While Abortion and Marijuana Steal the Spotlight, What Are the Other Ballot Amendments?

As the citizen-led abortion and marijuana amendments wholly hog the Floridian spotlight, four other Republican-backed ballot initiatives have fallen by the public wayside despite having the same ability as the controversial Amendments 3 and 4 to reshape the state constitution.

Here's what to know:

Amendment 1: partisan school board elections

Opposed by Democrats, Amendment 1 repeals part of the state constitution keeping school board races non-partisan, meaning that if passed, candidates would have to disclose their political party when campaigning for office.

Republican backers have argued that because school board elections have become increasingly partisan in everything but name, this Amendment will be the cherry on top in terms of transparency for voters, allowing them to more clearly see where their representatives stand on divisive education issues. The politicized nature of the races, once considered unnoteworthy, picked up in 2022 when Gov. Ron DeSantis threw his weight behind 30 school board candidates statewide.

Almost all of them won. (Though when he tried the same move this year and just six of his 23 endorsed candidates won outright, it kicked off a cascade of doubts over how much power the Governor still held over the reddening state).

Meanwhile, Democrats and teacher unions are against the Amendment, believing that it would inject politics over policies in schools, detracting attention from students' education.

"School board races are about meeting the needs of students, parents, and educators. These are needs that do not change with a political party because they are grounded in steadfast principles," Scott Mazur, President of the Leon Classroom Teachers Association, told The Floridian. "With recent culture wars, we have seen unproductive outcomes that do not address the real issues impacting the students of our state. It's time we focused on the kids and kept the political party noise where it belongs, not in our community schools."

Florida historically had partisan school board races until 1998 when voters approved an amendment removing the politicization. The constitution remained that way until 2023 when the Republican-dominated Legislature, in step with the Governor's foray into school board races months earlier, drew up and passed the proposed amendment.

If the Amendment is approved by 60% of voters, Florida will join Alabama, Connecticut, Louisiana, and Pennsylvania in partisan school board races.

Amendment 2: the right to hunt and fish

In language that some environmental groups have labeled as concerning, Amendment 2 aims to enshrine fishing and hunting in the state constitution as a "public right" and "preferred means" of managing wildlife populations.

The initiative was sponsored in the Legislature soon after Oregon in 2022 tried to pass a ballot initiative criminalizing hunters by charging them with animal abuse. Florida, supporters say, fully intends to protect the rights of hunters and fishermen.

On the other hand, detractors point out that the amendment promises to preserve the "traditional methods" of fishing and hunting. They worry that language will revitalize the ancient, banned method of gillnetting, which was outlawed in Florida in 1995 due to overfishing and the high, accidental death toll of any animal—big or small—that swam into it.

"This dangerous and misleading amendment will strip Florida citizens of their power to protect and conserve wild animals," the World Animal Protection said in a statement. "It’s designed to trick voters into allowing some of the cruelest forms of hunting and prevent citizens, scientists, and agencies from protecting wildlife in the future."

Proponents, however, insist that nothing in the amendment will override current Florida law, with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission telling The Floridian in a prepared statement, "Both our conservation and legal teams have stated that the current language proposed in Amendment 2 does not change or alter the existing net ban or the ability for it to be enforced. 'Traditional methods' do not undo regulation, nor reset FWC's regulatory authority," said FWC Chairman Rodney Barreto.

"The FWC maintains regulatory authority over all fish and wildlife in our state. Seasons, bag limits, methods, and licensing are still in place and will continue to govern time, place and manner should Amendment 2 pass," he added. While the FWC did not openly endorse the Amendment, the statement directs questions to the email address for the Vote Yes on 2 Florida PAC, which has already raised over $900,000 in contributions.

One of the largest, and most notable, contributors is Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson, who donated a whopping $100,000 to the PAC. His contribution alone dwarfs the total amount raised by the opposition PAC, "NoTo2.org", which has raked in just over $60,000 total.

Amendment 5: homestead exemption inflation adjustment

If passed, Amendment 5 would alter Florida's homestead exemption law so it can be adjusted annually for inflation, which began to rampantly plague Floridians in the pandemic's aftermath. Essentially, the GOP-pushed initiative hopes to save homeowners more on their tax bills by parallelly increasing their tax breaks as the cost of living increases.

Breaking it down more, a homestead's property taxes are calculated by subtracting the fixed, $25,000 homestead exemption from the home's market value. However, supporters argue that high inflation rates coupled with a fixed exemption end up costing homeowners large amounts in property taxes.

So, they have proposed Amendment 5, which removes the fixed exemption status from current Florida law and replaces it with an annually adjusted exemption depending on inflation, which means that the $25,000 amount could increase or decrease depending on inflation. For example: if the inflation rate is 8%, the value of the exemption would increase from $25,000 to $27,000.

Democrats, however, argue that while the Amendment may save homeowners money on taxes, it will hurt other Floridians because municipalities will have to make up for the missing revenue, WUSF reported.

"If there is an increase in taxes, it's going to impact everyone, including renters, who would not benefit from the homestead exemption. So, that's a point that people really need to understand,” said Sen. Geraldine Thompson. She explained that local governments may raise millage rates to cover the gap widened by Amendment 5, and thus landlords may punt their higher taxes over to their renters.

The Amendment was borne from skyrocketed inflation following the pandemic, with inflation peaking in the U.S. at 9.1% in June 2022. As of April 2024, the country was back down to 3.2%—though Florida had the highest rate in the nation at almost 4%.

Amendment 6: removes public financing options for candidates for governor or cabinet

Amendment 6 aims to revamp Florida's public financing options for statewide candidates by removing them altogether.

Currently, Florida allows candidates who agree to certain spending limits to use public money; this is usually more common for newer candidates and/or those without a trove of personal wealth to dive into. For example, under this law, a gubernatorial candidate whose campaign qualifies for public money can't spend more than $2 per registered voter unless another candidate who doesn't use public money blows past that limit.

Backed by the GOP, Amendment 6 removes that option from the law entirely because supporters believe that money could be put to other and better uses.

"This is money coming out of general revenue and I believe we should put the question back to the voters to see if they would like us to spend general revenue on things other than advertising for statewide office,” Sen. Travis Hutson, the amendment's sponsor, said during a Legislative committee hearing. He pointed out that over $13 million of taxpayer dollars went to gubernatorial candidates and three state Cabinet positions in 2022, the Miami Herald reported.

Critics, however, worry this will only serve to benefit wealthy candidates in the future because those without the ability to subsidize their campaigns will struggle to pay for ads, mailers, or organizations that may support them.

In 1998, Floridians voted for a constitutional amendment creating the public financing option to help gubernatorial and state cabinet candidates subsidize their campaigns. The Florida Legislature, however, in 2010 introduced an amendment removing the public financing option—it failed.

14 years later, they're trying again.