Shawn Griffiths
FLORIDA — Primary voters went to the polls Tuesday to choose nominees for Florida governor, US Senate, Congress and several state and local offices. But in some cases, the most consequential candidates weren't actually on the ballot.
They were write-in candidates who will technically advance to November. But they often raise little or no money, spend little or nothing campaigning, and—in some cases— leave almost no campaign footprint at all.
Still, their presence accomplished something much more significant. They determined who was allowed to vote Tuesday.
They fit a pattern IVN and other outlets have come to call “phantom candidates” — nominal write-in candidates who qualify in races dominated by a single political party but do little or nothing to seriously compete for office.
It is not an uncommon phenomenon, and in a closed primary state like Florida, they ensure that the primary stays closed.
Florida Primaries Are Closed — But They Can Be Opened Under Law
Florida has one of the oldest closed-primary rules in the country.
Registered voters may cast a primary ballot only for candidates of the political party listed on their voter registration. If a voter is not registered with a party, they are shut out entirely. So, Democrats vote in Democratic primaries; Republicans vote in Republican primaries.
It is a system that dates back to 1913 and denies more than 3.3 million independent voters an equal and meaningful say in elections.
There is one exception to the primary rules that Florida voters created in 1998 Revision No. 11 to the state constitution. It is known today as the Universal Primary Amendment. Article VI, Section 5(b) of the Florida Constitution says:
“If all candidates for an office have the same party affiliation and the winner will have no opposition in the general election, all qualified electors, regardless of party affiliation, may vote in the primary elections for that office.”
In other words, if three Republicans are the only candidates running for an office, the election isn't supposed to be decided exclusively by Republicans. The primary becomes the election, and Democrats and independents are supposed to get a ballot as well
The same principle applies in reverse in a Democratic-dominated district.
The point of the Universal Primary Amendment (UPA) was to address one of the most glaring consequences of Florida’s closed primary system. Specifically, the issue that voters in single-party dominated districts were denied any say in who represented them.
A Florida Senate report produced after the amendment's adoption noted that, before the change, voters outside the dominant party could be completely denied an opportunity to help choose the eventual officeholder in one-party races.
However, the broad language of the amendment opened the door for a loophole. Enter the write-in candidate.
Florida Lawmakers Saw the 'Sham' Candidate Loophole Coming
The loophole was not an accidental oversight. Florida lawmakers immediately identified and debated what would happen if a write-in candidate entered an otherwise one-party race while attempting to implement the UPA.
A September 1999 Florida Senate report describes two competing approaches:
- Senate Bill 710 would have allowed the universal primary to remain open even if the only November opposition was a write-in candidate.
- A House proposal took the opposite approach: A qualified write-in would count as general-election opposition and therefore keep the primary closed.
According to the Senate's report, lawmakers expressed concern that a person or group could field a “sham” write-in candidate—or phantom candidate—for the specific purpose of keeping a primary and the entire election restricted to party voters.
They warned that doing so could thwart the intent of voters. Notably, neither SB 710 or the House proposal passed.
In 2000, then-Secretary of State Katherine Harris issued an advisory opinion concluding that a qualified write-in candidate counted as general-election opposition. Under that interpretation, the presence of a write-in meant the primary stayed closed.
Federal courts have since upheld that interpretation in litigation over the rule.
In 2012, voters challenged closed Democratic primaries in both Miami-Dade and Broward counties. In Telli v. Snipes, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that qualified write-ins count as candidates under Florida law.
Notably, the court declined to determine whether a write-in represented “real” or merely illusory opposition.
So, in Florida, one person can file as a write-in candidate and turn an election that every voter could have participated in into a party-only primary that will effectively be the entire election.
In Marion County, Two Candidates Raised $0 — And 127,131 Voters Were Locked Out
Perhaps the clearest examples Tuesday came in Marion County. Every named candidate for County Commission Districts 2 and 4 was a Republican. Under the UPA, that should have allowed all voters to participate if there was no November opposition.
Then two write-in candidates appeared: Mark Okus in District 2 and Leonard Michael Racioppi in District 4. And so, Tuesday’s primaries remained closed.
The Ocala Gazette calculated that 127,131 registered Democrats and independent voters were excluded from the two contests. Without the write-ins, all 263,464 registered voters in Marion County would have been eligible to participate.
The campaign finance records may tell the whole story in these elections.
The write-in candidates were not on the primary ballot. However, the November election is only a couple of months away. Yet, as of the final pre-primary reporting period, Marion County election records showed Okus had raised $0 and spent $0.
Racioppi had also reported $0 in contributions and $0 in expenditures.
Meanwhile, the Republican candidates were raising and spending tens of thousands — in some cases well over $100,000 — to win the primary.
There is no public evidence establishing that Okus or Racioppi were recruited by one of the Republican campaigns or that they filed specifically to manipulate the primary. But the numbers certainly look suspicious.
Zero-dollar campaigns whose primary electoral impact is closing an otherwise universal primary match the pattern Florida election observers have repeatedly identified as a red flag for “phantom” candidacies.
Brevard County Showed Exactly What One Write-In Can Do
Brevard County looked almost like a controlled laboratory experiment by comparison Tuesday—showing how UPA should work and the impact a single write-in candidate can have on Florida elections.
In Canaveral Port Authority District 3, Republicans Vince Jackson and Greg Loyd were the only named candidates. But write-in candidate Camille Blackburn also qualified.
As a result, Brevard election officials told District 3 voters that the race would appear only on Republican primary ballots.
Blackburn's campaign finance reports through August 13 show just $300 in total contributions and $0 in expenditures.
Loyd won the primary with 17,695 of the 26,391 total votes cast.
Now look at Canaveral Port Authority District 5.
Only two Republicans qualified: Carol Craig and Randall May. But unlike District 3, there was no write-in candidate.
District 5 became a UPA contest that appeared for all participating Republicans, Democrats and independent voters.
The result? 44,125 votes were cast in District 5. This is 17,734 more than District 3. Craig won with 57% of the vote.
In a single county, it was a tale of two elections: In one race, every voter had the opportunity to vote and many voters took advantage. In the other, one write-in filing shut the door.
However, Brevard's County Commission District 4 also followed the same “phantom candidate” pattern.
After Democrat Natalie Allen failed to qualify, Republicans Adam Dyer and Rob Feltner were the only named candidates. Write-in candidate Cheyenne Brady-Mogle, however, qualified on June 11.
Brady-Mogle reported no contributions, no in-kind contributions and no expenditures through August 13.
The primary remained Republican-only, and Feltner defeated Dyer with 56.7% of the vote.
The Loophole Works for Democrats, Too
The write-in loophole is not a Republican invention nor does it only benefit the GOP. For example, look at Tuesday's Democratic primary for Florida House District 13 in Jacksonville.
Audrey Gibson and Leslie Jean-Bart were the two Democrats seeking the seat. No Republican qualified. But Brice Gaillard qualified as a write-in candidate for November, which meant the election did not become a universal primary.
This one is a particularly unusual case. Gaillard’s campaign-document page contains repeated entries labeled “Fail to File Letter” stretching from June through Election Day.
Again, by itself, this does not establish Gaillard's motive. But his presence kept Tuesday’s election closed to only registered Democrats and Gibson won with approximately 56.6% of the vote.
Florida Has Seen Far More Blatant Cases
Sometimes, there has been stronger evidence suggesting a write-in candidacy was connected to a political campaign.
One of the most notorious examples came in the 2016 race for state attorney in Florida's 4th Judicial Circuit.
Republicans Angela Corey, Melissa Nelson and Wes White were competing in what otherwise could have become a universal primary. Then, divorce attorney Kenny Leigh entered the race as a write-in.
A lawsuit alleged Leigh was a sham candidate and that one of Corey's campaign managers had filed his paperwork. Leigh had also contributed to Corey's campaign, according to reporting on the dispute. However, the courts declined to remove him.
The primary stayed Republican-only.
IVN reported on another example in St. Johns County in 2020, when a write-in candidate emerged hours before the filing deadline in the sheriff's race. More than 90,000 voters were kept from meaningfully participating in the contest.
The write-in was Scott C. Boutwell, a registered Republican. His candidacy meant only Republicans could vote in the primary between Rob Hardwick and Chris Strickland. Hardwick won 69%-30% and was the only named candidate on the November ballot.
Florida Has Known About This for 27 Years
Most electoral districts in Florida are drawn to be dominated by one party or the other. In Florida, the advantage goes to the Republican Party.
There are many instances in which the opposition party doesn’t bother to field a candidate because it would be an expensive and resource-consuming endeavor guaranteed to fail.
Voters tried to pass a solution, but trying to work around closed primaries instead of reforming the entire system allowed the parties to exploit the phantom-candidate loophole.
And though they may try to hide it, it is clear both parties have known about the loophole since voters approved the universal primary.
And they are using it to their advantage at the expense of voters’ rights.
Attempts to change the system have repeatedly failed. A bipartisan legislative proposal aimed at closing the loophole died in committee in 2017.
The Florida Constitution Revision Commission considered a similar proposal in 2018 but declined to send it to voters.
In 2020, 57% of voters approved a nonpartisan Top Two open primary system for state legislature, the governor, and other executive offices in the state. But, because Florida moved the goal post for amendments to 60%, it failed.
Regardless of the Universal Primary Amendment, the parties still control voting rights in Florida.
The state constitution may say voters outside a political party should get a voice when that party's primary will effectively determine who holds office.
But one write-in candidate with no money, no spending, and virtually no campaign at all can prevent that from happening.
They do not need to win a single vote to affect the election.
They do it simply by filing.