House passes overhaul of citizen initiative process after daylong debate

The Florida House passed CS for HB 1205 on April 3, 2025, a measure that changes how citizen-initiated constitutional amendments are proposed and verified, voting 76 to 31 on final passage.

Representative Persons Mullica, sponsor of the bill, told the House, "Our citizen initiative process is broken. It has been taken over by out of state fraudsters looking to make a quick buck and by special interest intent on buying their way into our constitution." She said the measure aims "to root out the problem and provide assurances that only those with a stake in our constitution can change it." The bill requires, among other provisions, that sponsors post a $1,000,000 bond after collecting 25% of the required statewide signatures, restricts petition circulators to U.S. citizens and state residents, and mandates background checks and training for paid circulators.

Supporters said the changes are designed to prevent the kinds of mass, out-of-state petition-gathering operations and alleged identity-theft incidents reported during the most recent initiative cycle. Representative Julie Henson, speaking in favor, said the measure is meant to "protect our state constitution" and to restore integrity to the process. Representative Brayce Davis said the initiative process has produced historic reforms when legislation did not move, and he urged colleagues to preserve it but to also address evidence of fraud.

Opponents warned the bill would place steep new hurdles on grassroots sponsors and ordinary Floridians. Representative Ryan Gottlieb, Representative Kristin Eskamani and others said the combination of a $1,000,000 bond at an early signature milestone, a shortened window for turning in petitions, new criminal penalties and other requirements would effectively favor wealthy, well-funded campaigns and deter volunteer-driven efforts. "This bill seeks to make it nearly impossible for regular Floridians to change our constitution," Representative Eskamani said in floor debate.

Lawmakers debated dozens of floor amendments during the long consideration. Two notable staff-anchored changes: amendments proposed by Representative Martha Joseph to remove or redact sensitive personal information from petition forms were rejected; a clarification offered by Representative Persons Mullica that requires the sponsor or applicant to pay for recommended circulator background checks was adopted. Sponsors repeatedly said supervisors of elections will continue to perform signature verification; the bill delays the supervisors' verification duties for 90 days to allow offices time to adjust to the new rules.

The bill also creates a notification-and-signature-revocation step: when a supervisor verifies a signature as valid, the voter must be notified by mail and given a postage-paid form to revoke the signature if they did not sign. The sponsor said the state also will require additional identifying information on petitions (for example, voter registration number or date of birth) and allow supervisors to charge sponsors for validation costs.

Representative Driscoll raised constitutional concerns during questions, noting the U.S. Supreme Court has described petition circulation as core political speech; Persons Mullica countered that courts allow reasonable, content-neutral regulations to protect petition integrity. The House considered more than a dozen amendments; several failed and several were adopted. The sponsor said the measure is prospective and includes criminal penalties for certain forms of fraud and for unregistered circulation under the new rules.

Final passage came after lengthy debate; the clerk announced the vote as "76 yays, 31 nays." Representative Persons Mullica closed by urging colleagues to support the measure to restore "integrity to the initiative process."

The bill now moves to the Senate for further consideration.

Ending: The House debate on CS for HB 1205 highlighted a deep split over balancing ballot integrity with access: sponsors emphasized documented fraud and new audit tools; opponents said provisions would raise costs and complicate volunteer-driven petitions, particularly for small, citizen-led campaigns.