March 5, 2013
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (27)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1250
· 4 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB1250”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1041
· 3 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HB1041”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB148
· 3 mentions in transcript, chapter
Matched: “148. Senate Bill 148 by Senator Key to repeal free railroad transportation for t…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1022
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…n, to whom is referred to House Bill 1511, House Bill 1527, House Bill 1022, and Senate Bill 338, beg to lead to report we've had the s…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1175
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…er, we, your Committee on Judiciary, to whom is referred to House Bill 1175, beg to lead to report we've had the same under considerati…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1248
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…, we are your committee on education to whom is referred to House Bill 1248, House Bill 1476, House Bill 1477, and House Bill 1509. Beg…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1384
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…yays, and two present. The clincher motion fails. Passover House Bill 1384, Passover House Bill 1486, read House Bill 1250.”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1411
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…r, we are your Committee on Education, whom was referred to House Bill 1411.”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1476
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…mittee on education to whom is referred to House Bill 1248, House Bill 1476, House Bill 1477, and House Bill 1509. Beg lead report we'v…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1477
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…on to whom is referred to House Bill 1248, House Bill 1476, House Bill 1477, and House Bill 1509. Beg lead report we've had the same un…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1486
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…e clincher motion fails. Passover House Bill 1384, Passover House Bill 1486, read House Bill 1250.”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1509
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…d to House Bill 1248, House Bill 1476, House Bill 1477, and House Bill 1509. Beg lead report we've had the same under consideration. He…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1511
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…e, your Committee on Transportation, to whom is referred to House Bill 1511, House Bill 1527, House Bill 1022, and Senate Bill 338, beg…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1527
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…on Transportation, to whom is referred to House Bill 1511, House Bill 1527, House Bill 1022, and Senate Bill 338, beg to lead to repor…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1558
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…Speaker, we are committee on judiciary to whom was referred House Bill 1558 and Senate Bill 357. Begley report we had the same under co…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB101
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB101”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB133
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB133”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB205
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB205”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB227
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…nays, and 0 present. You have passed the bill, passed over Senate Bill 227.”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB246
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB246”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB293
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB293”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB307
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB307”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB338
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…d to House Bill 1511, House Bill 1527, House Bill 1022, and Senate Bill 338, beg to lead to report we've had the same under considerati…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB357
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…ittee on judiciary to whom was referred House Bill 1558 and Senate Bill 357. Begley report we had the same under consideration here. We…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB361
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…e are your Committee on Public Health, whom was referred to Senate Bill 361, Senate Bill 385 and Senate Bill 423. Beg to lead report. W…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB385
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…tee on Public Health, whom was referred to Senate Bill 361, Senate Bill 385 and Senate Bill 423. Beg to lead report. We've had the same…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
SB423
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…, whom was referred to Senate Bill 361, Senate Bill 385 and Senate Bill 423. Beg to lead report. We've had the same under consideration…”
|
Pre-2017 bill |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 4, 2026
Led in prayer by Pastor Paul Strong of First Assembly of God Church in Blymouth, a guest of Representative Monty Hodges. And to remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance to be led by Representative Debbie Hobbs. Let us bow our heads in prayer. Father,
Speaker 2
0:14
today we thank you for this wonderful day you've given us. Lord, we pray today for all those that are gathered here that you would give them wisdom. Your word declares that if any man lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, and you will give it to us liberally.
Lord, we pray, God, that you would give us the wisdom and understanding to govern and lead our state. We pray for your hand of protection, your hand of blessing on all those that are gathered here. Watch over their families, and we give you
Speaker 5
0:51
all the thanks and praise in Jesus' name. And all God's people said, Amen. the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice
for all. Members, indicate your presence by pushing your yellow present button. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Thank you.
Cast off the ballots for 98 members present to chair seats of quorum. Any request for leave? Representative Armstrong, you're
recognized. Request for leave for Betty Overby. Leave granted for Representative Overby. Leave granted. Any other requests for leave? Representative Westerman, you're recognized. Representative Bragg. Leave granted for Representative Bragg. Leads granted. Representative James L. Ward moves we dispense with the reading of the previous state's journal.
No objections. So ordered. Are there reports from select committees? Read your reports. Nope. Are there reports from
Speaker 15
2:33
standing committees? Read your reports, Mr. Clerk. Mr. Speaker, we are your committee on education to whom is referred to House Bill 1248, House Bill 1476, House Bill 1477, and House Bill 1509. Beg lead report we've had the same under consideration. Herewith return the same recommendation that they do pass. Respectfully submitted, Representative James McLean, Chair. Mr. Speaker, we are your Committee on Education, whom was referred to House Bill 1411.
Beg to lead report we had the same under consideration. Herewith return the same with the recommendation that it do pass as amended. Respectfully submitted, Representative James McLean, Chair. Mr. Speaker, we are your Committee on Public Health, whom was referred to Senate Bill 361, Senate Bill 385 and Senate Bill 423. Beg to lead report. We've had the same under consideration herewith. Return the same with the recommendation that it do pass. They do pass. Respectfully submitted. Representative John Burris, Chair.
Mr. Speaker, we, your Committee on Transportation, to whom is referred to House Bill 1511, House Bill 1527, House Bill 1022, and Senate Bill 338, beg to lead to report we've had the same under consideration herewith, return the same with the recommendation that they do pass, respectfully submitted. Representative Jonathan Barnett, Chair. Mr. Speaker, we, your Committee on Judiciary, to whom is referred to House Bill 1175, beg to lead to report we've had the same under consideration,
Here we have to return the same with the recommendation that we do concur in Senate Amendment 1 and 2, respectfully submitted, Representative Marshall Wright, Chair. Mr. Speaker, we are committee on judiciary to whom was referred House Bill 1558 and Senate Bill 357. Begley report we had the same under consideration here. We have
to return the same with the recommendation do pass, respectfully submitted, Representative Marshall Wright, Chair.
Is there any unfinished business? Are there any executive communications? Members, I'd like to take this time to welcome our doctor of the day, Dr. Beth Milligan of
Little Rock. And our nurse of the day, Ms.
Geraldine Rambo, is here with us. members also on the house floor today joining us is former state representative
robert jeffrey of camden who served in the spani from 2003 to 2008 eight. In the East Gallery, we have a former state representative, Res Bennett of Louisville, who served in this body from 1999 to 2004, guest of Representative Lane Jean and David building. And finally, we have the Arkansas Ambulance Association Stars of Life that are
joining us in the gallery. The morning hour has ended. Mr. Clerk, read House
Chair
Unverified
5:54
Bill 1041. House Bill 1041 by Representatives Westerman et al. to limit
Speaker 15
5:59
the increase in general revenue expenditures from year to year and to create a nexus between the amount of general revenue expenditures and the growth
of state disposable personal income. Representative Westerman, you're recognized to explain the bill.
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
6:25
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, members, I'm finally here at the well, and I'm getting ready to run that bill. Regardless of the outcome today, at least none of you will be asking me tomorrow about that bill anymore. This is House Bill 1041. It's not a little bill. It's not one of these little bills that does nothing. It is a significant piece of policy that I believe will make Arkansas better. I ask you to listen, ask questions, participate in the debate, and vote for what you believe will make the future brighter for the people of Arkansas.
As I move through this presentation today, I will try to be brief, but I want to explain everything to the best of my ability to you. And what I want to tell you is first is why this legislation is needed. Then I want to explain to you what this bill does do, and then explain to you what the bill doesn't do. So I've been asked a lot of times, why is this legislation needed? After all, we're one of five states not to deficit spend during the previous recession. Now, I've heard it said before that on the railroad tracks of life, if you don't keep moving, you're going to get run over.
We have a good budgeting system here in Arkansas, but we can make it better. And I believe that putting this growth on expenditures will make our budgeting system better. I believe it will make us more fiscally responsible. I believe it will put us on a consistent, responsible, and sustainable track of government growth that aligns with the growth of our state's wealth and economy. Why else do I think this piece of legislation is needed? over 10 years our expenditures have grown from 8.8 billion to over 20 billion that's 140 percent
increase and they're currently over 21 billion over the same time frame the number of state jobs has grown over 21 percent while the growth in all jobs has increased only 4.9 percent and that's at the same time we had a 9.8 percent population growth We have seen swings in the general revenue budget from a 2.5% decrease in 2010 to an 8.5% increase in 2004.
Since we use baseline budgeting in Arkansas, the value we approve one year becomes the starting point for the next year. By growing our government by large margins in one year when revenue collections are up, like in 2004, we set ourselves up for more devastating cuts in the years like 2010 when revenues are down. Why else do I believe that this legislation is necessary? We've already got two tools that we can use to control spending in our state.
I believe this bill simply provides a third tool to the legislature to control that spending. Our two current tools are Appropriations and the Revenue Stabilization Act. And I want us to ask ourselves today, how effectively are we using those tools, and could we use another tool in our toolbox? First, let's talk about Appropriations. We're aware of our Joint Budget Committee meetings, where we hear the request of the agencies.
Those meetings start back in the fall. We spend a lot of time going through budgets and reviewing the budgets of agencies. Then we have appropriation bills that come out of the Joint Budget Committee that are on the yellow sheet that we vote on every day. Now, we've all been told you don't necessarily have to worry about appropriations. they're not spending any money, they're just giving us permission to spend money. Well, if we look back this past year, I asked the Bureau of Legislative Research,
how many appropriations did we, or what was the value of the appropriations that we approved? And the number they came back with was over $36 billion, and we spent $21 billion. So there's a large percentage of money that gets appropriated that never gets spent. So if you use the argument that we control spending with appropriations, I would say we have that tool. We certainly could limit the growth in appropriations, and we could control spending, but we have not used that tool.
So you may ask, why do we even approve appropriations? Well, that's part of the Constitution that says that for expenditures to occur, we have to have an appropriation that is passed by three-fourths of the bodies in both chambers. next we have the revenue stabilization act now we've all applauded the revenue stabilization act and i think we can all be grateful for the revenue stabilization act that was passed back in the 1940s and the revenue stabilization act basically says that we can't spend more money than we take
in which is a good thing that's fiscal responsibility in budgeting not spending more money than you take in. That's why during the previous recession, we didn't deficit spend. That's why we get all the accolades for a good budgeting process. But I think we can make the budgeting process better. I think we can put a limit on the amount that expenditures can grow above what we spent the previous year. For you that have been
here more than that it's not your first term, you know how the revenue stabilization process works. It would be difficult for the whole chamber in both ends of the Capitol, for both chambers to get together and hash out the details on the Revenue Stabilization Act. So the process that I've seen the two times that I've been here for budgeting is that the governor invites certain members to the mansion on Sunday night and they work out a Revenue Stabilization Act and we get
it placed on our desk two or three days before adjournment and that is you often hear called the governor's budget but it's the responsibility of the legislature to budget and I would say that although the Revenue Stabilization Act is a excellent tool and we as legislators have complete control over the Revenue Stabilization Act, we have yielded that authority as well. I believe that by passing this growth cap on expenditures, we will reassert the authority of the legislature to truly have control in the budgeting process.
This will not prevent the executive branch from doing what the executive branch is constitutionally charged to do, and that's to spend the money. It's our job to budget it. It's their job to spend how much we tell them is budgeted. So let's look at what the bill does. I believe the expenditure growth cap will work in conjunction with RSA to simply establish a limit that expenditures can grow from one year to the next. RSA will still be the robust tool that it has always been to keep us from deficit spending.
The expenditure growth cap will be a complement to RSA that will bring more discipline and responsibility to the budgeting process by limiting growth in expenditures to a reasonable rate that is tied to the rate of growth of the after-tax disposable income of Arkansas taxpayers. Those working on RSA bills will still have total flexibility in prioritizing expenditures, but the total growth in RSA will not be an arbitrary number that is simply the projected revenue to be collected during the next fiscal session.
The growth in expenditures in state government will be tied to the growth in expenditures of the citizens of Arkansas. In other words, if Arkansans have more disposable income in their pockets to spend, then the state government will be allowed to grow and spend at the same rate. To me, that seems like a reasonable request. The bill allows flexibility to do Amendment 82 projects, to address emergency expenditures, to allow general improvement funds to be spent without counting against the cap,
and for one-time expenditures for any claims against the state to be paid without counting against the cap. Like RSA, the bill can be amended by future legislatures, if needed, by a simple majority vote. So this doesn't tie
the hands of any future legislature if we pass this spending cap. So now I want to talk about what the bill doesn't do. I know you've
all gotten a lot of phone calls and e-mails and a lot of people telling you what this bill will do,
but the one thing this bill will not do is it doesn't cut anything. It simply controls the rate of growth. It doesn't reduce the baseline budget from the previous year. It slows the growth in the current year. The bill doesn't yield legislative authority to the executive branch, but to the contrary, it reasserts constitutional legislative authority in establishing a budget while allowing the executive branch to fulfill their constitutional duty that I already talked about
of executing the expenditures within the budget established by the legislature. The bill does
not require DF&A to estimate economic numbers needed for the allowable growth calculation. The data is non-biased and is published by the United States Bureau of Economic Analysis. Now I want to take this time to answer any questions that you may have
about the bill. Representative Walker, for what purpose?
what purpose? Question. You recognize. Representative
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
16:29
Westerman, apparently you want to do two things. Would you correct me? One of them is to retake apparent control from the executive in dealing with initial budget setting. Is that correct? Would you restate that, Representative Walker? You would like to, the first thing you'd like to do is to retake apparent control from the executive office and setting the initial budget for the state for the next year.
Would you like for this body to do
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
17:06
that? This bill, the effective date would be July 1st of 2014. So it would not apply to the current budget that we're getting ready to pass. But in the spirit of it, I would hope that if we pass this bill that we would stay true to that and pass a budget that falls in line
Speaker 32
17:24
with the stipulations of the bill. In other
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
17:27
words, you don't like the last-minute preparation after a little huddling a few days before the end of the session so that you'll have something presented to you
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
17:38
so that the only thing we have to do is vote it up or down? That's a fair statement. I would like for us to have more time to review
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
17:51
RSA and to have more input in the RSA process. Second question, Mr. Speaker, if I may. You want to also place a limit on what the budget growth can be from year to year. That is apparent. But would you also say that you want state government to be run and operated like a business, and therefore that you would not place the same kind of limitations upon a progressive business
that's functioning well in a state where the needs of
Speaker 32
18:19
the citizens are very great? Representative Walker, I would disagree with
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
18:24
that. I have not said at any time that we're trying to run the state like a business. I recognize there are differences between public policy and public institutions and government than there are in private business. Private business is motivated by profit, and I have not insinuated, nor does the bill apply or imply, that
it's to run state government like a business generating a profit.
Speaker 44
18:51
Representative Murdoch, for what purpose? Question. You recognize?
Speaker 45
18:55
Along that same vein, Representative Westerman, would you not say that by the policy that you're presenting, that by definition of that policy, you're limiting the money to be spent on the services or programs or whatever is needed for the people, you're predetermining that with a percentage. It
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
19:19
is a percentage that's predetermined by
the amount of disposable income that Arkansas taxpayers have to spend.
As their budget grows, then our budget could grow. Again, it doesn't cut anything. It just limits the rate of growth, and it also makes it a more consistent and sustainable rate of growth. If you look at RSA over the past decade, you will see spikes and you will see peaks and you'll see it flatten off and spike again. If you model this formula in our RSA process, you would see a more consistent, steady growth that I think would be better for agencies to be able to not know the exact number
but know that it's going to be more consistent and steady than what we see when we have large spikes and then when
Speaker 45
20:08
we have decreased revenues. Well, and if the ebb and flow of needs and services was as consistent as you just made it in your theory, but this is not theoretical, so I think it would be very bad policy if we put a number on what we must do for years ahead. I mean, what you're saying is laudable in some ways, but I just don't think it's attainable in functionality because of what you talked about, the inconsistency of how things happen.
I think we need to have that flexibility to address the needs of people, and I don't think that you give us that flexibility. I think you put us in a box by this policy, and I think what you care about is good government and good spending, and I think we all care about that. I think the system that we have has done a good job of that, as you noted. So not bad thinking, but it's bad policy to a process that I think deserves to stay as it is so that we will be consistent in making sure we serve the people properly and not just preserve money.
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
21:14
So that needs to be considered. Representative Murdoch, I appreciate
those comments. If you look at history, which is all we have to go on, the way our budget is determined is by the projection that DF&A makes on the available revenue for the next year. I dare say that those expenditures are always just directed to areas where there are needs. We already have a cap.
Our cap is how much revenue we bring in. And I'm saying we need to cap it as something that makes sense, which is tying it to the disposable personal income of the taxpayers of Arkansas rather than tying it to simply how much revenue we will collect next year.
Well, it appears you have no more questions, so that was much quicker than I thought it would
Speaker 32
22:25
be. I would appreciate a good vote on this bill. Representative
Westerman has explained the bill. Does anyone wish to speak against the bill? Representative Edwards, you recognize to speak against the
bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm going to now reveal something that most people don't know. If you want to know what's going on in my district on Saturdays, come to the Waffle House and you will find people there like Representative Burris and myself.
This past weekend we were there, I introduced him to a friend of mine named Tommy Mitchell. Now, I have cars older than Representative Burris, and I'm older than Representative Burris, and my friend Tommy Mitchell is older than both of us. He was actually alive back in 1945 when Governor Laney came up with the Revenue Stabilization Act.
now none of us are perfect and i applaud someone like representative westerman who comes up with an idea i like people with ideas i like representative westerman i never got to know governor laney he died in 1977 his nickname was business ben he was in banking he was in the oil business. He was in the cotton business. He was about in anything you could think of
concerning business. And he wasn't happy with the way state budgeting was going. And so he is known as the father of the RSA. Again, was Governor Laney perfect? No. But he did come up with a pretty good plan. This is a bill that if we didn't have the RSA, I would be voting for today, but we do have the RSA. We do have in our hands the ability
to manage our state budget. We can limit the growth to whatever we want to do right now. I happen to have a lot of confidence in our speaker. I happen to have a lot of confidence and the leadership in the Senate, I think we've done things very, very well when most other states in the nation haven't figured out the budgetary process. We are unique in this.
And so today I say that this bill, it's probably not a bad bill, But we have a great system that we know about. It's in place. We have a lot of changes that have occurred in this state recently, and a lot of them I've found out that I've liked. I've liked the blue calendar. I like the fact that the past couple of years, with the effort of Representative McLean, Senator Dismayne, Lieutenant Governor Dahr, that we have greater transparency with the electronic checkbook.
The voters of Arkansas said that they want us to meet annually to talk about fiscal issues in the off years. For these reasons, I think we've got a good system. For these reasons, I think it's a system we ought to keep for now. We don't know what's going on in D.C. We don't know what will happen up there tomorrow, but we know what's going on in Arkansas today. We've got a lot of good people who have balanced budgets, and I'd appreciate if we could keep the system we have.
Thank you. Representative Viviana, for what purpose? I had a question for Representative Edwards, please. Representative Edwards has spoken against the bill. Does anyone wish to speak for the bill, against the bill? Representative Westerman, would you like to close for
Speaker 37
26:42
your bill? You recognize? Recognize Representative Westerman, close the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
26:55
Members, again, it's always a privilege to stand here in the will and to present
new ideas. I think we are better, but this gives us an opportunity to be best. I hope you'll take the courage today to step out and strive not just to be better, but strive to be best. I think we can be an example to the taxpayers of Arkansas and to other states in this great country. If we will be innovative, if we will implement something to a good system,
to make it even better. You've heard the debate. You've heard the pros. You've heard the cons. I'm asking you to vote for what you think is best for
the people of Arkansas. And with that, I'll close and I'll appreciate a good vote. Members, we have a pair on the desk. Representative Ken Bragg votes yes. Representative Mike Holcomb votes no. witnessed by Representative Randy Alec Zander.
Representative Holcomb is the present member. Are there any procedural objections to the pair?
Please do not vote either one of the machines. Representative Holcomb, your vote has already been cast. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted?
Cast with the ballots, 48 yeas, 46 nays, and one present. The bill has failed to pass. 49. There were 49 yeas
and 47 nays with the paired vote, with one vote present. Representative McClain, moves to the clincher. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk.
Chair
Unverified
29:09
Putting on the clincher motion. Has
everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast the balance, 45 yays, 47 yays, and two present. The clincher motion fails. Passover House Bill 1384, Passover House Bill 1486, read House Bill 1250.
Chair
Unverified
29:40
House Bill 1250 by Representative Whitaker and all, amending battery in the second degree to
Speaker 15
29:48
reflect when injury to another person occurs as a result of driving while intoxicated. Representative
Whitaker, you recognize to explain the bill.
Representative David Whitaker
Unverified
30:00
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill very simply adds a line to battery in the second degree, which will give our prosecutors another weapon in their fight against drunk driving.
It adds the language that if one recklessly causes serious physical injury while driving intoxicated, they can be deemed guilty of battery in the second degree. We work with the prosecutor coordinator's office on this, and we have the support of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. I'd like to have a good vote. Thank you. Representative Whitaker has explained the bill. Does anyone wish to speak against the bill, for the bill?
If not, the question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1250.
Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Has everyone voted? As everyone voted, cast with the balance of 89 yeas, 0 nays, and 0 present, you have passed the bill. Passed over 1485 and 1517. We will move to the Senate calendar. Read Senate Bill
Chair
Unverified
31:14
148. Senate Bill 148 by Senator Key to repeal free railroad transportation for the College of Agriculture.
Representative McLean, recognized to explain the
bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Senator Key and members of the Bureau's staff during the interim have been searching for antiquated code and laws that are no longer applicable in this day and time. This bill essentially repeals free transportation for members of the College of Agriculture. With that, I'd appreciate a good vote, and Mr. Speaker would take any questions.
Seeing none, Representative McClain has explained the bill. Does anyone wish to speak against the bill, for the bill? Representative McClain, recognize the close. I'd appreciate you to
vote, Mr. Speaker. Question for the House. The passage of Senate Bill 148. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast the balance for 93 ayes, 0 nays, and 0 present. You have passed the bill, passed over Senate Bill 227.
Read Senate Bill 246. Senate Bill
Chair
Unverified
32:37
246 by Senator Hendren to establish the Argosaw Energy Summary and report for the accurate and objective collection of data and projections for
the current and future energy supply. Representative Hobbs, you're recognized to explain the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
32:59
Members, this bill is not
as complicated as it may first appear at first reading. It will simply require all state-supported institutions of higher education that currently participate in energy research activities to coordinate efforts to research and analyze various energy sources, summarize their findings, and then file a report with the Joint Committee on Energy by July 1, 2014.
And this will just simply help us make good policy when it comes to planning our energy needs. Any questions? Thank you. I appreciate it. Give the vote. Representative
Hobbs has explained the bill. Does anyone wish to speak against the bill for the bill? If not, question before
the House is passage of Senate Bill 246. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Has everyone voted?
Has everyone voted? Cast with the balance of 89 yeas, 0 nays, and 0 present. You have passed the bill.
Chair
Unverified
34:16
I'll read Senate Bill 293. Senate Bill 293 with Senators Johnson and Fowles to clarify education requirements
for real estate license. Representative Viviano, you're recognized to
Representative Mark Biviano
Unverified
34:26
explain the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this bill has a somewhat special meaning, and I'll explain in a minute. It just simply moves the educational oversight that is currently governed by the Board of Private Career Education
over to the Arkansas Real Estate Commission, who has the expertise and knowledge to administer this. It has no fiscal impact. You can also have a letter from Career Education in support of this. The reason this bill is somewhat special, when I ran this in committee last week, The person that testified for this bill was Tina Daniel. Some of you may know her. She is probably the most well-known education real estate person in the state of Arkansas for many, many years.
And this was really her passion with real estate education. She's been involved with the legislature for many, many years. When she testified in this committee, she wanted to ensure that this legislation passed. On Sunday morning, Tina Daniel passed away. This was the last thing that she did in the real estate business. So I would appreciate a good vote.
Representative Viviano has explained the bill. Does anyone wish to speak against the bill, for the bill? If not,
question before the House is passed to Senate Bill 293. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast with the balance to 93 yeas, 0 nays, and 0 present. You have passed the bill. Read Senate Bill 133. Senate
Chair
Unverified
36:20
Bill 133 by Senator Stubblefield to amend the law concerning the distribution of funds
for the purchase of voting systems. Representative Ballinger, you're recognized to explain the bill. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Bob Ballinger
Unverified
36:32
Speaker. This bill does a little more than the bill I had yesterday. Essentially, there's a fund that was set up by actual work that was done in the last legislative session, so this doesn't add any new funds. But what this does is this lets your county clerks use the funds for additional things. Originally, a fund was set up to buy voting machines and to purchase equipment associated. Well, there's training that's required, and there's software sometimes, some other things that are required to be purchased that this fund didn't specifically allow.
So it's basically taking that language out, give the county clerks the ability to use that money for any of those things. And I'd be happy to take any questions. I appreciate
a good vote. Thank you. Representative Ballinger has explained the bill. Does anyone wish to speak
against the bill for the bill? If not, the question for the House is passage of Senate Bill 133. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted?
Cast the ballots to 92 yeas, 0 nays, and 0 present. You have passed the bill. We have passed over Senate Bill 6. Read Senate Bill
Chair
Unverified
37:45
205. Senate Bill 205 by Senator Key to repeal obsolete laws regarding Medicare waivers. Representative Lee, you're recognized to
explain the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Speaker 73
37:56
If any of you know Senator Key, you know that he is extremely diligent.
This literally, as you look at it up on your computers, does nothing but remove obsolete language. It was well vetted by the House Public Health Committee. I'd appreciate a good vote. Representative Lee has
explained the bill. Does anyone wish to speak against the bill, for the bill? If not,
question before the House, the passage of Senate Bill 205. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clair. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted?
Cast the ballots for the 84 yeas, 0 nays, and 0 present. You have passed the bill. Members, I'd like to welcome again our guests in the gallery that have joined us, the Arkansas Ambulance Association Stars of Life. Welcome.
Chair
Unverified
39:03
Mr. Clerk, read Senate Bill 307. Senate Bill 307 by Senators Johnson and Hutchison concerning funding for courts and court-related services to amend the assessment collection and remittance of funding for
the State Administration of Justice Fund to declare an emergency. Representative Vines, you're recognized to explain the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
39:26
Friends, today I bring you an important bill that touches each one of us in a way. This bill is not unique to any one section or region.
It touches all 75 counties and all places in between here, there, and yonder. This is the trial court assistance bill that we've worked on, looked at, reviewed. We've all sat in either joint budget, legislative audit, or whatever committee through the last two years, and we all know the pitfalls of the Administrative Justice Fund. After two years of review, after the Chief Justice appointed a committee of legislators, judges, local officials,
to study the problem, this is the proposed solution. it's not a perfect bill but it's a bill we can live with and move forward with to take care of these 125 ladies that serve our communities and courts so well senate bill 307 raises certain fees in the court system it's not a uniform raise it doesn't raise every fee it raises after upon the the thorough review of the committee it addresses the areas that were basically loopholes or weren't addressed or simply weren't collecting funds and what we've done with
this bill is try to tighten those and put the costs on the backs of the people that actually use the system. If you don't ever go to court and you don't ever run afoul of the law, you have no problem with this bill. This bill will never affect you. But if you are a user of the system, you're going to pay for certain privileges. I'll be brief and go over what the bill covers. I'd be happy to answer any questions. I can see my friend, Representative Parrish, is ready to go, but I'll explain briefly and I'll answer all your questions all day long.
This bill deals with several areas, including reopen fees on a new case, whether it's a new case or an old case. It's going to assess costs to two new sections, court costs that haven't been assessed, and that's a seatbelt violation and no proof of insurance. It's going to equalize the fees in district and certain courts on a couple of offenses. It's going to make a collection fee in district court equal to the collection fee in a circuit court when you pay overtime,
so installment payments. Previously, district courts had a free pass. Now we'll add a fee to those collections if you pay overtime. It also adds a $50 fee if you go in and under Representative Williams Act 570 from last session, we have had an increase in expungements. Well, currently there's no filing fee on expungements, so we've gone in and added a $50 fee that if you're going to go have your record expunged, we'd like for you to pay for that privilege. With that said, I'd be glad to answer any questions, but make note that this affects each and every one of us in every part of this state,
And we have a duty to help these ladies out. And I say ladies because it is 125 trial
Speaker 3
42:31
court assistants. Representative, I'll be happy to take questions. Representative
Representative Justin T. Harris
Unverified
42:36
Harris, for what purpose? A question. You recognize? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thank
you, Representative Vines, for taking my question. Always. On line 28 through 31, can you tell me why you included people filing for guardianship, included adoption? Help me out again. What page? It's page 1, line 28 through 31.
It talks about petition for adoption. Okay. That was
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
43:01
a loophole that the committee had found that what would happen is that was the way people got around ever paying a filing fee for an adoption, is they would simply start it as a guardianship and then convert it to an adoption. And the point being is if you're going to have that instead of getting a free pass, which we want to definitely encourage adoption, it's not to be a deterrent, but basically we're using the system but never paying a filing fee. Okay, because I
Representative Justin T. Harris
Unverified
43:23
know we're trying to encourage adoption. Absolutely. And how much is that fee?
Speaker 3
43:29
$165. Okay, all right, thank you. No problem. Representative Hobbs, for
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
43:37
what purpose? Question, please. You recognize. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Okay, are you telling me there are no court fees for
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
43:44
guardianships currently? I'm not saying that, but I'm saying what happens is sometimes, not saying every time, But sometimes people will try to bootstrap into an adoption by initiating a guardianship before they get to the adoption. I'm not saying all the
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
43:56
time. No, ma'am. Okay, so then someone could pay a court fee for guardianship.
And then, as in the case of my constituents, as three brothers became older, they wanted to be adopted by this family. So would they have to pay adoption fees then at that
point? Well, it depends on, too, how. And that's addressed
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
44:14
in this bill when we get into what new cases and old cases, and that may lead us into the next section because what's happened is there's become a little bit of discrepancy, a little bit of a gray area, so to speak, when it comes to is this a
current case, a reopen, or a new case.
And this tries to give guidance and uniformity so that we don't have those problems. So at some point you're going to have to pay the filing fee. What we're trying to avoid here is the people that
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
44:43
are just never paying the filing fee. Okay, and are trial court assistants state employees? Yes.
Ben, why are they not paid out of general revenue like other state employees? First things first.
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
44:54
We've got to get the funding for them, and that bill's coming. We've got to get those where the priorities takes care of those, and I believe that's forthcoming. But we've got to have the funding mechanism first.
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
45:04
But, I mean, we have a surplus in general revenue currently. Is that correct? I don't.
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
45:13
funds. Okay. But I guess my question is, we currently have revenue in our general revenue fund that could pay these court assistants. I guess so. You know, the last, since we
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
45:22
were in session two years ago, Representative Hobbs, we've had to go back and keep using one-time money and one-time money and one-time money. We can't do that. We can't keep going back one-time money. We've got to find a source and pay these ladies, or I hate to say it, we need to do a way,
because we can't keep doing this and making them worry whether they're going to get paid like they are right now, whether they're going
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
45:45
to get paid next month. I guess my point is that why should they have to have a special fund when other state employees do not? So thank you. I agree with
Speaker 75
46:00
Chair. I'd appreciate a favorable vote. So, Representative Bynes has explained
the – oh, I'm sorry. Representative Scott, for what purpose? A question, please.
Representative Sue Scott
Unverified
46:10
You recognize. And a comment, Mr. Chair, if that's okay, or Mr.
Speaker, please. Recognize for a question for Representative Bynes.
Representative Sue Scott
Unverified
46:17
Representative Bynes, the wonderful ladies that we have working here in the Capitol, how do you think they would feel that at the end of the month they were told, hey, guess what? and even maybe a couple of days before Christmas, you all are not going to receive a paycheck. We're going to pay all the other state employees, but we're not going to pay you.
That happened in Benton County in December. As most of you know, my husband's a circuit judge. He came home and he said, you know what I'm thinking about doing? I'm thinking about taking part of my paycheck and paying all of my case coordinator's paycheck. And I said, and what is plan B? I ask you today, everyone in here, to help you out. And don't you think those employees deserve the same amount of respect that we give our dear women who work here at the Capitol?
Amen. I couldn't have said it better myself. I'd appreciate a positive vote. Representative Vines has explained the bill. Does anyone wish
to speak against the bill, for the bill? Representative Wright, you recognize, speak for the
Representative Marshall Wright
Unverified
47:34
bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to clarify that these ladies across the state are working their tail off every day, and they are absolutely critical to the court system. Our circuit judges, if they're out there in courts, traveling around the circuits, have to have them to keep their dockets straight.
It's not right that we've got a way to fix
it, and we don't. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Appreciate it, Bill. Representative Wright has spoken for
the bill. Does anyone wish to speak against the bill, for the bill? If not, the question before the House is passage of Senate
Bill 307. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Has everyone voted? Voting on the bill and the emergency clause, has everyone voted? Cast up the ballots with 86 a's, 4 nays, and 2 presents.
You pass the bill and the emergency clause. Passed over Senate Bill 111. Read Senate Bill 101. Senate Bill 101
to establish the Arkansas Video Service Act and to declare an emergency. Representative Wright, you're recognized to explain the bill.
Representative Marshall Wright
Unverified
48:51
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, this is a long bill, but I'm
just going to try to briefly sum up what it does. What this bill does is it provides for a uniform franchise agreement between cable providers and local government. Everybody will get the same opportunity and the same access to the cable channels throughout the state. I believe this bill will incentivize companies to get to markets because they'll know what they're facing. They won't have to be looking at different franchise contracts across the state, and if they're going to have a different one in this city and a different one in another city.
This is very similar to the way phone service providers are regulated within the state. I want to let you a couple things that this bill does not do. It does not raise taxes, does not raise any fees, and it does not in any way infringe on the rights and ways of our city. I'd be more than happy to take any
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
49:45
question. Representative Meeks, for what purpose? Question, please. You recognize. You just mentioned it doesn't raise any fees or any fines. And I'm looking here on the bill, and it says that the treasurer of the state shall create a special revenue fund to be called the Arkansas Video Service Fund.
Representative Marshall Wright
Unverified
49:57
Yeah, but it won't raise any new ones. It will transfer those payments to the secretary of state's office. Okay, so these
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
50:03
are funds that are already being collected then. All right, thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker. Appreciate a good vote. Representative Wright has explained the bill. Does anyone wish to speak against the
bill, for the bill? Now, Representative Gillum, you're recognized to speak for the bill. Thank you,
Representative Jeremy Gillam
Unverified
50:25
colleagues. Just real quick, I'm speaking in favor of this bill, and you know I don't come down here very often,
but this bill is going to create a level playing field and give small cities the ability to have the same kind of contracts as some of the large cities do. So this creates an option for them. So Representative Bryant, Senator Files, have worked very, very diligently to meet all the concerns that were expressed when it came from the Senate end. The only people that had even remotely had any problems with the bill at the Senate end are now very much in favor of this bill. They've seen their issues addressed.
And so this is a really good bill, and I encourage you to vote yes for it. Thank
you. Representative Gillum has spoken for the bill. Does anyone wish to speak against the bill, for the
bill? Representative Wright, would you like, Representative Wright is closed for the bill. The question before the House is a passage of Senate Bill 101. Prepare the machine, Mr. Clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted?
Cast the balance to the 81 yeas, 8 nays, and 2 present. You have passed the bill. Mr.
Speaker 15
51:47
Clerk, read the letter from the Senate. Notice of passage to override the governor's veto to Senate Bill 134, March 5, 2013. Mr. Speaker, I'm instructed by the Senate to inform your honorable body of passage to override the governor's veto to Senate Bill 134 by Senator Rayford,
the same being a bill for an act to be entitled, an act to create the Arkansas Human Heartbeat Protection Act to protect unborn children, and for other purposes, and I herewith, transmit the same for your favorable consideration, respectfully submitted, Ann Cornwell, Secretary of the Senate. Representative Baird, you recognize. After the announcement's
Representative Duncan Baird
Unverified
52:32
reading of the bills, placing the calendars on the desk, amending members on bills with their own amendments, members withdrawing their own bills, finalizing
resolutions, reading communications, and any remaining committee reports, I move we adjourn until 1.30 tomorrow. Proper motion, not
available. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? I have it. Motion carries. Are there any announcements? Representative Gene, you're recognized. Announcement.
You're recognized. We have joint budget claims immediate after adjournment of both chambers in Big Mac B. Representative Malone, you're recognized for an announcement.
Representative Stephanie Malone
Unverified
53:12
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Rules will meet tomorrow at noon in
Representative Tommy Wren
Unverified
53:17
Big Mac B. Representative Wren, you're recognized. Mr. Speaker, I've got two announcements. The Cattlemen Caucus will meet at 3 p.m. today in room 272, and Insurance and Commerce
will meet tomorrow at 10 a.m. Representative Shepard, you're recognized. House Aggravity Committee, tomorrow at 10
Chair
Unverified
53:34
a.m., room 138. Representative Fielding, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The state and county local will meet tomorrow at 10 a.m. in Big Mac B.
Speaker 73
53:44
Representative Lee, you're recognized. State agencies will be meeting in room 151 at 10 tomorrow, and tomorrow afternoon on adjournment we will start hearing constitutional amendments. Representative Baird, you're
Representative Duncan Baird
Unverified
53:57
recognized. Members, I have three things. One, budget will meet tomorrow morning, 9 o'clock, Big Mac A. Number two, Thursday is Members Day. If you want to have an individual appropriation on the calendar, make sure you notify staff by noon tomorrow. And number three, if you do not want to be a co-sponsor on the general improvement bills that I have, please let me know.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
54:16
Thank you. Representative Meeks, you recognize? Aging youth will meet tomorrow at 10 a.m., room 130.
Speaker 111
54:27
Are there any other announcements? Seeing none, read the bills, Mr. Clerk. House Bill 1682. Without objection, read the bill again. House Bill 1682. Public Health. House Bill 1683. Without objection, read it again. House Bill 1683. Eight agencies. I'm sorry. House Bill 1684. Without objection, read it again. House Bill 1684.
Aging children and youth. House Bill 1685. Read it again. House Bill 1685. Public Health. House Bill 1686. Without objection, read it again. House Bill 1686. Vacation. House Bill 1687. Without objection, read it again. House Bill 1687. Public Health. House Bill 1688. Without objection, read it again. House Bill 1688. County and local. House Bill 1689. Without objection, read it again. House Bill 1689.
Education. House Bill 1690. Without objection, read it again. House Bill 1690. Education. House Bill 1691. Without objection, read it again. House Bill 1691. Public Health. House Bill 1692. Without objection, read it
again. House Bill 1692. Revenue and tax. The desk will remain open for the reading
of the bills until 4 p.m. today. Upon completion of the items and the adjourn resolution, the House will be adjourned until 1.30 p.m. tomorrow.
Agenda
Call To Order
Prayer & Pledge
Committee Reports
HB1041
HB1250
SB148
SB246
SB293
SB133
SB205
SB307
SB101
Announcements
Reading of the Bills
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Representative James McLean Chair
Unverified
Speaker 2
Speaker 5
Representative Davy Carter Chair
Unverified
Speaker 15
Chair
Unverified
Representative Bruce Westerman
Unverified
Representative John W. Walker
Unverified
Speaker 32
Speaker 44
Speaker 45
Representative John Charles Edwards Chair
Unverified
Speaker 37
Representative David Whitaker
Unverified
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
Representative Mark Biviano
Unverified
Representative Bob Ballinger
Unverified
Speaker 73
Representative John T. Vines
Unverified
Speaker 3
Representative Justin T. Harris
Unverified
Speaker 87
Speaker 89
Speaker 75
Representative Sue Scott
Unverified
Representative Marshall Wright
Unverified
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
Representative Jeremy Gillam
Unverified
Representative Duncan Baird
Unverified
Representative Lane Jean Chair
Unverified
Representative Stephanie Malone
Unverified
Representative Tommy Wren
Unverified
Speaker 111