Tax-funded nonprofit spent $5 million on ads amid abortion ballot battle

The anti-abortion Florida Pregnancy Care Network, funded entirely by state taxpayers, launched its first-ever TV ads just as voters were about to decide an abortion rights ballot measure.

Photo credit: Floridians Protecting Freedom

This is Seeking Rents, a newsletter and podcast devoted to producing original journalism — and lifting up the work of others — about Florida politics, with an emphasis on the ways that big businesses and other special interests influence public policy in the state. Seeking Rents is produced by veteran investigative journalist Jason Garcia, and it is free to all. But please consider a voluntary paid subscription, if you can afford one, to help support our work. And check out our video channel, too.

An anti-abortion nonprofit financed by Florida taxpayers launched an unprecedented advertising campaign this fall — just as Florida voters were about to decide a ballot measure that would have enshrined abortion rights into the state constitution.

The Florida Pregnancy Care Network says it spent $5 million on the fall ad blitz, which included the organization’s first-ever television commercials. The nonprofit — which was created to distribute public money through a network of largely evangelical pregnancy centers that try to stop pregnant women from seeking abortions — is funded with nearly $30 million a year in state taxes provided by Gov. Ron DeSantis and Florida’s Republican-controlled Legislature.

The FPCN advertisements were ostensibly meant to promote a hotline for expectant mothers that refers callers to the anti-abortion centers in its network.

But the ads also sought to soften Florida’s image on women’s healthcare at a time when the state’s notoriously strict abortion laws — which prohibit most women from obtaining an abortion after just six weeks of pregnancy — were coming under intense criticism from supporters of Amendment 4. That was the ultimately unsuccessful November ballot initiative that would have overturned the state abortion ban and prohibited any further government interference with abortion in Florida.

“Nervous. Confused. Overwhelmed. An unplanned pregnancy brings many emotions. But one thing you never have to feel is alone,” a female narrator assured viewers in one of at least two 30-second spots commissioned by the Florida Pregnancy Care Network. “Florida provides lifesaving protections, judgment-free care, and free resources.”

“Florida cares,” a female narrator concluded in the other TV spot. “Because your life and your baby are that important — to you and to us.”

One of the FPCN ads was called “Emotions.” (Source: Florida Pregnancy Care Network)

Representatives for the Florida Pregnancy Care Network said the advertising was not intended to work against Amendment 4 — which ultimately drew support from more than 57 percent of voters but fell short of the 60 percent threshold needed to pass a constitutional amendment in Florida.

But the FPCN ads launched just as the DeSantis administration began spending taxpayer money on similar ads that implicitly attacked Amendment 4.

The FPCN ads sometimes played during the same commercial breaks as the state ads, which were sponsored by multiple state agencies and also defended Florida’s abortion laws. The FPCN ads featured similar-sounding narrators and used some shared language as the state ads, all of which ended with the tagline, “Florida cares.”

And the state ads were on top of millions of dollars in advertising explicitly attacking Amendment 4 paid for by the Republican Party of Florida — which itself raised money from deep-pocketed donors such as the Big Sugar companies Florida Crystals and U.S. Sugar and dark-money groups affiliated with right-wing activist Leonard Leo.

DeSantis has repeatedly refused to say how much taxpayer money he spent on the state ads against Amendment 4, which the Republican governor — who signed Florida’s six-week abortion ban into law shortly before launching a failed campaign for president — defended as “public service announcements.”

The DeSantis administration also spent taxpayer money on ads meant to weaken support for Amendment 3, another November ballot initiative that would have legalized marijuana but also failed to reach the 60 percent supermajority needed to pass.

But between the two advertising campaigns, the total tab for Florida taxpayers appears to be roughly $20 million, based on a Seeking Rents review of state contracts and vendor payments — which would climb to $25 million, if you count the additional advertising by the Florida Pregnancy Care Network.

While all the FPCN-sponsored ads specifically touted the organization’s hotline for pregnant women, documents obtained in a public-records request show the group aimed its campaign at far more people than just expectant mothers.

An internal report about the campaign identified half a dozen target demographics — including “audiences modeled as neutral” on abortion. Other target markets included people trying to conceive; anti-abortion healthcare providers; husbands and partners living with pregnant women; and religious leaders and groups.

An excerpt from a Sept. 24 report advertising report prepared for the FPCN by a marketing vendor.

In answers emailed through a contract spokesperson, FPCN Executive Director Rita Gagliano said the organization was attempting to reach the people in a pregnant woman’s support circle.

“Women in unexpected pregnancies often turn to mentors and family members for support,” Gagliano said. “We wanted to expand our reach by making not only pregnant women but also their support systems aware of the services provided by the program.”

The ad campaign was produced by a new vendor to FPCN called “One Two One Productions.” It appears to have come together very quickly.

While FPCN declined to say when it hired One Two One, records suggest it was brought aboard in August or September — on a contract that expired at the end of the year, according to FPCN. Records show the marketing campaign began ramping up in September with ads on Facebook, Instagram, streaming services, and Internet-connected television.

The campaign broadened by mid-October to include broadcast and cable television — the first TV advertising FPCN has ever done.

Gagliano said FPCN did not have enough money for TV advertising in years past. DeSantis and Republican lawmakers in Tallahassee dramatically increased the group’s funding in 2023 — as part of the same legislation imposing Florida’s six-week abortion ban.

The vendor behind the campaign is also something of a mystery. One Two One Productions appears to have no online footprint beyond a bare-bones website created in July — shortly before it began work for the Florida Pregnancy Care Network. An email address provided on the site does not work.

The privacy policy on One Two One’s website directs inquiries to a post office box in Alexandria, Va. That post office is a few blocks away from the offices of FlexPoint Media — a Republican political advertising firm that records show handled the Republican Party of Florida’s anti-Amendment 4 advertising.

Separate also show subcontractor with links to FlexPoint purchased advertising time on behalf of the Florida Pregnancy Care Network. The same ad buyer purchased airtime on behalf of the DeSantis administration for its advertising against Amendment 4, too.

The Florida Pregnancy Care Network declined to say why it hired One Two One Productions. It would not provide other examples of the company’s work. It would not identify a point of contact at the company. And it would not say whether it was aware of any relationship between One Two One and FlexPoint Media.

Representatives for FlexPoint Media did not respond to a request for comment.

Gagliano, the FPCN executive director, said all of the nonprofit’s advertising was approved by the DeSantis administration, via the Florida Department of Health, which oversees the state contract with FPCN.

“All of FPCN's education budget comes from DOH grants and is approved by DOH prior to the spend,” she said. “The educational campaign is a contractual requirement and is funded through the contract.”