Senator Jim Dotson

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:28:19)

hopefully they'll go that route, and initiated acts will be much more debatable than a constitutional thing further on. So this raises the standard, and more than likely, there might be a court case that challenges it if we pass it, And the Supreme Court of the state of Arkansas will get to ultimately decide it. Appreciate a good

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:27:49)

However, that's not the bill we have in front of us. We have a, there's always going to be a debate back and forth, but I think this raises the standard for initiated constitutional amendments. So somebody can't just buy their way onto the Constitution, write their name into the Constitution, their business name in there, with a simple majority vote. it will be higher than that. Now, they can still try to do an initiated act, and if it's something that is an initiated act,

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:27:14)

And so if we're looking at the Constitution, not a court case or an opinion by a court, which one carries more weight? The actual Constitution itself that has been, or a court opinion from a single court at a point in time that has since had. So this is a high threshold to do. To Senator King's point, should we have two-thirds of the counties, you know, I think I would possibly support that.

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:26:44)

Yes, it was Andrews. I forget what the other side of it was. But the Andrews case said that it had to have a standard of view established by Andrews that the plain language had to be used. Unfortunately, I don't have the exact wording in here, but the plain language of the Constitution had to be followed. Every word had weight and meaning.

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:26:06)

So the plain language of the Constitution is very clear on this. However, fast forward 30-some-odd years later, a court came up with a different standard. They used the word inconceivable in there, and Senator Tucker says it's law. It is an opinion. It is an opinion, as we have known throughout time, that court opinions change from time to time. There was another opinion more recently from the Arkansas court that talked about, I think, I thought I had it written down.

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:25:32)

I'm glad Senator Tucker brought up the Edgemont case and quoted it. That, if you go back in the history just a little bit, 1920 when Amendment 7 was adopted, it actually defined what a measure was. It also defined that the measure was not just an act, but also a constitutional amendment that was initiated by the people. And it said inside that amendment that no measure shall be amended or repealed unless by a two-thirds vote of both chambers of the General Assembly.

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:25:29)

you, Mr. Chair. Just a couple of points.

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:19:54)

So this is a higher threshold to pass. It takes 24, and I'm happy to answer any

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:19:20)

but this simply addresses that one part. The authority under Article 5, Section 1 of the Constitution for us to do that reads that the Arkansas, any measure that is, we've heard Senator Mark Johnson talk about this several times throughout the years, that we have the authority under the current Constitution to amend a measure by a two-thirds majority of both chambers.

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:18:48)

you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. President. Senate Bill 586

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:18:53)

does one very simple thing. It increases the threshold by which an initiated constitutional amendment has to pass at the ballot to a two-thirds majority. It is narrowly defined for just initiated constitutional amendments, not initiated acts. So initiated acts, referendum, they would still be a simple majority.

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:08:24)

total, to the total membership of joint budget. We're happy to

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:07:52)

And so as I was looking at the current membership of the ex-officios and currently the chairs of ALC and audit, as well as the immediate past chairs, are ex-officio members of Joint Budget Committee. However, the President of the Senate, as well as the Speaker of the House, neither one of them are ex-officio automatic members or they're immediate past members. So what this bill simply does is add those two positions in each chamber, so four positions

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:07:43)

Dotson, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. President. Members, this bill, the membership of

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (4:07:49)

Joint Budget Committee is in statute.

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (3:40:42)

And then Senator Gilmore, I will also recognize you for a motion. Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to make a motion to suspend the rules of withdrawal of Senate Joint Resolution 13 from State

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (3:32:50)

to. So the PSAO is a layer between the pharmacist and the PBM?

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (3:32:22)

PBMs, as I understand the process, the PBM was the middleman between the drug manufacturer and the pharmacist. And they're the ones

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (3:32:10)

then Senator Hickey. Thank you, Madam President. Senator Boyd, what—so, I'm unfamiliar with the PSAOs. I mean, this is pretty new.

Meeting — April 2, 2025 (2:38:31)

but I still think the language is a little too broad that it could catch a