Florida Amendment 4, Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative (2018)

Florida Amendment 4: Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative
Election date November 6, 2018
Topic Suffrage
Status On the ballot
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin Citizens

Florida Amendment 4, the Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative, is on the ballot in Florida as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018.

A "yes" vote supports this amendment to automatically restore the right to vote for people with prior felony convictions, except those convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense, upon completion of their sentences, including prison, parole, and probation.

A "no" vote opposes this amendment to automatically restore the right to vote for people with prior felony convictions, except those convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense, upon completion of their sentences, including prison, parole, and probation.

In Florida, a constitutional amendment requires a 60 percent vote of voters to be approved.

Overview

What would Florida Amendment 4 change?

Amendment 4 was designed to automatically restore the right to vote for people with prior felony convictions, except those convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense, upon completion of their sentences. Sentences include prison, parole, and probation. As of 2018, people with prior felonies never regain the right to vote in Florida, until and unless a state board restores an individual's voting rights. Under Gov. Rick Scott's (R) administration, convicted felons must wait five or seven years, depending on the type of offense, after the completion of their sentences to request that the board consider the restoration of their voting and other civil rights.

What is the current felon voting law in Florida?

As of 2018, Florida is one of four states where convicted felons do not regain the right to vote, until and unless a state officer or board restores an individual's voting rights. This felon voting law was part of the original Florida Constitution of 1968—the state constitution active in 2018—as well as the state constitutions of 1885 and 1868. On February 1, 2018, U.S. District Court Judge Mark Walker ruled Florida's process for the restoration of voting abilities for felons unconstitutional, saying it violated the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment.

State of the ballot measure campaigns

As of June 4, 2018, the support campaign, Floridians for a Fair Democracy, raised $5.51 million, including $1.72 million from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Sponsors spent $5.08 per required signature on petition gathering and verification. As of June 4, 2018, there was no committee registered in opposition to the initiative. However, there was a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, Floridians For A Sensible Voting Rights Policy, that opposed the ballot initiative.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title is as follows:

“

Voting Restoration Amendment

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary is as follows:

“

This amendment restores the voting rights of Floridians with felony convictions after they complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation. The amendment would not apply to those convicted of murder or sexual offenses, who would continue to be permanently barred from voting unless the Governor and Cabinet vote to restore their voting rights on a case by case basis.

”

Constitutional changes

See also: Article VI, Florida Constitution

The measure would amend Section 4 of Article VI of the Florida Constitution. The following underlined text would be added:

Article VI, Section 4. Disqualifications.— (a) No person convicted of a felony, or adjudicated in this or any other state to be mentally incompetent, shall be qualified to vote or hold office until restoration of civil rights or removal of disability. Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, any disqualification from voting arising from a felony conviction shall terminate and voting rights shall be restored upon completion of all terms of sentence including parole or probation. (b) No person convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense shall be qualified to vote until restoration of civil rights. (c) No person may appear on the ballot for re-election to any of the following offices: (1) Florida representative, (2) Florida senator, (3) Florida Lieutenant governor, (4) any office of the Florida cabinet, (5) U.S. Representative from Florida, or (6) U.S. Senator from Florida if, by the end of the current term of office, the person will have served (or, but for resignation, would have served) in that office for eight consecutive years.

Support

Floridians for a Fair Democracy is leading the campaign in support of the initiative. Desmond Meade, chair of the campaign committee, is also president of the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition.

Supporters

Officials

• U.S. Rep. Charlie Crist (D-13)
• Former U.S. Rep. Gwen Graham (D-2), gubernatorial candidate
• Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum (D), gubernatorial candidate
• Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine (D), gubernatorial candidate
• Christopher King (D), businessman and gubernatorial candidate

Organizations

• Florida Rights Restoration Coalition
• American Civil Liberties Union
• Our Revolution
• New Approach PAC

Arguments

Floridians for a Fair Democracy, the committee sponsoring the initiative, stated:

“

Americans believe in second chances. We need to make sure that Florida Law does too. Nearly 1.5 million people in Florida are permanently excluded from voting because of a prior felony conviction. Florida is one of only four states that still has a system that excludes so many people from voting. These are our family members, friends, and neighbors who have already repaid their debts to society. Now is the time to restore the ability to vote to Floridians who have earned the opportunity to participate in and give back to their communities.

”

Opposition

Floridians For A Sensible Voting Rights Policy was organized as a 501(c)(4) nonprofit to advocate for and against voting policies related to the group's mission and oppose the ballot initiative. According to the group's website, Floridians For A Sensible Voting Rights Policy could register as a ballot initiative political committee at a later date. Richard Harrison, an attorney, is the group's executive director.

Opponents

Officials

• Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam (R), gubernatorial candidate
• Rep. Richard Corcoran (R-37)

Arguments

Richard Harrison, executive director of Floridians For A Sensible Voting Rights Policy, said:

“

Other than murder and sexual felonies, it [the initiative] treats all other felonies as though they were the same. It's a blanket, automatic restoration of voting rights. If it gets on the ballot, your only choice will be an all or nothing, yes or no vote on the amendment. If it passes, neither you nor anyone else will ever be allowed to consider the specifics of the crime or the post-release history of the criminal before that new voter registration card is issued.

”

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Florida ballot measures

Total campaign contributions as of June 4, 2018
Support:	$5,610,109.15
Opposition:	$0.00

As of June 4, 2018, there was one ballot measure committee, Floridians for a Fair Democracy, registered in support of the measure. The committee had raised $5.61 million and expended $5.31 million.

The top contributor, as of June 4, 2018, to the support campaign was the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which contributed $1.72 million.

As of June 4, 2018, there were no committees registered in opposition to the initiative.

Support

The contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of the initiative were current as of June 4, 2018.

Committees in support of Amendment 4 Updated as of June 4, 2018 Supporting committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures Floridians for a Fair Democracy $5,080,596.86 $529,512.29 $4,775,884.53 Total $5,080,596.86 $529,512.29 $4,775,884.53

Totals in support Total raised: $5,610,109.15 Total spent: $5,305,396.82

Donors

The following were the donors who contributed more than $100,000 to the support committee as of June 4, 2018:

Donor	Cash	In-kind	Total
American Civil Liberties Union	$1,628,316.00	$87,383.06	$1,715,699.06
Laurie Michaels	$800,000.00	$0.00	$800,000.00
Daniel Lewis	$500,000.00	$0.00	$500,000.00
The Advocacy Fund	$375,000.00	$0.00	$375,000.00
Civic Participation Action Fund	$300,000.00	$0.00	$300,000.00
New Approach PAC	$200,000.00	$0.00	$200,000.00
Organize Florida	$120,000.00	$0.00	$120,000.00
Gamechanger	$119,000.00	$0.00	$119,000.00

Methodology

Ballotpedia calculates campaign finance based on the political committees registered to support or oppose a measure and independent expenditures, when relevant and available. When a committee is registered to support or oppose multiple measures it is impossible to distinguish between funds used for one measure and funds used for the other.

In calculating campaign finance for supporting and opposing committees, Ballotpedia does not count donations or expenditures from one ballot measure committee to another since that would amount to counting the same money twice. This method is used to give the most accurate information concerning how much funding was actually provided to and spent by the opposing and supporting campaigns.

Ballotpedia subtracts out committee-to-committee contributions—both cash donations and in-kind contributions. Because of this, it is possible for certain committees to have negative contributions. Negative contributions mean that a committee has provided more contributions to other committees than it has received. If expenditures exceed contributions, it means the committee has accrued unpaid bills, has unpaid or unforgiven loans, or has contributed a certain amount of in-kind services to another committee.

Ballotpedia provides information about all reported in-kind donations. In-kind contributions are also counted toward total expenditures since, with in-kind gifts, the contribution and services or goods are provided simultaneously. Ballotpedia does this to provide the most accurate information about the cash-on-hand of supporting and opposing campaigns.

Polls

See also: 2018 ballot measure polls

Florida Amendment 4 (2018)
Poll	Support	Oppose	Undecided	Margin of Error	Sample Size
Public Opinion Research Lab at University of North Florida 1/29/2018 - 2/4/2018	71.0%	22.0%	6.0%	+/-3.9	619
Note: A "0%" finding means the candidate was not a part of the poll. The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Media editorials

Support

• Florida Today said: "We expect convicted felons to fulfill their sentences, pay their dues to society and live law-abiding lives. Yet, we deprive them of a fundamental right in reintegrating them into society: voting."
• The New York Times said: "One hundred and fifty years after Florida enshrined this awful law, there’s only one clear way to get rid of it. Legal challenges have fallen short, the governor is no friend to voting rights, and lawmakers have limited power when it comes to constitutional amendments. It’s time for Florida’s voters to step up and restore the most fundamental constitutional right to more than a million of their neighbors."
• The Washington Post said: "Permanent disenfranchisement is a retrograde, racist and anti-American project. Here’s hoping Floridians heave it onto the scrap heap of history."

Opposition

As of June 4, 2018, Ballotpedia had not identified any media editorial boards in opposition to the ballot initiative. If you are aware of an editorial, please send an e-mail with a link to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Background

Convicted felons voting laws

See also: Voting rights for convicted felons

As of 2018, Florida is one of four states—the three others are Iowa, Kentucky, and Virginia—where convicted felons do not regain the right to vote, until and unless a state officer or board restores an individual's voting rights. Amendment 4 was designed to restore voting rights for convicted felons, except those convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense, upon the completion of all terms of sentence, including prison, parole, and probation. Of the 50 states, two states—Maine and Vermont—do not rescind the right to vote for convicted felons, allowing them to vote while incarcerated; 14 states and Washington, D.C., restore voting rights upon completion of a prison sentence; four states restore voting rights upon completion of prison and parole time; 19 states restore the right to vote after prison time, parole, and probation are completed; and seven states have systems where certain felons, based on the type or number of crimes committed, regain the right to vote. The following map details the convicted felons voting laws across the United States:

History of felon voting laws in Florida

Section 4 of Article VI of the Florida Constitution, which provided that persons convicted of prior felonies could not vote, was part of the Florida Constitution of 1968—the state constitution active in 2018. Section 4's provision on the voting rights of felons carried over from the two preceding state constitutions, the constitution of 1885 and the constitution of 1868. In 1968, voters approved a legislative referral to keep the provision in the new Article VI, with 55.71 percent voting in favor.

The state's first constitution, which was enacted in 1838, did not provide that persons convicted of prior felonies could not vote. However, the constitution did empower the Florida State Legislature to revoke the voting rights of people who committed infamous crimes.

As Amendment 4 would provide for the restoration of voting rights to certain convicted felons upon the completion of their sentences, the measure would be amending a constitutional mandate in place since 1868.

In addition to losing the right to vote, convicted felons in Florida lose the ability to hold a public office, sit on a jury, or possess a firearm.

Johnson v. Bush (2005)

On April 12, 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld Florida's felon disenfranchisement law as constitutional and not violating the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

Plaintiffs contended that "racial animus motivated the adoption of Florida’s criminal disenfranchisement provision in 1868," according to the court. While criminal disenfranchisement existed in Florida since 1838, plaintiffs said "the scope of such disenfranchisement was significantly expanded in 1868, after the Civil War... with the intention of restricting the voting rights of Florida’s newly freed black population." According to the plaintiffs, the provision had "a significantly disproportionate impact on African-Americans, particularly black men." Plaintiffs said the provision violated the Voting Rights Act and U.S. Constitution.

The Elevent Circuit disagreed with plaintiffs, arguing that criminal disenfranchisement, passed as a statute in 1845, preexisted the time when African-Americans had a right to vote and that the constitutional convention that crafted the 1868 constitution was multiracial. The court also decided that Florida re-enacted the felon disenfranchisement provision of the state constitution in 1968 for race-neutral reasons and that "Congress never intended the Voting Rights Act to reach felon disenfranchisement provisions."

Hand v. Scott (2018)

On February 1, 2018, Judge Mark Walker of the U.S. District Court for Northern Florida declared Florida's process, which involves an Executive Clemency Board, for restoring voting rights for felons unconstitutional, saying the process violated the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. He stated, "It is the Board’s process to restore voting rights that this Court finds unconstitutional." The order did not rule Florida's requirement of felon disenfranchisement unconstitutional. Judge Walker said, "A state may disenfranchise convicted felons. A particularly punitive state might even disenfranchise convicted felons permanently. But once a state provides for restoration, its process cannot offend the Constitution." The Fair Elections Legal Network, representing nine felons, brought the case against Gov. Rick Scott (R).

Judge Walker cited a quote from Gov. Scott, who said "we can do whatever we want" at a board hearing, throughout his ruling. The judge described the process for restoring voting rights for felons as subjective, arbitrary, and discriminatory. He said, "When a scheme allows government officials to “do whatever [they] want,” viewpoint discrimination can slip through the cracks of a seemingly impartial process." He stated that possible discrimination in the process violated felons right to free association and free expression. He also stated that the lack of time limits in processing and deciding applications for the restoration of voting rights could lead to discrimination and violated the First Amendment. The judge said the process violated the Fourteenth Amendment because the executive clemency process in Florida requires "act[s] of grace" that, according to the ruling, "courts historically have avoided."

Judge Walker upheld the five-year and seven-year waiting periods before felons can request the restoration of voting rights as constitutional. As the "state uniformly applies the waiting periods to all convicted felons," he said, "this application [process] poses little risk of viewpoint discrimination."

The judge stated, "having determined that Florida’s vote-restoration scheme is unconstitutional, this Court must determine the appropriate relief." He asked the parties involved to suggest remedies by February 12, 2018.

The office of Gov. Scott responded to the ruling, stating, "The discretion of the clemency board over the restoration of felons' rights in Florida has been in place for decades and overseen by multiple governors. The process is outlined in Florida's Constitution, and today's ruling departs from precedent set by the United States Supreme Court."

On February 12, 2018, Florida Solicitor General Amit Agarwal told the court that the Executive Clemency Board, not the judge, should be responsible for coming up with a process that meets constitutional requirements. Agarwal said, "there is no reason to upend the state’s constitutional and statutory framework." Fair Election Legal Network, which brought the case against Gov. Scott, told the judge that voting rights restoration should occur for felons following the completion of a waiting period set in state law or administrative rules. The group said, "Such an order will effectively eliminate the requirement for ex-felons to affirmatively apply for restoration and eliminate the state’s obligation to investigate each ex-felon in the state of Florida prior to making what this court has found must be an objective determination made in a timely fashion."

On March 27, 2018, Judge Walker ordered the state to develop a new method for deciding how ex-felons regain the right to vote. He gave the governor and board until April 26, 2018, to come up with a new method. Judge Walker did not order specific rules, stating, "This court is not the vote restoration czar. It does not pick and choose who may receive the right to vote and who may not. Nor does it write the rules and regulations for the executive clemency board."

Gov. Scott announced that he would appeal the ruling to U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. John Tupps, a spokesperson for the governor, said, "People elected by Floridians should determine Florida’s clemency rules for convicted criminals, not federal judges. This process has been in place for decades and is outlined in the both the U.S. and Florida constitutions." On April 25, 2018, Gov. Scott asked the Eleventh Circuit to change the deadline that Judge Walker gave the cabinet to come up with a new method. The Eleventh Circuit concurred with Gov. Scott's request, staying the lower court's ruling.

Executive Clemency Board

In Florida, the right to vote can be restored for convicted felons with the approval of the Executive Clemency Board. The governor and members of the executive cabinet make up the board. While the governor makes the final decision as to whether to grant or deny clemency, including the restoration of voting rights, at least two members of the board need to join the governor to grant clemency. Under rules enacted by Gov. Rick Scott's (R) administration, convicted felons must wait five or seven years, depending on the type of offense, after the completion of their sentences to request that the board consider the restoration of their voting and other civil rights.

Under Gov. Charlie Crist, who was elected as a Republican, changed his affiliation to unaffiliated toward the end of his term in office, and registered as a Democrat after his time as governor, the Executive Clemency Board automatically restored the rights of felons who had completed their sentences, paid restitution, and had no pending criminal charges. Gov. Crist's automatic restoration policy did not extend to felons who were convicted of murder, attempted murder, sexual battery, attempted sexual battery, aggravated child abuse, kidnapping, arson, first-degree trafficking in illegal substances, treason, or other specified felonies. During Gov. Crist's four years in office, 155,315 felons had their voting rights restored.

Election policy on the ballot in 2018

Electoral system
Ranked-choice voting
Electoral systems by state
Election dates
Election agencies
Election terms

Voters will be considering ballot initiatives addressing elections in seven states in 2018.

• Ohio Issue 1, Congressional Redistricting Procedures Amendment (May 2018): The Ohio State Legislature, through a bipartisan vote, referred Issue 1 to the ballot for the election on May 8, 2018. The measure was written to change the vote requirements to pass congressional redistricting maps and the standards used in congressional redistricting in Ohio. Voters approved Issue 1.

• Arkansas Issue 2, Voter ID Amendment (2018): Issue 2 was designed to require individuals to present a valid photo ID to cast non-provisional ballots in person or absentee. The Arkansas State Legislature referred the measure to the ballot, with Republicans and four of 30 Democrats voting to put Issue 2 on the ballot.

• Colorado Independent Congressional Redistricting Commission Amendment (2018): The amendment was written to create a 12-member commission responsible for approving district maps for Colorado's congressional districts. Democrats and Republicans in the Colorado State Legislature voted to refer the measure.

• Colorado Independent Legislative Redistricting Commission Amendment (2018): The amendment was written to create a 12-member commission responsible for approving district maps for Colorado's state House and state Senate. Democrats and Republicans in the legislature voted to refer the amendment.

• Florida Amendment 4, Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative (2018): The committee Floridians for a Fair Democracy collected more than the required 766,200 signatures to get Amendment 4 placed on the ballot. The measure was designed to automatically restore the right to vote for people with prior felony convictions, except those convicted of murder or a felony sexual offense, upon completion of their sentences, including prison, parole, and probation.

• Maryland Election-Day Voter Registration Amendment (2018): Legislative Democrats voted to place the amendment the ballot. The measure was designed to authorize a process for registering qualified individuals to vote at a precinct polling place on election day.

• Montana Ballot Collection Measure (2018): The Montana State Legislature voted to place the measure on the ballot, through the support of 80 of 91 Republicans and one of 59 Democrats. The measure was written to ban persons from collecting the election ballots of other people, with exceptions for certain individuals.

• Nevada Question 5, Automatic Voter Registration via DMV Initiative (2018): The measure was designed to provide for the automatic voter registration of eligible citizens when receiving certain services from the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The Nevada Election Administration Committee, a project of iVote, collected more than the required 55,234 signatures to get Question 5 placed on the ballot.

• South Dakota Constitutional Amendment W, State Campaign Finance and Lobbying Laws, Government Accountability Board, and Initiative Process Amendment (2018): The committee Represent South Dakota collected more than the required 27,741 signatures to get the initiative certified for the ballot. The measure was designed to revise campaign finance and lobbying laws, create a government accountability board, and enact new laws governing the initiative and referendum process.

• Utah Independent Redistricting Commission Initiative (2018): The measure would create a seven-member independent redistricting commission to draft maps for congressional and state legislative districts. The committee Utahns for Responsive Government collected more than the required 113,143 signatures to get the initiative certified for the ballot.

Reports and analyses

Estimated number of disenfranchised felons

The Sentencing Project, a criminal justice organization that advocates for changing laws to restore the right to vote for persons with felonies, published a report estimating the number of disenfranchised felons in each state in 2016. Sociologists Christopher Uggen, Ryan Larson, and Sarah Shannon wrote the report and developed estimates based on data for correctional populations, national recidivism rates for people released from prison and probationers, and a higher death rate for felons.

The report estimated that, as of 2016, around 6.1 million people, or about 2.5 percent of the U.S. voting age population, were disenfranchised due to a felony conviction. Florida was estimated to have 1,686,318 persons—10.43 percent of the voting age population—disenfranchised due to felonies. The majority of the disenfranchised persons, around 88.23 percent, were estimated to have completed their sentences. Florida had the highest rate of felons disenfranchised in the U.S. in 2016, according to the report. The estimated average rate of felon disenfranchisement across the 50 states was 2.28 percent in 2016.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Florida

In Florida, the number of signatures required for an initiated constitutional amendment is equal to 8 percent of the votes cast in the preceding presidential election. Florida also has a signature distribution requirement, which requires that signatures equal to 8 percent of the district-wide vote in at least half (14) of the state's 27 congressional districts must be collected. Signatures are valid for two years and must be submitted before the verification deadline on Feb. 1 of the year that proponents want the initiative on the ballot.

The requirements to get an initiative certified for the ballot in 2018:

• Signatures: 766,200 valid signatures were required.
• Deadline: The deadline for signature verification was February 1, 2018. As local officials had 30 days to check signatures, proponents had to file signatures at least 30 days before the deadline on February 1, 2018.

The Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative was filed in October 2014. The initiative was sent to the Florida Supreme Court on October 4, 2016, and the court determined the initiative met the state's single-subject rule on April 20, 2017. Justice Fred Lewis wrote the court's decision.

Proponents aimed to get the initiative placed on the ballot in 2016, but then decided to aim for the ballot in 2018.

Desmond Meade, chair of Floridians for Fair Democracy, said the campaign had more than 900,000 signatures, including unverified signatures, as of November 28, 2017.

On January 22, 2018, the Florida Division of Elections reported that 799,278 signatures had been validated in 14 of the state's 27 congressional districts, which meant the initiative qualified for the ballot.

Cost of signature collection:
Sponsors of the measure hired PCI Consultants, Inc. to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $3,890,759.12 was spent to collect the 766,200 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $5.08. Sponsors spent $143,973.64 (3.70 percent) of the total cost on verifying petitions.

How to vote

See also: Voting in Florida

Poll times

In Florida, all polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote. Florida is split between Eastern and Central time zones.

Registration requirements

To vote in Florida, one must be at least 18 years of age, a citizen of the United States, and a legal resident of Florida and the county in which he or she intends to vote.

Voters may retrieve registration applications at the following locations:

• Local elections offices
• Public assistance agencies
• Disability services agencies
• Independent living centers
• Military recruitment offices
• Public libraries
• Offices that issue driver's licenses
• Fishing and hunting license shops

A registration form is also available online. The form can be printed and submitted via mail.

Registration forms must be completed at least 29 days prior to the election one wishes to vote in. Identification is required to register.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

On May 15, 2015, Governor Rick Scott (R) signed into law SB 228, which authorized the creation of an online voter registration system in Florida. The legislation was passed by majorities in both chambers of the Florida State Legislature: 109-9 in the Florida House of Representatives and 37-3 in the Florida State Senate. Online voter registration was first made available in October 2017.

Pam Carpenter, an elections administrator in Alachua County, said, "We are really pleased to see that the governor has gone ahead and signed this bill. I think it is going to be a real step forward for the citizens of Alachua County and the state of Florida. It’s another vehicle for the citizens to use to make registering a simpler process." Deirdre Macnab, president of the Florida League of Women Voters, said, "[Scott] did the right thing for Florida voters."

Although Scott ultimately signed the bill, he did express some concerns about the new law:

“	Cyberattacks are on the front pages almost every day, and fraud and identification theft issues arise whenever a new avenue for information transmittal is created. ... While these challenges exist, I am confident that the Department (of State) and the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles will act carefully and prudently in developing needed protection for citizen information.	”
—Rick Scott

Voter ID requirements

Voters in Florida are required to present photo and signature identification on Election Day. If a voter's photo ID does not display his or her signature, he or she will need to supply a second form of identification that does.

See also

2018 measures

• 2018 ballot measures
• Civil and criminal trials on the ballot
• 2018 legislative sessions

Florida

• Florida ballot measures
• Florida ballot measure laws
• Voting rights for convicted felons

News and analysis

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

State overview

Demographics

Demographic data for Florida
	Florida	U.S.
Total population:	20,244,914	316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):	53,625	3,531,905
Gender
Female:	51.1%	50.8%
Race and ethnicity**
White:	76%	73.6%
Black/African American:	16.1%	12.6%
Asian:	2.6%	5.1%
Native American:	0.3%	0.8%
Pacific Islander:	0.1%	0.2%
Two or more:	2.4%	3%
Hispanic/Latino:	23.7%	17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:	86.9%	86.7%
College graduation rate:	27.3%	29.8%
Income
Median household income:	$47,507	$53,889
Persons below poverty level:	19.8%	11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

As of July 2017, Florida had a population of approximately 21,000,000 people, with its three largest cities being Jacksonville (pop. est. 860,000), Miami (pop. est. 430,000), and Tampa (pop. est. 360,000).

Partisan control

This section details the partisan control of federal and state positions in Florida heading into the 2018 elections.

Congressional delegation

• Following the 2016 elections, Democrats and Republicans each held one U.S. Senate seat in Florida.
• Republicans hold 16 of 27 U.S. House seats in Florida.

State executives

• As of May 2018, Republicans held five out of eight elected state executive positions. The other three positions were held by nonpartisan officials.
• The governor of Florida is Republican Rick Scott.

State legislature

• Republicans control both chambers of the Florida State Legislature. They have a 23-16 majority in the state Senate and a 76-41 majority in the state House.

Trifecta status

• Florida is under Republican trifecta control since the governor is a Republican and both chambers of the Florida State Legislature are under Republican control.

2018 elections

See also: Florida elections, 2018

Florida is holding elections for the following positions in 2018:

• One U.S. Senate seat
• 27 U.S. House seats
• Governor and lieutenant governor
• Three other state executive offices
• 20 out of 40 state Senate seats
• 120 state House seats
• Four of seven state Supreme Court seats
• Municipal elections in Hillsborough, Miami-Dade, Orange, and Pinellas Counties

State history

This section provides an overview of federal and state elections in Florida from 2000 to 2016. All data comes from the Florida Department of State.

Historical elections

This chart shows the results of the presidential election in Florida every year from 2000 to 2016.

Election results (President of the United States), Florida 2000-2016
Year	First-place candidate	First-place candidate votes (%)	Second-place candidate	Second-place candidate votes (%)	Margin of victory (%)
2016	Donald Trump	49.0%	Hillary Clinton	47.8%	1.2%
2012	Barack Obama	50.0%	Mitt Romney	49.1%	0.9%
2008	Barack Obama	51.0%	John McCain	48.2%	2.8%
2004	George W. Bush	52.10%	John Kerry	47.09%	5.01%
2000	George W. Bush	48.847%	Al Gore	48.838%	0.009%

U.S. Senate elections, 2000-2016

This chart shows the results of U.S. Senate races in Florida from 2000 to 2016. Every state has two Senate seats, and each seat goes up for election every six years. The terms of the seats are staggered so that roughly one-third of the seats are up every two years.

Election results (U.S. Senator), Florida 2000-2016
Year	First-place candidate	First-place candidate votes (%)	Second-place candidate	Second-place candidate votes (%)	Margin of victory (%)
2016	Marco Rubio	52.0%	Patrick Murphy	44.3%	7.7%
2012	Bill Nelson	55.2%	Connie Mack	42.2%	13.0%
2010	Marco Rubio	48.9%	Charlie Crist	29.7%	19.2%
2006	Bill Nelson	60.3%	Katherine Harris	38.1%	22.2%
2004	Mel Martinez	49.4%	Betty Castor	48.3%	1.1%
2000	Bill Nelson	51.0%	Bill McCollum	46.2%	4.8%

Gubernatorial elections, 2000-2016

This chart shows the results of the four gubernatorial elections held between 2000 and 2016. Gubernatorial elections are held every four years in Florida.

Election results (Governor/Lt. Governor), Florida 2000-2016
Year	First-place candidate	First-place candidate votes (%)	Second-place candidate	Second-place candidate votes (%)	Margin of victory (%)
2014	Rick Scott/Carlos Lopez-Cantera	48.1%	Charlie Crist/Annette Taddeo-Goldstein	47.1%	1%
2010	Rick Scott/Jennifer Carroll	48.9%	Alex Sink/Rod Smith	47.7%	1.2%
2006	Charlie Crist/Jeff Kottkamp	52.2%	Jim Davis/Daryl Jones	45.1%	7.1%
2002	Jeb Bush/Frank Brogan	56.0%	Bill McBride/Tom Rossin	43.2%	12.8%

Congressional delegation, 2000-2016

This chart shows the number of Democrats and Republicans who were elected to represent Florida in the U.S. House from 2000 to 2016. Elections for U.S. House seats are held every two years.

Congressional delegation, Florida 2000-2016
Year	Republicans	Republicans (%)	Democrats	Democrats (%)	Balance of power
2016	17	62.9%	10	37.0%	R+7
2014	17	62.9%	10	37.0%	R+7
2012	17	62.9%	10	37.0%	R+7
2010	19	76.0%	6	24.0%	R+13
2008	15	60.0%	10	40.0%	R+5
2006	16	64.0%	9	36.0%	R+7
2004	18	66.7%	7	33.3%	R+11
2002	17	66.7%	8	33.3%	R+9
2000	15	57.9%	8	42.1%	R+7

Trifectas, 1992-2017

A state government trifecta occurs when one party controls both chambers of the state legislature and the governor's office.

Florida Party Control: 1992-2017
One year of a Democratic trifecta  •  18 years of Republican trifectas

	92	93	94	95	96	97	98	99	00	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17
Governor	D	D	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	I	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
Senate	D	S	S	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R
House	D	D	D	D	D	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R	R

External links

• Initiative information