Ron DeSantis Recommends a ‘No’ Vote on Florida’s Rainy Day Fund Amendment. Here’s Why.

The Florida GOP announced yesterday that it was supporting Amendment 1, a measure to protect the state’s rainy day fund. That amendment would raise the state’s rainy day cap from 10 to 25 percent of general revenue, require annual deposits of $750 million until the fund is fully stocked, and allow lawmakers to tap the fund for only “critical state needs.”

The Florida GOP has officially endorsed Amendment 1.

This amendment will help strengthen Florida’s rainy day fund so the state can handle storms, downturns, and other emergencies without raising taxes or raiding the budget. pic.twitter.com/51rD83ctKh

— Florida GOP (@FloridaGOP) September 14, 2026

Gov. Ron DeSantis, however, is breaking with the Florida GOP and explained why.

This is a foolish constitutional amendment proposal. We already have a maxed out rainy day fund and have run the largest surpluses in state history.

Any additional revenue should be used for lower taxes, including assisting local governments with grants so that homestead… https://t.co/umP260lF1A

— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) September 14, 2026

“Any additional revenue should be used for lower taxes, including assisting local governments with grants so that homestead properties can be exempt from local property tax. Surplus revenue could also be used to remove tolls once the property tax issue is settled,” he wrote on X. “I recommend a no vote.”

Right now, Florida’s rainy day fund is at about $5 billion, its current legal maximum. It can be accessed for two reasons: a shortfall in the general revenue fund or for an emergency (Governor-declared under the Emergency Management Act or declared by law). Under Amendment 1, the Legislature could tap it on a nonrecurring basis for “critical state need” with a two-thirds vote of each chamber in a standalone bill.

Abuse of a larger rainy day fund seemed to be a big concern for some people.

Agreed. A fatter rainy day fund will be abused, period.

— Raybury (@raybury) September 14, 2026

Another user asked who decides what the critical need is, calling the term “Orwellian.”

But but but… it lets lawmakers tap funds ONLY for critical needs!

If that’s not Orwellian, I don’t know what is. Do lawmakers, who only get to tap those funds for critical needs also get to decide what a critical need is?

Imagine saying that with a straight face and saying…

— Parallel Spock (@RussLarson) September 15, 2026

Will DeSantis’ recommendation impact the vote?

The rainy day fund is already maxed out at $5 billion sitting unused. What’s a better use of your tax dollars, piling even more into Tallahassee coffers or keeping some for your own needs at home?

I’d rather see more of my tax dollars returned to my family. Hard no on Amendment… https://t.co/bqvFRNQejk

— Brock Juarez (@Juarez_Brock) September 15, 2026

In the past, DeSantis successfully swayed voters on amendments. This included Amendment 3 (2024), which would have legalized recreational marijuana, and Amendment 4 (2024), which would have legalized abortion up to the age of viability. DeSantis opposed both, and neither reached the 60 percent required to amend the state constitution.

It will be interesting to see what happens to Amendment 1 in November, given that Ron DeSantis is on record opposing it.

Editor’s Note: The 2026 Midterms will determine the fate of President Trump’s America First agenda. Republicans must maintain control of both chambers of Congress.

Help Townhall continue to report on the Democrats’ radicalism and inform voters as our nation faces a crossroads. Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.