014, supporters of a constitutional amendment to legalise medical cannabis began collecting signatures to place the issue on the 2014 ballot. In June 2014, Governor Rick Scott signed the "Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act" into law, allowing the use of low-THC, high-CBD cannabis oil for qualifying medical conditions. In 2016, medical marijuana was adopted by Florida voters with 71% support. Initiatives to legalise recreational marijuana were circulated in Florida for the 2016, 2018, 2020, and 2022 ballots, but none qualified.
The Case for Legalisation
Proponents of Amendment 3 argued that legalisation would have several benefits, including:
- Increased state revenue from taxes on marijuana sales.
- Job creation within the marijuana industry.
- Reduced burdens on the criminal justice system, especially for minor possession offences.
- Curbing the state's black market, channelling revenue into legitimate, regulated businesses.
- Removing power from Central American drug cartels and reducing gang violence.
- Ensuring marijuana users have access to a safe, regulated product.
Opposition to Legalisation
Opponents of Amendment 3 expressed concerns about the potential negative impacts of legalisation, including:
- Public health risks.
- Increased criminal activity, traffic accidents, homelessness, and hospitalizations.
- Complications for law enforcement.
- Impaired driving and negative effects on youth.
- The state "starting to smell like marijuana".
The 13th Amendment: Freedom from Slavery in the US
You may want to see also
Changing school board elections to partisan
Florida voters rejected the legislatively proposed Amendment 1, which would have changed school board elections from nonpartisan to partisan. The ballot measure was defeated as it needed to receive 60% of the votes to be approved, but only received 55%.
The amendment would have required members of a district school board to be elected in a partisan election, with candidates nominated through partisan primaries and featured on the ballot with partisan labels, such as Democrat and Republican. This would have applied to elections held on or after the November 2026 general election.
Supporters of the amendment argued that it would increase transparency and provide voters with more information about candidates. They believed that it would be helpful for voters to know the party affiliation of school board candidates, especially in a state like Florida, where Republicans hold a majority in the legislature.
However, critics of the amendment warned that it would harm the education of children by injecting state and national-level politics into local decision-making. They also argued that it would be undemocratic, as independent voters would lose the ability to shape the future of their local school systems. Additionally, some critics believed that the amendment was not about transparency but about making school board elections more contentious and politicizing education in the state.
The rejection of Amendment 1 by Florida voters indicates a desire to keep school board elections focused on educational issues rather than partisan politics and to maintain stability and consistency in the state's education system.
Amending the Constitution: A Deliberate Process
You may want to see also
Adjusting homestead property tax exemption for inflation
On November 5, 2024, Florida voters decided on six proposed constitutional amendments. One of these was Amendment 5, the Annual Inflation Adjustment for Homestead Property Tax Exemption Value Amendment.
The amendment proposed an annual inflation adjustment for the value of the homestead property tax exemption. In Florida, property tax rates are set by counties, school districts, cities, and special districts. Homes in Florida are assessed at just value (market value), minus the homestead exemption. The homestead exemption reduces the taxable value of a property. Every primary residence is eligible for a $25,000 homestead exemption, which exempts that amount from all taxes. Another $25,000 homestead exemption is applied on a homestead's value between $50,000 and $75,000, which exempts that amount from all taxes except school district taxes.
Amendment 5 did not change the basic homestead exemption but could reduce taxes paid to all governmental agencies except schools on the exemption that now excludes valuations between $50,000 and $75,000 of a home's value. If inflation were to increase, taxes on that other part would decrease unless governing boards raise tax rates. This could result in reduced revenue for police, fire, roads, parks, and other municipal and county services.
Supporters of Amendment 5 argued that it would provide property tax relief for homeowners, especially given that the buying power of the $25,000 tax break had dropped since Florida voters approved the additional homestead exemption in 2008. They also pointed out that without adjusting for inflation, homeowners lose money.
Opponents of the amendment warned that it could reduce the tax base for local governments, potentially giving them fewer tax dollars to provide programs and services. State economists estimated that the amendment would cost local governments across Florida a total of $23 million in the first year of implementation, steadily increasing to $112 million by the fifth year.
Amendment History: Second Amendment's Constitutional Past
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Protecting the right to hunt and fish
Florida Amendment 2, also known as the Right to Hunt and Fish Amendment, was on the ballot in Florida as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 5, 2024. The amendment sought to provide a state constitutional right to hunt and fish, declaring these activities as the preferred means for "responsibly managing and controlling fish and wildlife".
The amendment faced opposition from various groups, including wildlife conservation and animal protection organizations. Opponents argued that the amendment was a threat to wildlife and could lead to a resurgence of destructive and inhumane practices. They also questioned the need for such an amendment, as Florida law already protects the right to hunt and fish. The phrase "traditional methods" was particularly contentious, with critics interpreting it as a potential return to prohibited methods such as steel traps, spearfishing, and gill nets. There were also concerns about interference with private property rights by trespassing hunters.
Supporters of the amendment, including State Rep. Lauren Melo (R-80), framed it as a way to protect Florida's heritage, economic interests, and rich traditions. They argued that the amendment would prevent extremists from taking away the right to hunt and fish, which has been under threat in other states. Additionally, they highlighted the economic impact of hunting and fishing, which bring billions of dollars to the state annually.
The amendment received the required 60% vote for approval, and hunting and fishing are now constitutionally protected rights in Florida. While this outcome has reassured those who were concerned about potential threats to their ability to hunt and fish, critics worry about the potential impact on wildlife conservation and management. The future implementation of the amendment and its specific regulations will be closely monitored in the 2025 legislative session.
In conclusion, Florida's Amendment 2 has sparked debate between those who view it as a necessary protection of their cultural and economic rights and those who fear it will jeopardize wildlife conservation and private property rights. The amendment's approval has elevated hunting and fishing to constitutional rights in Florida, and the coming years will reveal the full extent of its impact on the state and its natural resources.
Third Amendment: Understanding the Constitution's Amendment
You may want to see also
Providing Medicaid coverage for eligible low-income adults
Florida's Medicaid program provides medical coverage to low-income individuals and families. The state and federal governments share the cost of the program. While Medicaid primarily serves low-income individuals, it also covers other groups, including children, pregnant women, and the elderly. Florida sets its own income limits for qualification, which can exceed the minimum levels set by the federal government. For instance, Florida's Medicaid/CHIP eligibility standards include a built-in 5% income disregard, with varying percentages of the federal poverty level (FPL) for different groups. Children under one year old are eligible for Medicaid at 211% of the FPL, while children under 19 can qualify for Florida Healthy Kids (CHIP) with monthly premiums if their household income is between 138% and 200% of the FPL. Pregnant women qualify at 196% of the FPL and continue to receive coverage for 12 months after giving birth. Adults with minor children can qualify at 26% of the FPL.
Additionally, Florida offers the Medically Needy Program, which allows individuals who are not eligible for full Medicaid due to income or asset limits to receive coverage after meeting a monthly "share of cost." This program is based on household size and family income. Florida's Medicaid program also covers children's health check-ups, dental screenings, immunizations, and other medical services. Pregnant women who do not meet the citizenship requirements for Medicaid can apply for Emergency Medical Assistance for Non-Citizens or Presumptively Eligible Pregnant Women (PEPW), which provides temporary coverage for prenatal care.
Florida's Medicaid eligibility criteria include factors such as identity, Florida residence, citizenship, or eligible immigration status. Income and, for certain coverages, asset information are also considered. Applicants can apply online at ACCESS Florida or fill out a paper form. The application process includes determining eligibility for food or cash assistance in addition to Medicaid.
In 2013, the federal government approved an amendment for statewide expansion of managed care, renaming Medicaid Reform as Managed Medical Assistance (MMA). This amendment aimed to improve the quality of care and save costs through a smaller network of providers. However, Florida is one of the states that have refused Medicaid expansion, resulting in a coverage gap for an estimated 388,000 residents. Advocates are working to get a Medicaid expansion ballot measure on the 2026 Florida state ballot, but it faces significant challenges, including the requirement for nearly a million voter signatures and certification by the Florida Supreme Court.
Amending the Constitution: When and How?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Florida voting on constitutional amendments takes place on November 5, 2024.
Floridians will vote on six proposed constitutional amendments.
Amendment 3, titled "Adult Personal Use of Marijuana," would allow adults 21 years old and older to possess, purchase, or use a limited amount of marijuana.
