# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
transcript

nick casey

From The New York Times, this is The Field. I'm Nick Casey in Florida.

[TRAFFIC NOISE]

nick casey

So earlier this year, Daily producer Rachel Quester and I went down to Gainesville.

nick casey

Because after decades of restricting former felons from voting, one of the few states to do so, in late 2018, the state passed an amendment called Amendment Four, which automatically restored a person's voting rights at the end of their sentence. And overnight, it added nearly one and a half million new eligible voters to the ranks.

nick casey

We went to meet Julius Irving, who works for a group that was trying to get this new voting population registered ahead of the November election.

nick casey

We came to Gainesville because the city is about a quarter black in a state where one-fifth of African-Americans have felony convictions right now. Florida is also, of course, a swing state, a state that has, in the past, been decided by around 500 votes. And this year, it's considered essential in President Trump's narrowing path to victory.

[music]

And so this is exactly the sort of place where if Democrats could register and activate even a fraction of the one and a half million convicted felons affected by Amendment 4, it would have a meaningful difference in the election.

nick casey

So as the general election got under way, we wondered what kind of efforts were being made in the state to try to mobilize this new group of voters and what efforts were being made to stop them from voting.

nick casey

We met up with Julius at our hotel before a morning of registering voters. We're meeting there because he's currently sleeping in his car.

nick casey

Julius is himself a former felon. He got out of prison nearly a decade ago. And he agreed to let us watch him do his work. But we first wanted to spend a little time understanding his own story.

[music, cheering]

nick casey

The story of how Julius became disenfranchised is a pretty common story for Black men in Florida before Amendment 4 passed. Young men were getting their right to vote stripped from them almost as soon as they were becoming eligible to vote. If you were like Julius and got busted when you were 18, poof, your right to vote was gone.

nick casey

This part of Julius' story is a little less typical. This is back in 2005. At the time, there was a popular TV show in Gainesville called Gainesville Police Beat. It was like a local version of the show Cops. But this particular show was produced by the police department itself. So that's who showed up at Julius' door that day, the police and the camera crew, to capture footage of him being arrested to later air on the episode.

[music - theme, "police beat"]

nick casey

Julius was sentenced to 90 days in jail for selling marijuana to that undercover officer. And after he got out, he went back to selling drugs.

nick casey

He developed an addiction and ended up in and out of jail over the next couple of years on more drug charges. And then he gets a cocaine charge and violates his probation.

nick casey

Up until this point, Julius had only ever spent time in jail. So this was the first time he'd be going to prison.

nick casey

Months into his sentence, Julius says he had an experience that would change him for the worse. The way he tells it, a fellow white inmate believed that Julius had stolen some of his remittance money, which is money sent to inmates by their families so they can buy specialty foods and items in the prison.

[music]

And then one day, Julius says that he was working his job at the prison as a laundroman, handing out clothes to other inmates-

nick casey

Julius alleges that it was a prison guard who allowed the other prisoner into the room to resolve this dispute.

nick casey

After that, Julius was assigned to work at a lumber mill under a contract between the prison and a private company that uses prison labor. He was paid $0.25 an hour and says he became an agitator at the mill, calling it legalized slavery and encouraging others to quit and protest the low wages. He says one day he reached a breaking point and began just screaming at people. He was put in solitary confinement for 30 days, where he alleges that he was regularly beaten by the guards.

nick casey

So Julius' prison experience leaves him with a tremendous amount of distrust of the system. But it also activated him in a way that sort of unexpectedly leads him to this kind of work trying to convince people to engage with the system. It starts when he's released in 2009 and eventually gets a job working at Waffle House.

nick casey

This work Julius is doing catches the attention of a voting rights group, which is composed of formerly incarcerated people who are campaigning for Amendment 4 to be passed. One of the group's most active members was Julius' own sister, who also served time in prison. [CROWD CHANTING] Together they start going through Gainesville- [CROWD CHANTING]

nick casey

-trying to convince people- people, mind you, who already have the right to vote- to give that right to former felons.

nick casey

And they were hugely successful. Amendment 4 got passed with 65% of Florida voters voting in favor. And it was the largest expansion of voting rights in the country in nearly four decades.

nick casey

For Julius, the success of Amendment 4 showed him that voting can actually make a difference. It was the first time seeing a positive side to the government that he'd been so skeptical of. That's how he ended up working for an organization that's been trying to register and activate these 1.5 million potential voters. And so as this amendment was finally being applied for the first time in Florida, and people were getting their rights back during a presidential election, we headed out with Julius to watch him register people to vote.

[STREET NOISE]

nick casey

Pretty quickly, as Julius gets to work, a few things become clear. One is that he's extremely charming. ^Speaker 1^: What's the other line for?

nick casey

People like talking to him. And they want to help him out by registering.

nick casey

Another is that his job is as much about educating people as it is about getting them physically registered. Many of the convicted felons that Julius talks to-

nick casey

-either don't know that they can vote or are unclear on what exactly Amendment 4 means for them.

nick casey

And in some cases, people are so disconnected from the political system-

nick casey

-that Julius finds himself explaining the very basics of government.

nick casey

What Julius really has going for him as he has these conversations is that he either can connect with or he already knows a lot of people coming in and out of the plasma center.

nick casey

Like this guy, who he knows from the neighborhood, and is also a convicted felon.

nick casey

You can tell this guy is skeptical of registering.

nick casey

But Julius is able to appeal pretty directly. Hey, I get it. But here's why it matters.

nick casey

And it works.

nick casey

We watch as Julius registers this new voter.

nick casey

So this looks like success, both in educating this person on his new rights and getting him registered, right? But we're starting to realize as we listen to these encounters that registering people is really just the first step and maybe the easy part. As this newly registered voter starts to walk away-

nick casey

Rachel and I grabbed him for a quick follow up.

[music]

nick casey

It's one thing for Ronald to have registered to vote. It's another to convince him that it's worth his time to actually show up and vote in November. It's that same lack of faith in the system that Julius felt when he got out of prison, where his only experience with the government has been with the law. And the thing is, this group of voters has good reason to mistrust the system and to think it might not want to change its relationship with them, either. Ever since Amendment 4 was passed, Republican lawmakers in the state have been working to undermine it.

nick casey

As we're standing outside the plasma center, this older gentleman is watching us, curious about the microphone. And eventually, he acts on that curiosity and comes up to us.

nick casey

Mr. Kelly's right.

nick casey

Shortly after Amendment 4 was passed, Republicans did come in behind it and they passed legislation that aimed to dramatically limit its effect.

nick casey

In June 2019, the Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, signed into law a requirement that convicted felons pay all the court fees associated with their case, even a fee associated with accepting a public defender, before they would be allowed to vote again. The argument was that a person's sentence is not actually complete until they've paid these fees.

nick casey

That money that Mr. Kelly says he owes has to do with a pretty complicated fraud scheme from a few years back.

nick casey

So even though technically Amendment 4 gave Mr. Kelly his right to vote back, practically speaking, this new law made voting impossibly out of reach. But then shortly after Governor DeSantis signed the law, 17 former felons, along with the ACLU, sued the state. And in October of 2019, a judge said those 17 people did not have to pay fees in order to vote. And the expectation was that the ruling would eventually apply to all felons whose voting rights had been reinstated under Amendment 4. But in this moment, as we're talking to Mr. Kelly, everything is still kind of hanging in limbo. While we're standing there talking to him, Julius comes over.

nick casey

Julius is trying to convince Mr. Kelly that he's OK to vote.

nick casey

But technically, Mr. Kelly is actually right, that for the time being, the judge's ruling only applied to those 17 felons. And it just goes to show what a confusing tug of war this right to vote has become.

nick casey

After this interaction, Julius is clearly feeling a little down. He says interactions like this can cause him to reflect on the nature of the work that he's doing and how he came to be doing it.

nick casey

Remember, Julius' main reason for taking this job wasn't his belief in the power of voting. He took it because he needed a paycheck, which is really hard to come by if you have a felony conviction. And while the passage of Amendment 4 was this moment where Julius saw what the power of voting can be, the legal battle that has ensued in its wake, that's more closely in line with his overall experience of government and with the state of Florida. So while Julius makes a convincing case for voting every day at work, he can find himself being pretty conflicted about the work that he's doing. As he's talking with us, he remembers one particular conversation where he really felt bad, where another former felon actually refused to register.

nick casey

This way of looking at things only makes more sense in the time since we were in Gainesville.

nick casey

In May of this year, the Florida judge who sided with the 17 felons and the ACLU did in fact expand his ruling to apply to all former felons in Florida.

nick casey

He ruled that requiring former felons to pay off their fines was unconstitutional and essentially amounted to a poll tax.

nick casey

The state responded by challenging that ruling, which landed the case in a federal appeals court.

nick casey

That court, the 11th Circuit, sided with the Republicans and allowed the restitution requirement to go into effect until they made their own decision on the case at a later date.

nick casey

And just a few weeks ago-

nick casey

-the court handed down its definitive ruling.

nick casey

In a majority decision, consisting in part of five judges appointed by President Trump, the court ruled that felons do, in fact, have to pay off all of their fines and fees before they can vote in November.

nick casey

There's no central database where someone can go and check whether they have outstanding fines or if they've paid any amount toward it. And the state says it would take years to make that kind of database. On top of that, if a person doesn't know if they owe fines or fees and goes ahead and votes anyway, they could face perjury charges, which would mean another felony conviction and the possibility of going back to prison. Some estimates show that this could basically negate Amendment 4. That up to 80% of former felons in Florida will not be eligible to vote in November after all. And one of those people is likely to be Julius himself.

[music]

He owes money related to his court cases, which would be disqualifying. But on top of that, he now faces a new felony charge stemming from a knife fight he got into back in March of last year, which he insists was self-defense. But given his long record, prosecutors charged him with first degree attempted murder. Because of the pandemic, his case has been up in the air. He's been regularly attending his court dates by Zoom. But no trial date has been set. So things are pretty uncertain for him right now. Regardless, he will most likely face a life sentence.

[ACOUSTIC GUITAR PLAYING]

michael barbaro

Here's what else you need to know today. Early Friday morning, the White House said that both President Trump and First lady Melania Trump had contracted the coronavirus, a stunning development that brought the pandemic to the highest possible level of American government just 33 days before the election. As a result, the president will have to withdraw from the campaign trail and remain isolated at the White House for an unknown period of time. In a statement, the president's physician said that he expected Trump to carry out his duties without disruption while he recovers. Trump has repeatedly downplayed the threat of the virus, avoided wearing a mask, and held public events at odds with government guidelines. On Thursday, his top advisor, Hope Hicks, tested positive for the virus after traveling with the president on multiple flights. Hours later, the president himself tested positive.

The Daily is made by Theo Balcomb, Andy Mills, Lisa Tobin, Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Annie Brown, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Larissa Anderson, Wendy Dorr, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, Kelly Prime, Sindhu Gnanasambandan, MJ Davis Lin, Austin Mitchell, Neena Pathak, Dan Powell, Dave Shaw, Sydney Harper, Daniel Guillemette, Hans Buetow, Robert Jimison, Mike Benoist, Bianca Giaever, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Caitlin Roberts, Elise Spiegel, Diana Wynne, and Marion Lozano. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Mikayla Bouchard, Lauren Jackson, Julia Simon, Mahima Chablani, Nora Keller, Sofia Milan, Des Ibekwe, Steven Kersey, Amy Chen and Safak Timur. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you on Monday.

A 2018 ballot initiative in the swing state was supposed to extend the franchise to 1.5 million former felons. A Republican policy and a lack of information threaten to keep these voters from the polls.

Hosted by Nick Casey; produced by Rachel Quester, with help from Stella Tan; and edited by Lisa Tobin and Paige Cowett.

This episode contains strong language.
During much of this election cycle, Julius Irving of Gainesville, Fla., spent his days trying to get former felons registered to vote.

He would tell them about Florida's Amendment 4, a ballot initiative that extended the franchise to those who had, in the past, been convicted on felony charges - it added an estimated 1.5 million people to the electorate, the nation's largest voting expansion in four decades.

If Democrats were to activate a fraction of this portion of the swing state's electorate, it could be decisive in the outcome of the election.

Mr. Irving had himself spent time in prison, an experience that left him with a distrust of the system but also a desire to encourage people like him to engage with it.

Image

Julius Irving, right, taking a selfie with a man he helped register to vote. Credit... Eve Edelheit for The New York Times

While canvassing, he found that many of convicted felons he spoke to did not know whether they were eligible to vote. And their situations are further complicated by a contested Florida law, currently winding through the courts, that requires ex-felons to pay all restitution and court fees in order to vote.

On today's episode, Nicholas Casey, a national politics reporter, spends time with Mr. Irving in Gainesville and explores the voting rights battle in Florida.
INSIDE 'THE DAILY' For an exclusive look at how the biggest stories on our show come together, subscribe to our newsletter. Read the latest edition here.

Mr. Irving is one of 1.5 million former felons who regained the right to vote because of an amendment to Florida's constitution passed in 2018. Credit... Eve Edelheit for The New York Times

There are a lot of ways to listen to 'The Daily.' Here's how.
We want to hear from you. Tune in, and tell us what you think. Email us at thedaily@nytimes.com. Follow Michael Barbaro on Twitter: @mikiebarb. And if you're interested in advertising with "The Daily," write to us at thedaily-ads@nytimes.com.

Nicholas Casey contributed reporting.

"The Daily" is made by Theo Balcomb, Andy Mills, Lisa Tobin, Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Annie Brown, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Larissa Anderson, Wendy Dorr, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, Luke Vander Ploeg, Kelly Prime, Julia Longoria, Sindhu Gnanasambandan, M.J. Davis Lin, Austin Mitchell, Neena Pathak, Dan Powell, Dave Shaw, Sydney Harper, Daniel Guillemette, Hans Buetow, Robert Jimison, Mike Benoist, Bianca Giaever, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi and Rachelle Bonja. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Mikayla Bouchard, Lauren Jackson, Julia Simon, Mahima Chablani, Nora Keller, Sofia Milan and Desiree Ibekwe.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Field: The Fight for Voting Rights in Florida

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
transcript nick casey From The New York Times, this is The Field. I'm Nick Casey in Florida. [TRAFFIC NOISE] nick casey So earlier this year, Daily producer Rachel Quester and I went down to Gainesville.

# data[].attributes.headline
Restoring voting rights to felons in Florida: DeSantis gets support in Amendment 4 fight

# data[].attributes.subject
Restoring voting rights to felons in Florida: DeSantis gets support in Amendment 4 fight

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
10 states and 2 election-centered organizations support Gov. Ron DeSantis' request that a federal appeals court revisit a ruling that felons who cannot afford to pay court-ordered fines and fees be allowed to vote.

TALLAHASSEE - The legal wrangling over a 2019 Florida law about restoring voting rights to felons continues to draw national attention, as 10 states and two conservative groups have filed briefs backing Gov. Ron DeSantis.

The states and the election-centered organizations support DeSantis' request that a federal appeals court revisit a three-judge panel's ruling that felons who cannot afford to pay court-ordered fines and fees be allowed to vote.

"The panel's holding calls into question the constitutionality of reenfranchisement statutes in a majority of states, reaching any statute that provides a benefit to felons who can immediately satisfy financial terms of their sentences while requiring less pecunious felons to wait ... longer," lawyers for Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas and Utah wrote in an "amicus," or friend-of-the-court, brief filed Wednesday.

The states "have a substantial interest in ensuring that they can continue to pursue the goal of reenfranchisement alongside other important state interests like deterrence, retribution, and restitution."

DeSantis has asked the 11th U.S. District Court of Appeals for a full court, or "en banc," review of a Feb. 19 decision by a three-judge panel of the Atlanta-based court.

The panel upheld an October ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle, who decided that Florida cannot deny the right to vote to felons who are "genuinely unable to pay" legal fines and fees.

Floridians in 2018 passed a constitutional amendment designed to restore the voting rights of felons who "complete all terms of their sentence including parole or probation." The amendment excludes felons convicted of murder or sexual offenses.

The legal wrangling centers on a requirement that "legal financial obligations" - including fines, fees and restitution - be paid for felons to be eligible to vote. That requirement was included in a law approved last year by the Republican-dominated Legislature and signed by DeSantis.

Voting-rights groups quickly challenged the 2019 statute, arguing that hinging voting rights on felons' finances amounts to a modern-day "poll tax." Upholding Hinkle's ruling, the three-judge panel last month found the Florida law "unconstitutionally punishes a class of felons based only on their wealth."

But in Wednesday's brief siding with DeSantis, the 10 states argued that the judges' ruling forces them into an "all-or-nothing choice."

All but two states in the country have imposed voting restrictions "on at least some felons," the brief said.

While all states have some system for allowing felons to regain the right to vote "a majority of those systems take into account whether the felon has completed all terms of his sentence, both carceral and financial," the lawyers added.

The panel's decision would force states to develop new systems to determine whether felons were genuinely unable to pay their financial obligations, the states argued. Determinations that didn't favor felons "would likely spawn additional litigation," they wrote.

"If states are limited in their ability to pursue reenfranchisement alongside their other interests, some states may well throw in the towel and prohibit any felon from regaining the right to vote," the brief argued.

Florida, however, would not be able to permanently ban all felons from voting, due to the constitutional amendment.

Echoing arguments made by DeSantis' attorneys, the states argued that the panel ruling was the first time a court had decided that felons who cannot afford to pay legal financial obligations must be allowed to vote.

Eight states, including Alabama and Florida, "explicitly require payment of financial terms of a sentence before a felon can take advantage of at least one avenue for reenfranchisement," lawyers wrote in the brief filed by Alabama and joined by the other states.

Alabama's law denies voting rights to felons convicted of "crimes of moral turpitude," which includes non-violent crimes such as theft. Felons can petition to have their rights restored after they pay court-ordered fees, fines and restitution. The law is being challenged in court.

According to the brief, nine other states, including Georgia, "use broad language, such as requiring the undefined 'completion of the sentence'," to determine voter eligibility.

The three-judge panel's ruling would reach further, because at least 13 states require completion of probation and parole, which often require payment of restitution, before voting rights are restored, the states' lawyers wrote.

But Nancy Abudu, a lawyer with the Southern Poverty Law Center, told The News Service of Florida that the plaintiffs in the Florida case have "been emphasizing that they're two separate things, the financial obligations and the fundamental right to vote."

"And one should not be conditioned on the other," said Abudu, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

The 10 states maintained in the brief that determining felons' genuine inability to pay "would be a difficult task." That also has been an issue in Florida, which lacks a single centralized database where felons can find out if they have outstanding financial obligations. Local databases maintained by county clerks have "inconsistent, incomplete and inaccurate" information, the plaintiffs' lawyers wrote in a brief filed last year.

During a December hearing, Hinkle called the process an "administrative nightmare."

In addition to Alabama and the other states, two national groups -the Honest Elections Project and the Indianapolis-based Public Interest Legal Foundation - filed friend-of-the-court briefs on Wednesday. For example, the Public Interest Legal Foundation urged the full court to review the panel's decision "so that it can perform a balancing test" between the rights of victims and felons.

Hinkle in October issued a preliminary injunction and allowed felons with unpaid financial obligations to register to vote. But he placed a hold on allowing them to vote. That hold expired Feb. 11, and the three-judge panel this week refused the state's request to keep it in place until the full court takes up the case.

That ruling enables the 17 plaintiffs in the case - felons who claim to be unable to pay their legal financial obligations - to cast ballots in the upcoming presidential primary elections.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Restoring voting rights to felons in Florida: DeSantis gets support in Amendment 4 fight

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
10 states and 2 election-centered organizations support Gov. Ron DeSantis' request that a federal appeals court revisit a ruling that felons who cannot afford to pay court-ordered fines and fees be allowed to vote.

# data[].attributes.headline
Florida Amendment 4, Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative (2018)

# data[].attributes.subject
Florida Amendment 4, Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative (2018)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Florida Amendment 4, the Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative, was on the ballot in Florida as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported 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 opposed 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.

Implementing Amendment 4

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) said that Amendment 4 would require the Florida State Legislature to pass implementing legislation for the amendment before it could take effect. The Florida Legislature convened on March 5, 2019. Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner (R) said, "We need to get some direction from [the Legislature] as far as implementation and definitions - all the kind of things that the [elections] supervisors were asking. It would be inappropriate for us to charge off without direction from them." Florida Senate President Bill Galvano (R) said "By a lot of accounts, there's no action even required for its implementation." Proponents of the measure said that the initiative's language is self-executing and did not require implementing legislation. Former-Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum (D), DeSantis' 2018 general election opponent, tweeted: "The role of the governor is to faithfully execute the laws, including #Amendment4 on January 8 - and not one day later. Justice delayed is justice denied."

Senate Bill 7066

Florida Senate Bill 7066 (SB 7066) was signed into law by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) on June 28, 2019. SB 7066 was designed to implement parts of Amendment 4 of 2018. Most notably, SB 7066 was designed to require convicted felons to complete "all terms of sentence" including full payment of restitution, or any fines, fees, or costs resulting from the conviction, before they could regain the right to vote. Lawsuits were filed against Senate Bill 7066, in which plaintiffs argued that requiring payment of fines and fees before being able to vote was unconstitutional.

On September 11, 2020, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the state of Florida can require former felons to pay all fines and fees before regaining the right to vote. The court ruled that the plaintiffs failed to show that their constitutional rights were violated. The court wrote in its ruling, "The felons complain that it is sometimes difficult to ascertain the facts that determine eligibility to vote under Amendment 4 and Senate Bill 7066, but this complaint is only another version of the vagueness argument we have already rejected. The Due Process Clause does not require States to provide individual process to help citizens learn the facts necessary to comply with laws of general application. ... States are constitutionally entitled to set legitimate voter qualifications through laws of general application and to require voters to comply with those laws through their own efforts. So long as a State provides adequate procedures to challenge individual determinations of ineligibility-as Florida does-due process requires nothing more."

For detailed coverage of Senate Bill 7066, the current status of the bill, and lawsuits concerning the bill, click here.

Election results

Florida Amendment 4

Result

Votes

Percentage

Yes
5,148,926
64.55%

No

2,828,339

35.45%

What did Amendment 4 change about voting rights of convicted felons?

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, including 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 former Florida Governor 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. Current governor Rick Scott (R) eliminated those reforms made by the Crist administration. Under Scott's 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.

Going into the election, Florida was 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. Gov. Scott announced that he would appeal the ruling to U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The Eleventh Circuit concurred with Gov. Scott's request, staying the lower court's ruling.

How did the number of disenfranchised voters in Florida compare to margins of victory in notable Florida elections?

A report from The Sentencing Project estimated that, as of 2016, around 6.1 million people (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. A state-by-state comparison of disenfranchised voting populations can be found here. The margin-of-victory (MOV) in the 2010 and 2014 gubernatorial elections was 1.2 percent and 1.0 percent, respectively. For presidential elections, the MOV was 0.9 percent in 2012 and 1.2 percent in 2016. More information on the MOV of past elections can be found here.

Who was behind the campaigns for and against Amendment 4? One committee was registered in support of Amendment 4: Floridians for a Fair Democracy. The committee had raised $25.3 million and spent $21.5 million.

The top contributors to the support campaign were the American Civil Liberties Union ( ACLU), which contributed $5.53 million, and The Sixteen Thirty Fund, which gave $3.95 million.

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. The committee did not report any campaign finance activity.

Felon voting policies in other states

Going into the election, Florida was 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. Approval of Amendment 4 meant that Florida joins 19 other states that restore the right to vote after prison time, parole, and probation are completed.

Other election-related issues on the ballot in 2018

Ten other states had ballot measures related to election policy on the ballot in 2018. Five of the measures concerned redistricting, and, like Florida's Amendment 4, three other measures concerned the topic of voting laws such as voter ID and voter registration.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:

Ballot summary

The ballot summary was 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

The measure amended Section 4 of Article VI of the Florida Constitution. The following underlined text was added:Note: Use your mouse to scroll over the below text to see the full text.

Readability score

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The initiative proponents wrote the ballot language for this measure.

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

Supporters

Organizations

Individuals

Mark Holden, chair of Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce and senior vice president of Koch Industries, Inc

The League of Women Voters of Florida stated, "The League was one of the sponsors of this initiative. Florida is one of only four states that permanently bars felons from voting after their sentences are completed. This restriction on voting is a vestige of Florida's post-Civil War Constitution. Everyone deserves a second chance."

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."

Melba Pearson, Deputy Director for the ACLU of Florida said, "Let's look at what voting entails: It gives you the ability to have a say on your roads, on who is going to be on your school board to help educate your kids and who is going to be trying to get funding for your neighborhood. These are all important things that have to do with the communities people live in and if you take away people's right to vote and say 'you can never be fully engaged in the community,' how are you encouraging them to reintegrate and be part of said community?"

Mark Holden, chair of Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce and senior vice president of Koch Industries, Inc, said, "We believe that when individuals have served their sentences and paid their debts as ordered by a judge, they should be eligible to vote. [...] If we want people returning to society to be productive, law abiding citizens, we need to treat them like full-fledged citizens."

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said, "Amendment 4 represents a potential civil rights triumph: It could enfranchise more people at once than any single initiative since women's suffrage. It's on the ballot this November and would restore the voting rights of nearly 1.5 million Floridians."

Reggie Garcia, a Florida lawyer and the author of two books on executive clemency including "Second Chances-Florida Pardons, Restoration of Civil Rights, Gun Rights and More," wrote the following in the Tallahassee Democrat:

"

Data from the Florida Commission on Offender Review proves that the vast majority of felons who get their voting and other civil rights back do not commit new crimes. They have learned their lesson and are trying to earn the second chance they have been given.

"

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, was the group's executive director.

Organizations

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.

"

Paul Wright, founder and executive director of the Human Rights Defense Center, a nonprofit based in Lake Worth that advocates for progressive criminal justice reform, wrote the following in the Tallahassee Democrat:

"

The problem with Amendment 4 is that it perpetuates the discrimination and bigotry of disenfranchisement against a subclass of ex-felons - those convicted of murder or sex crimes. If Amendment 4 passes, it will enshrine into our state constitution discrimination against convicted murderers and sex offenders that will make enfranchising them virtually impossible. While some may point to the serious nature of their offenses, they have nothing to do with voting. The punishment of disenfranchisement does not fit the crime.

"

Media editorials

The Herald-Tribune said: "Despite having paid their debts to society, more than 1.5 million ex-felons in Florida - the largest number of any state - are denied voting rights. This is morally wrong. It is also unnecessarily punitive: Denying voting rights does nothing to protect public safety or advance the common good; it erects yet another barrier that makes it more difficult for former inmates to reintegrate into society. We recommend voting YES, for Amendment 4.

Additional editorial endorsements

In addition to the above editorial endorsements, the following outlets have also endorsed a yes vote on the measure:

Opposition

Campaign finance

One committee was registered in support of Amendment 4: Floridians for a Fair Democracy. The committee had raised $25.3 million and spent $23.2 million.

The top contributors to the support campaign were the American Civil Liberties Union ( ACLU), which contributed $5.53 million, and The Sixteen Thirty Fund, which gave $3.95 million.

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. The committee did not report any campaign finance activity.

The following were the donors who had contributed $800,000 or more to the support committee:

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Florida Amendment 4 (2018)

Note: 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.

Background

Convicted felons voting laws

As of 2018, Florida was 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:

Margin-of-victory in past Florida elections

A report from The Sentencing Project, 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. A state-by-state comparison of disenfranchised voting populations can be found here.

An electoral margin-of-victory (MOV) is the difference between the share of votes cast for the winning candidate and the second-place candidate in an election. For example, if Candidate A wins an election with 55 percent of the vote and Candidate B, the second-place finisher, wins 45 percent of the vote, the winner's margin of victory is 10 percent. Margins of victory can be used to measure electoral competitiveness, political party or candidate strength, and, indirectly, the popularity of a particular policy or set of policies. Ballotpedia considers competitive races to be those with a MOV of less than 10 percent.

Gubernatorial elections

Republicans have held the office of Governor of Florida since the 1998 election. The chart below shows the partisan breakdown of Florida governors from 1992 to 2013.

The Florida gubernatorial and lieutenant gubernatorial election of 2018 was rated as a toss-up.

2014 MOV: 1 percent

2010 MOV: 1.2 percent

Presidential elections in Florida

2016 MOV: 1.2 percent

2012 MOV: 0.9 percent

2008 MOV: 2.8 percent

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 that was 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

Voters considered ballot measures addressing election policy in 15 states in 2018.

Redistricting:

Voting requirements and ballot access:

Arkansas Issue 3, a legislative term limits initiative, was certified for the ballot but was blocked by an Arkansas Supreme Court ruling. The measure would have imposed term limits of six years for members of the Arkansas House of Representatives and eight years for members of the Arkansas Senate. The ruling came too late to remove the measure from the ballot, but the supreme court ordered election officials to not count or certify votes for Issue 3.

Campaign finance, political spending, and ethics:

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

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 cast a vote

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.

Automatic registration

Florida does not practice automatic voter registration.

Online registration

Florida has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

Florida does not allow same-day voter registration.

Residency requirements

To register to vote in Florida, you must be a resident of the state. State law does not specify a length of time for which you must have been a resident to be eligible.

Verification of citizenship

Florida does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration.

Verifying your registration

The page Voter Information Lookup, run by the Florida Department of State, allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

Florida requires voters to present photo identification with a signature while voting.

The following list of accepted ID was current as of November 2019. Click here for the Florida Secretary of State's page on accepted ID to ensure you have the most current information.

Florida driver's license

Florida identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles

United States passport

Debit or credit card

Military identification

Student identification

Retirement center identification

Neighborhood association identification

Public assistance identification

Veteran health identification card issued by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs

License to carry a concealed weapon or firearm issued pursuant to s. 790.06

Employee identification card issued by any branch, department, agency, or entity of the federal government, the state, a county, or a municipality

A voter who presents an ID without a signature must show a second form of identification that includes the voter's signature.

Background

In 1977, the Florida Legislature required every voter to present an ID in order to vote. In 1998, the legislature required voters to present a photo ID.

As of December 2019, 34 states enforced (or were scheduled to begin enforcing) voter identification requirements. A total of 19 states required voters to present photo identification at the polls; the remainder accepted other forms of identification. Valid forms of identification differ by state. Commonly accepted forms of ID include driver's licenses, state-issued identification cards, and military identification cards.

State overview

Partisan control

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

Congressional delegation

State executives

State legislature

Trifecta status

2018 elections

Florida held elections for the following positions in 2018:

Demographics

Demographic data for Florida

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015)
Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in Florida.**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's three largest cities were Jacksonville (pop. est. 860,000), Miami (pop. est. 430,000), and Tampa (pop. est. 360,000).

State election 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

Presidential 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

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

2006

60.3%

Katherine Harris

38.1%

22.2%

2004

Mel Martinez

49.4%

Betty Castor

48.3%

1.1%

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.

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

Trifectas, 1992-2017

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

External links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Florida Amendment 4, Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative (2018) - Ballotpedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Florida Amendment 4, the Voting Rights Restoration for Felons Initiative, was on the ballot in Florida as an initiated constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018. It was approved. A "yes" vote supported 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.

# data[].attributes.headline
Persons of color are significantly more likely to vote democratic graph

# data[].attributes.subject
Persons of color are significantly more likely to vote democratic graph

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What If Only Men Voted? Only Women? Only Nonwhite Voters?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Five maps show who would control the House if only certain demographic groups went to the polls.