Florida Republicans tried but failed to keep an abortion rights initiative off the November 2024 ballot, losing by 4-3 in the state supreme court (read the court’s opinion here). It would amend the state constitution as follows:
“SECTION __. Limiting government interference with abortion.—Except as provided in Article X, Section 22, no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”
The approved ballot title is “Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion,” and the ballot summary reads:
“No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has
an abortion.”
That’s what voters see on their ballots when vote for or against the amendment. Florida also requires a financial impact statement, which normally is written by a Financial Impact Estimating Conference committee. As Huffington Post explains (in story here), “The supposedly nonpartisan FIEC crafts fiscal statements to appear next to any citizen-led measure that makes it on the ballot.”
Normally the FIEC committee consists of a House and Senate staffer, a representative from the governor’s office, and the chief state economist. But the GOP speaker substituted for the House staffer an employee of the Heritage Foundation (profiled here), the extremist organization behind Project 2025 (described here) which Wikipedia says advocates “a de facto national abortion ban.” This is the ballot statement they came up with:
“The proposed amendment would result in significantly more abortions and fewer live births per year in Florida. The increase in abortions could be even greater if the amendment invalidates laws requiring parental consent before minors undergo abortions and those ensuring only licensed physicians perform abortions. There is also uncertainty about whether the amendment will require the state to subsidize abortions with public funds. Litigation to resolve those and other uncertainties will result in additional costs to the state government and state courts that will negatively impact the state budget. An increase in abortions may negatively affect the growth of state and local revenues over time. Because the fiscal impact of increased abortions on state and local revenues and costs cannot be estimated with precision, the total impact of the proposed amendment is indeterminate.”
This statement flat-out lies about parental consent, and falsely insinuates taxpayers may have to subsidize abortions. Nothing in the amendment does that, or creates any “uncertainty” about it; read it for yourself (that’s why I quoted it). Every other assertion in the statement is non-factual speculation.
An earlier version was challenged in the courts; yesterday, a Florida appeals court declined to send this one back to the circuit judge, so it’s unclear what will happen next or whether a court will order changes (see story here).
The initiative group called it “a dirty trick to mislead voters” written by political operatives. That it clearly is; but I’m not so sure it’ll work. Even if voters read it, most have already made up their minds about whether abortion should be legal in Florida. So far, no abortion rights measure has lost in a red state.