Florida voter turnout surges as key measures spark heated political debate

TALLAHASSEE , Fla — Florida candidates up and down the ballot made their final pitches this week in the runup to Tuesday’s general election.

As of Friday morning, 6.73 million voters — roughly 48 percent of the 13.95 million Floridians registered to vote — had already cast their ballots.

Data posted on the state Division of Elections website showed 2,995,871 votes by Republicans and 2,218,111 by Democrats. Also, 1,364,203 unaffiliated voters and 153,775 third-party voters had cast ballots.

Despite being outpaced by the GOP, Democrats remained upbeat early in the week as they strive to end a Republican supermajority in the state House.

“We’re going to have a lot of surprises on Nov. 5 because people are frustrated with extremism,” Florida Democratic Party Chairwoman Nikki Fried told reporters during a conference call Tuesday.

Gov. Ron DeSantis, whose name is not on the ballot, criss-crossed the state for a second week barnstorming against ballot proposals aimed at allowing recreational marijuana and enshrining abortion rights in the state Constitution.

The governor has enlisted numerous state agency heads — including leaders of the Department of Juvenile Justice, the Department of Children and Families, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles and the Department of Health — to join his crusade against the the proposals. DeSantis also has unleashed a variety of state resources to campaign against the measures.

ON THE AIR

Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker extended a restraining order blocking state officials from taking action against TV stations running a controversial ad in favor of the abortion-rights proposal, which appears on the Nov. 5 ballot as Amendment 4.

The Floridians Protecting Freedom political committee, which is sponsoring the measure, filed a lawsuit seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction after the state Department of Health sent threatening letters to broadcasters alleging the ad posed a public “health nuisance.”

Walker on Oct. 17 granted the committee’s request for a temporary restraining order blocking state officials from taking action against broadcasters airing the ad and this week extended the order, saying he needed more time to consider issues that arose during a hearing Tuesday.

Attorney Brian Barnes, who represents the state, likened the abortion commercial to a “hypothetical” scenario in which a political candidate “goes on television” and asserts that all 911 operators have been fired and emergency services are no longer available to the public.

“We see this case as being controlled by the same legal principle that would apply to that 911 scenario,” Barnes, a lawyer with the Washington, D.C.-based Cooper & Kirk firm, argued, adding that the state must be allowed to step in “to prevent a public health crisis.”

Ben Stafford, an attorney representing Floridians Protecting Freedom, told Walker that an injunction was necessary to block the state from punishing anyone after the election.

“We’re just waiting to get stung,” Stafford said, adding that uncertainty about future prosecutions amounts to a “coercive threat” by the administration.

Walker’s Oct. 17 restraining order said the ad “is political speech — speech at the core of the First Amendment.” The DeSantis administration “cannot excuse its indirect censorship of political speech by simply declaring the disfavored speech is ‘false,’” the judge wrote.

‘WIN-WIN’ DEAL

Seminole Tribe of Florida leaders announced Monday they had reached an agreement with pari-mutuel companies that will end years of legal battles over a 2021 deal that gave the tribe statewide control over online sports betting.

The pari-mutuel companies — West Flagler Associates; Bonita-Fort Myers Corp.; Southwest Florida Enterprises, Inc.; and the pari-mutuels’ owner, Isadore Havenick — agreed to “refrain from engaging in any future litigation with respect to the Seminole Tribe’s gaming operations,” according to a press release. As part of the deal, jai alai provided by Battle Court Jai Alai, LLC, which is affiliated with West Flagler, will be offered on the Seminoles’ betting app in early 2025.

Jim Allen, the CEO of Seminole Gaming, called the deal “a win-win agreement” for the tribe and the gambling operators.

The pari-mutuel companies filed state and federal lawsuits challenging a “hub-and-spoke” provision in the 30-year gambling deal that allowed the Seminoles to accept mobile sports bets placed anywhere in the state, with the wagers run through servers on tribal land.

Under the compact, the tribe agreed to pay Florida about $20 billion, including $2.5 billion over the first five years of the agreement. The agreement also allowed the Seminoles to offer games such as craps and roulette at tribal casinos.

CHILD PROTECTION

The week got underway with a long-anticipated constitutional challenge by two internet-industry groups — the Computer & Communications Industry Association and NetChoice — against a new Florida law aimed at keeping children off social-media platforms.

The federal lawsuit alleged that the law, which goes into effect Jan. 1, violates First Amendment rights and that parents should make decisions about children’s social-media use.

“While states certainly have a legitimate interest in protecting minors who use such services, restricting the ability of minors (and adults) to access them altogether is not a narrowly tailored means of advancing any such interest,” the 48-page lawsuit said.

The law, in part, seeks to prevent children under age 16 from opening social-media accounts on some platforms — though it would allow parents to give consent for 14- and 15-year-olds to have accounts. Children under 14 could not open accounts.

If social-media companies violate the law, they could face penalties up to $50,000 per violation. The law also would open them to lawsuits filed on behalf of minors.

The law does not name social-media platforms that would be affected. But the lawsuit repeatedly referred to sites such as YouTube and Facebook, while also saying the law would not apply to services such as Disney+.

©2024 Cox Media Group