Welcome to the Monday, September 23, Brew.
By: Briana Ryan
Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
- Florida Amendment 3 ranks as the most expensive recreational marijuana legalization measure nationally since 2010
- Help Desk: Do you have to vote for everything on your ballot?
- Six federal judges have been confirmed since Aug. 1
Florida Amendment 3 ranks as the most expensive recreational marijuana legalization measure nationally since 2010
There is a new record-holder for the most expensive marijuana legalization ballot measure: Florida Amendment 3.
Marijuana has been a recurring trend for ballot measures since 2010, though there were a few before then. From 2010 to 2023, there were 24 ballot measures to legalize the recreational or personal use of marijuana. Campaigns cumulatively raised more than $174.83 million supporting ($146.98 million) and opposing ($27.85 million) those ballot measures.
The most expensive marijuana legalization ballot measure before 2024 was California’s Proposition 64, which voters approved in 2016. Campaigns raised $27.14 million supporting ($25.07 million) and opposing ($2.08 million) Proposition 64.
With supporters and opponents raising a combined $105.08 million, Amendment 3 has already surpassed California Proposition 64 by $77.94 million—with seven weeks remaining until the election on Nov. 5.
Supporters of Amendment 3, led by the Smart & Safe Florida PAC, raised $90.44 million through Aug. 30. Opponents, led by the Keep Florida Clean PAC, raised $14.64 million.
- In Florida, citizen-initiated constitutional amendments must receive a vote of 60% of those voting on the question. Just one legalization ballot initiative—Arizona Proposition 207—received more than 60% of the vote, with 60.03%. Two legislative constitutional amendments, in Maryland and New Jersey, also received more than 60%.
- The largest donor to the support campaign, Trulieve, is a marijuana business based in Florida with dispensaries in several states. Trulieve has donated $82.89 million.
- While the support campaign has outraised the opposition 6-to-1, the opposition campaign is also the most expensive legalization opposition campaign on record, with $14.64 million. Ken Griffin, CEO of Citadel LLC and a resident of Florida, contributed $12.00 million to the opposition.
- Florida has a Republican trifecta, meaning Republicans control the legislature and governor’s office. In Republican trifectas, voters approved 50% of legalization measures. In Democratic trifectas or divided governments, voters approved 90%.
Supporters outraised opponents in the 16 legalization measures voters approved between 2010 and 2023. However, voters defeated several measures where supporters raised more than opponents. While no measures were approved when opponents raised more money, with six of eight defeated measures, supporters raised more than opponents. The average difference between supporters and opponents was similar for approved and defeated measures. For approved measures, support campaigns raised an average of $5.03 million more than opponents. For defeated measures, they raised an average of $4.84 million.
Florida Amendment 3 is not only the most expensive marijuana legalization measure on record but also ranks as the most expensive ballot measure of the year—a position typically held by California ballot measures. The second most expensive measure of the year is also in Florida, Amendment 4, which would provide for a state constitutional right to abortion. Supporters and opponents of Amendment 4 have raised a combined $56.79 million. As of Sept. 17, a California measure, Proposition 33, ranks third, with supporters and opponents raising a combined $49.74 million.
You can find more information about Ballotpedia’s campaign finance data for ballot measures at the following links:
Help Desk: Do you have to vote for everything on your ballot?
Last week, we told you about our 2024 Election Help Desk, a major component of our Voter Toolkit. The Help Desk provides reliable, nonpartisan answers to more than 50 election-related questions on topics ranging from voter registration to casting a ballot to the certification of final results. We started the project in 2020 and are excited to bring it back for this election cycle.
Today, let’s look at a topic covered in the Help Desk: do you have to vote for everything on your ballot?
No—you do not have to vote for everything on your ballot. Leaving an option blank on a ballot while filling out other options is commonly called undervoting. For example, The Washington Post’s Philip Bump wrote that in 2016, 1.7 million voters in 33 states and D.C. didn’t vote in the presidential contest but did vote in another contest on the ballot.
A ballot will not be canceled or disqualified because of an undervote. An undervote can be intentional (e.g., protest votes, tactical voting, or abstention) or unintentional (e.g., oversight on the voter’s part or confusing ballot design).
Undervoting does not directly affect candidate elections with a majority requirement to win. However, undervoting can affect ballot measure results. In seven states, constitutional amendments must be approved by a certain percentage of all voters casting a ballot in the election, making the effect of a blank vote different. In states requiring majority approval from all ballots cast in the election, leaving the question blank is the same as voting against the measure. The threshold for approval varies from 30% to a majority of all ballots cast in the election. Click here to read about how undervoting affects ballot measure campaigns in those seven states.
Six federal judges have been confirmed since Aug. 1
Ballotpedia tracks the number of federal judges each president appoints, provides historical comparisons of presidential appointments, and compares appointments over time by president and court types. Let’s take a look at how President Joe Biden’s (D) judicial appointments compare to his predecessors at this point in their terms in office.
Through Sept. 18, there were 890 authorized federal judicial posts and 44 vacancies. All 44 of those vacancies were for Article III judgeships. This report is limited to Article III courts, where appointees are confirmed to lifetime judgeships.
- From Aug. 1 through Sept. 18, six judges were confirmed
- From Aug. 1 through Sept. 18, three judges were nominated.
By Sept. 18—1,338 days in office—President Joe Biden (D) had nominated 250 individuals to Article III judgeships. For historical comparison:
- President Donald Trump (R) had nominated 451 individuals, 230 of whom were confirmed.
- President Barack Obama (D) had nominated 256 individuals, 182 of whom were confirmed.
- President George W. Bush (R) had nominated 302 individuals, 205 of whom were confirmed.
The following data visualizations track the number of Article III judicial nominations by the president by days in office during the Biden, Trump, Obama, and W. Bush administrations (2001-present).
The first tracker is limited to successful nominations, where the nominee was ultimately confirmed to their respective court:
