James Madison Institute poll: Amendment 3 has the votes until voters hear the tradeoffs
The homestead exemption increase loses more than 20% of its support when likely voters learn of consequences to decreased funding.
A new poll from the conservative James Madison Institute shows broad support for Amendment 3 — until voters hear what it might cost them.
Once respondents learn what the measure could mean in practice, support falls below the 60% threshold constitutional amendments need to pass.
Presented without tradeoffs, the proposal — which would raise the homestead exemption to $250,000 by 2028 — draws support from 74% of registered voters and 76% of likely voters. More than 4 in 10 (44%) strongly support it.
That support crosses party lines: 89% of Republicans, 64% of independents and 59% of Democrats say they would vote yes when the measure is described without reference to hard choices for local governments.
The picture changes when voters hear what JMI calls “tradeoffs” — for example, that cities and counties might have to cut services or find new sources of funding.
Even then, a majority holds. Among likely voters, 55% say the cuts are worth it, while 38% are opposed. Registered voters split similarly, 55% to 36%.
But the coalition thins. Republican support falls to 70%, support among no-party voters drops to 50%, and just 36% of Democrats remain in favor.
It’s not the first time a statewide survey has found support for Amendment 3 dropping sharply once voters get more information.
A poll from the University of North Florida’s Public Opinion Research Lab found 61% support when respondents weren’t told about the measure’s effects — but just 45% once they learned it would strip $11.86 billion from local budgets, a figure derived from the Legislature’s nonpartisan Office of Economic and Demographic Research. Unlike JMI, the UNF poll cited a specific dollar amount.
While Republican candidates continue to back the proposal, some of the loudest opposition now comes from public safety organizations. The Florida Sheriffs Association (FSA), the Florida State Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) and the Florida Professional Firefighters all say the measure would cut vital services and imperil funding for emergency response.
And even as police and fire unions line up against it, the wording voters will see in November remains unsettled after a court ruling this week.
Leon County Circuit Judge David Frank declared the ballot title and summary for Amendment 3 “clearly and conclusively defective.”
The amendment stays on the ballot for now, but Attorney General James Uthmeier has 10 days to revise the language. On Tuesday, he said his team was “taking a hard look” at the ruling — whether to fix the defect or appeal.
Among Frank’s objections: a ballot summary that endorses the amendment and amounts to “political rhetoric,” along with claims that the measure protects core services, safeguards small businesses and ensures “fairness for Florida residents.”
Frank’s ruling caps three consolidated lawsuits brought by the nonprofit Save Our Voters From Misleading Ballot Language, former Stuart Mayor Thomas Campenni, former Key Biscayne Mayor Michael Davey, former South Miami Mayor Philip Stoddard, former Democratic U.S. Rep. Al Lawson and former Republican state Sen. Jeff Brandes.
Targoz Market Research conducted the survey of 1,400 Florida registered voters July 20-26. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.62 percentage points.