State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs- House

The. Obviously this afternoon all that we will be hearing is constitutional amendments. And the. We will not be taking a vote on those amendments today but we fixed a hand out of form with each constitutional amendment on this form I want you to keep that takes a good notes and then after will all the constitutional amendments have been presented. Then you'll be asked to fill out on this form your first choice what your first choice of a constitutional amendment that you lock if its first choice is one four one if your second choice is to put two and third put three a and once once to all amendment presented you can take those with you but I'll need those forms submitted back to Carly OR analyst I need those for. Senate to her by noon tomorrow so we're here all of them today you have over the night think about it look at you know study about it but by noon tomorrow need those turned back into the staff here and the and the ever which one got the most votes. From the Committee and the number of of the first and the second one because this year the House gets to the constitutional amendments the Senate gets one and so make sure that you get those four back in everyone constitution members receive the to the top to see your motion votes that will be on the agenda on Wednesday. At the ten AM so. we will have those grew only agenda and at that time since we've already heard constitutional members presented which hopefully will be get through all of the day and we will and then I would need is a motion and we're not will be necessary to represent those on Wednesday morning but committee be notified which one was first in which one was second then what is made a motion of do pass and we'll go from there. Committee members remember now at a thank you some good notes patient extremely important and you know like shall we get to we don't we just do one or we don't have to do any at all so keep that in mind there's not that says we have to pass constitutional amendment out here but that's going to be up to this committee whether to send it to the house floor but also like I said we can do nothing we can do one or we can do a Max of two from this committee so with that. Hi one more reminder don't forget. Make sure you've got you form certain pattern back into Carly by noon tomorrow noon tomorrow and even if you decide you don't want to write any of them you just. Four but a road win any of your life still make sure you turn that form back and we need to record it ever committee member had an opportunity to rebuild and they were able to vote on a so with that said I'll go ahead if you got an agenda in front of you have had three sponsors are eleven correction to sponsors notify me that they are not going to present our constitutional amendment. One thousand one by representative ray will he is up P. as Paul that pulled that house joint resolution from consideration also of the House joint resolution. One thousand four by representative ray he is pulled that one from consideration and represented five Lanny Fite has pulled house joint resolution one thousand seven from consideration so that's only sponsors that I heard from so as to chair I'm assuming that the other sponsors are here ready to presenter Constitutional amendments today so we'll go in order and Also committee and all those of you in attendance if there is a constitutional amendment that you would like to speak for or against today that testimony will also be allowed along with the sponsors presentation so be sure just sign up the sign up sheet and just outside the door there to back of the room just sign up staff pick it up that way and make sure you put out which constitutional amendment is you're here to speak for against so with all that said hopefully I've not forgotten something done and got anything so at this point will start without joint resolution one thousand to represent you makes. And again committee remember we're hearing testimony only will not be taken to vote today that's what to forms of for and he didn't get a form be sure to let me know. And I'll make sure you get one it forget started a representative may show up for your sake Committee met before we get started are there any questions from the committee I tried to be as clear as I could and explain how what the process is going to be so it for all good. We're good recommend to make sure you're recognized president. I do have a question on the form of that's okay so on the forms you want to put our name so our analyst can keep track of who's turned a man who not. There's a place on the form that's got a place for your name and the date okay so make sure you print your name and put the date and yes we'll have to have a record if it's not signed up I have to know which which one you know over which committee member balls to you so it would have to be signed before we can count any other questions saying No representative makes you're recognized thank you Mr chairman thank you colleagues today presenting how storm resolution one thousand two which is allowed the General Assembly to phase out personal property tax. So just a real quick backstory the year I graduated from high school my dad's job moved to Florida merit a Florida girl and I decided I want to move back here to Arkansas to make it our home state when we moved back we bought a car that she had purchased prior to our marriage it was a car this we own free and clear to know any taxes on it or anything moved it moved here to Arkansas and now suddenly the vehicle that we own free and clear we had to start paying personal property tax on AS in new resident coming back to the state went to get it titled and the questions they asked me if you had your vehicle serviced in the course I had no clue what they're talking about like all. Many that come to our state New so that I found out that well between you know January in April we got to go get it assassin and by October you have to pay your personal property tax on it and if you don't we're going to put your name in the newspaper to to the same yeah and then eventually if you don't we're gonna come take that vehicle away from you so in essence a vehicle that I purchased every year has a lien against it for that personal property tax and it begs the question no I actually own that vehicle if the state can put a lien against every year for that tax and it's not just vehicles that are subject to personal property tax it's everything from watercraft ATVs trailers even livestock business property all of that is included in personal property tax personal property taxes also the most any fashion mmhm the most inefficient. Cost prohibitive tax that we have so in other words it takes more money to collect and distribute that tax than any other tax so public purposes from that tax are diminished by moving that tax to another revenue source we could actually lower the overall tax burden on our citizens and still accomplish the same amount of financial good so what house joint resolution does is allows over the next twenty five years for the General Assembly to get rid of and phase out personal property taxes two ways it does that allow first way is it just allows the General Assembly to take action on this the second way that it does it is allows local school districts to do their male age based on real property tax and personal property tax so as we move forward they can gradually or raise the real property tax while slowly lowering the personal property tax to keep the revenue net neutral for those entities because as you know roughly eighty percent of this goes to our our public schools so the intent here is to still be able to hold down whole but at the same time get rid of what is an overly burdensome and punitive tax no when I say punitive I'm talking about is this. If a automobile manufacturer for example reported moved Arkansas come tax day that would have to inventory all those vehicles on the lot they pay the personal property tax on it it was a good year the song lots of cars very little inventory on the lot they're gonna have a much rest Robert reduce the bill but during a lean year when the economy is not doing very well they're gonna have more vehicles on the lot and so the tax burden is going to be higher so when the economy is good the tax burden is lower when the economy is bad the tax burden becomes higher which is detrimental to our businesses and our efforts to try to attract businesses to the the the state it's also very burdensome on these businesses because they have to go out on tax day take a complete inventory of all this stuff in order to try to calculate out what that taxes by shifting it from a personal property tax over to a real tax it makes it way simpler for the businesses they save a lot of manpower overhead trying to calculate that so it not only saves the taxpayers money but also can save our businesses money by switching and phasing this out over time so that's what this bill does it try to make our lives simpler by doing away with probably the most everyone in my opinion the most regressive tax that we currently have Arkansas is one of only a handful states that does it time to get rid of it and eliminate the confusion for drawing new residents in new people to our state and with that I'm happy to answer any questions from the committee. Any questions from committee members. Saying none no one signed up to speak for against the bill representative to make sure you I've just a few closing comments and then they'll move on all got along agenda so over the last couple of years this is the third year I filed this in this bill has come up just short of the couple that we have sent out it's always been like the third or fourth choice out of all the choices that we've been offered. The last couple of cycles when we've sent out Constitutional amendments that were focused on doing us good like the last two that we sent out they've been defeated overwhelmingly by the public we send out bills like this that benefit the public those are the bills they support and this is a bill that would benefit the public if you think about the You know all these bills which bill is going to benefit the most people over the longest period of time and I would submit this bill impacts improves the life of all our Kansans and so with that I would appreciate your consideration when it comes time to vote necessities bill thank you. Thank you representative to make for your presentation committee members just thank you some notes you heard presentation of one thousand two. So next we'll move on to House joint resolution one thousand three representative Cavenaugh. Thank you Mr chair you're recognized to present your House joint resolution one thousand three thank you committee this resolution will actually set up a recall process for a niece office that was created constitutionally and there are twenty six of them listed in the bill and it goes through and sets up how many signatures need to be actually gathered we made sure that the signatures had to be gathered within the area that the people are voting on so someone say they wanted to recall me as a house representatives it couldn't be from another district that was trying to recall may but it had to be actually from people that vote in my district the same thing for every office it goes in and it clarifies that if the secretary of state is actually the one that's being recalled in the Attorney General will handle the certification from the Secretary of State. it sets the time lines of when this happened the intent when it has to be filed how many days I've got togethers minimum together signatures the maximum together signatures it sets up how long the secretary state has to respond to it it goes through and even sets up what the actual petition these look like it clarifies that for every page of signatures can only be for a county so he got multiple County recall then it would just be one page would be one County so I mean so you would have multiple counties on the same page it will also go in there and if it does then it talks about the time frame for if there was successful to do a recall with the gifts that gathering of the signatures the time frame that they would have to actually call a special election for that office and that's a quick overview. Questions from committee members. J. none no one signed up to speak for against the Constitutional amendment so If you have no you're recognized closed this is similar to that constitutional amendment at present at last session except that it includes a lot more offices because it does include every office that was created constitutionally and with that I'd appreciate your consideration. Thank you representative Cavenaugh for your presentation committee members again that's. House joint resolution one thousand three as you make a note. Next we'll move on to house joint resolution one thousand five. Into the Long. Committee members and in that an amendment to this bill we're not going to adopt that member today but Issues for you to look at is you. Analyzer review the put this presentation. While you're recognized make presentation thank you Mr chairman. In the committee on I apologize to to I didn't quite know the proper process and thought I would be able to do my amendment last week but found out when it's too late it was not to be able to do that until today so I apologize if you don't have a copy earlier. Back in nineteen ninety two the citizens of Colorado pastor taxpayer bill of rights I remember thinking at the time. Arkansas needs to do this. Ask for thirty years later I'm proposing house bill house the joint resolution two thousand five S. CT one thousand five very similar amendment to the one in Colorado. The taxpayer bill of rights amendment would do for major things it would give us a constitutionally required balance budget the current revenue stabilization act has served as well but it is an act and could be repealed by a future legislature. The second major component amendment is required because of the of the amendment is it is required three fourths vote of the legislature to raise any taxes or fees. Third major component it caps of the budget increases to three percent. This is like having Lane Jean built into the constitution because he tells me that's what he uses sheets for each year is a three percent increase in no more. and finally the final component The Amendment is provided for a temporary cuts in income or sales tax when the mandatory mercy Fund revenue stabilization funds are full so would have by scan automatic waited to send money back to the taxpayers we have I have surplus. To be happy to answer any questions I. Representative make sure recognized for a question. Thank you Mr I'm just trying to read through the through the bill here real quick Page three says the treasure of State shall not be required to transfer any monies to this catastrophic reserve fund on the other than the money required under subdivision be one of this section so if the General Assembly wanted the treasurer you know if there is a surplus in the General Assembly wanted to direct some of that into the catastrophic reserve fund for our future savings the treasurer would not be required to do that the way this is written in my reading that correctly yes Sir. Follow up with recognized so why would you not want to give the General Assembly flexibility to move stuff into our long term savings account the the the catastrophic fund this is set up to basically four as we define or emergency purpose only and five I didn't want it been basically siphoned out for any other reason. The. Any further questions from the committee members represented Wardlaw you're recognized for a question. I want to follow represent makes question I'd glanced over that and set it down and. If you follow up on this amendment we don't have a line numbers but if you follow up under section two this is an expenditure from the catastrophic reserve fund may occur with three fourths of a vote of a quorum present which is less than that is today because today is three quarters regardless of what's present and then you follow down this is transfer the budget stabilization for a fun it says the treasure shall first transfer the access to the Castro Reserve so I'm reading this that all of the excess would automatically go to catastrophic continue could pull back. With the legislature with three quarters of a quorum is that not the way that reads well of intent on a three quarter court I mean I I've had this for a few minutes I'm sorry for nets card apologized that was supposed to be my fault the third quarter of a quorum the thinking behind that was in this catastrophic events we were thanking you measure fault has a major earthquake that type of thing so hi this is very possible your quarter to maybe a third of the House members legislature might not be able to make it to the capital that should be have a special session so that's basically what we're shooting for store requiring a high high burden of three quarters of members present to spend money on this but just in case you like to a lot of people could not make it to the capital then it would not hold up reason utilizing these funds for the rescue of of of people the total. It may have occurred. Follow I think I've got a lot of questions but I hold on to understand this a little better okay. It further questions from committee members represent you all I have one. This is actually if I'm reading this correctly this is actually a repeal of what's already in the Arkansas constitution under article five is it not I believe it is a partial repeal yes for. So make sure it's not a it's not a new constitutional member noted stations actually repealing part of article five of the current Arkansas constitution is that I have a roll I believe so yes Sir. Thank. I'm sorry representative could you tell me what amended or you look in something about the our purpose and that that was my understanding that is okay I'm sorry part of I was waiting on you are okay I see part of it yes any further questions from committee members. Sam Nunn no one signed up to speak for against bill representative while you're recognized to closed thank you for your consideration appreciate a good vote. Represent long thank you for your presentation here today. Committee members again that was House joint resolution one thousand five oh your sheet there is you make your note. Next item on today's agenda is house joint resolution one thousand six representative Lundstrum. Representive Lundstrum. Representative you're recognized to present you of. One thousand six. Thank you Sir can I call someone to the end for me please. City. I believe he just stepped out well we'll wait to submit Akan Sturch if Mr Broadway comes back in okay if there is. Serve you would just well no you but first let your name to the committee for the record thank you Mr chairman in this kind of shame Broadway in this context and not with a issue system in this context I'm former senator who is involved in the passage of the lottery scholarship bill after the amendment passed by a vote of the people. You're recognized to present your bill thank you colleagues I'm excited to present this bill this bill would allow lottery scholarship to include both tech and vocational education in our state we have sixty thousand jobs open and I think vocational education has been passed over year after year we talk a good game about saying the plumbers and electricians and LPNs are important to our state I think it's time we opened up lottery scholarship to its original intent to also include vocational and education in my neck of the woods we have two thousand eight hundred ninety four jobs open we have even have an app you can get on your phone that's updated every night I just checked it to see how many jobs are open. This is important and we even have about sixteen pages of different vocational technical schools that are all over the state just waiting to help our kids go from. Six months or eight months of training two jobs that can pay forty fifty sixty thousand dollars to start that's a big deal and those are tax dollars that come back to the state and support for families with that I'll open it up to any questions. Any questions from committee members. Representative Gonzalez you're recognized sure how many voted schools we have in the state. We allow it says sixteen pages I can tell you it's about that didn't count them all they're all over district I'll be glad to send you a copy of it okay so wide variety farmers recognize of. Someone with other because the with this bill include apprenticeship programs as having the thing about that was sent here that that's another no different bill I'll be glad to include as a co sponsor. Can be added to this and thank you sorry thank you to the right to change the constitution to do that now. There were three All let me quickly Mr chairman at the time that the lottery members passed by the people of Arkansas was initiated act those of us who were involved in drafting the bill after it was over It if we if it had been one of our three constitutional amendments we would've included vocational technical schools at the time there were three Crowley's Ridge wanted the department corrections in the northwest technical institute the drafters for whatever reason when the drive to the lottery moment did not include Kotex so after the passage of the lottery moment in the two thousand nine session I believe as we worked on developing the scholarship program we were told by our attorneys we cannot include does go to vote the state owned vocational technical schools because they were not included in the definition in the constitutional amendment and so that's how represent Lundstrum has this constitutional amendment that would allow that last remaining and then others there will be others that are vocationaltechnical schools that are nonprofit for profit and then you would come back this just as we did after that passage if this goes out to the voters you would come back to general assembly and passing implement implementing a law that would set the parameters to they have to be domiciled in the state of Arkansas do they have to be recognized by the federal financial aid all that would be determined not in the constitution but but in implementing legislation that you would pass after the next election if this goes goes out as approved by the voters. So you could restrict one the concerns we had back then was you could have somebody you know this better than that or just as much as that somebody sees money they're gonna come and set up shop may I get under this so that the school we're gonna get lottery proceeds for kids go to school in you get some fly by night operators that are not in the best interest of our students and we've had some of those one of directivity two we had a couple had to close so by being able to subdue the implementation language you can set parameters to try to protect that from happening. You know I was thinking that when we pass that scholarship for the lottery program I thought to take schools were included until I saw this being presented by representative Lundstrum so I thought and I thought that question even came up but you're telling us here today that does take schools receive no kind of benefit from the lottery scholarship at all to go to northwest technical institute they're not eligible for the lottery scholarship and all that is correct Sir. Okay. So it might make sure I understand if. If this was what the constitutional amendment with this. With this affect aber vocational or technical school that we have in Arkansas whether be state owned or is that correct to help me understand that you would have to set up in the rules and rags on how it would be applied because with those both tax some of them we don't want lottery scholarship going to we wanted to go to that site the top twenty needs we want to go to the the electrical welcome plumbing LPN so it needs to be set up needs based what does that the state of Arkansas need what do our businesses need and then also we need to require them to be bonded insured and have be able to present a license and certification But that's nothing that we wouldn't do anyway that that's part of being our our our proper response what property did not Judiciary but for additional response with that money so for example we have and. Saint Vincent's infirmary record has a nursing or Texarkana nursing academy they're different spots in the state that we have needs and those people are trying to provide those needs but they simply cannot. And we have students that want to go to the schools. Okay thank you for your answer any any questions from committee members representative very recognized for a question. Thank you Mr chairman and Representative Lundstrum we should bring this to the committee because I think it's a tremendous opportunity My question is So let's take Arkansas tech they have a number of vocational schools it in the used to be a vocational technical school and say Ozark as well as in Fort Smith universe of Arkansas Fort Smith has some technical related program so when I when an individual plies per scholarship they may not necessarily have the the grades and and so forth to be accepted by the university but the but they're looking at more of a the technical trades so is all that can be set up in the when you promulgate the rules to in order to make sure that that that's taken in consideration for the the individual's yes Sir and I'm giving example there are twenty two junior colleges in the state and northwest Arkansas junior college has certifications already available but they cannot apply for this so if you want to get electrical certification or plumbing certification or welding certification of trucking. Too bad so sad if you can't financially afford it are you need a little help the latter Scholarship is not available for you okay thank you Mr chairman thank you president very I would add that eighty you Ozark or any additional campuses part of Arkansas tech would already be covered on under this there because they're affiliated with Arkansas tech university which was a subsequent bill later so or abuse R. U. F. S. but NWTF then they're not. The other questions from committee members representative macro. we'll what about the fiscal impact. On the on the students already receiving the scholarships would it would it eventually lower than the amount available to the students already receiving. Well Sir we actually have in here. We don't have a capped but that's something that they. The legislature can do that if you want to limit the amount of scholarships available. but that certainly that's something the legislature can decide the rules and rags we have I believe two hundred million am in the funds right now two hundred millions a lot to go around the state and then overall the lottery scholarships raised one point two billion dollars. Thank you thank you very much a Billy Rosa McElroy in the existing legislation if it hasn't changed there is a prioritization for students are already on the scholarships if funds were to be short is represent Lester mentioned there is a considerable surplus at the moment there's a process you passed in the last session that limits the amount that can be expended the session to them out it's kind of a mathematical figure the Senator Hickey came up with for instance this session it's fourteen million I believe and it stops there to try to protect the fund due to some changes this Legislature may last session to a richer. Further questions from committee members say none no one signed up to speak for against the bill representative learn from you're recognized close. I think everything is been set alight in front of you and and trust your judgment and thank you so much for your time thank you. And I'll remind you Mr chairman when you're done come over the Jonesborough reception to issue system off you're going to be there that late. Just for you Mister chairman okay. Colorado. Colleagues are a committee members that was one thousand six per your notes. Which of the House joint resolution one thousand and. One thousand eight representative Ferguson. Committee members representative version has a handout us binge distributed to you at this time so. Wait just abuse second here to get the hand built to or distributed. Okay representative function you're recognized to present the one thousand eight thank you Mr chairman thank you committee of this constitutional amendment would allow the people of Arkansas to vote for the right to reproductive health I think we're all aware the DOT's decision probably the most consequential Supreme Court decision that's been made in the last fifty years to overturn roe V. Wade and The all this amendment does if you look at the but I passed out the amendment sixty eight which is the amendment that's on the books now I want you to understand that this amendment does not change one in three in other words no public funds would still be allowed to pay for abortion except for the life of the mother in the Amendment does not affect the concept is required for appropriate public funds it it really number two has become inconsequential based on the Dodge decision because there is no federally federal constitutionally protected right for abortion that got thrown back to the states the issue was thrown back to the states to decide. so I think referring this to the people would allow them to definitely say what they want it for reproductive health either in this proposed law or the current law on the books they may decide to keep the reproductive rights exactly as they are now. But I do think it's an important enough issue to not be dictated by the legislature and referred to the people for a vote we certainly have precedence for this I know people felt concerned about taxation without representation and didn't want to vote on the highway tax that we referred the half cent sales tax to the people to vote on we also referred the term limit change which extended its sixteen years total for the people to vote on so so there's precedence for the S. and like I said it's not really about my personal opinion or your personal opinion about abortion but I think it's what the people of Arkansas one and that's exactly what the Supreme Court is done it's from this back to the states to decide so if the states are going to decide I don't think it should be the legislature I think it should be the people of the state. Any questions from committee members. Well one person signed up to speak against. The Amendment. Mr ****. If you would just try to set up to committee members and then you're recognized to speak on this bill thank you Mr chair members of the committee my name is Gerry **** I'm executive director of family council and we are an organization based here in Little Rock I'm here to point out some things that are wrong with this amendment and we are against it for a number of reasons. One is that it would put Arkansas in some pretty Bad Company as far as we are concerned because to date as far as I can tell only three states have actually in trying to abortion in their constitutions that would be California Vermont and Michigan other states have found a right to abortion in their constitutions of the of the right to privacy and so this would make Arkansas with probably one of the most extreme abortion laws in the country if not the most extreme simply because it enshrines abortion as a constitutional right. The the other thing that I'd like to point out is its definition of viability is extremely troublesome because the the the the unborn child would have to be able to live outside the womb without really much if any medical assistance and so as we know today is a child can live maybe it the twenty fourth week of pregnancy that would not be viable as far as this law is concerned you'd have to be probably at the sixth seven maybe eight months somewhere in there according to this definition of viability also it refers to an attending healthcare professional. That's not a doctor necessarily that could be any attending healthcare professional it gives that individual the right to order an abortion after viability if in that person's opinion the mother's mental health or physical health is in danger. And the reason that is so problematic is that is a health exception that you could drive a eighteen Wheeler through because under that you could literally and I would hope this would never happen you could literally perform an abortion up until Labor has begun if it was for a health reason including the mental health of the mother so this is probably the most extreme abortion amendment that I've seen and for that reason we are very very much against it. Mr chairman thank you for your time committee members thank you for your time Mr this god we appreciate you being here but we have a question for you representative clan you're recognized for a question yes thank you Mr chair Mr **** and. Well I hear your point that not a lot of states of insurance in the constitution as representative Ferguson just mentioned that wasn't ever necessary before because it was in Chinese the United States constitution for fifty years or interpreted to be that way so I think that fact on its own is not super compelling to me but my question to you is. What if we were if this were a bill rate if we were to just deciding sort of regular bill we're making policy is legislators I can understand your opposition could use a little bit more about why you are afraid of this particular amendment getting before Arkansas voters well for one thing I think you this is the kind of amendment that powerful national pro abortion organizations with absolutely love. And they would love to be able to come to a small state like Arkansas and dump ten million twenty million thirty million dollars whatever it whatever it might take to try to mislead the voters and that's exactly what happened in the state of Kansas I've talked to people who live there and they will tell you straight up they came to Kansas and they lied about the measure and they did it over and over and over again and that's that the people of Kansas were actually deceived by that I don't want to put Arkansas in that place I think that's a very sad place to put us in follow up thank you Mr chair I think it's I don't we don't trust Arkansas voters I I think that we hear a lot when there are certain things on the ballot that a lot of owners are going to be misled. In the wrong direction on this and I guess that is always an argument that is used very very pointedly when it is a position that the person who is making the argument disagrees with there are certainly national pro life groups that would come in and I know that your group has the right to experience on the ballot there are lots of groups that would come in and spend lots of money to also do educational efforts here I guess I just I don't understand again why we are convinced what why we are fearful of turning this over Arkansas voters if there's not some sense that maybe this is in fact what Arkansas voters might want Arkansas voters have already voted on this first of all they they passed amendment sixty eight which is a part of the Arkansas constitution that says we will protect the life of every unborn child from conception until birth as much as the federal constitution allows that's the part of this amendment it's being repealed they This amendment does away with that it says we're no longer going to do that that's not right the second thing is many of you around this table have run on the pro life platform the people of Arkansas have voted over and over and over again for pro life candidates every opportunity that they've had to do that many of you are here because you ran on a pro life platform and so if they did not agree with that then you probably wouldn't be here the other thing that I would not that I would put yes I let referred to the Committee about how they got here and how they voted in what they stand for we're talking about this amendment today if you could direct does your college appears to that and not to the committee I would appreciate it yes yes that's that that's well taken and I appreciate that Mister chair so my point is the people of Arkansas have made their voices clear on this Arkansas is the most pro life state in the nation we've been ranked that way over and over again so the people of Arkansas have spoken. And they have voted on it and they have made their voices heard this amendment it would be the most extreme. Amendment probably in the nation it would put us among the top three most pro abortion state and so we would take is from being the most pro life state to being the most pro abortion. Okay it further questions from committee members. Same numbers **** thank you for your time here today thank you Mr chair. Say no one else is signed up to speak for against the the bill representative first you're recognized because. Thank you yeah I've been here for ten years and I I know we have a lot of bills have passed an abortion bills and we've always known that it was gonna be federally protected by right the way that that was going to be as far as I was going to go so I think now that the DA's decision is come along at I do think it's an herein unassisted not leave this dictated by the legislature by us but to let the people vote on it that they may vote as of Mr **** said are they may vote against it in and prove that they approve of the circuit court decision but I think it's the fair thing to let the people vote. The representative first thank you for being here thank you ma'am that was a. House Bill show resolution one thousand eight for your notes. Next on today's agenda is one thousand nine representative Lundstrum. Back at the end of the table you're recognized to present the. One thousand nine. Thank you Mr chairman. This ballot initiative is about judges running partisan. From June two thousand and seventeen eighteen thirty six to two thousand and two from year to the from two year two thousand hundred sixty four years judicial candidates in Arkansas. Ram partisan they we could ask them anything on the ballot for any questions and then we change that and I thought we change it for pretty good reasons at the time but and since then we've tried it and it hasn't worked our constituents are used to voting partisan they're used to looking at us and looking at me and making decisions based on what they see on the ballot. Nowadays they know more about what's in the snickers bar then what they know about what the judicial candidates stand for re use of judging our presidents or vice presidents are house and Senate members. Our secretary state Attorney General based on partisanship and they need to know about what they're looking at what they're shopping for and it's about transparency I think that's important for our candidates and for our judicial candidates I think it makes it very difficult on them they can't talk about their what they're gonna do how they're gonna judge a particular case but they can't talk about particular issues or world views that they have I think that's important for them and I think that's important for the voters to have transparency this simply returns it back to that. With that I'll I'm up and any questions any questions for a representative make sure recognized. Thank you Mr chairman so my my question is and I appreciate what you're what you're trying to to do here my question is this you know kind of like my my bill earlier today people get used to do when stop a certain way even if it's harmful they'll continue doing it because they're comfortable with that. With this. People are just used to the idea that judges are nonpartisan because that's fair that way judges posed to be non biased and have you had polling might not be the correct word but do you get any sense of if we put this out whether people would be receptive to the idea. For a limited to only two as you know as we're gonna be very selective and I want to make sure the ones we send out actually you know like your are your last one I think that would have a fairly good chance of success what's your thought on the chances of success on something like this. You know I think we trust the people they brought us all here they look at us on the ballot or they look at any candidate on the ballot I have to make decisions. They have to ask questions I think it's a transparency issue They have to make a judgment call and I think it's very did difficult it's very frustrating for the voter I've been door to door and I've had people held up the ballot and look at that and say do you know anything about this person I don't know anything about this person's frustrating for the voter they can't tell anything about a judicial candidate and so this is a response to that frustration no what if if you're asking me what what I choose to put on the ballot I'm here putting in front of you all to choose you're asking me to choose between my two favorite children that between my to read paper ballot initiatives the two that I'm running oh boy that would be a toughie. At. Yeah I don't know that I can make that choice if you type. Would be a difficult choice I I do have I think a favorite yes but I'm gonna leave it from this body to choose. It further questions from committee members. No one signed up to speak for against the bill representative Lundstrum you're recognized close. Colleagues I think we all choose we go to the ballot I think the more information that we have on those choices the better decisions that we can make I think we need to trust the voters with as much information as possible and as much transparency as possible I think the results show that we can trust them with that I'll leave it in front of you and trust you to make a good vote. Representative thank you for your presentation here today so Alex. Colleagues are committee members that is One thousand nine for your notes. We moved next to AJ R. T. and T. in. Representative Gazaway. Representative Gazaway. He's not here so where is not going to run it. I move to ten eleven represent built you're recognized. The representative of the table and. Make a presentation. Thank you chairman thank you committee today present a constitutional amendments that would require two thirds vote to amend the constitution is a B. ball for Because it's a limits referred out by the legislature as well as those done by the citizenry it would also require that this amendment passed with two thirds for it's going to fact and would also limit the constitutional amendments the legislature could send to the voters from three down to to can we think that is very similar to. Representive rays bills last session I was put on the ballot but through the process to the campaign I heard a lot of criticism about why are you doing this for citizen let in it amendments but not everyone some of the legislature what do you get three year if you're always claiming that you want to the constitution is amended all the time and I think that's a valid criticisms and so for me you know I always believe what's good for the goose is good for the Gander and so why I think we need to kind of rain and how much we amend our constitution I think it's a good way to do it I think having an overwhelming majority support change their constitution would happen and so that's kind of the gist of the bill there's one other thing I did have apartment where if they are two conflicting amendments that passed both of the two thirds whoever it the most votes that would be the one that that one's a good way to think about it let's say there's two groups one once the state bird to be the peacock and the other with the state bird to be the mallard let's say the peacock got sixty seven percent that's over two thirds hello to the Mallory got eighty percent that would mean that the mallard one if that makes sense there's a conflicting to amendments on the ballot the one that also got the higher votes in the two thirds threshold would I would be the one that would go into effect and and that's it pretty is pretty sweet simple I think it's a good good amendment and when the time comes to rank it I I hope all the one your top three any questions from committee members representative makes. Thank you Mr chairman so I'm gonna kinda asked the same question that I just ask representative loan Lundstrum so the last two election cycles there have been bills to try to do something somewhere and they have both failed and I support what your thought is here we need to try to protect our constitution but since you're doing basically the same thing and you're making your finish line a lot higher so what do you think your prospects of getting this across the finish line differentiates from the prior two failed attempts yes so by representative Meeks to answer questions like I said this would require both amendments done by the legislature as well citizens to be two thirds it also would take it would limit our concerts remember from two to three I think the citizenry is would be a little more willing to do this and support this because they do realize at the same time the legislature is playing by the same rules and if anything is also taking away one of their amendments that they pass out yeah I think it's rare for governments to to sometimes give power back to the citizens and and take it away from themselves but I think this is a good active good faith I think one of the things that I heard during the campaign was yes we agree with you the constitution is amended to many times but we felt like this creates an uneven playing field and so this is this is an attempt to address those concerns because B. at left have both agree that our constitution's change too much but like I said they just wanna make sure there's an even playing field and said this is an attempt to to add that on there so I'd say with these changes it now makes a lot more like okay we understand you're willing to play with the same rules as as citizen led amendments and also you're willing to give up twenty years because you truly are you know practicing what you preach was if you say the amendment you say the constitution amended to many times you're able to take one off the table and so that's why I think it's as a way. Their chance of passing that it had the past. Other questions from committee members. About one person signed up to speak for the bill Josh was Silverstein. Serve you would justify yourself to the committee noon you're recognized to give you testimony. Thank you Mr chairman and representatives my name is Josh Silverstein I'm a professor at the university of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law but I'm speaking exclusively in my individual capacity not on behalf of the university. So is the chair said I'm here to speak today in favor of H. K. R. ten eleven and I want to begin before I go into my prepared remarks about something that representative Pilkington said about how both the left and the right I think that our constitution and frankly all state constitutions get amended too often representative of poking is Republican I think most of you know I'm a Liberal Democrat I know I'm here supporting his resolution so just to show that the truth in his point. The United States and every individual state within our union our democracies the fundamental principle of democracy is that the majority is entitled to govern in most areas of public policy simply because it's the majority. This means that decisions concerning legislation whether voted on by elected representatives are by the citizenry normally should be decided by majority rule. This country and the states are not just democracies their constitutional democracies and the essence of constitutionalism is that certain principles of fundamental importance are enshrined in the constitution I'm pleased to be on the reach of regular political majorities some of those principles relate to the structure of governments just separation of powers or an independent judiciary and others concerned individual rights such as the freedom of speech the free exercise of religion and the right to bear arms. Because constitutions are intended to serve as paramount laws beyond the control of majorities only a supermajority should be authorized to amend the constitution in other words changing our form of government and eliminating or adding toward individual rights to require a super majority if Amir majority has the power to alter the structure of government established by the constitution and the political system can become unstable I have a simple majority may remove constitutional rights and those rights are not actually fundamental former judging constitutional scholar Robert Bork explained constitutionalism in this way constitutions are super majoritarian checks on transient majorities to elaborate political majorities Comando parties obtaining lose power in Washington Little Rock and other capitals and the views of the population on matters of public policy are constantly shifting that's what's meant by the phrase transient majorities according to park in a constitutional democracy the supermajority establishes a constitution to a create a sphere of authority for ever changing majorities B. create a spear of individual rights shielded from majority rule and see establish courts that preserve the boundary separating the two spheres to be sure the boundary can be altered constitution can be amended but only the supermajority is entitled to make such a change only one a super majority consents to an amendment can we consistently trust that the change to our structure of government fundamental rights is warranted. This reason justifies a vote in favor of H. J. R. ten eleven which will install super majoritarianism in the Arkansas constitution and explains why countries across the globe of the moving towards American style constitutional democracy over the last century rather than bracing other systems such as pure democracy we're all laws are subject to majority rule. Some critics of proposals like HR eleven claim that such a change permits minority rule because under representative poking his proposal thirty four percent of voters will be able to block an amendment favored by the other sixty six percent remember the very purpose of a constitution is to establish by super majoritarian consensus the structure of government and our fundamental rights as a result of minority should have the power to stop Amir majority from altering the constitution for example thirty four percent of our Kansans ought to be able to present sixty six percent of our Kansans from stripping away the freedom of speech the freedom of religion or the right to bear arms in the Arkansas constitution as representative Pilkington noted H. J. R. ten eleven avoids the pitfalls of issue to from the twenty twenty to ballot and many other past compatible reforms that it only raises the threshold for passage for constitutional amendments not legislation that's critical raising the threat to trust the threshold for legislation about the majority is generally inconsistent with our democratic ideals and HDR ten eleven only applies to Constitutional amendments I also like the other addition that representative talking to put in the resolution which cuts the number of amendments the Legislature may refer to the people from three to two that's a positive change it's difficult for regular citizens to keep up with all the candidates running for office whether they be judge's or otherwise let alone all of the issues on the ballot during elections that's especially true when a measure as many pages as many measures often are so basically I think it is critical that we bring the Arkansas constitution into alignment with the core features of constitutionalism by making the document harder to amend and also supports HDR ten eleven when I spoke about what became issue two two years ago one of the questions I received was where should the supermajority line B. should be fifty five sixty sixty six seventy I think that's a matter of a judgment call I don't think there's a clear answers to. Where we should draw the supermajority line my god would be sixty percent because it's the people voting rather than the two thirds that is required in in Congress to get an amendment before the state's but I think sixty six percent works really well I think it goes high is seventy any higher than that the constitution becomes too hard to amend any less than fifty five you don't really have a supermajority requirement to anywhere in that range it's a judgment call I respect representative poking his judgment that sixty six is the way to go and I support that thank you I'm happy to answer any questions any questions from committee members. J. nine district thank you for your testimony thank you to recognized closed thank chairman Tosh I think that was a very good presentation and with this I just think this is a this is good governance I think we've been dates on this issue for a long time ballot how to kind of rein in change their constitution and I think this is a fair way I think it's sometimes the best part of our democracies we listen to the other side we figure out the points of contention and work towards a middle ground and and I think this bill does that and so with that I ask that we passed this when the time comes thank you. Thank you. Committee members that was ten eleven. Ten eleven. Next up on today's agenda is ten twelve representative Scott Richardson. Thank you. Okay we'll move to the last one on today's agenda that's representative flowers. Representative fires committee members there is a member's own on this president we're not taking a vote without objection will go ahead and hear the how shell resolution ten thirteen. Thank you pleasure recognized thank you so much Mister chair. I want to start consent I don't I know that we have some some folks who may have who may not have heard this. Resolution before it's not the first time that I brought it but hopefully it will be the last. This was this resolution would essentially to. Is repealed the language that is essentially an exception for slavery. And a lot of people aren't even aware that this exists. if you look on page two of the bill if you have it up. It simply says. Slavery standing armies and military subordinate to civil power there should be no slavery in this state nor involuntary servitude. And what it says is except as a punishment for crime. Now I'll be as brief as I can in saying that we know that. We have a criminal justice system where if someone violates the law we have code that stipulates what the punishments are. None of those punishments stipulate enslavement. Of anyone. And. As we. Have a correction system. Our correction system does not require. Maybe compel but does not require at least on paper anyone to work we have work programs we are and those programs exist right now where some inmates could be paid and others are remunerated with good time. What department of corrections is very clearly told me. Is we could pay inmates today. So we don't need legislation and we don't need to change in the constitution to make that happen and I say that to let you know that that's what this is not about this is not about that. As a matter of fact we do pay inmates for many of our programs. For re entry and other programs. So again that is not what this is about. What this is about is our guiding document that defines who we are that serves as a foundation for all other law. Creates an exception for the enslavement of people. I will tell you quickly that. There are. Several states in the country who have recognized that that is not who they want to be. In twenty twenty Utah. Past. A measure a constitutional amendment out of the legislature put it on the ballot. And the people said now. We don't want this exception. In twenty twenty. Oregon Tennessee Alabama and Vermont did the same I'm sorry twenty twenty two. It in all four of those states. That measure passed. So we wouldn't be the first but I pray that we won't be the last. I would ask of Mister chair if a couple of gentleman join me to deliver a very brief remarks a professor Andre Cummings is here who is a law professor from the U. L. R. Bowen School of law as well as clean as the who is a movement builder with the Carceri. The representative flowers yes Sir both recognized actually help for people signed up and you just named two of on that one okay I have ever signed up to speak for your bill and there's two others also in the audience signed up to speak for the bill what will it do to you gentlemen go first and then I recognize the other two thank you so much okay professor. Good evening everybody I recognize its it's getting late I will be brief in my remarks I am Andre Cummings I am a professor of law at the bill in law school and I'm so grateful that representative flowers is invited me to say a couple of words about this amendment as all of you know the thirteenth amendment one passed was a watershed moment in United States history it's where following the emancipation proclamation by president Lincoln Congress two years later passed the thirteenth amendment the purpose of the thirteenth amendment as was ratified in eighteen sixty five was to eliminate chattel slavery. The thirteenth amendment reads neither slavery nor involuntary servitude comma except as a punishment for a crime of the workwear of the partial been duly convicted shall exist within the United States and we're here today to talk about the state of Arkansas having the opportunity to remove the punishment clause from the from the the the The Amendment in the state of Arkansas legal historians mostly agree that this amendment outlawed chattel slavery out rate and a lot involuntary servitude except as punishment for a crime in at the time in the eighteen sixties there was a need to reconstruct the self and so there was some thinking there at the time that some states needed prisoners to help rebuild the South to build roads and to engaged in menial labor of public works so this was used initially to help rebuild the south after the civil war but as many of you likely know the loop hill the loophole in this amendment the thirteenth amendment allowed some southern states to pass the horrendous black codes and engaging convict leasing you probably all know that the black codes were laws that allowed some of the states here in the south to it incarcerate a new these newly freed black slaves for things like loitering unemployment and vagrancy so that allowed a read sort of enslavement of these individuals by imprisoning them because of the convict leasing system which allowed states to lease out prisoners for profit to corporations in the conduct leasing system was even more brutal than slavery if you can imagine so convict leasing and of the black codes that were passed in the south because of this loophole this was never was never intended to. Was never intended to. what many northern and central states were aghast to see these codes pass that allowed the reinstatement of black Americans and so with those things in mind the time has come to remove the punishment clause from the Arkansas constitution and from the United States constitution for that matter for for a couple reasons in twenty twenty three there's no need for the states to force any individuals into labor for public works were not reconstructing the south there's no need for it plus the punishment clause has allowed slavery and involuntary servitude in our prisons and as most of you know we imprison black and brown Americans at disproportionate rates and so we are re enslaving black and brown prisoners and poor white Americans that as well so I believe that all all here where that we can do better the last thing I wanted to mention is that when we. When we Reince leave prisoners we put a disproportionate burden on their families they are they are they are in scenarios where they are meeting their families to send the money for commissary to send the money for phone calls when we do not pay prisoners or when we allow our prisoners to work without pay we are economically harming their families and their communities as well so I invite each of you today to imagine a different world a better world for Arkansas strikes the punishment clause from our constitution we can be a state that no longer engages in slave labor we can also be a state as a representative flowers mention that is in the trend of eliminating this provision from our constitution including the states that representative flowers mentioned and the brassica Tennessee Alabama at such a so I urge you all to support house joint resolution ten thirteen let the state citizens determined that this is the time to remove the punishment clause from R. thirteen our from our state constitution questions from committee members say none. Representative flowers you got another guest in the table yes Sir Mr nessie you're recognized to be testimony good enough all Committee Amendment members and chairman of my name is Committee not saying I work for the organization to casa rate up as a movement builder and all I like to just give you a brief history if I can come back to it all if I can offer this committee all. When I was seventeen years old I was sentenced to life without parole sentence in Arkansas department of correction alternate did twenty eight years and eleven months of that sentence so today when I speak about is from a personal perspective but also from a more perspective our first like to just introduce this one statement to say that all we want people to do better we treat them batter in I think this whole conversation around the thirteenth amendment deception call this is a very more issue of when I was incarcerated I always said to myself that if I ever have the opportunity to regain my freedom that I we exercise my freedom all in all its forms well I've been out for five years now by a vote in every cycle on I began my passport which has allowed me to go out of the country of several times aw I pay my taxes aw I do community work in different things of that nature to exercise my freedom I believe the constitution is a living document and with anything that is live in we have improved is all within ourselves right now we have been paired is that we have to purge out with this section clause in the constitution or the thirteenth amendment yes I am here today that needs to be parsed out once upon a time of the United States constitution said bill all African Americans Wallace all three feel something man what we purchased at law that calls out of the constitution I think this is one of those clauses that also need to be person about constitution to make goes back up better individuals about our state a better citizen for all when individuals are incarcerated all. I think it's out duly responsibility to make those individuals batter and I'm I'm a I'm a firm believer that there is power there are unique powers that are. In leased in words so we have all a clause in our constitution this said it is alright is Kerry to turn I'll I'll sit insert our citizens into slaves then this doesn't more clause that we need you know that that's in morality that we need to all purge out of our constitution I'm not all I'm not all you want to save it I'm all the one to be talking to you guys about morality. But at this point I think I have the most of I I have the biggest dog in the fight. Because when when the individual has gone through a sorry sorry in all. All punishment. Our abuses. Then I think that individual has a right to all speak of to those who can change those conditions so I would like to just re one statement by all the late Nelson Mandela and this is what he said. And I think this is Dylan all perfectly well what we have going on today. It is it that no one truly knows a nation until one has been sat in insiders jails a nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens but had previous lords. In individuals who are incarcerated are considered low Arkansas's all lower citizens so is impaired today we treat them right so Tool give them hope it's about coming battle individuals so with that there are up thank you for allowing me to serve thank you Sir if any questions represented Clowney you're recognized yes I have a question for the sponsor that okay. I have a question for the sponsor. The representative flowers okay okay actually for anybody wants to answer it but you know I think one of the things that we've heard a lot of today is concern for how popular something is going to be if it does go on the ballot I think there are some amendments that were presented today that we know would likely get huge amounts of support if they were in front of the public and I think that it's our job in the committee to kind of try to push out those amendment that we think may have the most popular support my question for you is I mean looking at this list of co sponsors it's clearly it's it's regionally diverse diverse across parties it's it's really impressive and I guess my question is is there any opposition that you're aware of can we imagine what opposition might look like if this ended up on the ballot in terms of it the size of that opposition and and how much popular support do you think this would have thank you for your question represent cloudy I and I'm glad you pointed to that. There are very few people who I went to with this measure and didn't sign on what an excited to sign on to it So I do think that it. I have not gotten any feet I mean any push back there's been no vocal person or group who has expressed opposition to the language in any way and as a matter of fact I've gotten really really great assistance with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and what I wanted this committee in particular but I won't say is name I'm just very grateful that people recognize that this is something that needs to be done so over the years it's really become of a good resolution and a great measure and I'm glad that we're here now because to get to answer your question about the possibility of passage by the people if we look at where this measure has been on the ballot across the country not withstanding partisan you know majority not withstanding region not withstanding race it they've passed wildly the only times that these measures in the last I would say four years have not passed this when there's been a technical issue with the ballot issue and one of the states that passed in twenty twenty two had put it on the ballot a couple of times in that third time it passed so I think we can look at especially to like states with regard to partisanship composition racial composition and reason and look to Tennessee which is right on our border as well as to Alabama and say absolutely this would passed with flying colors. I would just come in really quickly I'm so grateful for not seeing a cleans testimony because. We as a state have a chance to do the right thing to be on the right side of history and to do it early rather than leave to be with those seven eight states that have trended in what we feel like it's the right direction. Representative Crawford you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chair. When I was speaking to a constituent about this bill a couple of questions came out. When a person is incarcerated life without parole. And. If I understand the bill correctly they would they couldn't get good behavior time correct so they would then what would this would say is I would get paid reimbursed for their services. It's only like to finish okay. Well and then I have is how would say could and and I guess one of the points that I tried to make earlier early on is while this issue of pay and good time is sort of a I mean I would say it's it's it is almost. It speaks to policy it speaks to morality it but it also speaks to sort of a philosophical perspective about the direction of the state I think what we have to do is. You know you've heard the history of where the language came from. And and I guess separate and distinguish what that language meant then and what it means now. Follow up. You're recognized thank you and so the other part of that question is then if they're getting paid. Then are they going to in turn pay for room and board and food and since the state is already paying for all of the great that's a great question that were yes so if we see if we set this apart and recognize that what we're saying is we we are not a state that wishes to enslave anyone under any circumstances but then look over here where we are today and in the twentieth and twenty first centuries really where I think that we could look at this differently and say right now today we could pay inmates this does not operationalize that and it doesn't say we have to pay anyone I think what we can recognized is that people are already paid people are already afforded good time and people are already afforded privileges even as inmates for life in prison and I don't you know many of you didn't see this when I used to be a staff person this place was filled in the evenings with inmates who got an opportunity to come here and clean the capital so you know you have different kinds of incentives for good behavior you have different kinds of incentives inside the prison in out and so you know I think what we have to recognize what this is is to say we are not a state that supports the exception for slavery in our guiding document that defines who we are as a as a state that is a part of a nation of laws okay that helps thank you. Okay representative fires I appreciate to to get us to ten the table your testimony got two more years before the bill so I would just excuse yourself and make room for the other I believe Mister Davis is not here but read yeah revenue run Davis is not here yeah Hey I don't think you made it back okay I've got one we have one other signed up to speak of Columbia bill yes are you about that for now the name and I apologize. Good evening I am quite me of dual bay I'm here in two capacities the first someone of the coconveners of the Arkansas peace and justice memorial movement and I am also the Senate president for the Arkansas student legislature and in the Arkansas student legislature. I actually sponsored a very similar bill to this in twenty twenty two that also had wide bipartisan co sponsorship and it ended up getting out of both the Senate and the house it with unanimous vote so wanted to let you guys know that. the young people the students of Arkansas recognize the importance of this bill and they have sent a message that this is something that is relevant and something that is needed in a lot of the other states that have student legislatures the real legislature actually takes a lot of its cues from the student legislature so I ask that you guys recognize that the Arkansas student legislature has unanimously passed be similar to similar constitutional amendment I also want to add that there are two other states that aren't on your list that she did not mention Colorado and Nebraska are almost all so overwhelmingly the voters there overwhelmingly voted for this type of legislation and I wanted to him by saying that this type of legislation. Is what's known in international law as transitional justice and transitional justice is a moment where governments decide to break from their pass so what this legislation would do with this constitutional amendment would do is they will give us an opportunity as our Kansans to the side of the R. we the Arkansas of twenty twenty three we're different from the Arkansas of eighteen seventy four and this is a clear message that we send to everyone that we are turning the page and we are moving forward with a new agenda and a new definition of who we are. Any questions from committee members. So thank you for your testimony here today thank you thank you representative prior you're recognized to close to your bill yes Sir thank you so much Committee I would just close by saying that you know we we see that there is a strong contention of members and support we know by virtue of other states that this measure would likely passed overwhelmingly in the State of Arkansas as it has in seven other states I would just ask you to think about Some of the errors and horrors that have happened in our country and in our state and mistakes whether we talk about child labor whether we talk about the oppression and the second class citizenship of women and and we can go on about how native Americans were treated at different points in time in our history we can't undo past mistakes when we look at the history of anything. Of our selves of our family but what we what we can do is recognize that when we make things right when we become better we don't create exceptions and this is our chance to erase the exception for something that I truly believe that everyone in this room borders I truly believe that everyone in this room values freedom and liberty and I just would ask you to think about that when you're considering the amendments that you would push forward to be considered by the voters of Arkansas thank you so much representative flowers can. Committee members we've heard all the constitutional amendments on today's agenda you have you. Sure she jim grunted member which one you of black. The motion you get to one and the second is to and you go all the way up to three but you can write a committee vote for one or two or three you don't have to vote for any of them at all but I will need direction each back even if you decide not to vote make sure they're signed and a reminder make sure they're turning back into Carly by noon tomorrow and then by a the top two will be on the the agenda on Wednesday morning and will vote at that time and so with that any questions from committee members. Hey I really appreciate child thank you for staying in here was getting this way this meeting is adjourned.