House Convenes
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (51)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
SJR15
· 5 mentions in transcript, chapter
Matched: “Joint Resolution number 15. Senate Joint Resolution 15 by Representative Beatty, a constitutional amendment concer…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS; AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL … | J. Dismang | Approved by the Governor. |
|
HR1115
· 3 mentions in chapter, transcript
Matched: “HR1115 Wooldridge TO RECOGNIZE THE IMPACT OF COMMUNITY ACTION AGEN…”
|
TO RECOGNIZE THE IMPACT OF COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCIES IN THIS STATE AND TO COMMEND THEIR … | Wooldridge | READ AND ADOPTED. |
|
HCR5
· 2 mentions in transcript
Matched: “resolution. Thank you, Speaker. Um, House concurrent resolution 5 is regarding the American Cancer Society. The society estim…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HR11
· 2 mentions in transcript
Matched: “Madam Clerk, please read House resolution 11:15”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HR1114
· 2 mentions in transcript
Matched: “…this week, I came before you and, and ask you to pass. Um, House Resolution 1114, that basically authorized, uh,”
|
REQUESTING THAT SENATOR DISMANG BE AUTHORIZED TO PURSUE THE CONSIDERATION OF SJR 15 AS A … | Beaty Jr. | READ AND ADOPTED. |
|
HB1131
Act 959
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1131 #1,2 Pilkington TO AUTHORIZE AN ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERE…”
|
TO AUTHORIZE AN ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED NURSE TO DELEGATE CERTAIN TASKS TO MEDICAL ASSISTANTS AND … | Pilkington | Notification that HB1131 is now Act 959 |
|
HB1186
Act 960
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1186 #1 Vaught TO CREATE THE PAIN RELIEF PARITY ACT; AND TO REQU…”
|
TO CREATE THE PAIN RELIEF PARITY ACT; AND TO REQUIRE PAIN RELIEF PARITY IN THE … | Vaught | Notification that HB1186 is now Act 960 |
|
HB1295
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1295 L. Johnson TO CREATE THE HEALTHCARE COST-SHARING COLLECTION…”
|
TO CREATE THE HEALTHCARE COST-SHARING COLLECTIONS TRANSPARENCY ACT. | L. Johnson | Died in House at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1606
Act 922
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1606 #1 Steimel TO ALLOW A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO AUTHORIZE THE OPE…”
|
TO ALLOW A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A UTILITY TASK VEHICLE ON … | Steimel | Notification that HB1606 is now Act 922 |
|
HB1685
Act 1008
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1685 #1,2 Underwood TO CREATE THE GROCERY TAX RELIEF ACT; TO AME…”
|
TO CREATE THE GROCERY TAX RELIEF ACT; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE SALES AND … | Underwood | Notification that HB1685 is now Act 1008 |
|
HB1762
Act 1009
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1762 #1 Hall TO REQUIRE REVOCATION OF A PERMIT FOR THE DISPOSAL…”
|
TO REQUIRE REVOCATION OF A PERMIT FOR THE DISPOSAL OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE IN AN AGRICULTURAL … | Hall | Notification that HB1762 is now Act 1009 |
|
HB1801
Act 961
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1801 #1 K. Moore TO AUTHORIZE AN OUTSOURCING FACILITY OF LEGEND…”
|
TO AUTHORIZE AN OUTSOURCING FACILITY OF LEGEND DRUGS AND CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES THAT COMPOUNDS A PRODUCT … | K. Moore | Notification that HB1801 is now Act 961 |
|
HB1841
Act 1021
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1841 #1 L. Johnson TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS REVENUE INVESTMENT IN…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS REVENUE INVESTMENT IN VITAL EMS SYSTEMS (ARRIVES) ACT; AND TO CREATE … | L. Johnson | Notification that HB1841 is now Act 1021 |
|
HB1845
Act 926
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1845 #1 Holcomb TO ALLOW THE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATION OF DOCUME…”
|
TO ALLOW THE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATION OF DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE OWNERSHIP OF MOTOR VEHICLES; TO … | Holcomb | Notification that HB1845 is now Act 926 |
|
HB1865
Act 976
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1865 #1,2 Vaught TO CREATE AN ENHANCED PENALTY FOR CERTAIN OFFEN…”
|
TO CREATE AN ENHANCED PENALTY FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES AGAINST A CHILD. | Vaught | Notification that HB1865 is now Act 976 |
|
HB1877
Act 977
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1877 #1 S. Meeks CONCERNING CRIMINAL OFFENSES RELATED TO POSSESS…”
|
CONCERNING CRIMINAL OFFENSES RELATED TO POSSESSION OF SEXUALLY EXPLICIT MATERIAL THAT DEPICTS A CHILD; AND … | S. Meeks | Notification that HB1877 is now Act 977 |
|
HB1897
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1897 Painter TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS TOWING AND RECOVERY REFORM A…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS TOWING AND RECOVERY REFORM AND EFFICIENCY ACT OF 2025; TO AMEND … | Painter | Recommended for study in the Interim by the … |
|
HB1963
Act 963
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1963 #1 Gonzales TO CLARIFY THAT AN ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED…”
|
TO CLARIFY THAT AN ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED NURSE WHO PRESCRIBES A STIMULANT MAY SUBSTITUTE A … | Gonzales | Notification that HB1963 is now Act 963 |
|
SB121
Act 968
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB121 C. Penzo Long TO AMEND THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE…”
|
TO AMEND THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR OUT-OF-STATE LICENSURE ACT; TO APPLY THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL … | C. Penzo | Notification that SB121 is now Act 968 |
|
SB122
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB122 C. Penzo Long TO AMEND THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE…”
|
TO AMEND THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR OUT-OF-STATE LICENSURE ACT; TO APPLY THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL … | C. Penzo | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB149
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB149 J. English Brooks TO AMEND PUBLIC SCHOOL FUNDING AMOUNTS UN…”
|
TO AMEND PUBLIC SCHOOL FUNDING AMOUNTS UNDER THE PUBLIC SCHOOL FUNDING ACT OF 2003. | J. English | Died in House at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB217
Act 969
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB217 C. Penzo Bentley TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICE…”
|
TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES TO REQUEST A WAIVER TO EXCLUDE CANDY AND … | C. Penzo | Notification that SB217 is now Act 969 |
|
SB262
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB262 C. Penzo Pilkington TO AMEND THE CORPORATE PRACTICE OF MEDI…”
|
TO AMEND THE CORPORATE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE DOCTRINE; AND TO AUTHORIZE A LICENSED MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL … | C. Penzo | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB325
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB325 A. Clark Brooks TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS JUVENILE CODE OF 1989…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS JUVENILE CODE OF 1989; TO AMEND THE CHILD MALTREATMENT ACT; TO … | A. Clark | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB326
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB326 A. Clark Brooks TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS JUVENILE CODE OF 1989…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS JUVENILE CODE OF 1989 AND THE CHILD MALTREATMENT ACT; TO MODIFY … | A. Clark | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB347
Act 1025
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB347 C. Penzo Mayberry TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM…”
|
TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO INCREASE REIMBURSEMENT RATES FOR CERTAIN DENTAL SERVICES AND … | C. Penzo | Notification that SB347 is now Act 1025 |
|
SB355
Act 1000
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB355 J. Bryant Underwood TO AMEND THE CRIMINAL OFFENSE OF OBSTRU…”
|
TO AMEND THE CRIMINAL OFFENSE OF OBSTRUCTING GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS. | J. Bryant | Notification that SB355 is now Act 1000 |
|
SB362
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB362 AN ACT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION - DIVISION OF ELEMEN…”
|
AN ACT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION - DIVISION OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION YOUTH … | K. Hammer | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB437
Act 945
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB437 Hester Hall TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ACT. | Hester | Notification that SB437 is now Act 945 |
|
SB441
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB441 Hester Pilkington TO CREATE THE JUNK LAWSUIT PREVENTION ACT…”
|
TO CREATE THE JUNK LAWSUIT PREVENTION ACT OF 2025. | Hester | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB444
Act 970
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB444 K. Hammer L. Johnson TO AMEND THE MEDICAL ETHICS AND DIVERS…”
|
TO AMEND THE MEDICAL ETHICS AND DIVERSITY ACT. | K. Hammer | Notification that SB444 is now Act 970 |
|
SB459
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB459 G. Leding Hudson TO AMEND THE MINIMUM AGE NECESSARY TO ADJU…”
|
TO AMEND THE MINIMUM AGE NECESSARY TO ADJUDICATE A JUVENILE DELINQUENT. | G. Leding | Died in House at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB486
Act 955
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB486 B. Johnson Bentley CONCERNING SAFETY AND PRIVACY IN CERTAIN…”
|
CONCERNING SAFETY AND PRIVACY IN CERTAIN ENTITIES; AND CONCERNING THE DESIGNATION OF MULTI-OCCUPANCY RESTROOMS, CHANGING … | B. Johnson | Notification that SB486 is now Act 955 |
|
SB491
Act 956
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB491 K. Hammer Achor TO REQUIRE A VENDOR THAT CONTRACTS WITH THE…”
|
TO REQUIRE A VENDOR THAT CONTRACTS WITH THE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS DIVISION TO SUBMIT DATA FOR … | K. Hammer | Notification that SB491 is now Act 956 |
|
SB538
Act 782
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB538 Gilmore Wardlaw TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS PROCUREMENT LAW.”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS PROCUREMENT LAW. | Gilmore | Notification that SB538 is now Act 782 |
|
SB54
Act 1015
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB54 AN ACT FOR THE AUDITOR OF STATE - DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORN…”
|
AN ACT FOR THE AUDITOR OF STATE - DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2025-2026 … | Joint Budget Committee | Notification that SB54 is now Act 1015 |
|
SB554
Act 1022
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB554 C. Tucker Wooldridge TO CREATE THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH LOAN F…”
|
TO CREATE THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM. | C. Tucker | Notification that SB554 is now Act 1022 |
|
SB569
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB569 M. Johnson Ray AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION CO…”
|
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION CONCERNING BALLOT TITLES OF PROPOSED MEASURES; AND AMENDING THE … | M. Johnson | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB585
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB585 G. Leding Gonzales Worthen TO REQUIRE CERTAIN RECORDS BE PR…”
|
TO REQUIRE CERTAIN RECORDS BE PROVIDED TO AN EMPLOYEE WHO IS A MINOR. | G. Leding | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB591
Act 973
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB591 C. Penzo K. Brown TO PROHIBIT RACE-SELECTION ABORTION IN TH…”
|
TO PROHIBIT RACE-SELECTION ABORTION IN THIS STATE; AND TO CREATE THE RACE DISCRIMINATION BY ABORTION … | C. Penzo | Notification that SB591 is now Act 973 |
|
SB596
Act 940
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB596 M. McKee McAlindon TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING ENERGY; TO ES…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING ENERGY; TO ESTABLISH A STATE ENERGY POLICY; TO REGULATE RETIREMENT … | M. McKee | Notification that SB596 is now Act 940 |
|
SB601
Act 971
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB601 Hester L. Johnson TO CREATE A PATHWAY FOR A GRADUATE OF A F…”
|
TO CREATE A PATHWAY FOR A GRADUATE OF A FOREIGN MEDICAL SCHOOL TO BE LICENSED … | Hester | Notification that SB601 is now Act 971 |
|
SB621
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB621 Irvin L. Johnson TO CLARIFY ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS AGAINST…”
|
TO CLARIFY ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS AGAINST A HEALTHCARE INSURER; TO RETROACTIVELY APPLY TO A HEALTHCARE CONTRACT … | Irvin | Died in House at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB625
Act 920
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB625 B. Davis Brooks TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CO…”
|
TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CONCERNING THE ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S EDUCATIONAL FREEDOM ACCOUNT PROGRAM; … | B. Davis | Notification that SB625 is now Act 920 |
|
SB636
Act 1017
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB636 AN ACT TO TRANSFER FUNDS; DEFINE THE MONIES TO BE AVAILABLE…”
|
AN ACT TO TRANSFER FUNDS; DEFINE THE MONIES TO BE AVAILABLE IN THE RESTRICTED RESERVE … | J. Dismang | Notification that SB636 is now Act 1017 |
|
SB637
Act 1018
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB637 TO AMEND THE REVENUE STABILIZATION LAW; AND TO DECLARE AN E…”
|
TO AMEND THE REVENUE STABILIZATION LAW; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. | J. Dismang | Notification that SB637 is now Act 1018 |
|
SB638
Act 1019
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB638 J. Boyd L. Johnson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE COLLECTI…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE COLLECTION OF SALES AND USE TAX ON THE SALE … | J. Boyd | Notification that SB638 is now Act 1019 |
|
SB67
Act 1016
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SB67 AN ACT FOR THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC DEFENDER COMMISSION APPROPRI…”
|
AN ACT FOR THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC DEFENDER COMMISSION APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2025-2026 FISCAL YEAR. | Joint Budget Committee | Notification that SB67 is now Act 1016 |
|
SCR5
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SCR5 Irvin Barker TO CONTINUE TO ENCOURAGE THE PURSUIT OF NATION…”
|
TO CONTINUE TO ENCOURAGE THE PURSUIT OF NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE DESIGNATION BY THE WINTHROP P. … | Irvin | Approved by the Governor. |
|
SCR7
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SCR7 J. Scott Ennett TO RECOGNIZE THE MILLS UNIVERSITY STUDIES H…”
|
TO RECOGNIZE THE MILLS UNIVERSITY STUDIES HIGH SCHOOL COMETS BOYS' BASKETBALL TEAM AS THE CLASS … | J. Scott | Died in House at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SCR8
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “SCR8 J. Scott Ennett TO RECOGNIZE THE MILLS UNIVERSITY STUDIES H…”
|
TO RECOGNIZE THE MILLS UNIVERSITY STUDIES HIGH SCHOOL LADY COMETS BASKETBALL TEAM AS THE CLASS … | J. Scott | Died in House at Sine Die adjournment. |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 2, 2026
Chair
Unverified
14:36
I invite the members, staff, press, and guests in the galleries to stand and be led in prayer this morning by Pastor Justin Haley. Associate pastor of outreach and young adults, Faith Baptist Church of Cabot and remained standing for the Pledge of allegiance to be led by Representative Lane Jean. That's probably Father God, I just want to
Speaker 9
14:55
thank you so much for who you are. And Father, I thank you for the opportunity to pray for everyone under the sound of my voice, while they're out there. I thank you so much for their selfless and sacrificial service that
they have offered, uh, throughout the year. Father, thank you so much for the countless hours that they have put in, uh, just the tireless work that they have done. Father, I pray that you help them finish the course well today. Father, thank you so much once again for everything that they have done, help them be encouraged and remember that their labor is not. been in vain. Father, I pray that everything that comes forward today, that righteousness prevails. Father, and I pray that in all of the conversations and all the decisions that we do unto others
as they would have uh done unto themselves. Father, I pray that you just help, um, them and everything that they need, Father, for their families, I pray that you continue to bless them and and just help them remember that their sacrifices don't go unnoticed either. Father, and even though session is over after this morning, I know that they have numerous tasks, uh, many other things awaiting them. And Father, I pray that you help them remain encouraged, remain steadfast and all of the responsibilities that they have to carry out in their
position for this great state. Father, I just thank you so much once again for everything that you have done. I pray that you
Chair
Unverified
16:40
Members, please indicate your presence by pushing your yellow present button. Prepair the machine, madam clerk.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
17:22
Cast up the ballot. With 98 members
present. The chair sees a quorum. Are there any requests for leave? Representative McGruder,
Speaker 21
17:33
for what purpose? Leave. I'll hear your leave. Lead for Representative Glenn
Chair
Unverified
17:37
Barnes. I leave granted for Representative Glenn Barnes. So ordered Representative Mike Holcomb, for what
Speaker 24
17:45
purpose? Lee, you're recognized. Leave for representative Wardlaw his leave granted for Representative Wardlaw. So ordered
Chair
Unverified
17:56
Representative Matthew Shepherd moves that we dispense with the reading of the previous day's journal. No objection. So ordered Madam Claire, do you have reports from select committees, any reports from standing committees, any unfinished business, executive communications. Thank you, Madam Clerk.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
18:21
Members, if you would, I would ask you to join me. Please rise. Direct your attention to the
Chair
Unverified
18:27
back of the chamber and I want to recognize this morning. Our Arkansas state troopers, Sergeant Chuck Lewis of the Wellness Unit and Corporal Trey Keller of the Highway Patrol Administration. They have labored here with us all session. Gentlemen, thank you for your work for the state of Arkansas and for the Arkansas House of Representatives.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
18:57
Members also in the back of the chamber this morning. We have with us Doctor
Chair
Unverified
19:01
Jason Lofton. He is a family medicine physician from the Queen, Representative Deanne Bot's District, Doctor Lofton, thank you for being here with us this morning. And also amazing service that we've had this session and so grateful for the work that she has put in to help us, our nurse, Ms. Lee Fazio. Ms. Lee, thank you.
Madam Clerk, please read Senate concurrent resolution number
5. Senate concurrent resolution filed by Representative Barker to continue to encourage the pursuit of national Cancer Institute designation by the Winthrop P. Rockefeller Cancer Institute at the University of Arkansas for
Medical Sciences. Representative McAlinden, you're recognized to explain the
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
19:58
resolution. Thank you, Speaker. Um, House concurrent resolution 5 is regarding the American Cancer Society. The society estimates that 19,700 Americans will be
diagnosed with cancer. Our state's cancer-related deaths has increased 9% over the last 28 years, while the national rate has decreased by 5%. Currently, Arkansas lacks a National Cancer Institute designation Cancer Center, forcing many patients to seek advanced treatments outside of the state. Designating the Winthrop Rockefeller Cancer Institute as an NCI center would expand access to cutting edge treatment, clinical trials, and research funding. It would also support our healthcare providers and institutions statewide fostering innovation and improving patient outcomes.
By passing SCR 5, we affirm our commitment to combating cancer and enhancing healthcare for all Arkansans. And with that, would you ask the clerk to read the resolution
Speaker 45
20:51
and title only, please. Madam Clerk, please read the resolution
Chair
Unverified
20:54
by title to the pursuit of National Cancer Institute designation by the Winthrop P. Rockefeller Cancer Institute at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences.
Representative McAlinden has explained the resolution. Would anyone like to speak against the resolution. For the resolution,
Representative McAlinden is closed for the resolution. The question before the House is the
passage, adoption of Senate concurrent resolution number 5, all those in favor say aye. Ponay, the ayes have it. Congratulations, Representative McAlinden, resolution is adopted.
Chair
Unverified
21:42
Madam Clerk, please read House resolution 11:15
Resolution 1115 by Representative Wooldridge to recognize the impact of community action agencies in the state and to commend their dedication to improving their lives of Arkansas, Arkansans. Representative orders,
you are recognized to explain your resolution. Thank you,
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
21:58
Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. I wanted to come forward this morning and recognize the Community action agencies that serve the great state of Arkansas. I'm blessed to work in that field. What I love about community action is it's not a
Republican or Democrat issue. It's a people issue and these agencies and these Arkansans that serving them work hard every day to make sure that they're giving back and creating opportunities for every Arkansan to be the best version of themselves. With that, I know we have members of the, uh, network that are here today. They were the ones that served breakfast for us across the street. I'll ask them if they will rise, please, in the gallery, and if you will help me welcome them to the Arkansas House of Representatives.
Speaker 45
22:50
Mr. Speaker, if you will have the clerk read the resolution and title. Madam Clerk, please read
Chair
Unverified
22:57
the resolution by title. We recognize the impact of community action agencies in this state and to commend their dedication
to improving the lives of Arkansans. Representative Wooldridge has explained the resolution. Would anyone like to speak against the resolution. For the resolution. Representative Wooldridge is closed for the resolution. The question
before the House is the adoption of house resolution 11:15. All those in favor say aye.
Posne, the ayes have it. Congratulations, Representative Wooldridge, your resolution has been adopted. Members
Chair
Unverified
23:38
at the request of Representative Enit, we will pass over Senate concurrent resolution number 7 and Senate current
resolution number 8. Madam Clerk, please read Senate
Joint Resolution number 15. Senate Joint Resolution 15 by Representative Beatty, a constitutional amendment concerning economic development in the state of Arkansas and
Speaker 47
24:05
authorizing the General Assembly to provide for the creation of economic development districts to promote economic development.
Chair
Unverified
24:11
Representative Beatty, you're recognized to explain the resolution. Thank
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
24:18
you, Mr. Speaker, members, um, to present, uh, Senate Joint
Resolution 15, uh, for a constitutional amendment concerning economic development in the state of Arkansas, and authorized the General Assembly to provide for the creation of economic development districts to promote economic development. Members earlier in this week, I came before you and, and ask you to pass. Um, House Resolution 1114, that basically authorized, uh,
All right. Maybe I'll just stand right here. It,
are we still here? It's always good to have a little technical difficulty. I need to take the mic cover off. So, earlier in the session, we'd asked, uh, for you to approve, uh, authorizing Senator Dimain to, um, allow SJR 15 as the third constitutional amendment. You granted that, uh, Senator Dimaine presented that in the
Senate. It was, it was overwhelmingly supported in the Senate, uh, and then passed the Senate, came back to the floor, ask you, um, To send it to committee, it went to committee last night. We were able to debate that, and, and got the motion to get this here today. And basically what I'm doing today is asking you as a body to let's send this to the voters of Arkansas and get their support on, on this resolution. Um, You should have all had the
talking points, uh, for those of you that were in committee as to why this is important and what we're trying to do. And basically what we're trying to do is level the playing field with our neighboring states right now, Texas, Louisiana, Missouri, Tennessee, uh, all have, uh, economic development, um, potentials with TIFF districts, uh, and what we're proposing in this bill. So what this bill would do is it's going to level the playing field. It's going to allow us for Economic development districts to be created. Uh, it's going to
allow direct local incentives to be made for retail, uh, potentially for retail, for housing, uh, to clean up blight in your communities, uh, and it's gonna have, um, it's gonna have the ability for local control where your, your local communities can decide what's important to them and make the decision, uh, to create jobs and improvement in those communities. We talked about this a lot. So I, I think I'll just entertain questions and
see if there are concerns from the members in the body that I can address.
Speaker 71
27:22
Representative Richmond, for what purpose? Question, you're recognized. Representative Beatty,
Representative Marcus E. Richmond
Unverified
27:26
you, you, you've probably seen a lot of the same information coming over, you know, different media and stuff about this, calling it corporate welfare, calling it this and that. Why are they referring to it as corporate wealth, and don't get me wrong, welfare, corporate welfare is my favorite welfare, but that's, you know, the thing is, is that, again, you know, it has that stigma. So can you explain that a little bit as, as to why and why it's not.
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
27:52
Well, I, first, I would, I would completely and totally disagree that this is corporate welfare. I mean, because a lot of this, a lot of this bill is going to impact your small business men and women in your communities, those that have been there, they have chosen to invest in your market with maybe a potential expansion. It's not just limited to corporate America. This is, this is true community development, instead of just economic development and manufacturing jobs. This opens it up for retail businesses in your districts. This is, this is for what your community wants. If, if there's something goods
and services, why should people in, in a community have to drive an hour, 2 hours away for goods and services that they can get in their community. If we just had the tool to entice those folks to locate in our market. It's all controlled by your local people and what they choose. It's not a mandate that you have to participate in this program. It's a tool that's missing from Arkansas's economic development toolbox. And it's important that we get it in there. And I don't know that I answered your question, but I
Tempted. So I hope it gave some insight.
Speaker 77
28:55
Representative Joey Carr, for what purpose? Question. You're recognized. Representative
Representative John P. Carr
Unverified
28:58
Beatty, uh, for example, we have the Great River Economic Development Group in Mississippi County, will this work along beside this or will that make that obsolete? Representative Carr, I would be disappointed if I, if I had
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
29:10
to stand up here and tell you that this would compete or harm your economic development group. One thing your group should have been advocating for this because it's gonna give them the tools to
attract business and industry into your community, it's gonna be something. Now, when folks
contact us and say, first thing they ask, what's your incentives? What can you offer? You know what the answer is?
If it's retail and it's not manufacturing jobs. I'm sorry, we don't have anything. This is going to let that answer change to something that's going
Speaker 84
29:43
to attract investment and get their attention. Thank you, sir.
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
29:47
Representative Duke, for what purpose? You're recognized Mister Speaker. Representative Beatty, could you explain to me why this needs to be put in the Constitution as an amendment. What is it that
raises it to that bar that we need to have it put into our
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
30:03
state constitution as an amendment. Representative Duke, that's an excellent question. Part of the TIFF districts were created and the voters actually approved TIFF districts, which is what this bill does. But there was a legal issue that, that, that came up. I think it dealt maybe with some school districts that had an issue or concern about the taxing, uh, that was taking away from their, um, from their institutions. And so that was through court, it created a
problem. So now that's, there's a, a restriction on creation of these TIF districts. We have a few in, in Arkansas. Uh, if you wonder across the river, some of the development that we have over here, TIF District Opportunity zone. So it is in there, but the language in the Constitution needs to be amended and the issues and the roadblocks that were brought up in that lawsuit need to be addressed. And
this is what this legislation does. You're recognized. Is this the only solution.
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
30:58
Available to the people of Arkansas through the legislative body and through this process. This is the absolute only way that
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
31:05
this could be addressed. Represent Duke again, a question. The only way right
now, this is restricted based on the, on the court ruling from, from pursuing this in Arkansas until we adjust the Constitution and amend it, this is not allowed. So this is the only way, the Constitution is, is our governing document, and without an amendment that allows this. We can't pursue it.
Representative Zack Gramlich
Unverified
31:30
Representative Rye, for what purpose? Question. You're recognized.
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
31:34
Representative Howard and it, it's got a broad range to it. I mean, we saw some like with new core with what Joey was talking about maybe cost you $9 million but millions and millions and millions of jobs and money coming into that area. And then we saw one yesterday where it was only $14,000 but it, it's gonna contribute about 1.2 or $3 million. So I mean,
without things like this right here, you've got no spur. This has to be.
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
32:06
And I appreciate you. Representative Ryan, again, you raise a very valid point. Sitting in
this room, we all represent diverse segments of Arkansas. Each of our districts, there may be similarities, but there's difference in differences of what the needs in our community are. This bill had to be broad so that we can address all those concerns in your community and Representative Duke's community
Speaker 100
32:31
in my community. So thank you for that question. Representative Richardson,
Speaker 101
32:36
for what purpose? Question, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative
Scott Richardson
Unverified
32:39
Beatty, I appreciate you bringing this issue, uh, the, how do you address the question that a lot of my, uh, constituents have that this is going to unfairly advantage new business over existing businesses that have been there for a significant period of time. Another good
Chair (Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.)
Unverified
32:54
question. Let me point out, This is open to any business. So if you have a business in your
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
33:02
community that's there and, and, and they choose to expand, or they want to, um, uh, open another branch or they want to bring on new employees or, or maybe even a new building. This opportunity is open to them should the community decide to do it, you can incentivize growth in your community. Most of it's going to be organic growth right out of your district, people that have invested that know that market, that are looking for a reason. to expand and just a little bit of help, this bill, if we, if we pass this and it's, and it's passed by the voters of
Arkansas, it will incentivize and motivate folks in your community, maybe expand their business. So it's not just for new business coming into your community. This helps everyone
Speaker 26
33:44
in your community. Representative Torres, for what purpose? Question, you're recognized. Representative
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
33:47
Beatty, you mentioned that other states have this tool in their toolbox. Is there an example of a community in our state that's can
be served as an example of us not having one versus someone that does. Representative Torres, I, I would say and
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
34:04
challenge anyone that, that travels to the interstate and goes into through Texarkana, Arkansas. When you cross that state line, what do you notice? You notice the development, all the investment that's being made on the, on the Texas side of the line. The reason that's happening is because of this program in Texas, and, and the, the foresight and the tools that they have in Texas, you see that this will change the landscape of our border communities. This is important. The same thing,
uh, in, in Carr's district, um, where you look at, um, Memphis, West Memphis, uh, Helena, those areas. This will be a game changer. for these communities, not just with job development, but if there's a blighted area of the community and there's community revitalization. This, this will help that
Speaker 111
34:54
as well. Representative McKenzie, for what purpose? Question, you're recognized. Representative
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
34:57
Beatty, um, no one ever wants to prepare for a worst case scenario, but through reading the bill and
then watching testimony last night, it wasn't
really asked or understood what happens in the event of a of a tiff bond fail failure. What's political subdivision is next responsible for picking up the slack in the event that one of the
bonds or one of the incentive packages that goes out, isn't collateralized or isn't taken care of by those who
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
35:22
request that bond. I think all those would go. of, of the, of the local uh municipality that, that is approving that. A lot of these, um, are gonna be so stringently underwritten that I, I think we'll be protected on that side,
um, these are not things that we're gonna kick out right off the door and be willy-nilly about what we do. And I, someone did ask me to say willy-nilly, so I thought I'd throw that in there. But I, I think these, these are going to be well vetted and, um, and you're gonna have some of the best folks,
Speaker 119
35:57
um, working on these projects. Representative Long, for what purpose? Question you're
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
36:00
recognized Representative Beatty, of course, we're all for economic development, and I think most of us in here have always voted for the tax cuts, um, because it helps everybody in the state.
But with this being basically limited to smaller geographic areas. I'm, I'm wondering. After sitting through a lot of these, um, Uh, audit committees, uh, dealing with municipalities and counties. Um Can you help me feel better about the oversight, uh, because I think you said last night, they're not going to be subject to, uh, legislative audit. Represent Long, that's, that's
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
36:37
another valid, valid point. Part of the enabling legislation
that will come after, if, if this is
approved by voters will be the, the guardrails and the rules that are set up on, on these districts. Uh, Senator Dismay and I both made note that audits are very important part of the project at anytime local tax dollars are involved, there needs to be an audit requirement in here. So we're going to make certain that that enabling document has, has external audit that's going to provide some security and reassurance. uh, to folks in that community. Again, these are things that are gonna be set up by your governing body, and, and the folks in, in, in your local
Speaker 124
37:16
community to, to oversee these, these issues. So there's nothing that
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
37:21
follow up. You're recognized for a follow-up. So there's nothing in the uh Amendment that would prevent us from, uh, requiring a a legislative
audit, uh, to be involved in it rather than, uh, them hiring someone else. I don't, I
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
37:34
don't think there's anything in this amendment that would prevent that. The, the governing, the governing document with the guard rails is going to be introduced and sent as an interim study. And I think
during that process, we can all have a little insight and a little, little attention on that document to help establish those guardrails. And
Chair
Unverified
37:54
everyone's input is, is welcome. Thank you for your answers. Representative Henley, for
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
38:01
what purpose? You're recognized. Can you say without a doubt that this will certainly bring jobs to the
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
38:08
state of Arkansas. What I can tell you is, if we don't do this, these neighboring states are going to continue to
kick our tail. They're gonna get that investment, and we're not even going to see the opportunity. So I can't tell you without a doubt that communities are going to embrace this. But what I can tell you, if this tools out there, you're gonna have
a lot of them that will. And I do think this will stimulate economic development, community development in Arkansas. Members,
I appreciate your attention. Thank you for the questions. I think this helps.
Speaker 24
38:47
Representative Beatty has explained the resolution. Would anyone
like to speak against the resolution? Representative Blundstrom, you're recognized to speak against the resolution.
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
39:07
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I realize we want business to come to Arkansas. I'm not arguing
that. What I am concerned about
is page 2, line 1. It says loans and grants of public money. That's our taxpayer dollars at risk. The taxpayer who's who this will roll down the hill upon if it should fail. I think this particular idea needs more vetting and more time. Representative Eads, when he ran the energy bill. One of the things that he did that was very helpful is we had Quiet meetings over and over and over to dig into it and to
understand that Bell, this is much more intricate than that. This actually creates a system of politically connected tax breaks. Taxpayer-backed bonds, giving them an unfair advantage over other businesses, we need to take care of the businesses that are in Arkansas, right now. And the way we do that as a government is by getting out of the way. By removing barriers such as the city permit process, the cities can do this right now. They can make it easier for businesses to come to their city by working
with them on the permit process. This is one more barrier. Yes, it's a good idea. Yes, we want people to come to Arkansas, but it's not up to us. Representative Beatty mentioned opportun zones. You know what's great about opportunity zones, it doesn't cost the taxpayer a single dime. Opportunity zones. What they are is your local investors investing in your communities and they take all the risk. If that business person fails,
They pay for it, not the taxpayer, line one, loans and grants of public money. We need the businesses to step up and they are in these opportunity zones, and you know what happens? Every single stick, every single spade of dirt, those taxes come into the state, and we have absolutely no risk. That's the beauty of opport opportunity zones, and we already have that in Arkansas and it's successful. We need to take, this is just a little bit of help is what Representative Beatty said, If it's a good project, it will
happen on its own, and those cities can get behind it and make those that happen. This puts the taxpayer on the hook. And with that, I would ask for a
Chair
Unverified
41:34
no vote. Representative Lindstrom has spoke against the resolution. Would anyone like
to speak for the resolution. Representative Dalby, you're recognized to speak for the resolution. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Representative Carol Dalby
Unverified
41:56
Probably out of all 100 of us. I sit in a unique spot. That no one else in this chamber sits in. I literally can go across the street. to another state. I worked for Bowie County, Texas, as their county attorney for 27 years. And in my position with Bowie County, Texas. I had the opportunity to draft documents.
For these types of projects that representative Beatty is bringing to us through this amendment. And I can tell you the guardrails are there. A city and a county, I, I did it for the county. Sometimes there would be Tax rebates, sometimes it would be maybe a break on their real property. It'd be very different ways to fit that particular.
Job or that particular opportunity for Texarkana, Texas, and Bowie County, Texas. Representative Beatty is exactly right. You come through Texarkana, you cross that state line, and you see the economic development that happens in Texas. It's not for the lack of trying of Textra County, Arkansas or Miller County, Arkansas. I guarantee you we fight constantly. To get things into our district.
And here's what we hear all of the time. I can go across the state line, and I can get a better deal and they have gone across the state line, and we have sat there and we have watched it, and we have watched it, and we have watched it. This will give our state the opportunity. To fight for those projects that should be in our state. Should be for our people. I know that there are some questions about, well, it's just
going to affect business. No, I saw an opportunity zone, go down, obviously in Texana, we have Arkansas Boulevard, we have Texas Boulevard. Texas Boulevard is a mixed-use street in which there are businesses and homes on it, and they entered into one of these agreements. And it transformed that section of Texas Boulevard. I would urge you to vote for this. I've seen the real, the real results of what happens
Speaker 148
44:34
when we're giving the opportunity to develop and
Speaker 95
44:38
to do these things. Representative Hawke, for what purpose? Question you're recognized.
Representative RJ Hawk
Unverified
44:42
Representative Dalby, with your experience with doing this stuff, it was brought up at committee last night about the housing portion of this and about how you, we can give rebates to uh to developers and things of that nature in Texas, when you dealt with this, was there ever anything as far as the housing aspect, because when I look at the bill, I hear about businesses, right? And I agree
that we want to bring businesses in, but when I see the the aspect about putting affordable housing and and things like that. That's, that's helping a few people, that's helping a few investors. How is that helping businesses? Did Texas
Representative Carol Dalby
Unverified
45:20
do something like that to to offer for the rebates for housing. can't speak for the whole state of Texas, obviously. But there have been situations in which developers wanting to develop land. Maybe with the
What the county did was relax, um, the requirements for a road. Or to that they will do things like that. These are things, these types of agreements can be tailored. To the project. And it's not taking, it's not always taking taxpayer dollars. It may be an incentive. To Lessen the tax load for 5 years or 10 years or something like
that. They may reduce it. But with all of that being said, this, I think, really is, and I hate to use the word game changer, but for those of us who live on border cities, and we see that in other states. It will make a difference. It'll make a difference in the middle of our state. It'll make a difference for South Arkansas, Southeast Arkansas, Northwest, Northeast, all areas, and I would urge you to vote for this. I've seen it. I see, I have seen
what it can do, and I know what it
Chair
Unverified
46:41
can do for the state of Arkansas. Thank you. Representative
Darby has spoke for the resolution. Would anyone like to speak against the resolution? For the resolution, Representative McClure, you're
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
46:56
recognized to speak for the resolution. Thank you, Representative, uh, Betty for working on this. I know that's been a point of conversation between us for a long time. Thank you, Representative Darby. I agree with both of you very much. Just
quickly, I think most of you know this, but I've been involved in economic development in Arkansas now for 15 years. Before that, in Texas, 5 to 10 years. They are dramatic differences and it's too long a discussion to get in here. But here very simply, what this will do. Think about local control versus central control. Our state is extremely diverse. Our AEDC does a great job. They work hard. They work very, very hard, but most of the time they
are put in a responsive mode just dealing with things that are coming in to areas that are already blooming, and sometimes they'll pick a rural area that, that somebody's coming in. What this does is give the control back out to the local officials. The smaller regions of smaller need. What's needed in Texarkana is greatly different than what is needed and. across it. What is needed in Cross it is much different than what is needed in Bentonville. And the list goes on and on and on. This allows great flexibility. Let me remind you,
under our current system, we still have over 50 counties that are declining in population. Our large businesses are going to AEDC. They do great. I think this is really going to home in on smaller businesses as far as the TIFF, listen, TIFF program has worked in Texar Canada. It's worked in Jonesboro, um, that goes back to the bond issue or what's going to be backed up there. Um, If we don't do something. We're going to be talking about this issue every session we come back.
I think local control is the best issue on it. People are worried about the money. Well, this doesn't give a blank card. There is all different types of layers of things it has to go through. Let me address the opportunity zone. Uh, last check, opportunity zones are being used very, very rarely because they have to hold the Capitol for 10 years. A lot of investors don't want to hold the capital for 10 years. The new market tax credits are used a little bit more. Now, we do not know what the feds are going to do and these type of incentive.
Programs, we'll just have to wait and see. But if you can combine, if somebody wants their, uh, opportunities zone, the new market tax credit with local issues where they know their property, know what best fits, they know their infrastructure and what best fits, they know what their needs are and they're working at Ground Zero, I think we will start making, uh, a great stride forward. Listen I've heard about the taxpayer. This is the taxpayer money. What about the taxpayer money in the small towns.
This is their money too. Why don't we let the small towns and small counties, as well as the bigger ones, have some say so on where it goes. I stood here and I, and I'll do, we'll do it again, promoted everything that is going on with our steel industry. I was glad to say it was the largest project I've ever even seen. Why don't we do that across the state? Let the people in the area that know their area of the state best. Those people that are on ground zero, that are getting
some of the phone calls, let them go to work, and I'd
Chair
Unverified
50:21
encourage you to vote yes. Representative McClure spoke for the resolution. Would anyone like to speak against the resolution. For the resolution. Representative Whittaker, you're recognized to speak for the resolution.
Representative David Whitaker
Unverified
50:43
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, colleagues. I'll be brief and you know I
don't come down here a lot. It's probably one stop this time. But I've got to tell you, in my time here, and it's been a while now. I have never seen such broad support for an issue across the state. And not only bipartisan, but I'd say nonpartisan. We've got folks talking from east to west, north to south. And I don't want you to think that because we have a lot of good things already going on in Northwest Arkansas, that there's not an appetite for this reform.
So I'm gonna ask you to please vote yes and when we go forth from here, please work with communities to get this thing
Chair
Unverified
51:27
passed. Thank you. Representative Whittaker, who spoke for the resolution. Would anyone like to speak against the resolution? For the resolution. Representative Ryer. represent a rise ahead of you, Representative Rye, you're recognized to speak for the resolution.
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
51:51
Representative Howard this way it ought to be. We're talking about it and we're gonna send this back to people. We need to let the people of this state make a move. And it comes from here, and we let them vote on it. You know, I've heard different things about this is costing. Certain kind of money you give. No, no. You're just given a tool. You're given a tool to bring something in. It costs money, a little money
to make money. And that's what this project is, and without this, we don't have every lane every time we come down here, it costs a little bit more money. OK. We cannot continue on the road to spending. Extra money that's needed unless we have money coming in. And this is what it's all about. If you don't have jobs, you don't have income taxes.
We need to, we need to be serious about this, and we need to send this to our people, letting them know a
Chair
Unverified
53:02
strong yes, we are for this. And I appreciate you. Representative Ry spoke for the resolution. Would anyone like to
speak against the resolution? For the resolution, Representative Wootten, you're
recognized to speak for the resolution. Colleagues, I'd like
to approach different points. One concern. The public schools May Uh, we're reduced. If people are permitted to vote on this and they approve it. To the public school but the
overriding issue here is to create opportunity until we overcome. Poverty Who we address we're gonna continue. To have areas. And this will give the local authorities and opportunity in a way to increase the tools that they have to work with to deal
if we give our people the opportunity to have a decent wage to be able to afford a home. To be to address the problem of food insecurity. This is the way that another tool I encourage you and plus uh proposal and I would, I would appreciate it, yes, well, thank you.
Chair
Unverified
55:09
Representative Wooton spoke for the resolution. Would anyone like to speak against the resolution, Representative Duke, you're recognized to speak against the resolution.
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
55:24
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, the reason why I came down here is I feel like I need to be a voice for the people back in District 12. It was reference to how this would be good for people in my district. What I know about my people in the district is I haven't heard from them on this, and I haven't had them say, hey,
we need this. What I hear from the people in District 12. Largely is we just need y'all to leave us alone. And let us do our job, our things, our way. Their answer is not having the government get involved. I mean, wasn't it Ronald Reagan that said, like the scariest thing you hear is I'm from the government and I'm here to help you. And I appreciate the idea and the concept behind it. I kind of, kind of see where this is going, but this has not been something that my people have asked for. I think that, um,
They want us to, to stop having the government get involved and putting their finger on the scale. And stop amending the Constitution. And so I'm gonna be voting against this bill, and again, I border two states, Missouri and Oklahoma. And this has not been something that I've been, a lot I've been begged
for. Mostly it's just leave us alone. So, with that, I'm gonna be voting no. Representative Duke has
Chair
Unverified
56:34
spoke against the resolution. Would anyone like to speak for the resolution, Representative Steele. You recognized to speak for the resolution.
Speaker 24
56:50
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll be, be very brief, uh, long time
ago, uh, I think I was serving with your dad, Representative Wilbridge. There was a major industry that was looking closely at Arkansas. That injury industry is called Nissan. And it came down. Representative Ryan, you remember that. It came down. To Mississippi, And Arkansas. Nissan is in Mississippi.
And every time I go to visit my son in New Orleans. Sometime I'll take a shortcut through Mississippi. And I have to pass that Nissan plant. And I can remember one time my son was with me and he would ask me, what is that huge facility over there? And I told him it was the Nissan plant. And I can remember one time he asked me, Why is that not in Arkansas? Thousands of jobs, economic
development. I can't help but to think if Arkansas would have had a tool. To use such as this, that we may have not only the Nissan plant in Arkansas, but actually in the Arkansas Delta region. I'd appreciate a good vote on this resolution. Representative Steele has
Chair
Unverified
58:11
spoke for the resolution. Would anyone like to speak against the resolution. For the resolution Representative Woldridge, you're recognized to speak for the resolution.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
58:24
Thank you Mr. Speaker, and thank you, colleagues, and, uh, like my colleague Representative Steele, I'll be brief. I spoke about this in committee last night, and I think that there are valid points on both sides of the issue. But what I see from this is I see this as a companion and a tool that can be used, used alongside of what we're already doing at AEDC. We've got a mechanism in place that brings industry to Arkansas. I think that everyone in this chamber would agree that has served the state of Arkansas well over the last several years.
This creates a tool that can go alongside of that hand and glove as Representative Dave mentioned, that will allow communities the opportunity to choose whether they want to engage in this process or not. I've got a diverse legislative district. I've got Greene County, which has the city of Perry, a large city, and then I've got Clay County and Randolph County, which have smaller cities in the, um, the difference in what those cities are able to accomplish is very drastic. And I think that these type of things and these economic Development centers allow
smaller communities the opportunity to come together and say, we want to band together as a group and we want to try to invest in our community to create jobs and create opportunities. Uh, people, industry will come to your community, Corning, Arkansas is the perfect example through the AEDC rebates and other incentives, we were able to get a manufacturer to Corning in the last year. It's an extreme shot in the arm for that community, but where they're struggling is workforce. We've got to have a tool like this where we can put a community
development program together, we can improve the quality of life. We can cause people to want to move to rural parts of the state. I live in the rural part of the state. I choose to live there. I love to live there. And I said this in committee last night and it's sincere with me. I am here to make sure that my kids have an opportunity to live in a rural part of Arkansas and raised my grandkids, I hope someday close to me if they choose to live somewhere else, that's one thing. But if they're forced to live somewhere else, that's something. that I can't live with. That's why I serve in the legislature.
Other than that, I would be home with them right now and at a job that I love, but I'm here to try to make decisions for the future that will impact them, like I said in committee last night, a wise man says you plant trees under which the shade you will never enjoy, none of us may be in the legislature when we see this program come to fruition, that is our job. Our job is to plant seeds and watch them grow and cause the state to be better as we move forward. I commend Representative. Beatty and Senator dismaying for bringing this legislation, just
like I mentioned in committee last night, I think that this is something that as we move and progress forward as a state, we're gonna see great benefit from this kind of replicates what we've done as a state that's caused us to get to this point inbound migration, we're in, we're the number one state in the nation. People want to move to Arkansas because of tax-friendly policy because of other decisions that we're making because of cost of living, all of the things that make Arkansas great, people want to live here. This is just taking what has been so successful for the
state, and it's replicating it at the local level. And the beauty of it is we're just referring this out for the people to decide if the people of Arkansas say this is not what we think is best for our state. They get to reject it at the ballot measure, and in 2 years, we get to come back to the drawing board and we get to collectively decide what can we do to benefit our state and start the process over. I would ask you for a yes vote. I think this is
forward thinking. I think it's good. for the state of Arkansas, and I would appreciate your support.
Chair
Unverified
1:01:59
Representative Waridge has spoke for the resolution. Anyone want to speak against the resolution. Representative Beatty, you're recognized and closed
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
1:02:16
for the resolution. And it says it all right there, Dream big. That's what this resolution does.
I want to address a couple of the issues that were raised while we were here. The the housing issue raised by
Representative Hall. This bill will definitely help in that issue. And if you've got housing issues or concerns, an economic development district that has incentives that are tailor-made to grow housing in your community, this will affect that. I want to talk about what Representative Langstrom said about the 0, the tax implications. This has zero risk to state taxes. In fact, it'll only increase state revenue and it'll help achieve statewide tax reforms,
which is something we have all leaned into and embraced. I want to say I respect every member in this body, and the people you represent. And I would just ask that you, you take into consideration, you vote your district, you vote what your, what you, what you think your people would want you to do. But along the same lines, think about the rest of us in the room, that this could benefit, be beneficial, and have an open mind related to this,
this policy. All we're asking for here is to give the voters of Arkansas a voice if this is something they want or not. May not pass, but I'm telling you, the folks in my district in South Arkansas, and many areas in this state, they have been demanding this, and that's what they want. This is not something that just popped up on the radar during these 3 or 4 months that we've been here in session, this has been a pro project since Representative McClure raised the issue about what are we going to do for rural Arkansas.
What are we going to do for retail? We've set through my, my time in the legislature in City County Local, we've heard communities come in. and talk about, hey, we got a tractor supplier, we've got a small business coming. Silo Springs, one of the communities that said, hey, there's nothing we can do for retail investment. This opens the door for that. So I'm gonna say, think about your communities, think about what this does. This will let your local people make the decisions that are, that is right for their community. It's time to label lay level the playing
field and unlock the full potential for growth and prosperity in this state. This res solution offers a comprehensive solution that addresses the shortcomings in our current economic development toolbox. We can't afford to let this transformative pro these projects slip through our fingers and go to neighboring states and investments outside this state. Let's seize the opportunity today to drive sustainable growth, create jobs, and revitalize our communities where we live and raise our
families. Together, let's support the adoption of this resolution. Let's
send it to the voters, and I please ask you to vote for this resolution.
Chair
Unverified
1:05:12
Thank you. Representative Beatty is closed for the resolution. The question before the House is the adoption of Senate joint resolution
Speaker 119
1:05:17
number 15. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. Everyone voted. Everyone voted.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:05:35
Cast out the ballot The vote of 74 ye, 21
nays, and 2 present. Resolution has been adopted. Members, I'm gonna go now
Chair
Unverified
1:05:46
over to Take up first the regular Senate bills without objection, I'm gonna take some of these out of order. No objection.
Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 459.
459 by Representative Hudson to amend the minimum age necessary to adjudicate a
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:06:20
juvenile delinquent. The request of Representative Hudson, we will pass over that. Members, if you'll
Chair
Unverified
1:06:30
turn the page, go about halfway down. We'll take up Senate Bill 625.
Representative Austin McCollum
Unverified
1:06:41
Representative McCollum, for what purpose? Uh, parliamentary inquiry, please. You're recognized. So I'm looking at
rule 38T and I'm just gonna read the first part because my question's gonna be. Um, about the rule. Anytime before a bill requiring expenditure of public funds or otherwise imposing a new or increased cost obligation. I read for the 3rd time.
In the House of Representatives, any member of the House may request and the speaker shall direct that a fiscal impact statement for the bill be prepared and placed on the desk, so on and so forth. So my question around that is, um, if there is a bill that currently has a fiscal impact statement attached to it, but it has since been amended, so therefore, there's no um fiscal impact on the bill as amended. If a member wants to request, uh, fiscal impact on that bill.
Representative Rebecca Burkes
Unverified
1:07:53
Shall they be granted that In reviewing your Request at this time. Uh The rules simply states that would be provided. And looking quickly, um, It appears that there is, is one, but you're concern is that the Right, so the bill in front of us has
Representative Austin McCollum
Unverified
1:08:17
been amended and the amendment had made, so I guess the uh.
Concern or question is. With that be applied to that logic, the fact that there is a the bill as amended. On the rule, that would, that
Representative Rebecca Burkes
Unverified
1:08:43
would be the rule, the rule of the chair, the chair would have to rule on that amendment. OK Thank you.
Representative Zack Gramlich
Unverified
1:08:55
Madam Clark, please read Senate bill. 625625 by Representative Brooks to
Chair
Unverified
1:08:59
amend provisions of the Arkansas Code concerning the Arkansas Children's Educational Freedom Account Program and to declare an emergency. Representative Brooks, you're
recognized to explain your bill. Thank you,
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:09:10
Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, I bring you Senate Bill 625. 1st, and this may be a little bit unique in terms of build presentations. I want to begin with what this bill does not do. Senate Bill 625 does not
take any funds away from an EA any EFA family. That's Education Freedom account. Those funds are still set as in learned statute to 90% of foundation funding. That represents over $6800 per student in the 25, 26 school year and increases proportionately 5% in the 26, 27 year because of the foundation funding bill we just passed. This bill does not tell anyone how or what they have to teach. To earn a degree in the state of Arkansas, all students, no matter the learning setting,
must have math, English language arts, science, and history. However, the curriculum and the methods that are used purposely are allowed to vary based on the student's specific needs. Finally, this bill has been intentionally mislabeled as targeting particular groups. In reality, there are no groups in education freedom accountants. The EFA program, which I authored and passed as a part of Learns in 2023 does not have private school students or
homeschool students, or microschool students. It has students. This is a universal program in which all students in the state of Arkansas qualify. That has been my commitment from the day that I stepped into this body. I even drafted a bill in 2021, which I never failed articulate and universal ESA before any state had actually adopted the idea of a universal ESA. My goal then remains my goal now. The money follows a student to put their specific needs. First and foremost.
Senate Bill 625 continues with that commitment and does nothing to hinder or attack education freemen in the state of Arkansas. In reality, it strengthens it for the almost 40,000 students that will benefit this upcoming school year and in the years to come. And I want to thank Governor Sanders for her support of this bill and helping us, uh, move this to the finish line. Here's what Senate Bill 625 actually does. It supports a long-term sustainability of the learned education freedom accounts. It allows for reasonable cost to be reimbursed for the
education needs of students related to co-curricular courses in fine arts, music, and STEM, if those are offered at a school somewhere in the state of Arkansas. Does your student want to learn piano, guitar, Cello, theater, dance. All those fall under this subsection of reasonable costs. That's intentionally broad-based. It also allows for educational services and non-traditional settings. For instance, let's say that hippotherapy is a benefit to your student as a
speech language pathologist helps with phonetical formation to improve student literacy. That is covered under the reasonable cost of a Len CFA. It still allows, as Laws did two years ago, for technological devices, which made the students' learning needs. For instance, a laptop, a printer, or an internet connectivity device. Senate Bill 625 still allows for student costs relative to transportation. There's a requirement of those costs do not exceed 25% of the total EFA amount, which in the coming year is a little bit over $1700 per student. And in the
following school year moves to almost $1800 per student. Senate Bill 625 also still allows to help meet the students' extracurricular needs, such as gym, PE, or field trips. The same requirements of a maximum of 25% of the total EFAL exists here as well. Here in Little Rock, that amount would equate to a full year membership at D1 sports training for a student who would have unlimited visits. If you're like former rep Andy Davis, you could go to classes 3 days a week. Or if you take your family for an amazing trip to the lodge at
Mount Magazine. You can learn about the natural beauty in the great state of Arkansas. This allows for that. Senate Bill 625 gives an initial application period of February 1 to June 1 for consistency with our public school choice deadlines, but it also allows for the department to accept applications after that initial date. Finally, the bill clarifies for the department, the ability to pursue remedies if there's evidence of intentional misuse of funds to ensure that the EFA funds allocated on behalf of the students are in fact used for
the student to maximize their individual education. And with that, I'll be
Speaker 84
1:13:37
happy to answer questions. Representative McAlinden, for what purpose? You're recognized. So
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:13:41
right now as I understand it, uh, any student, but homeschool students can use some of these funds in order if they need occupational therapy or physical therapy as well. Does this impact that at
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:13:51
all? I said, there is zero limits on how they can utilize those types of funds. If there's, if there isn't an educational therapy setting, um, or just a therapy setting. Let's say that a student is involved in speech
language pathology, and again, as I, as I mentioned there, and they need that for their literacy needs. There's no limits on those on the funds that can be used, they can be used up to the maximum allowed under, uh, the learns, which is that
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:14:17
this coming school year 6854. Recognized. Thank you so all you're doing is you are putting a limit on the amount
of those funds that a homeschooler can use for phy for extracurricular, those kinds of things. Is that correct?
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:14:28
I want to clarify this is not directed at a homeschooler. A homeschool appears nowhere in this bill.
This is an EFA student. That can be anyone. There's, there's a school in South Arkansas. Uh, that their tuition is roughly $3000 per year for their school. And so, it would apply to those students as well who are still going to a full-time private school, uh, but they would have the additional opportunity to utilize additional funds within the, the reasonable limits that are applied within this bill. Uh, so again, that, that's the only place where you see any type of a percentage. And again, it's not directed at any particular type of student, it is the full EFA program is a 25% cap for
those types of 25% maximum is, uh, the cap is transportation costs, which again, uh, roughly equates to $1,713 per student this upcoming year. That's about 150 bucks a month in gas. If you want to think about it that way, you get reimbursed 52 cents a mile. You get to spend $150 a month in gas. So it does that. Also, the, the cap remains there for extracurricular activities, uh, which again would be, you know, think about it, tennis lessons, field trips, uh, again, D1 membership, it's been used for that. Uh, so it's very broad-based and does not hinder the opportunity for the students
Chair
Unverified
1:15:35
to be educated in any way. Thank you. With that, I appreciate a good vote. Representative
Brooks has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the
Representative Austin McCollum
Unverified
1:15:53
bill? Representative McCollum, you're recognized to speak against the bill. Thank
you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, colleagues. It was actually just a question, Representative Brooks. Maybe someone can pass this question on to Representative
Brooks. The question I was gonna ask instead of speaking against is in your testimony, you, uh, made the statement that this bill will help with the long-term sustainability of EFAs. I guess I didn't hear how that would. How your bill will help for the long-term sustainability of the EFA program. Can you let us know perhaps in your closing, how your bill actually helps that. Thanks. Representative McCollum has spoke against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the
Chair
Unverified
1:16:36
bill? Representative Wayne, you're recognized to speak for the bill. I
first want to just thank Representative Brooks for being a champion for education here in the state of Arkansas. I want
to express my support for this bill and also, uh, say there has been some misinformation about this
bill that's kind of sad, and he hasn't had an opportunity to correct that. In fact, some of the groups that had been opposed to this bill have already backed off of the bill and that or backed off of the opposition to the bill, and that's a credit to Representative Brooks and his explanation of the bill. establishes some very good and reasonable
guardrails to help ensure the long-term sustainability of our education policy here in the state of Arkansas, and I would encourage you to vote yes on this bill. Representative Wing has spoke
Chair
Unverified
1:17:33
for the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill?
For the bill Representative Wooten, are you speaking for the bill? Yes, no Are
you speaking for the bill? You're speaking against your, you're speaking for the bill.
You're recognized. I know that Confuses a lot of confuses me. But the one point about it is
for the first time, if I understand it correctly represented Brooks, you're putting a limitation on Extracurricular activities of 25%. Is that, is that contain that's correct. So actually, the reason I'm supporting the bill is the fact that if for the first time, we put a limitation on freedom account money.
And I want you to keep that in mind whenever I run my other bills again in regard to testing, but also I want to make the point. With the speaker's permission. To The fact that we put $90 million in the Freedom of accounts. In a normal budget. And we put 90 million out of the
surplus into so that's 180 million. The $400 increase per student that we're giving to public schools is only $150 million. So we're putting $30 million more. Into The private schools than we are the public. And with that, I'll sit down. Thank you. Representative Wooton has spoke for the
Chair
Unverified
1:19:36
bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill?
for the bill, Representative Brooks, you're recognized to close
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:19:49
for the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and to represent McCollum, I appreciate the question and it makes you wanna uh address that. So just in terms of long-term sustainability of this program. Uh, I think that long-term sustainability of anything we do is relative to our fiscal responsibility to taxpayers in the state of Arkansas. And so if we can continue to ensure that our commitment is kept for, uh, EFA families, which is very strong and it continues to be very strong, uh, as well as to
make sure that, frankly, that money is not wasted. I'm not gonna say that it has been wasted, but to ensure that long term that that money is not wasted within this program. I think that does the benefit of the students more than anything else. We went from 2015, uh, the first time any type of programs such as this was passed in the state of Arkansas called the Succeed Scholarship Program. We have 23 students that first year who benefited from that. Uh, we took a break for 6 years, up to, uh, 2021. In 2021, Representative Ken Bragg ran
House Bill 1371, which would have, uh, benefited about 500 students. Those 500 students had to be at 200% of federal poverty level or below. That bill failed by about 7 votes. Later on that session, I ran Senate Bill 680, which benefited 250 students in the state of Arkansas. Still, the limitations of 200% of federal poverty level. In 2023, we were able to turn the education freedom world on its head, and we're able to support students more than 5000 year one, tripled
in year two. And now we have a universal program that this year is going to support almost 40,000 students. In the state of Arkansas, our commitment to education freedom and to the good of the student is unwavering. This bill does nothing to impact that in any way, uh, and I would appreciate, I appreciate what Representative Wooton highlighting the fact that, uh, this year we are going to, uh, push 270+ million dollars in education freedom accounts. To me, that is the support of the students more than anything else and that highlights our commitment as a state to make sure that
education freedom continues to reign strong here in the state of Arkansas. And with that, I'm closed
Chair
Unverified
1:21:50
and I'd appreciate a good vote. Representative Brooks is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 625. Prepare the machine, madam clerk.
Speaker 177
1:22:04
So everyone voted. Members you are voting on the bill and the emergency clause. So everyone voted. Cast up the ballot.
The vote of 74 e, 9 nay, and 12 present. You've passed the bill in the emergency clause, Madam Clark, please transmit Senate Bill 625 to
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:22:28
the Senate immediately. Madam Clark, please read Senate Bill 437. Senate Bill
Chair
Unverified
1:22:33
437 by Representative Hall to create the Arkansas Wind Energy Development Act. Representative Hall, you're recognized
to explain your bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, colleagues.
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:22:49
Today I bring you before, uh, Senate Bill 437. This bill creates a regulatory process for which the wind industry. Uh, must abide by. Currently, there are no regulations on the wind industry in the state of Arkansas. There are only 2 states across the country who have yet to place regulations on this type of industry. These states are Arkansas and Louisiana. These regulations mimic other regulations that have been found in other states such as Texas, Iowa, and Oklahoma.
Currently, there are projects who have already started construction and will be grandfathered in. I am as far away from a regulation individual as you can get. Normally, the least amount of regulation on a farm or business, the better. But this is why I'm standing before you today. As a lot of you know, a large portion of these wind energy companies are foreign-owned. The majority of their profits come from being subsidized by the federal government with your hard-earned tax money. The electric industry as well as
the oil and gas industries are highly regulated. I don't believe that it is fair for this industry, a lot of them foreign-owned, should be allowed to come in and carve up our state like a Thanksgiving turkey. Because you see colleagues, if we do not act today, then that is what is going to happen. We cannot wait another 2 years after all the land leases are signed. And they are grandfathered in. If we pass this legislation today, there is going to be an interim study. By uh Jeremy.
Uh Done on the wind energy development across the state. After this study is completed, we might find, you know, areas of the state that work out better using this type of energy. Uh, these bills we passed in this chamber are amended and altered every day. That's our job. This bill allows us to be proactive for once instead of reactive. And uh I was sent a letter. Uh, last night, and it, it says, good afternoon, Representative
Hall. My name is Mike Ackerman, and I am the Department of Defense Regional coordinator for Arkansas and the states that surround it within federal, Region 6. I wanted to provide some DOD input for consideration on Arkansas SB 437 regarding the Wind Energy Development Act in case there is a chance to include language for this coordination with the military in the future. I apologize for the late time frame for this input, realizing the bill is in its final stages.
We appreciate your consideration of language to ensure coordination occurs to avoid loss of low-level flight routes or radar interference generated by wind turbines. We hope to avoid future impacts to military operations in Arkansas, which have several key air bases included, including Little Rock Air Force Base, and now Ebbing Field with its F-35 allied pilot training missions.
And that's why uh this vote today in the interim study is so
Chair
Unverified
1:26:05
important. Any questions? Representative Ray, for what purpose? You're recognized.
Representative David Ray
Unverified
1:26:09
Representative Hall, you mentioned that this puts sort of a regulatory framework on wind turbines. Can you, can you just describe generally, I, I just, it's a 21-page bill. Can you just describe generally what the regulatory framework looks like and how it compares with other states.
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:26:26
A lot of it is just putting it into the Public Service commission under their, under their rule. Uh, you've also got setbacks where, uh, the towers that are being built in Northwest Arkansas are, uh, some of the largest that's ever been built. And so, The setbacks from the other property lines have to be 2.5 times the size of the windmill. And also, uh, you've also got, uh, the limits from the cities, you know, you got to be a mile from churches and 1 mile from,
uh, schools, and, and that's, believe it or not, that is from the ice throws that come off those. I, I know that's probably hard to believe, but that's, you know, That was pretty interesting. So anyway, that's. So you know other questions, I'd appreciate a good
Speaker 24
1:27:13
vote. Representative Hall has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Representative Ladyman,
you're recognized to speak against the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
1:27:29
Colleagues, I hate to come down here and And speak this strongly against this bill,
but This is a moratorium. On a segment of the energy business. And I think y'all know that I'm all of the above. I think we give the, we need to give the opportunity to every Uh, fuel that produces energy in our state. We don't need to cut out coal on one end of the segment. Or wind
If, if wind is a bad idea, It will fail on its own. You know, it's not our job to kill a segment of an industry. But let me just talk about a few things that was mentioned in the previous presentation. Uh, someone asked, uh, does this copy one of the other states bills in Texas and Iowa was mentioned. I have worked in Texas and Iowa in the wind industry. I have worked with the governments there.
This bill does not match either one of those state bills. I actually have a bill that I filed, or I will file today. To work on this in the interim. Uh, to make, to look at Texas because I think Texas has a good bill. A good, uh, regulation. But what this bill is, is a consortium of 5 or 6 states. They took all the regulations from multiple states and put it in one bill. It's 20 pages of regulation. This is government overreach.
One of the things in this bill, if you're gonna put a wind farm, you've got to study all the water sources, 5 miles from the site. I mean Why are you doing that? this would kill any wind project in Arkansas. Let me talk about foreign Companies I worked for a foreign wind company, but there is a US company. There's the, uh, 2nd largest
wind turbine producer in the world. It's a company I worked for for 30 years. GE employs thousands and thousands of people in the wind industry. They are the 2nd largest producer of wind turbines in the world. Uh, the other thing Private property. This bill would not allow any farmer. Or rancher In the state To, to allow wind farm on their
land if they want to do that. They, they wouldn't be able to do that. You know, I, I know people that are 3rd generation farmers. My roommate in college that lives up in Clay County. He's a 3rd generation farmer, and he has thousands of acres. If he wants to put a wind farm on one of his A part of his acreage, he should have the opportunity to do that. It might be an economic thing that he needs to do to protect that family farm.
We have what we call, I think it's called heritage. Farmers who, who have forms that have been there for 100 years. 100 years, blood, sweat, and tears in that land that they owned, their fathers owned, their grandfather's own. And we're gonna tell them, you don't have the right to do this. Even if it's good for your, your family economically. We're not going to allow you. To make this decision to put these turbans on your land. The other thing in South
Arkansas, most of the people that worked on this bill, I believe, are Northwest Arkansas. South Arkansas, we had some of the forestry people talk to us in committee. And they have opportunity to put these wind farms in their areas down there where they process trees, and they can do that within the forest. This would not allow them to do that. One of the guys said they had, I think, 7 projects that they could do. In the forest area. Well, that's not close to a lot of people. That's out in the outback.
But they wouldn't be allowed to do that if this bill passes. I filed a bill. I'm gonna work on it for the next 2 years to get a good regulation bill, and we need regulations as Representative Hall said, we do need regulations. But we don't need to kill the industry. We don't need to over-regulate. And that's what this bill does. And I would ask you to vote no. Representative Long, for what purpose? Question, you're recognized for a question. Representative Ladyman, um,
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
1:32:10
you've mentioned several times, like the former friend, the forestry, he said they would not be able to do it. Could you give some examples of why
they would not be able to do it. You don't
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
1:32:22
think they can meet the setbacks or what? Well, there's so many regulations in
this bill. Uh, they can't be close to a city, they can't be close to a, a church, uh, the ice throw, let me mention that. I throw off of these turbans. Um, it does happen.
But these wind farms shut down, that we, we have monitors on these wing, these blades. And Shut them down when it gets to the point to where it's gonna throw ice. That's not only to protect the people around, these things cost a million dollars apiece. And that ice would damage the, the turban. So that's, that's not really a problem there. um, Talking about planes. These turbans can be shut down
if someone's spraying around that, that farm. Uh, uh, there's so many regulations in this bill. I, I can't remember all of them, but there was a map that was given to us in committee that showed where you could build these things and There was hardly any
place in the state that you could build one. That complied with all the regulations. Representative Duff Hill,
Representative Zack Gramlich
Unverified
1:33:34
for what purpose? Question, you're recognized. Representative lady, when we were out
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
1:33:38
of session, we had a committee meeting that I
attended that was just on the particularly on this topic, and I found it quite informative. There were some out of state legislators there. They, they came in on a Zoom call. And they had done some research that they presented to us, and from my understanding when it came to this industry, Arkansas does not have, we just simply don't have the wind for this to work in Arkansas. Is that, is that accurate? Is that, is that what you? That, thank you
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
1:34:10
for that question. That's a very good question. Uh
In the past that was true. But these turbans, like any other industry, they've improved those. They've made them more efficient so they can operate on lower wind speeds. When I was a playing engineer at a plant there in Jonesboro. I looked in the building a, a wind turbine at that factory. We used a lot of power that would have helped us financially. And at that point, this is about 20 years ago. It was not, uh, could not work there. It was not economical to do that, because based on what the uh Memphis
weather report was. Our, our sustainable winds were 11 mile per hour. And we only had those for like 25% of the time. So that was not an economical Thing to do back then. Now, these turbines can operate on a lower wind speeds. And they, they are a little bit taller. I think it was mentioned that these are the tallest in the world. Well, These things are all basically the same height. They're all
300 320 ft tall. Now, if you add the blade on there, Yeah, it is quite a bit taller, but they're all basically the same size, but they've improved the efficiencies of them so that they can operate in lower wind areas like Arkansas. Can I
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
1:35:32
have one more? You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, Representative Ladyman, I, I appreciate your, your effort on this topic. I guess my next question is, you referenced just now that in a couple of years, you had a bill to regulate this industry. I
guess my concern would be, is for this industry to go on the next 2 years entirely unregulated. That's a concern I have. Could you address that? Well If
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
1:35:56
you put in this moratorium, there won't be any wind turbines for 4 years. The actual
scientific study that you have to do before you put up a wind turbine is about 2 years. The construction time, depending on the size of the, uh, wind farm might take a year and a half.
So, you know, you're talking a long time. Before these farms actually come online. And none of these that we're talking about and when or around that area are operational yet. There may be 50%. Completed. So I don't think we're at a critical time. I think we have time. To write good regulations to control this industry. So with that, I, I
would appreciate know Representative Ladyman has
Chair
Unverified
1:36:44
spoke against the bill. Would anyone like to speak
for the bill? Represent the more you're recognized
to speak for the bill. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Anytime you have an emerging industry, you will have disruption in both the marketplace and the communities in which these industries are placed. There are currently 8 wind development projects, to my knowledge, that are planned for
Arkansas. And these range from the Ozarks to the Delta, and these projects will be grandfathered in. Under the existing regulation framework. Which is nothing. One project in particular in my district. Has 2695 ft tall wind turbines going down the White River for about 20 miles. Dotting the landscape. And one of the greatest waterfowl flyways in the country.
695 ft is pretty tall. So for your reference, uh, the Statue of Liberty is 305 ft tall. Simmons Tower just that direction is 547 ft tall. So you had about 150 ft more to the Simmons Tower and you have a wind turbine. Um If we take a backseat with no regulation whatsoever. There will be thousands of these turbines littering our state border to border. And the effects will be quite disastrous.
This will affect tourism in a negative way. This will affect migratory waterfowl and a negative way, and this will affect. Now, I represent Stuttgart, which we proclaim as the Rice and duck hunting capital of the world. And let me tell you about Rice farmers. You cannot raise a rice crop without aerial application of chemicals and fertilizer. You can't do it because when that rice farm is underwater
flooded for the production of rice. You can't use a ground rig or a ground sprayer. To grow that rice. You have to use aerial application. If these wind turbines exist. The first thought in your mind will be like, well, they're just not gonna be able to grow rice in that particular field. That's fine. That's that landowner's decision. But what's not fun is the turbulence caused by these wind farms. Downstream.
Turbulence as much as up to 1 mile or more. will cause chemical drift from these ag pilots spraying. And they will not be able to do that job responsibly. So when we talk about setbacks, when we talk about property rights and affecting your neighbor's property rights. This bill protects that because if I've got a rice field, just next door to somebody that has a bean field that has a wind farm on it. I still want to be able to
grow rice in my. Wind turbines will be the next cryptoine debacle. You all remember that. If we don't pass this bill, The wind turbines are coming to your district. I feel quite sure. And if we do nothing today on this issue. Our constituents will wonder why. So with that, I asked for a good vote. Thank you. Representative Morris
Chair
Unverified
1:40:19
spoke for the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill?
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
1:40:24
For the bill. Representative Hall, you are recognized to close for your bill. As resentative Moore just said, you know, whose property rights are we going for anyway, you know, I mean, it's a complex problem that we want a common sense solution. And we can always take out some of these regulations if we have to, you know, if, if the study says so, and we'd appreciate your input,
you know, Representative Ladyman. But uh, Anyway, I urge you to pass this legislation today because we just can't wait another 2 years. So we got, we wait 2 years, they're gonna be all over us. And it'll be signing land leases and, and they'll be grandfathered in and there's nothing we can do about it. So I appreciate a good vote.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:41:12
Representative Hall is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 437. Prepare the machine, Madam Clerk.
Chair
Unverified
1:41:27
Everyone voted As everyone voted. Cast
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:41:36
up the ballot. The vote of 73 y, 11 nays, and 13 present. The bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please transmit Senate Bill 437. The Senate immediately. Madam Clark, please read Senate Bill 491. 491 by
Chair
Unverified
1:41:54
Representative Ancher to require a vendor that contracts
with the employee benefits division to submit data for verification by an independent audit to impose a civil penalty on a vendor that provides inaccurate data and declare
an emergency. Baker, you're recognized to explain your bill.
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
1:42:10
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, uh, I'm excited to present this bill today. Uh, this was, uh, amended in uh conjunction with comments from EBD and we've come to a, uh, what I believe is a great bill. Um, what it does is simply states that if a vendor for EBD is going to be submitting data that's gonna be used for fiscal impacts that they have to agree
for that to be actuarly uh reviewed and if they are found to submit fraudulent data, uh, on a regular basis. They can be fined, and then on a 3rd time basis, they will be removed from contracting with the. CBD. With that, I welcome your questions. Lian, I appreciate a good vote. Thank you. Representative Acer
Chair
Unverified
1:42:47
has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill Representative Acer is
Speaker 119
1:42:54
closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage
of Senate Bill 491. Prepair the machine, Madam Clerk. Members, your one vote is
Chair
Unverified
1:43:06
for the bill and the emergency clause. So everyone voted. Everyone voted. Cast up the ballot. By
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:43:19
a vote of 968, 0 nay, and 0 present. You have passed the bill and the emergency clause.
Speaker 19
1:43:33
Please transmit those two bills to the Senate immediately. Members will go
Chair
Unverified
1:43:54
down now to Cinderville 601 by Representative Johnson to create a pathway for graduate of a foreign medical school to be licensed in the state. If he or
she is offered full-time employment as a physician from
a healthcare provider. Representative Johnson, you're recognized to explain
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
1:44:09
your bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is a bill meant to try to address some of the workforce shortages we have, uh, with physicians across the state by removing a requirement that an international medical graduate complete a residency in the United States. You know, the residencies are apprenticeship program as physicians, it's where we train. Currently in Arkansas, they have to come to Arkansas and do some post-medical graduate training, even if they've completed a
residency in cardiology and, uh, United Kingdom, uh, Germany and in the reputable country, it still has the requirement that they all the same exams that I have to pass. They also have to obtain a certificate from the Educational Commission on Foreign graduates, which has a requirement that their residency be substantially the same as the ones we complete here. This is a bill we worked on with the medical society, the the medical board, the Department of Health, uh, and came to a language we could all agree on that was, uh, safe and would help the state, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Appreciate a good vote. Thank you.
Chair
Unverified
1:45:04
Representative Johnson has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the
Speaker 119
1:45:11
bill Representative Johnson is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 601. Prepare
Chair
Unverified
1:45:23
the machine, Madam Clerk. everyone voted, as everyone voted. Cast up
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:45:31
the ballot. The vote of 97 ye, 1 nay, and 0
present. The bill is passed. Members, if you'll turn the page on the red calendar. To
the top. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 347. 347 by Representative Mayberry to require the
Chair
Unverified
1:45:47
Arkansas Medicaid program to increase reimbursement rates for certain dental services and to send an annual reimbursement cap for adult dental services. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized
to explain your bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
1:46:08
So this morning when I got in my car to drive
here, you know, but I saw flash up on my engine. It said on my dashboard, it said, oil change needed. Yeah, we've been busy, right? And I haven't had a chance to do that. And As I told the speaker the other day, I'm pretty cheap and I don't like to spend money, I don't have to. But I'm gonna have to spend the $50 to $70 or so to change that oil in my vehicle, because if I don't,
My engine's gonna fall apart. Burn up, and I'm gonna have a much greater expense in the long run. I might even be stranded along the side of the road and not be able to make it to work or not be able to get my kids to class. That's kind of what we're dealing with right here. We have dentists around the state. Who are having to make A decision that they don't want to do, but
Economically, they cannot continue to be charity. They are Choosing now to not carry Medicaid. Which means that we have children around the state, and adults with special needs that cannot get dental care. When they can't get dental care, you know where they go? Because their teeth hurt. And they could have an infection. They go. To the ER
In 2019, we know that there were 5000. Who went to the ER. Instead of to their dentist. And if you think paying for a little, uh, expense of a checkup is a lot of money. That ER visit is a whole lot more and it doesn't solve the problem because that child Probably just gets maybe an antibiotic, which doesn't solve the problem, and they're back a few weeks later because they still have the same problem. They need that tooth extracted
and we don't have dentists in the ER. What this bill is going to do is going to raise the rates that have not been raised in 18 years. For Medicaid. Not for everybody. Again, this is only for adults with special needs. And For our children, our pediatrics. It doesn't even
raise it as high as it needs to be.
We added an amendment. That just puts into place what we wanted in year one. And what that is is imagine across the country, an average. All we're asking for is 60% of that average. Not even the average across the country, just 60% of that average. Yes, there is a fiscal impact of $6.9 million.
I promise you, if we don't spin that. We are gonna be spending a whole lot more. As Folks go to the ER. And have even more complicated medical care that's needed. We need to do something to help our dentist around the state, but more than anything, We need to do something to help our children and our adults with special needs get the care that they desperately need.
Chair
Unverified
1:49:53
I'll be happy to take Seeing none, I appreciate a good vote. Representative Mayberry has explained the
bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? the
Representative John P. Carr
Unverified
1:50:10
bill, Representative Carr, you're recognized to speak for the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In my research on this, I have found out that clinics will no longer be able to serve those dental patients, uh, they're struggling right now. Elderrea Hot Springs,
Fayetteville, Jonesboro, Fort Smith, Conway, Little Rock, and Pine Bluff. That's the ones that I know of. So we need to take care of this.
That way these kids and their dental needs are being served. Thank you and I
Chair
Unverified
1:50:36
appreciate a good vote. Representative Carr spoke for the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For
the bill, Representative Mayberry, Representative Garner. You're recognized to speak for the bill. Colleagues, thank you.
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
1:50:54
I don't come down here very often, as you know, and so it's really important when I do. My first patient as a nurse practitioner in the ENT department was a patient who came in from rural Arkansas, didn't have access to a dentist with two, abscessed teeth. He died of sepsis, and he was 8 years old. That's the true cost if we don't. Do this if we don't take care of
this issue now. So, I've just appreciate
Chair
Unverified
1:51:27
a good vote. Thank you. Representative Garner has spoke for the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? for the bill, Representative Torres, you're recognized
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
1:51:39
to speak for the bill. Uh, thank you, Mr. Speaker, House members, uh, you know, when this bill came on, I'm
never about expanding Medicaid. I mean, that's just one of my rules. But I did recently, actually last week, had a dentist come into my bank to talk to me about
just a lot of different things and he said, Do you realize that none of the dentists in our community are taking Medicaid, uh, for treating children in our dental clinics, none of us are. We just can't afford to do it anymore. So because of that, I'm gonna be a yes vote. Representative Torres
Speaker 104
1:52:16
has spoke for the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the
Chair
Unverified
1:52:23
bill Representative Mayberry, you are closed for the bill. The
question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 347, repair the machine, madam clerk. So everyone voted. So everyone voted. Cast up the ballot. The vote of 82, 6 nay, and 6 present, the bill is passed.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:52:59
Madam Clerk, please transmit those last two bills to the Senate
Speaker 24
1:53:11
immediately. Members we're going to go back to the top of the regular
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:53:18
Senate bills. Representative Brooks. Madam Clark, please read Senate Bill 325. Get about
Chair
Unverified
1:53:23
325 by Representative Brooks to amend the Arkansas Juvenile Code of 1989 to amend the child maltreatment Act to
amend the law regarding reinstatement of parental rights and to amend the law
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:53:37
regarding the child maltreatment Central registry. Representative Brooks, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, uh, Senate Bill 325 come to us front. Senator Clark on the other side, uh, these, uh, couple of bills that are up next have been supported by several folks within the, um, juvenile justice uh uh world here in the city of Arkansas, places like Restore Hope, Arkansas Baptist family members, members and child advocacy and centers.ESP 6 SB 325, sorry,
decreases the time to reinstate parental rights from 3 years to 2 years for children who've not achieved and are still sitting in foster care. It also performs a central registry criteria to keep only neglect on the registry when the alleged offenders perpetrated the neglect during the course of their employment working with vulnerable positions or the child was placed in foster care as a result of neglect. And with that, I appreciate a good vote. Representative
Chair
Unverified
1:54:24
Brooks has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Representative Clowney, you're recognized to speak against the
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:54:31
bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Brooks, maybe you can address this if you close, um, but I just wanted to ask this bill removes abandonment from the things that are on the list on the child maltreatment registry, abandonment of a child, and I'm curious why in the world that is a change Arkansas law would, would want to make, um, but that's my question. Uh, if I don't get an answer,
that's why I will be a no on this, and I would appreciate you all joining
Chair
Unverified
1:54:58
me. Thank you. Representative Clowney has spoke against the bill. Would anyone
like to speak for the bill? Against the bill. Representative Brooks, you're recognized close for the bill. Representative Brooks
is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 325. Prepare
Speaker 177
1:55:25
the machine, madam clerk. So everyone voted, so everyone voted.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:55:31
Cast up the ballot. The vote of 6 years, 72 nays and 9 present. The bill has failed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 4
Chair
Unverified
1:55:42
326. Cinabel 326 by Representative Brooks to amend the Arkansas
Juvenile Code of 1989 and the Child Maltreatment Act to modify guidelines for a judgment made in the best interests of a child and to amend procedures around reporting child maltreatment. Representative Brooks, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That was
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
1:56:02
amazing. Uh, colleagues, Senate Bill 326, it emphasizes the importance of family integrity and preservation. It requires a child abuse hotline to use a standardized tool to ensure accuracy of screening decisions when a report is made, it also broadens the threshold to accept a report. It also does not allow children and youth to be directly ordered into foster care during offense or delinquency case. Rather, it allows the judge to order a 72 hour holds of the DCFS can assess the child's safety. Finally, it prevents the children from coming into foster care for poverty. - re late d issues unless there's an immediate risk to the
Chair
Unverified
1:56:32
harm of the child. I appreciate a good vote. Representative Brooks has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill, Representative Brooks is closed for the bill. Question before the house is the passage of Senate Bill 326, repair the machine, madam clerk. So everyone voted.
So everyone voted, cast up the ballot. With about a 15 years, 51 nays, 14 present.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
1:57:09
The bill has failed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 638. 638
Chair
Unverified
1:57:23
by Representative Johnson to amend the law concerning the collection of sales tax and sales and use tax on the sale of a new or used motorboat and to provide for the direct payment
Speaker 47
1:57:34
of sales and use tax on a motorboat sold by
Chair
Unverified
1:57:38
a motorboat dealer. Representative Johnson, you are recognized to explain your
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
1:57:41
bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, members, what we're doing with this bill is trying to create some parity with how we collect, uh, sales tax on boats to make it comparable with how we collect sales tax on motor vehicles. So right now when you buy a new or used motorboat from a motorboat dealer. The dealer has to collect that tax at the point of sale. What we're trying to do is make it the same as when you buy a car where they would be able to collect the tax when they got their tags for
their boat. It does not create a new tax. It doesn't, uh, cut any taxes. Uh, so there's no fiscal impact to DFNA and I'd be happy
Speaker 288
1:58:13
to answer your questions. Representative Hawk, for what purpose? Question, you're
Representative RJ Hawk
Unverified
1:58:18
recognized. Representative Johnson, don't we currently have a problem with the collection of taxes from on these cars that we're not getting during the last session or during the interim, we DFNA came and said that the state was losing almost $100 million in unpaid taxes when they've got a
vehicle. Don't you see that could be a problem now? I mean, we've we've already got a ton of temporary tags on, on vehicles that aren't being taxes aren't being paid on, wouldn't this cause the same problem for
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
1:58:44
boats. So what DNA testified to in the Senate is that they did not think this would be the same problem with boats. Boats get a certificate. It's a little different than a tag, and it's something they have to do when they put it on the water. Almost all boats are trailered and there's tags on the trailer. And so what they testified in committee was that they did not think
Speaker 80
1:59:00
this would be the same impact. for what purpose? Question.
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
1:59:06
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative, so kind of to piggyback off of representative uh Hawks. A boat is one of the largest purchases you'll make an average wakeboard boat now being 100 to 150, I've actually seen them in $250,000 price range. So if a person doesn't collect that at the point of sale. Where at the dealer, and now they're gonna postpone that. We're gonna see a lot of boats that they're gonna be on the
water, unregistered, uninsured, and there's not a way to really govern it. The game and fish or the, the Coast Guard will not have an ability to really monitor that or enforce that to an avenue. So how would you say this would benefit the consumers having a lot of people Unregistered, unlicensed, uninsured, run around in the water. But first of all, I don't think
Speaker 296
1:59:55
that's gonna happen. I mean, first of all, I don't think people are gonna buy $250,000 boat
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
2:00:01
and not insure it. Second of all, I think that there already is a process in
place to, on our waters that we navigate. I've been out on the lakes many times in Arkansas, and I've seen the boat patrols and they're looking at the boats and looking at how the register. So I think they're gonna be able to enforce this with no problem. The other thing I'll say is when we talk about dodging taxes, you know, what you can do currently is you can drive across the state border. To Louisiana to Ark to Missouri, to Tennessee, to Texas, to Oklahoma, and you can buy a new boat. from that dealer. And because you're an Arkansas resident, you're not required to pay sales tax on that boat at the dealer. So you're coming back to
Arkansas with no real process to collect that tax. This will give us the opportunity when those people go to collect the, to get their uh registration for the boat to collect that tax. So, anyway, I appreciate a good
Chair
Unverified
2:00:49
vote. Thank you. Representative Johnson has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill,
Representative Johnson is closed for the bill. Question before the house is the passage of Senate Bill 638. Repair the machine, Madam Clerk.
Everyone voted. As everyone voted, cast up the ballot. By a vote of 58 ya, 23 nays, and 10 present. The bill is passed. Members
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
2:01:27
at the request of Representative Lee Johnson will pass over Senate Bill 621, that will take us down now to Senate
Chair
Unverified
2:01:42
Bill 441. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 441. Bill 441 by Representative Pilkington to create
the junk lawsuit Prevention Act of 2025. Representative
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
2:01:56
Pilkington, you're recognized to explain your bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Centel 441 is an important bill that protects Arkansas consumers, restores integrity to our courts. And puts an end to opportunistic predatory lawsuits that are more about enriching out of state firms than delivering justice to our Arkansans.
At its core, this bill is essentially about reforming an outdated and misused section of Arkansas law. In code. The statue was designed to give consumers a pathway to take legal action when they, when they've been harmed by unfair or deceptive business trade practices. A good law. But instead of helping Arkansan, it's been exploited and perverted. By an out of state firms who are using our courts to file suit without showing any actual injury to a single resident of the state. Let's take the real world example of the lawsuit that
inspired the bill that filed this against GoodRX. The plaintiff in that case, based in Arkansas, has suffered 0, no damages. In fact, they didn't even own or use a GoodRx cart. Yet they filed suit anyways with the help of a notorious out of state firm that has made a business out of suing Arkansas companies like Walmart, Tyson, and Simmons Banks. These lawsuits are not rooted in justice. They are designed to pursue bus they, they are.
Legal fishing expeditions to businesses into settlements. Senate Bill 441 makes three critical changes. First, it ensures that only those that have actually been harmed can file a lawsuit under this law if there's no injury. There should be no case. That's basic fairness. 2, it removes the automatic recovery of attorneys' fees for plaintiff. This provision has been used as a weapon to generate quick payouts for these out of state firms rather than pursue real justice for our Kansans.
And 3, it establishes a 30-day notice and cure period giving businesses the opportunity to fix an issue before litigation is initiated. We should be encouraging resolutions and compliance, not creative incentives for lawsuits. Um, I know some of the lobbyists against this bill have handed out a sheet, uh, saying that all they have to do is say they're sorry and they can't, you can no longer sue. That is factually inaccurate and not true. I'm sorry that you were given that bad information. Now, I want to be clear, this
should not be a partisan or divisive bill. In fact, the Arkansas Trial Attorneys Association, who typically weighs in on these legal reforms is neutral on this legislation. They sent an email last night about it. Uh, even those who practice plaintiff side litigation recognize that this bill is fair and reasonable. And while some have raised questions about the retroactive application of the bill. Let me remind this body that this is not unprecedented. We've done this many times before and if we find it is within the purview of the legislature to do this.
Uh, and it was a lot longer. We actually shortened it during the amendment on the Senate end to where it was, I went to 2021, so it's not as far as it was in the original bill and so I know there's some misinformation about that going on as well. Uh, finally, I want to highlight the support and involvement of the Arkansas Attorney General's office, which played a constructive role in shaping this legislation, and their position is threefold. The underlying statue needs to be amended, and this bill does that. And they are fully prepared to defend this bill in court, and they work directly with us to
ensure the AG remains retains full authority to bring enforcement action on behalf of Arkansas's consumers in the name of consumer protection. So let's be clear, this bill doesn't take away the state's power to protect the people. It strengthens that power while stopping out of state private legal abuse. This bill is about keeping our courtrooms focused on real harm, not headlines. It's about protecting Arkansas jobs and businesses from being dragged and dragged into lawsuits that have no merit. It's about fixing a broken system before it gets worse, and I urge you to vote yes on this bill. Thank you.
Chair
Unverified
2:05:52
Representative Pilkington has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Representative Meeks, you are recognized to speak against the
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:06:07
bill. Thank you, uh, Mr. Speaker, and again, I hate coming down and speaking against one of my colleagues who have the utmost respect and appreciate the intent of what's trying to be done here, but I'm afraid that the way it goes about this sets a very dangerous precedent. So
first off, it uh requires that if I'm gonna sue a company for damages that I have to give that company 30 days' notice. So what that allows is during that 30 days is to give that company the opportunity to harass the bully, to try to get me to stand down from my, from that lawsuit. Uh, I'm afraid that could be abused to no end by bad actors. Second is the retroactivity concern, uh, if someone files a lawsuit, uh, against someone that has a very strong lobbying firm. Are we
going to set the precedent that all I got to do is come down here and find a lawmaker who can retroactively change that law to say that a past General Assembly got it wrong and so we're gonna come and say no. And then my third concern is, is probably my, my biggest concern here is that it's gonna encourage bad actors, because what this says is that if a company runs afoul of these laws, and the consumer does the thirty-day notice that that company is 30 days to fix the problem. And so he's right. They do have
to fix the problem. But what that's going to encourage a company to do is say, we can violate these laws all day long and as long as nobody cries foul, we're good. And if somebody cries foul, we got 30 days to fix the problem. So it's gonna encourage bad behavior because they can get away with it, right? And then let's say they fixed the problem, what's going to stop them from two months later, going back to the bad behavior. Nothing. They can go back to the bad behavior, because they know that if someone calls them audit again, they've got 30 days to fix it.
And then after that 30 days, they fixed it. A month later, they can go back to the bad behavior. And so, in a lot of ways, like I said, I respect what he's trying to do, and I think that's a good thing. I just think this sets a very dangerous precedent on how we're trying to do it. With that, I, I'd
Chair
Unverified
2:08:10
appreciate a no vote. Representative Meeks has spoke against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Beatty, you're recognized to speak for the bill.
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
2:08:26
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I, I think if, if you were
on judiciary, you're probably, and probably most of this body was lobbied one way or the other on this bill. Uh, I guess the reason that, and I changed my position from the original position, something I seldom do. Uh, usually I make my mind up and I stick with, with, um, with that decision from the facts that I've been given. There are some concerns with the bill, but primarily, I think the focus of this bill is to, um, to focus on frivolous lawsuits that are coming.
in, I think what won me over was that they couldn't prove any harm to any Arkansan. We started this session off with Phantom Damages that this body passed. Here we are now dealing with frivolous lawsuits in the state. So I, I think this bill would, would restore fairness. It stops these legal fishing expeditions, and it keeps it keeps our courts and our folks focused on real harm to our Khansson. So with that, I'd encourage you to vote yes on this. Representative
Chair
Unverified
2:09:24
Beatty has spoke for the bill. Would anyone like
to speak against the bill? Representative Brown, you're recognized to speak against the bill. Thank
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
2:09:43
you, Mr. Speaker. This bill would exempt prescription drug card companies from the consumer protections of our healthcare discount code, which has been around, I think, for So long as they didn't charge the consumer for that card. Whether or not that's a good
idea or a bad idea, I leave that for y'all to determine. I would suggest though that the saying goes, If you're not the one paying for the product, you're the product being sold. Maybe that's when we really do need to make sure these people are protected. But I'm a no vote on this bill and I was in committee for 3 reasons. The first reason has been touched upon and Meeks is a retroactivity clause. Last page of the bill, it says it's retroactive to 2021. And it's all agreed that it's specifically intended to target some lawsuit that's pending. I think it was Pope County.
Now I don't know any details about that lawsuit, to be quite frank. I was a little bit late to committee when it was talked about. I'm not quite sure who the plaintiffs are what the claims are being made. But I can tell you this, if there are truly no damages in that lawsuit that has been alleged. At some point in the process, that lawsuit will go away, because one of the things you have to have in order to be able to maintain a lawsuit in this state, in every state in this country, you have to have been damaged in some fashion. You can't just go to court for fun. And it may very well take it to appeal to get it knocked out, but it will eventually be knocked out. As many of y'all know, I had a bill that
Had the perception that it might have, might impact a pending litigation, and it died a spectacular death to say it, to put it bluntly. This bill is specifically intended to affect a pending lawsuit. Let that process play out. We shouldn't get to their business just like we don't like it when the judges legislate from the bench and get to our business. The other reason I'm against this spill, the second reason is the 30 day cure period. On paper, this cure period seems imminently reasonable. It provides that, hey, if we've
done something wrong before you can sue us, let us know, give us a chance to make it right. And if we make it right, then there's no lawsuit. If we don't make it right, then you can sue. What could be more American than that. Give people a chance to fix the problem. But here's what this clause actually does on Planet Real World. We have class action lawsuits in this country, and they are intended to address those situations where many, many people are damaged in some manner, but just by a little bit. Such that no one person could
ever justify going to court to sue over something. But when you multiply that out by all the people affected, we start talking about real money. So what's, uh, what's an example? Let's say you have mega corporation that has a million customers that they charge them $10 a month for some service. Well, let's say that they are overcharging them by $1 just $1 a month times a million people, a million bucks a month extra profit. Well, if you figure out what they did, You're not going to be able to go to court and sue them for $1 a month, you know, what, $12 for a year, I mean, you'd be stupid to do so.
Class actions are there to take care of situations like that where a plaintiff can file an action on behalf of everyone affected. It goes to court, it's litigated when it's determined that they're correct, hey, we're being overcharged. All right, here's the refund to all the people that were overcharged and the company going forward has to fix its practices and not do that going forward. So how does this clause affect a class action? Well If I've been over, figured I've been charged or done wrong by these companies. I want to file a class action. First thing I have to do is give them notice. Hey, you short charge you
shortchanged me on the card by $1 a month for the past two years. They then have 30 days to say, oh yeah, our bad. Here's your check for $24. Thank you. But what happens to the 999,000 other people in the class. They can keep on trucking, and they don't have to make any change to the other people in that class and less and until every single one of them people says, hey, you're shortchanged me. Oh, here's your check. This bill would completely eviscerate the ability of consumers to go after these companies if they're being bad
actors to have them comply with the statute and do. Third reason I'm against this bill. is that this bill would create a unicorn in our code, in my opinion. I've practiced law for 18 years now, I think it's been. Worked in the legal profession before that for several years. I'm not aware of any other industry and none could be identified in committee, but I'm not aware of any other industry in our state code and our 150 to 20,000 pages of code. That gets the same kind of protection. That, hey, before you're sued, you have to be notified in writing and you have to be given a chance to fix the problem.
I'm sure that banking, healthcare, automobile dealers, insurance companies would love to have similar protections. But we don't give it to them. So why is this one industry being singled out to be given such Preferential treatment to be put on such a pedestal in our law, when I would mention that the code, this code section already only gives them a two-year statute of limitations, which in and of itself is pretty unusual because the default statute of limitations for about 80% of everything else in Arkansas is 3 years, not 2. It has been said in this chamber.
Speaker 315
2:14:37
Many, many times that we should not be
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
2:14:39
in the business of picking winners and losers. In my opinion, this bill not only literally picks a winner, but it also gives an entire industry. A get out of jail free card. And for that reason, I'm gonna know. Representative Brown has
Chair
Unverified
2:14:54
spoke against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? against the bill. Representative Mark Perry, you're recognized to speak against the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
2:15:07
Members Besides the fact that this bill will interfere with an ongoing lawsuit. I know earlier this session, 89 of, of, of us are actually 89 members voted to clamp down on PBMs. With my experience of over 39 years in the insurance business, I can tell you no one is more in bed with PBMs than Good RX, which is a company that wants
this bill. To pass. If you're concerned about PBMs and their operations. I urge you to vote no for this. Thank you. Representative Perry has spoke against the bill. Would
Chair
Unverified
2:15:48
anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Eubanks, you're recognized to
speak for the bill. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
2:16:03
Speaker. Uh, I was on the judiciary also, so I
got to listen to a lot of the testimony that we heard, uh, Like Representative, uh, Howard Beatty. I was, I started out against this bill, and then after hearing more and more, uh, not only the testimony in the committee, but, uh, uh, information from various sources, I, I changed that position, uh, Part of the reason for the lawsuit that was said in, in the committee was that
The car didn't have in bold that this was not an insurance. Program. And You know, I hate with all due respect, all the attorneys in, in, in the chamber, I think this is the sort of thing that gives attorneys a bad name that here we are, we have a firm that's out of state that is uh looking for some sort of technicality to bring a class action lawsuit. Uh Representative Brown said, you know, it, this thing, this may
only affect individuals, you know, and immaterial amount, but when you take it all together, it's a lot of money. Well, I guess my question is, it's a lot of money for who? I think it's a lot of money for, for the firm that's bringing the lawsuit, uh, I don't, it was also brought out that there was nobody in Arkansas that was harmed by this. And so, I don't know. I I'm sorry. I, uh I ran the phantom damages bill. I I against.
Uh, I guess attorneys in general, but, uh, you know, frivolous lawsuits, and I, I feel like this is a frivolous lawsuit. So I would hope, oh, and by the way, in 2017, many of the people in this chamber voted for a bill that also had retroactivity in it, so I think there is some precedent that we have the legislature has got an engaged in this issue. So I'd appreciate a yes vote. Representative Eubanks who spoke for
Chair
Unverified
2:18:07
the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill?
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
2:18:22
Representative Duffield, you're recognized to speak against the bill. Represent Pilkington I appreciate all your hard work this session, you know, you really busted your ear and I respect that, but, but I have some issues. I have some issues with this bill. That I'll lay out. To me, there are 3. Red flags, uh, that come with this bill. Uh, the first and most obvious to me, it's the end of session. And I think that we've heard this entire time to always look at the title of the bill. One of my colleagues in the Senate refers to it as, as a
snake bite bill. And if you look at the title of the bill, it says to create the junk lawsuit prevention Act. Well, in my view, that could be a little bit misleading. And I think it puts pressure on us as a body to vote for the bill. So that's, that's one point. Um The second point I'd like to make is, in my view, we were elected here to represent the will of the people, and we are elected to pass policy that helps our Kansans. In my view, this bill gets involved.
With a lawsuit. And I don't think that it's good policy. When it has a direct effect on any lawsuit, irregardless what it may or may not be. So that is, uh, That would be the 2nd 1, uh, the 3rd. The point is This is a fairly lengthy bill. I know there are many of my colleagues have spoken to me about concerns they have. There's some things that you're
unclear of, I would ask you today if you have any uncertainty in regards to this bill, even if you don't feel comfortable voting like no, vote no like I plan to. I would ask that you vote present or just abstain from voting for this bill at the end of session. To prevent any undue consequences. I appreciate the time. Representative Duffield has spoke against
Chair
Unverified
2:20:15
the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Against the bill Representative
Pilkington, you're recognized to close for your bill.
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
2:20:30
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate those comments, Represented Duffield about me busting my butt, the all session, uh. It's very kind of you.
Um, but I just wanna uh address a few issues. This This is a misleading headline. These are junk lawsuits. If you could name me one person here in Arkansas. Who was affected by this. I would love that name. Because there's not a single Arkansas resident. was affected by this. What it is is an analysate.
Socialist activists, law firm that has come in here and trying to basically fleece Arkansas businesses like they have in the past. Now, on Representative Brown's point about, about being able to see the damages. He's generally right, but in this specific statute, it authorizes suits without damages. That's why it's just to this. On the retroactive part, I appreciate Eubanks bringing up the point that we have voted on retroactive, well, uh, retroactive, uh, clauses many times before I passed out of this body. This is nothing
new. We've done it tons of times before. And then, of course, the pending litigate litigation. We've also passed bills. We just passed uh Dee's bill out of here the other day
that affects pending. I'm tongue tied. Uh, litigation. Um These are false flags. They're ways to get you to vote
no. Worry about the boogeyman. Uncertain consequences, all these things. Here's the reality. There's not a single Arkansan here in the state
that's against this bill, unless they're on the payroll of this law firm. That it affects You're gonna walk out of that door right there. After this vote, whether it fails or loses, and not a single our hands in. is going to say Thank you for defeating this bill because guess what? It's not gonna affect anyone. Cause there's no plane. There's no damages. We're just stopping junk lawsuits and that's the reason why the trial lawyers are not against this bill. Trust me.
If they thought this was somehow destroying the legal system and destroying your ability to sue companies and bring class action lawsuits. Trust me. They would be burning me in effigy out there. But they're not. Because even they know this gives what what these out of state firms are doing is actually giving them a bad name because guess what, sometimes you do need to bring class action lawsuits. Sometimes there is a need for that. And I think it's actually better. That we fix the fringes. of our legal system so that it's better and it's tight so it protects consumers and it protects our businesses.
Because otherwise we'll end up taking a sledgehammer to the issue and then people might actually really get hurt. So don't freak out about the the small statue change. OK? It's gonna be fine, and I'll tell you your people will be happy because if this doesn't pass, they'll read about it when this goes and they'll go, why do we allow our legal
system to be perverted and corrupted by people who don't even live here. Thank you. Appreciate a good vote. Representative Pilkington is closed
Chair
Unverified
2:23:34
for the bill. The question before the House is the
passage of Senate Bill 441. Prepare the machine, madam clerk.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
2:23:58
Everyone voted As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot. The vote of 28 ya, 62 nays, and 4 present, the bill has failed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 355.
Chair
Unverified
2:24:12
In about 355 by Representative Underwood to amend the criminal offense of obstructing governmental operations.
Underwood, you're recognized to explain your bill. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker 328
2:24:21
Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. Looks like it's a good day to present a bill on the House floor today. Um, this bill adds a provision to obstructing governmental operations for an individual who
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
2:24:30
receives a subpoena in a criminal trial, trial, and they knowingly fail to appear. Um, this was brought by a district judge, and this is really a goal to streamline the process so that way they can clear their
dockets. Um, the senator that worked on this bill also worked with the public defenders. They suggested some changes and he accepted those changes, so they were neutral on the bill. And I think it really just helps. both the prosecution and the court and the defenders and um helping them move these trials along and I'm happy to take any questions. Seeing no, I appreciate
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
2:25:04
a good vote. Representative Underwood has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? for the bill. Representative Underwood is
closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate
Chair
Unverified
2:25:28
Bill 355, repair the machine, madam clerk. Everyone voted Everyone voted. Cast
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
2:25:33
up the ballot. The vote of 98, 0 nay, and 0 present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill
Chair
Unverified
2:25:40
444. It'll be a 4:44 by Representative Johnson to amend
the Medical Ethics and Diversity Act. Representative Johnson, you're recognized to explain your bill. Remember this
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
2:25:49
is aitting a bill we passed a few sessions ago around, uh, the ability for a healthcare provider to, uh, due to medical conscience reasons, I refuse to provide a certain healthcare service. Uh, all we're doing is changing the healthcare service definition to include research. We're outlining some more things in clarity of what that they could refuse to do. And then we're still requiring them, of course, to take care of patients in any case of emergency regardless of conscience. Happy to answer any questions.
Chair
Unverified
2:26:13
Seeing that, I appreciate a good vote. Thank you. Representative Johnson has explained the bill. Would anyone like
to speak against the bill? For the bill Representative Johnson is closed for the bill. Question before the house is the passage of Senate Bill 444. Prepare the machine, Madam clerk. Everyone voted As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
2:26:50
The vote of 82, 13 nay, and 2 present, the
Chair
Unverified
2:26:56
bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 554. Senate Bill 554 by Representative Woolridge
to create the behavioral health loan forgiveness program. Representative Woldridge, you
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
2:27:05
are recognized to explain your bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, colleagues. This bill is a bill that just creates a mechanism by which the Department of Human Services can start the process to look at a loan forgiveness program for behavioral health providers. There is zero state dollars going into this. There's no appropriation, there's no
requests, there's no angle for state dollars. This just allows, uh, the state of Arkansas to raise money privately, um, or have contributions given. Through the Behavioral Health Association. However, we can look to start to create private dollars to incentivize behavioral health providers to work with those in our state who suffer from the most severe mental illness. Currently, this body before I became a part of it, uh, enacted legislation that rolled back the requirement of behavioral health agencies,
which allowed all providers to go out and hang their own shingle. That's a great thing. I support that and I appreciate the effort that this body made prior to me being involved. However, it has created an issue that has caused a lot of providers to work under their own private practice where they don't deal with the severe mental issues such as schizophrenia, bipolar, all of these other issues that a lot of Arkansans face the intent of this legislation again is just
to create the, the framework, DHS supports this. The Secretary of DHS and others will look at a program like there is at the federal level. level that would steer folks into working with these Arkansans that had the most severe mental illness. What it would do is it would create a benefit for them that they would, they would sign up to work for so many years in this field with this population for a return to a, uh, loan
forgiveness program. And with that, I'll answer any questions.
Chair
Unverified
2:28:55
So no, I would appreciate a good vote. Representative Wooldridge has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill Representative
Speaker 119
2:29:05
Waldridge is closed for the bill. Question before the house is the passage of Senate Bill 554, repair the machine, madam clerk. So everyone voted. Everyone voted. Cast up the ballot
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
2:29:30
The vote of 76, 15 nay, and 5 present. The bill is passed. Madam Clark, please read Senate Bill
Chair
Unverified
2:29:41
121. 121 by Representative Long to amend the automatic occupational licensure for out of state licensure Acts to apply the automatic occupational licensure for out of state licensure Act to
physician assistants. Represent you to explain your bill.
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
2:29:54
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, we've had several bills, uh, creating compacts this year and
to try to help with our problem with, uh, getting, um, qualified medical uh people into the state. Uh, this bill, uh, is between 121, uh, it's basically to go, uh, and help expedite people that maybe lives in a state that's not part of the compact that we'd like to move here and basically just expedite the process of them, uh, getting their license here, which would be a great help to, um, uh, all of our clients, Arkansans. I appreciate a good vote. Representative Long has
Chair
Unverified
2:30:31
explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill
Speaker 119
2:30:36
Representative Long is closed for the bill. Question before the house is the passage of Senate Bill 121. Prepare the machine, madam
Chair
Unverified
2:30:51
clerk. So everyone voted. So everyone voted. Cast up the ballot. The
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
2:30:58
vote of 86 ya, 2 nay, and 5 present. The bill is passed.
Chair
Unverified
2:31:02
Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 1222 by Representative to amend the automatic occupational licenser for out of state licenser Act to apply for the automatic occupational licensure for out of state licenser Act to physicians. Representative, to
explain your bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, uh,
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
2:31:17
failed to mention that first one was for physician assistants. This bill basically does the exact same thing, but it's for physicians. We appreciate a good vote. Representative Long has explained the bill. Would anyone like
Chair
Unverified
2:31:29
to speak against the bill? For the bill?
Representative McGee, you're We're back, you know, the, the trains
Representative Richard McGrew
Unverified
2:31:54
coming to the end of the station here and, and we're about to get off of it and I found a debate this morning really interesting
Speaker 342
2:32:01
on a lot of bills, but a lot of bad things
come on the last day, and this is one of them. If you'll notice on the last bill, I know we don't talk I'm firmly against this one for physicians. And the reason is, is Physicians had to be properly vetted by the medical board, and I'm going to give you an example. as to why I think this bad. I had a physician prior to coming into the legislature who We, we were in desperate need of, of someone. And we advertised and, and we interviewed several people, and
I had a physician from Oklahoma. And they came in with All the stars trained. Did their eye training at the ins. University, LSU that I trained at. Did a good fella. Um personable
Everybody in the practice like this person, went out to dinner, we always take them out to dinner. Anyway, I asked the question. You know, Oklahoma, but you just moved back to New Jer. Well, my father's ill and I've just moved home.
We, we position based on them going through the appropriatehoma Medical Board had been brought before them. For disruptive behavior in the operator and poor surgical judgment. They did not suspend this physician's license. You have to go back to school. And you have to go over to Dean McGee and do 6 more months of training and then come back to
us, and if you, if they certify that you're OK to go, we'll give your license will be unrestricted. That physician chose not to do that. So still had an active license in Oklahoma. It went back to New Jersey. Her family was from New Jersey. The other positive thing was Arkansas. I mean, it was, we can't as individual positions adequately vet people.
You know, they come to you and you get a good impression of them, and you, you know, it seemed like they check all the boxes. I can't call the Oklahoma Medical Board or the Tennessee Medical Board or Missouri and get any information about a physician. But our medical board can call. And they will share that information. It's confidential and then our medical board will make their decision. I got a nice call from the medical board, and they said, we're not
going to give me briefly, that story. So, I, I, this is a real patient safety issue. Patients have to be able to trust that their doctors are vetted properly before they get to the state. Uh, this, this, I'm concerned, you know, this will be an open door for practitioners who may be having problems in their own states to get an automatic licensure in our state and our bad bad president. Thank you. Questions. Representative Ease, for what purpose? Question. You're
Representative Les D. Eaves
Unverified
2:35:47
recognized, Doc, are you saying that if this passes the Arkansas Medical Board would not have the ability to look at someone's past behavior if they were licensed in another state or the
Speaker 342
2:35:56
actions of the process. I'm not saying they're not gonna look at it, but there's a potential that it's dumbing down the process. OK. So, that's my concern. Thank you. Thank you, colleagues. Representative McGee has spoke against
Speaker 24
2:36:12
the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Against the bill
Chair
Unverified
2:36:19
Representative Long, you recognize clothes for your
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
2:36:24
bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, my understanding was that the, this does not shortcut the um the process of the medical board, uh, basically choosing whether or not to, uh, issue a license to a new doctor. Uh, earlier today, we passed a bill to help bring uh folks from foreign countries and quicker without them having to repeat a lot of things. It's basically, uh, my understanding was kind of do the same thing for, uh, if the the
board thinks that this person is eligible, I think they issued the license basically just. speeds things up a little bit, and I have to repeat maybe classes and that type of thing, um, but I, I'd a whole lot rather trust, uh, somebody coming from another state in the United States, then maybe somebody coming from uh Indonesia or something, so, uh, I think we're gonna help those folks, we should help the, the American doctors get uh moved to Arkansas too. Appreciate a good
Chair
Unverified
2:37:14
vote. Representative Long is closed for the bill, question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 122. Prepare the machine, madam clerk.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
2:37:31
Everyone voted Everyone voted Cast up the ballot. The vote of 24, 59 nays, and 8 present. The bill has failed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 217.
Chair
Unverified
2:37:48
C 217 by Representative Bentley to require the Department of Human Services to request a waiver to exclude candy and soft drinks from eligible foods and supplemental nutrition assistance program.
Representative Bentley, you're recognized to explain your bill. Speaker, colleagues, for those of you who have been here for a year or two, this is a little bit of deja vu, and I can't tell you how excited I am, uh, to present this bill today. The food stamp program started in 1939 during the Great Depression when President Johnson used surplus from farmers to get the program's purpose was to strengthen the agricultural economy by providing improved levels of nutrition among low income households.
SB 17 will help us get back to the original intent of this program. Unfortunately, surveys in the past decade have shown that soft drinks were the number one items purchased with EBT cards. Soft drinks contain zero nutritional value. Many contain increased sugar content, high calories, and carbonation, which can lead to obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, tooth decay, GI programs, and increase for dementia. As a member of the Public Health Committee and a member of this legislature. I'm sure that you
guys unders are aware that Arkansas ranks forty-eighth in the nation for overall health, has, has retained that position for a decade. We have some of the highest rates of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and high blood pressure. Because of this, our Medicaid rates have continued to rise every year with no slowdown in sight. A certain public health committee years ago, so frustrated at what I was seeing. Frustrated that Arkansas taxpayers are paying for a food stamp program. That its present form is contributing to our health
problems by paying for soft drinks and candy, and then having to pay for increased Medicaid costs because of the poor health, this poor nutrition is causing. Just like we did with the dental uh
increase today. We're increasing the rates to our dentists, and we're paying for food that's causing tooth decay. This is totally wrong for the Arkansas taxpayer. Let, let me remind you what the original purpose of
the food stamp program was to strengthen the agricultural economy by providing improved levels of nutrition among low-income households. Allowing food stamps
to be used for soft drinks and candy does not accomplish this at all. This bill simply asks for the, the governor to request a waiver from CMS that will exclude candy and soft drinks from eligible food items. I know many of you saying, well, representing Bentley, the governor just did that yesterday. I see absolutely no reason for that's as a legislator supporting what the governor is doing with that, I'm happy to take any questions if we have seeing none, I'd appreciate a good vote. Representative
Chair
Unverified
2:40:31
Bentley has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the mill
Representative Bentley is closed for the bill. Question before the house is the passage of Senate Bill 217. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. So everyone voted. Everyone
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
2:40:57
voted. Cast up the ballot. about a 78, 17 nay, and 1 present. The bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate
Chair
Unverified
2:41:07
Bill 26262 by Representative Poll continues to amend the corporate practice of medicine doctrine and to authorize a licensed medical professional who owns a medical corporation to maintain
ownership upon an initiative license or retirement. Representative Pilkington, you're
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
2:41:22
recognized to explain your bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, this is a pretty simple bill, uh, essentially right now we have an interesting quirk in our law that says, if you're a medical doctor, And you decide that you want to retire, uh, and give up your medical license that you also
have to basically sell your practice. Um, this is unfair. I think to someone who has spent time their whole life building a medical practice, especially if they still want to remain in some sort of ownership role of it. Uh, in committee, I gave the example of a provider who may have a son who's in medical school, but he's not, hasn't graduated yet, but is wanting to take over the firm or maybe even a grantson that's looking to go into the field as well and be able to press on that family legacy, that family business that they've worked so hard to build.
Um, now, when they do this, and they, they like, so they have to give up their medical license, but we are allowing them to remain administrative role. And this is something important, I think that people have gotten confused on when they do that, they can no longer dictate. How to practice medicine. So I'm a clinic administrator. That's what I do outside of here. I have a master's in healthcare administration from UAS. My father and grandfather were both hospital administrators. My dad's still a hospital administrator. Um, I'm not allowed to tell doctors how to practice.
If there's someone in room 4 who's been waiting for a flu shot and another waiting for a flu shot. I literally cannot go to a doctor and say, go give a flu shot to that. That is dictating medicine, and I'm not allowed to practice as yet. Now I can go say, hey, I think patient for the patient room 4 has been waiting a while, you know, or if you've seen them yet. You know, that's just, that's the way it is. And so essentially that provider has been turning into an administrator who has not, who's not able to dictate medicine at that point. And so that's what the doctor's doing. So if they say, hey, listen, I want to retire, but I still want to own
my practice. I still want to be involved in it, and I'm willing to give up my license. I think I should still be able to be able to own this without having to give up what I've sent my life building because I no longer have a medical license because you're, like I said, you're giving up also your ability to dictate how care is done. You are simple just going in and becoming the administrator, you're not being, um, Or the owner and you're not dictating how medicine is practiced at all. So it's a very key important thing to understand and that's how people like me. who live in the world of healthcare administration. We
manage doctors, but we can't tell them how to practice. That's a very important rule. That's why it's a specialty, that's why it's its own program at UAMS and other places around the country. Uh, because there are special rules and guidelines on how we're, what we are legally and not legally able to do. And so I just, I think there was a little confusion on that and I just wanted to clear that up. Really simple, Bill, and I just think it's a good way to allow these providers who spent their life building a practice to be able
to give up their license, retire away but still maintain ownership of a practice that
Chair
Unverified
2:44:14
their name is on and that they've built and spent their life building.
Representative Pilkington has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill, Representative McGee, you're recognized to speak against the bill. Thank
Speaker 340
2:44:37
you, Mr. Speaker. So colleagues, it's not a simple bill. And I've got a lot of gray hair
Speaker 342
2:44:44
and I hope I don't confuse you any on it. So if I do, ask questions, OK? If I get lost, just kind of poke me and remind me to go on. It's not a simple quirk in the law. It's a, it's a quirk about patient protection, first of all. You don't have to sell your practice when you retire. There's no law that says, You can keep it. You can actively be involved in
it. All you have to do is be in good standing with the state medical board. Probably be maintaining your malpractice. If you have to maintain an active medical license and problems with the medical board. You pay your fees every
I'm a retired physician. I did sell my practice, but I'm maintaining medical care. I can go out and work in free clinics, I can work in my own office. If the, if they need some help, as long as I don't charge for my services. But I want to start this off with some comments about how this all came about and, and sort of give you a little history. Many of you this morning
probably got a text from someone about, uh, this is a great big administrators, that sort of thing. That person. Also, it was discussed with them that you asked for an amendment that would allow, we asked for an amendment. Such that the person could continue continue to own the
practice and have we ask an agreed chat an amendment that would rescind the requirement for having continuing me and this is, this is one doctor, this is not the entire state of Arkansas. There's one doctor's behind this. And initially, that physician agreed. OK, I'll do that. Um, I'll keep an active license, but now I don't have to do CME. We go back. And they decided
No, don't 200 bucks a year to keep your license and not have to do any CME and the guy still could have owned his practice. So that raised the flag. And then another flag that was raised was in there were two big Medical groups here in Arkansas that were behind this. In addition to this one physician. One of the groups I didn't talk to, but one of the groups I know the doctor that owns the practice.
He is a big family practice, primary care. position Always in my communities all over eastern Arkansas and uh when I heard that his group, We're in support of this, I called him and last Friday, Thursday night after we left here, I called him at 6:30. And I told him, he said, we can't have that. That's corporate practice of medicine. So, so his group. In prior conversations, this
particular person had said that they supported it, but they didn't. So now that raises an anyway, that's kind of a background of, of, of, of how it, how it transpired. Then when it gets to committee, their attorney for the The doctor The concern with this is if, if, if you don't have An active medical license if
you're retired and you don't have an active mentality over you. None. 0. Nobody has any authority to help you. And, and Her comment in committee was, oh well, yeah, but the health department has authority over medical practices. No, they don't. No one does. The medical board has authority over doctors and what we do. So that was for false statement. That was misleading in committee. So that, that kind of brought another thing to my mind. Well,
why wouldn't this guy want to keep an active medical license, not have to do CME. A lot of you in here might not might know about stark regulations state that a physic. can't refer, cannot refer to a facility in which he has ownership. It's a conflict of interest and it's potential financial gain. You can't do that. By letting that physician, Retire
In his medical license and run that practice. He's not, he's no longer under the medical board and he's no longer under stark. Laws There's no control over what he does. So I'm going to give you a quick example. of my practice and how that might all play out. I'm an ophthalmologist. I have By physicians, but I own the practice entirely, solely by myself. I, I didn't in
my own practice. I sold to my partners, but, but let's just assume I own the practice and I own my myself. Stark law says, I can't refer you as a patient. You come to my office, I can't refer you to my optical shop or can't. Coerce you to my optical shop.
When you leave my office, you walk up to the front and check out, you get your glass prescription. You can go anywhere you want to go. If you want to use my optical shop, someone else's, that's fine. Same thing with contact lenses. We give them their prescription. All I care providers do that. We, we live under those rules. My optical shop, you have to go out the front door and some of you have been in my office, you actually have to walk out the front door and walk about 1/3 of a block and go in another door
to go in the optical shop. The two don't even connect. So, and we did that years ago came around. So now, I go sell my practice. The doctors that are working in that practice now have sold it, I've retired from medicine. I do not have an active medical license. I'm not under the medical board. I'm not under stock laws anymore. But my doctors are out there working.
I'm not back there telling them how to do their my employees. They don't earn any I can coerce my employees. Or make it difficult for them to not refer those patients to my optical shop, so I make more money. And nobody that opens the door for a lot of potential fraud, a lot of potential abuse. So I hope that explains from my situation, why, if you have, if
you retire as a physician and you want to have a practice and you still want to be in it, just keep your darn medical 200 bucks a year. How to keep your medical lots do that. If we pass this bill, what's the consequence? We have fought in this floor. Over the last few years, many times against PBMs. Pharmacy benefit managers, corporate people running pharmaceutical
practices. Some of us agree with that, some of us don't agree with it. If we pass this, I won't be here. Sometimes around here you go, well, I won't be here in 2 years. I won't be here in 4 years, uh, you know, that's the next guy's worry. If we pass this bill, You're gonna, it's not gonna be pharmacy benefit managers be physician benefit managers. It opens the door to the corporate practice of medicine and that's a bad road to go down. And if you, I ask you please vote no on this. And I'm open for questions.
Chair
Unverified
2:53:52
Representative McKenzie, for what purpose? Question. You're recognized. Thank
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
2:53:56
you, Doctor McGee. I appreciate it because uh I do have some I have some questions coming in and then you opened up a few other questions. Um, so referral, um, that's an interesting one in, in, in reference to laws that I'm unfamiliar with and I'm in completely in the deep end of the pool. It seems to me that even though there are stark claws, which I don't know much about, but you just referenced, um, if I walk into and this happened during session, I walk into a uh emergency room. Um, and I'm
given a referral to a specialist, the referral to the specialist is within the same hospital practice. That seems to be in violation of the Stark clause you just mentioned, but it's common practice some almost every medical doctor in the state of
Speaker 342
2:54:36
Arkansas. That's true. Now, the difference is, the difference is, is the position that is referring, I'm the doc, you came and I saw you in the emergency room, and I'm sending you, uh, to Doctor Richardson over here, who's, who has expertise in something. I don't know what, but something. I'm sorry.
Representative Richard McGrew
Unverified
2:54:55
I would have said Perry, but I looked at Richardson first. I don't have any financial gain. I don't, it
Speaker 342
2:55:06
doesn't benefit me. Financially to refer to Doctor Perry, Doctor Richardson, Doctor, Doctor Hall, any of that. So it's, if, now, if it, if I got financial gain from that, that's a stark violation. But, so when you're, when you see someone in the hospital, the physician that's, they're gonna, they're gonna refer you, refer you to the best patient they think, best physician they think
can take care of you based on your medical condition, not money on the back end. That's what SA
Speaker 116
2:55:33
tries to stop. Follow up. You're recognized. Thank you for that. That was happened as
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
2:55:37
you kept going. My initial question is, to your knowledge, and I'm not asking someone from the medical board, I'm asking Doctor McGee in the well here. What's the purpose of a license. So if the medical board issues a license, what is that purpose for it and the oversight that is provided in issuance of and then eligibility for. The state medical board is charged with protection of the public.
Speaker 342
2:56:01
And as, as much as I hate to say it, guys, sometimes We have bad docs. And most of them, Go to the, before the medical board. Probably I don't know, 75% of the people that appeared before the medical board appear. Or substance abuse or staff, that sort of thing. Most of the time when you go to
the medical board, the medical board slaps you on the wrist back to work. We're gonna monitor you and make sure that you're safe for patients. They make every effort to get a, it cost a lot of money to educate a physician. And it takes a lot of time to try to take up for this reason for that. So they work diligently to, to try to rehabilitate a patient. I certainly don't want to be at the end of that table trying to defend yourself. When, before the medical board,
if you, if you have some infractions. So their whole role is, is to protect the patient. One more follow up, please. Recognized
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
2:57:12
I appreciate that, and I assume that
was the answer, but I do have a question as to the purpose of a licensure from a board, medical board or otherwise. And this is a license I have no desire or wish to be in front of or obtain what other specific business practices does the medical board dictate onto licensees? Do they dictate the point of sale system they have
to use, the color of paper, because it seems to me as though that um Requirement to maintain the license is important for the protection of the public, as you just mentioned, for a doctor practicing medicine, but what it seems to be is that this is a bit of a cudgel for people that want to maintain a business as opposed to a license to care
Speaker 342
2:57:56
for patients. They don't, they, they don't dictate how you run the medical business. If, if Well, let me back up a minute. If you did something fraudulent,
You know, the medical board could call you in on it. Typically, that's going to be something that occurs that where Uh, some charges are brought against a decision as to whether or not to let you continue to practice. They may suspend your license or, uh, put some restrictions on it for a period of time, as the case. I'll give you an example, um, there was a physician, that was
accused of inappropriate sexual behavior that were, those were, those were charges. I mean, they were criminal charges and he had to defend himself, and, and the medical board What they did They they don't have any authority to take your license for that. You're not being convicted of anything at this point. Now, if you were convicted, they could Take your license away from you. Uh, but what they did was they made accommodations to ensure
that physician would not be alone in a they had to have a chaperone in uh as all that played out. The position of ultimately was cleared of the charges, but that's, that's Colleagues, thank you very much. I'm getting out of the way. I've been down here too long. Appreciate no vote. Thank you. Representative McGee has spoke
Chair
Unverified
2:59:36
against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill?
Against the bill, Representative Pilkington, you are recognized to close for your bill.
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
2:59:53
It's a whole lot, um. I don't know what this has to do
with straw man arguments. This is really about letting a provider now has decided, I'm old, I no longer want to have to do CMEs every year. I no longer have to pay a fee to the medical board. I just want to be able to own the practice that I spent my life building and, and, and keep it in my family, my family name.
That's what this is about. Um You know, all this boogeyman fear these things of that, and stark violations. I mean, all those things still exist. I have to worry about star violations. I am not a physician. The provider who now is the owner who's no longer a provider who gives up this license, we'll still have to worry about stark violation. The law still applies to this. It's not like this is some magical get out of jail free card. Um It's just silly. I mean, it really is. This is an old
antiquated way of doing things. Let's bring it forward. Obviously, you have provider groups that would like businesses that they grew so they can pass it on to their children. That's what this is about. Um You know, I mean, that's, that's the reality. Once again, they cannot dictate medicine. They are still governed by a whole host of federal regulations and state regulations. Those are all still in place. Nothing changes. Um, and so I just want to ask that for a good vote. Don't be
scared off by this. It is a good bill. I appreciate the support that we have in the Senate, and I appreciate the support of the providers who brought this to me to let me know this is a way that we can help a lot of our doctors keep the business that they worked so hard to grow and so they can still be a part of it without having to undue burden and regulation on them.
Chair
Unverified
3:01:42
Thank you. Repres of Pilkington is closed for the bill.
Speaker 119
3:01:44
Question before the house is the passage of Senate Bill 262.
Prepare the machine, madam clerk. Everyone voted. As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot. The vote of 32 years, 45
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
3:02:13
nays, and 13 present. The bill has failed. Madam Clerk Please read Senate Bill
Chair
Unverified
3:02:16
585. 585 by Representative Gonzalez to require certain records be provided to an employee who is a minor. Representative Gonzalez Worthen.
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
3:02:25
You're recognized to explain your bill. Thank you, Chair. Good morning colleagues. I bring you Senate Bill 585. This bill amends the employment, employment law. Um, and assists and benefits working youth.
And those are under the age of 18, by providing them with a pay stub. A pay stub is proof of income. Currently, Arkansas is one of 8 states where we do not have mandatory pay stubs. Believe it or not, I found that interesting. Most employers issue pay stubs. However, it is not mandatory, and we do have youth who are not receiving a pay stub.
They are the most vulnerable. This law allows mandatory pay stubs for employers who have more than 10 employees, and it only impacts minors. We're only talking about minors. Um Having a job is a rite of passage for any young person with that comes saving for a car, getting an apartment, etc.
but with those items, proof of income, often comes up. How are you gonna pay for this? And without having that evidence, then it makes it a little difficult. This category of labor force participation, when we're talking about labor force participation, the division of workforce Services, ADWS. In the age group of 16 to 19 year olds who are in the workforce. And that includes the 16 and 17
year olds, 40% of them are in the workforce. That's a large number of about 65,000 youth are in the age group of 16 to
19 that are working. For minors, oftentimes they do
not. know about Social Security, Medicaid, um, deductions, etc. Especially if they do not receive a pay stub. Now, if they receive one, oftentimes their employer will help them decipher what all of that means.
By having a pay stub, this also protects employers, um, in that. Um, if a minor asks about, well, I thought I was making this much money because I put in this much overtime, they can discuss that and that would be That that would be amenable to the employer. They can, they can help with that. So this protects our most vulnerable population, minority, um, uh, youth, this bill ensures that our working youth, all
working youth, are paid fairly, and they'll be learning financial literacy, and it's also gonna help to To protect Payroll errors and individuals are generally the ones that recognize payroll errors. I am available for questions. Yes. Representative Perrier, for what purpose? You're recognized this to our state
employee? Does, does our state have employees that are under 18? Yes, um, as a matter
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
3:06:09
of fact, we had, uh, we did have, well, we had uh at testify on behalf of this, and what she had said was that they have about 300 people, because they have interns working, youth working, and, and they train, they trained them on how to read their pay stub, because many of them do not. This only applies to, um, entities that have over 10 employees and only to minors. So, in a state agency, if there
are minors employed and, and, and they have
over 10 employees that would apply to them as well. You're recognized state employees. Why do we not have a, what would be
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
3:06:53
the fiscal impact to the state there is
no fiscal impact, um, with this, with the, with, we were told that in in committee, yes. Additionally, there was a
Chair
Unverified
3:07:14
question asked about students with disabilities and Representative Gonzalez Worthen has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak
against the bill? For the bill Representative Gonzalez Worthen is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 585. Prepair the machine, madam clerk. So everyone voted. everyone voted.
Cast up the ballot The vote of 42 years, 34 nays, 14 present, the bill has failed. Members, I want to pause
Speaker 24
3:07:57
here and go to your yellow budget calendar.
Chair
Unverified
3:08:07
Representative Jean, you're recognized to present the budget calendar.
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:08:31
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues, we've got, uh, 2 bills out of the Senate, Senate Bill 54, which is the auditor of the state. The deputy prosecutor's attorneys, uh, and also, Senate Bill 67, the public defenders. There's been a little change on this, and I'll just kind of go over the change right quick on both of them, uh, by agreement, uh, The uh, deputy prosecutors are
getting 9 additional positions. Uh, and it's going to be an increase of 5.5 million. Uh, the public defenders are getting 51 additional positions, but they're not full time. Most of these people, these lawyers, and we have trouble getting, uh, public defenders. They don't want to work full time. They, they want to do part-time, so a lot of these positions are, they're not part-time, they're probably working over 30 hours, but they don't want to be, they
don't want to be full time, but they'll, they'll help and we have a case load that, that needs this and it's additional $3.1 million on the Senate bill. 67. So those are the two changes. My intent is to batch these two and, and get to the others. Any question on these two bills? Seeing none, your one vote is for Senate Bill 54 and Senate Bill 67. Uh, and the emergency clause, Mr. Speaker, the clerk read the bill for the 3rd time. Madam Clerk, read the bills for
Chair
Unverified
3:10:03
the 3rd time Senate Bill 54, Senate Bill 67. the machine,
Madam Clerk. Members, your one vote is for the bill in the emergency clause of both
bills in the batch. Everyone voted As everyone voted. cast up the ballot. The vote of 98, 0 nay, 0 present. You've passed the bill in
the emergency clause of each in the batch. Representative Jean, you're recognized.
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:10:34
But anyway, Speaker, we'll take up, uh, Senate bill. 362. This is the, uh, Senator Hammer's bill, the $4 million for A youth activities, we,
I think, they didn't get the votes yesterday. I explained it yesterday. Any questions about this? It's not, it's not funded. It's $4 million appropriation, he's got to find the funding. Any questions? Seeing no, your one vote is for the bill and the virgy clause,
Chair
Unverified
3:11:05
Mr. Speaker, the clerk read the bill a 3rd time. Madam Clerk, read the bill for the 3rd time.
Representative Jean has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill Representative Jean is closed for the bill. Question before the house is the passage of Senate Bill 362. Prepare the
machine, madam. Everyone voted. As everyone voted, cast up the ballot. The vote of 70 years, 16 nays,
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:12:15
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, we'll take up the Senate version of the revenue
stabilization that we passed out is the identical bill that we passed out here yesterday. I went into some detail. Uh, yesterday on all the changes, I won't do that today unless there are questions, and I'll entertain any questions on the Senate version of the RSA. Sing no Your one vote is for the bill and the mercy clause.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
3:12:47
Mr. Speaker, the clerk read the bill for the 3rd time. Madam Clerk, read the bill for the 3rd time the 3. Representative
Chair
Unverified
3:12:58
Jean has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill Representative Jean is closed for the bill. The question before the house is
Speaker 119
3:13:04
the passage of Senate Bill 637. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. Members your one vote is for the bill and the emergency clause. Everyone voted
As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot The vote of 88, 5 nays, 3 present. You have passed the
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:13:34
bill and the emergency clause. Representative Jean. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The last bill. For this session is the Senate Bill 636. And We had our meeting
yesterday morning, I guess about 20 members showed up, and I got to the chamber this morning and I
realized a lot of members did not have this sheet that was passed out. Let's go over this sheet first. And that red up
there, it says, Senate Bill 633, draw a line through that. I don't want anybody get confused. We're not, that's, that's
the prison bill. We're not dealing with that this session. And if you'll go to 3 columns down where it says
surplus bill. For the prison, this is just old working papers that we had for members strike through that. I don't want anybody get confused
to think we're trying to fund any money, uh, for the prison. That's not going to happen. This just for y'all to have information where we're spending the one-time money. So that's why I handed out these sheets to make sure every member had one. Uh Senate bill Uh, 6:36. Let me just start off with what, what is funding? Uh, if you'll see the yellow column,
In the 2nd paragraph there, it says new set asides. That's what's in this funding bill. Uh, the 136. A million dollars is the state's property insurance. That's on this building. It's on our K through 12 public school buildings. It's on every state building that the state owns, and it's owned every college campus. That's what this one-time funding is for to pay the insurance. And by the way, the first payment, I do
July 1st for $45 million and that's where this funding is coming out. The, uh, the next item is the Medicaid. Uh, set aside, that's new money, that's the ongoing money that I showed you was not in the RSA yesterday. This, this page for the Medicaid increase that the governor's asked for. The next item is the educational Freedom account. It's a set aside of $90 million. This is for the learns. And by the way, the ones there yesterday, when you see transfer.
It's going directly to it. When you see set aside. Just a a straight set aside, that's a 3-5 vote. You have to have a governor's letter to fund this and 3/5 of the, uh, legislative council. And then when you come to this next one, you see, A majority set aside, have to have a governor's letter and just 51% of the vote to fund it in council. So, just to be clear, when you're looking down this list, you understand what that is. The
next item is, uh, majority set aside, 51 votes. In council with the governor's letter and goes through Pier. This is, uh, 45.9. million dollars for additional various voting set asides, and that's the part that people can come to and ask for money. I think the, I told you yesterday that the, uh, senior citizen food. Like I told Representative Vault, this is where that's gonna be funded out of, and that's by agreement. But there's
various other things. Last year, we spent, uh, about 41 million replenishing the pot and adding a little bit more for, uh, adult, uh, senior, uh, meal. The next item is the educational facilities. This is the, uh, part we have. roofs, air conditioning, schools that have to be, uh, repaired or upgraded or built. That's 45
million, uh, at one time, that balance was over a 500 million, you see the new balance on the side will be 396 million. Uh, the teacher academy scholarship is something we've been doing for the last 3 years. That's where if a young person gets, uh, Uh Goes to school and to be a teacher from high school in Arkansas, we will pay them $6000 a year, uh, Tuition and a scholarship,
But however many years they used it, if they use it one, they've got to teach school in Arkansas one year to have this forgiven if they take some 5456 years, whatever the degree they're getting in teaching, they have to commit to serving, to teaching that law. Uh The motor vehicle set aside, something we do every year. This week, I think we set aside a little over 6 million last year. This puts it in our car fleet, gives us a balance of 13 million. We're putting 4.7
million to buy state police, any department, cars other than Uh, gaming fish and um Uh Highway Department. They're not included in it, but every other department, we buy the, the vehicles out of fleet. The economic stimulus program is for site infrastructure. We talked about this a lot, uh, the other day and, uh, Room 130, I think, uh, this is a to clear off sites and make them
ready available for economic development. This came from a request from the governor and the economic development team. Uh, Arkansas school that that day, that's, that's new money. That's $35 million. We're fixing to build a new schools over there, which were badly needed, uh, that's new money. The $9.1 million for the economic Oh excuse me, for the uh HVAC, that's putting an air conditioned system, duct work
and whatever they need to do on the north side of the campus of the, uh, uh, Capitol, uh, and that's, that's been agreed to by, uh, House and Senate leadership and the governor's office. Uh, the quick action closing fund, something we've been doing for years, help economic development they're closing the deal. We've always had a pot. It's, it's 25 million this year. And then last year we did $40 million in the historic rehabilitation Trust Fund that
we, uh, I know the Veterans Hospital, the Arlington, it was something else. We cut that in half to $20 million this year to, for, uh, the, the, uh, Restoration of old buildings. In the last part of it is 25 million for the water grants. For 3
Speaker 410
3:20:28
years. That's 75 million, and the money will roll
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:20:31
out one year at a time. We won't put 75 million in the pot. It'll be, it'll be 11 at a time. Uh
It's spending a lot of money. I, I'm not, I'm not debating that point, but I think it's all needs that the governor came up with a house and house got some needs that we've asked for. Senator's got some needs, um, and I, and I'll say this, uh, We have an emergency clause on this, so we have to get 67 votes or The insurance ain't going to be paid July 1.
And that's not a threat. I'm just telling you what it is. And, and if the water project's important to you, we don't do that, that money's gonna roll over into catastrophic reserve by the way the
bill is written. So I'm letting, letting you know, I, I hate for people to vote on stuff
Speaker 414
3:21:29
and say, well, I didn't know that. Well, I'm telling you. But at
Speaker 415
3:21:34
this time, I'll take, uh, any questions. Representative McAlinden, for what purpose? You're recognized on the motor vehicle set aside, you said that's
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
3:21:40
something that we do every year. Why is that not then in our RSA?
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:21:46
Well It's just, I don't really have a good answer for it. I, I think most governors and
most people in the house try to keep the RSA low. It's a, yeah, it's an ongoing expenditure. It probably needs to be in there, but I mean, we've had good surpluses, but since I've been here, uh, the, the fleet has been, uh, uh, replenished with one-time money. And it may be something we need to look into.
Chair
Unverified
3:22:18
Representative Ray, for what purpose? You're recognized. Representative Jane,
Representative David Ray
Unverified
3:22:21
could you just repeat, uh, before Representative McAloon's question, can you repeat the last thing you said about how the funds roll over. On that
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:22:32
water system. The way that bill's written, and I'm, I'm, I'm leaning on our BLR staff fiscal thing that,
because I asked them if the repercussions of this not passing, do we have any problems that's going to hit us July 1, because if we don't, it'll go and act August, August 5th.
And the payment of the insurance was one. And the other was this bill, which is $25 million for grants for the rural water systems and sewer systems, uh, to apply for grants, and we didn't have to be ruled, it could be any, uh, if, if this is not enacted on July 1, that money rolls into our catastrophic reserve fund. That's just the way the bill was written. Uh, I don't know why it was written that way. I didn't write the bill, so I don't know.
Representative Wooton, for what purpose? You're recognized 5033 at a add a
couple more zeros,
a million 1000 was moved from there down to the prison you're talking about the 250 million now. Yeah, and and what
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:23:51
that 250 million will do
if it's, it's gonna, it's gonna roll over to the general allotment, and
we'll have that money in there to start the next fiscal year. So it's, and nobody can touch it, and
we'll get the interest off of it. We'll follow up. Yes sir, go ahead. Doesn't DFA have discretion relative
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:24:18
to where that 200. Now, uh, you may be getting two pots of money. DFA cannot touch that. We have, we do have 330
million allocated for the prison, that, that has not been appropriated yet. Now, That, that could be done in the interim through counsel. I would, I would encourage us to wait till we get back in the fiscal session. But, but this 250 million will roll over and nobody will be able to touch it till we get back into session. Thank you. Representative Rose,
Chair
Unverified
3:24:54
for what purpose? Question, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Representative Jean, I'm, I'm sorry. I, I didn't get this sheet yesterday in the meeting and you came in late. I did. I was in committee. And thank you for waiting around for me. Uh, but I just now I'm seeing this sheet. I must have missed it yesterday. So this is about the set asides that are recouped. I just had one question. There is the, there's 4 of them there, uh, but the law enforcement stipends set aside, and it says those funds are being recouped and that they
don't expire and they return to the restricted reserve fund. I was just curious
specifically if that means that those stipend funds are no longer going to be designated at all or if there's still some law enforcement stipends that should be dispersed.
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:25:45
I think we've had either 3 or 4 rounds on funding law enforcement, and I think you were part of one of them, somebody
we missed those dispersed, which is why I'm touching on it now. Well, I didn't realize
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:26:02
that, but, but these by law can be recouped if they're not used. Some, some things that DHS has and education. halves cannot be recruited. This is just, they're just following the law. There was no rhyme or reason, but
these four things that you see being recruited or recouped. I thought we had taken care of everybody in law enforcement, but Evidently
we didn't. You're recognized. So, uh, and not to dive into that, but what you're saying is those no longer will have any designation that's.
Representative Zack Gramlich
Unverified
3:26:33
That's right. Thank you. Representative McCollum, for what purpose? Question, you're recognized.
Representative Austin McCollum
Unverified
3:26:38
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Jean, is it a good idea to give $25 million to The economic development incentive. Quick action fund and do you know what the balance is? I do not have the balances. I'll
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:26:55
get that for you. But, but that's something typically we've done every year, and I, I think
last year we did 30 million, if my memory serves me right, that's just something that economic development and the governor asked for, this is, this is last minute things to put together to close the deal. A lot of years, uh, A lot of years, uh, it doesn't get spent, but, but that's, that's a typical thing that we've done
Speaker 119
3:27:28
since I've been in the legislature. long for what
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
3:27:31
purpose? You're recognized. Thank you. Thank
you, Mr. Speaker Dean, um, you may have
covered this last. Is there a reason why these are all grouped together and we can't,
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:27:46
uh, vote on them separately. It's part of the bill. I mean, We, we, we, we put it in the bill over a joint budget. It's, it's, it's just like RSA. We put it all together, we don't vote it separately. It's just part of the bill,
the spending bill. this RSA is the budget bill. This is the
one-time funding bill, and that's, that's, that's the way we've always done it. Uh, could they be put one at a
time? Yeah, but, but, I mean, I'm, I think you could judge the bill big enough. If you have a problem with it, I think the time to do it is, is in budget. A lot of things get
Representative Zack Gramlich
Unverified
3:28:23
cut out of budget if you, if you get over
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
3:28:26
there and work it. OK. Thank you, sir. Representative Lundstrom, for what purpose? Question line 8, 388 is the economic stimulus program set aside for site infrastructure grants. So this is Not for the private citizen to
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:28:42
clear their land. This is for cities and counties, economic development corporations,
uh, probably could use if you state land, if Fort Chaffee or Camp Robinson had something they, they, they could do it on that. It would be publicly owned entities. You're recognized. So it
went from 10 million to 50 million.
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
3:29:02
At, at the request of the governor and AEDC. Was there
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:29:06
a reason why? You know, we don't, they don't tell
us a lot about who they're talking to because, you
know, that's private, they're trying to negotiate corporations don't like information out that they're looking here, there, how much, you know, they're, they're getting, we've always respected that. We've always took the guidance of economic development to be, to be private about this. This was the ask, and, you know, I'm, I'm a big proponent of economic development, but, but, uh Uh, this, this wasn't me asking this is what the governor and
Chair
Unverified
3:29:43
the AEDC asked. Alright, thank you. Thank you.
Representative Austin McCollum
Unverified
3:29:48
Representative McCollum, what purpose? Question you're recognized. Is it a good idea for that economic development when we're continuing to give money
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
3:29:56
to it. You know. I, I, I've worked in economic development. I've been on the economic development
commission in prior years, uh, when, when the, the The daddy of our current governor put me on there many years ago. And, and I do know
that privacy and keeping things close to the vest is very key to a lot of these corporations, these businesses, and, uh, I think once you start throwing their name out, some of them just say, I'm going somewhere else and people that have worked on it probably can attest to that also. Not that had to like it, but that's, that's the way business is run. Any other questions? All right, seeing none. Uh, your one vote is for the bill and the mercy clause.
Remember, it just takes 51 to pass, but to get this enacted by July 1, we will need 67 votes on the emergency clause. And uh with that, I'll ask the, uh, speaker to ask the clerk to read the bill for the 3rd time. Madam Clerk, read the bill for the 3rd time
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
3:31:04
Representative Jean has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill Representative
Chair
Unverified
3:31:10
Jean is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage
Speaker 24
3:31:17
of Senate Bill 636, repair the machine, madam clerk. Members, your one vote is for the bill
Chair
Unverified
3:31:34
and the emergency clause. Everyone voted as everyone voted. Cast up the ballot. With a vote of 86 years, 10 nay, and 1 present, you have passed the bill and the emergency clause.
Madam clerk, please read Senate Bill 591. And members were going, uh, back to the red calendar, uh, for the last remaining of the Senate bills. 591 by
Chair
Unverified
3:32:46
Representative Brown to prohibit race selection, abortion in this state and to create the race discrimination by abortion prohibition Act. Representative Brown, you are recognized to explain the bill.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
3:32:58
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Senate Bill 591 is An act to prohibit race selection, abortion in this state and to create a race discrimination, abortion prohibition Act. This bill seeks to provide race selection of prohibit race selection, abortions in the state of Arkansas. It introduces a new subchapter in Arkansas code that is very similar to the other non-discrimination abortion bans, such as the sex
selection and Down syndrome band that are already in code. It stipulates that a position or any individual cannot perform or attempt to perform an abortion if they know that the pregnant woman is seeking the procedure. because Of the rice. This act will only take effect if Arkansas's existing laws against abortion are struck down or repealed. Before performing an abortion, the physician must inquire about
the race of the unborn child and informed the woman of the prohibition against Rice Bill also outlines criminal and civil penalties for violations, categorizing, knowingly performing an abortion. A prohibited abortion. As a class A misdemeanor. Physicians who violate the law may face suspension or re revocation of their medical licenses and women who undergo such abortions without being
informed of the prohibition may seek damages. This bill ensures that women who receive or attempt to receive an abortion in violation of this subchapter will not be prosecuted or held liable. As of April 1, 2025, the following states have enacted laws prohibiting abortion sought specifically due to the rights of the fetus. Arizona,
Chair
Unverified
3:35:15
Representative Steele for what purpose? You're recognized. Yeah, Representative Brown, uh, why are we just distinguishing minorities.
Speaker 24
3:35:22
Well, we're not distinguishing minorities.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
3:35:26
We are simply saying that any abortion sought strictly on the basis
of the race of the child. Regardless of what race that he is, is prohibited. We currently have an abortion ban.
But in some states, uh, specifically in Missouri. Uh, that abortion ban has been struck down. Arizona's, uh, one of Arizona's abortion ban was struck down, but they had like 37 other, uh, Um, restrictions on abortion that still stood. So that's why we want to put this in place in the event that our abortion ban. To maintain that protection. Follow up. You're recognized.
Isn't it true that your previous bill What not allow or disallow any reference to a minority or race, uh, people serving on boards and commissions, and then the other ones would be local municipalities you couldn't use race as a reference to anything and then why, I guess now in this bill, is particularly targeted toward The race of the child. For those of us who believe in
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
3:36:53
the sanctity of life. We believe in the sanct do not believe that it is a valid reason to receive an abortion strictly based on the race of a child, regardless of whether it's a
Chair
Unverified
3:37:05
minority or not. So all children. So why
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
3:37:13
do we need this bill? Because It prohibits an abortion-based solely on the race of a child.
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
3:37:24
Representative Shepherd, for what purpose? You recognized, Do we have any documented evidence of current uh race selective abortions occurring in Arkansas. Additionally, what solutions does this legislation offer that is not currently found in civil rights laws, medical practices or professional standards. With regard
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
3:37:50
to your first question, um, I was gonna ask
Representative Pilkington to speak. However, uh, he did state in the committee meeting the other day, something that I was unaware of that there are I believe they're called white nationalists that are encouraging abortion of children, of black children or mixed race children. And that is abhorrent to me. And I do not know the answer to the rest of your
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
3:38:19
question. So you don't know what solutions this legislation is offering. This
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
3:38:25
Solution. There's not. This so this legislation is strictly will become
active only in the situation. There's a trigger portion of this bill, only in the situation where our total ban on abortion is struck down except to save the life of the mother. Understood for
Speaker 468
3:38:49
a follow-up. Oh, I'm sorry. The original question
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
3:38:53
was, what solution does this legislation
offer that's not currently found within civil rights laws, medical practices, or professional standards Well, the three categories
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
3:39:04
you just mentioned, I don't think they deal with abortion at all. Healthcare, discrimination in
Speaker 466
3:39:10
healthcare. Thank, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues, I would appreciate a
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
3:39:15
good vote. Representative Brown has explained the
bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill. Representative Ennet, you're recognized to speak against the bill.
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
3:39:42
This legislation is both misleading and harmful, particularly to women of color. While it claims to prevent race-based abortions. It is rooted in paternalistic notions that women of color cannot make autonomous autonomous decisions about their bodies. The hypocrisy is evident. When SB 3 was passed, eliminated affirmative action and diversity initiatives under the guise of promoting equality.
Simultaneously, SB 591 imposes invasive requirements on women of color. Suggesting that they are incapable incapable of making informed decisions. This contradiction reveals a troubling agenda that undermines genuine efforts towards racial justice. SB 90s. SB 591 is not a protective measure. It is a direct attack on the autonomy of women of color.
It fails to address the real issues affecting these communities. Such as high maternal mortality rights. And limited access to quality healthcare and medical racism. Instead of empowering women, it seeks to control them under the pretense of anti-discrimination. Our body has passed out countless numbers of abortion bills already. Why is this needed? It is barbaric.
Offensive. It is an evasion of one's privacy. I humbly ask you to Recognize the harm of this bill and vote against it. Thank you. Representative Ennett has
spoken against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Bentley, you recognize to speak
for the bill. Thank you, Speaker, colleagues, this, this affects all races, not just any one particular
race, but I want to remind you guys, and I hope we never in the state ever start killing babies again. But when we were killing babies in this state, even though black Arkansans only encompass 13% of our population, the abortions, they encompassed were 43 to 48% of the of the abortions in our state. So nearly half of them were a black Arkansans, which I found horrific, and I want to remind you guys that Planned Parenthood was started by Margaret Sanger, and Margaret Sanger's purpose was to destroy and annihilate the black race.
That was her purpose. Read what she did. Margaret Sanger completely started Planned Parenthood, and she wanted to wipe out the black race, and that's what she did, and that's why Planned Parents are put in low-income areas for their clinics to take out black Arkansas, and that's what it's for, and that's why I find it the poor and I want to protect every child in Arkansas, especially those that are black Arkansans. Thank you. Representative
Bentley has spoken in favor of the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill Representative Brown, would you like to close for your bill?
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
3:42:55
You're recognized to do so. Colleagues This isn't no way a racist
bill. This is in no way selecting one race out of another. There's many reasons why somebody, um, might find it difficult
to have a baby when that baby's born and Uh, they might have to face some
difficult questions because that baby doesn't look like the rest of the family, regardless. So, Thank you. Representative Brown is closed for the bill. The question before the House
is the passage of Senate Bill 591. Prepare the machine, madam clerk.
As everyone voted? Has everyone voted?
Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 63 years, 17 nays, and 4 present, the bill has passed. Madam Clerk, please read
Chair
Unverified
3:44:17
Senate Bill 5969 by Representative McAloon to amend the law regarding energy to establish a state energy policy to regulate retirement of dispatchable electric generation facilities
and to declare an emergency. Representative McAlinden, you
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
3:44:35
are recognized to present your bill. Thank you, Speaker. Uh, Senate Bill 596 builds on the energy bill that we already passed, which was SB 307 to stay a state energy policy with respect to reliability and affordability. It makes sure that first electric utilities have an equal or greater amount of dispatchable energy when they are retiring dispatchable energy. And so that's the reliability, so that we have
energy when we need energy. The other thing is that it gives the PSC the tools that they need, uh, to work in the best interest of ratepayers. SWAPO and the co-ops have no objection to the bill. Uh, we worked with Ey to amend the bill to make sure that the policy helps ensure reliability and affordability for our ratepayers and with I would ask for a good vote. Representative
McAlinden has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For the bill Representative McAlinden is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the
passage of Senate Bill 596. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. Has everyone voted? As everyone voted You are voting on the bill and the emergency clause. Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 92 years, 1 nay, and zero present, the bill and the emergency clause have passed. Madam clerk, please read Senate Bill 538.
Representative David Ray
Unverified
3:46:03
about 5:38 by a representative of Wardlaw to amend the Arkansas
procurement law. Representative Eaves, you are recognized to explain the bill.
Representative Les D. Eaves
Unverified
3:46:19
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, Members, uh, during ALC meetings last interim, we discovered there were some departments and agencies that weren't, let me rephrase that, that we're following some different, uh, procurement procedures. So we had a consultant come in and review the procedures that we were using, and so this bill is
a result of those recommendations. It clarifies procurement law. It will also require, um, Uh, training
Speaker 486
3:46:42
of agency staff. Um It'll It's that time. Uh, just trying to get our
Representative Les D. Eaves
Unverified
3:46:49
procurement, uh, rules and, and, uh, procedures in place so that all these departments and agencies are using the exact same process. With that, I'd appreciate a good vote. Representative Eaves has
explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill for
the bill. Representative Eaves is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 538. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. As everyone voted. As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 93 years, 0 nay, and zero present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 486.
Chair
Unverified
3:47:36
Senate Bill 486 by Representative Bentley concerning safety and privacy in certain entities and concerning the designation of multi-occupancy restrooms, changing rooms, and sleeping quarters in certain entities based on an individual sex, to explain the bill.
Thank you, Speaker. All right, colleagues, the final bill
of the session, thankfully. SB 486 provides safety and privacy for an individual using
or occupying a multi-occupancy restroom. Changing room or sleeping quarters, an entity covered under this bill include domestic violence shelters, certain correctional and juvenile detention facilities and public buildings owned by the state of Arkansas and its political subdivisions. This bill will require a covered entity to take reasonable steps to avoid and provide, excuse me, to provide an individual with privacy and a designated multi-occupancy restroom, changing room and sleeping ward and to prevent its use by a member of the opposite sex. And it was some things that
does not allow them to come there for emergency reasons or to take care of. the bathroom or those kind of things. This bill is very similar if you guys remember the bill that I passed last session to help, uh, K through 12 in our schools are, many of our superintendents wanted to be sure we had a safe place for everyone to use the restroom and to cover some of the situations that they were dealing with at school. So this bill very much uh marks what we did with the uh privacy bill for K through 12 last session. Like our superintendents at schools, domestic violence shelters, and correctional facilities need this bill. This bill also follows what
President Trump did on the national level when he filed executive order, uh, to require that all federal buildings follow the same policy. 18 other states have filed this bill and was held up in court, and, uh, With that, I'll take any questions
Chair
Unverified
3:49:23
if anybody has any on this bill. Representative McCullough, for what
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
3:49:27
purpose? You're recognized. Representative Bentley, can you explain to me what the harm is if someone finds himself in a bathroom with the person of the opposite sex or transgender
person or just whoever. Can you explain what the harm is? Unfortunately, we've seen young girls that, you know, right now in Arkansas, there is no law against exposure. So we've had in some instances in other states, we've had people there completely exposed themselves in the bathroom and with that loophole in our law, there's nothing to, uh, Arrest that person for exposing themselves. We have no law against exposure. So I don't want us young girls like we're fixing to have swimming season and these young girls can go to the, uh, pool and have someone that day and someone exposes themselves and the officer comes in to arrest him like, I'm
feeling like a girl today. I'm sorry, I'm identifying as a woman. There's nothing I can do to arrest him at that point. I want to make sure that our young girls are able to go to the bathroom if they need to. I want a moms to be able to let their kids go to the, uh, to the restroom here and feel safe that they're finding in those restrooms. So, it's one just keep Uh, women's safe, and that's, that's what it's
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
3:50:27
doing. Follow up, please. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. But this bill doesn't say they have to expose themselves. They say they can bring cause for simply being in there.
If this person feels bad, there's, there's, if as long as
the facility makes reasonable accommodations and make sure that there's signs up to designate it. That's all it makes sure those, those facilities are designating the places for male or female just
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
3:50:49
like we've done on the federal level. Can you tell me what How do you decide what monetary value for damages that you're gonna have for just simply being in a room with
Speaker 498
3:51:01
someone. I'm, I'm not a lawyer. I can't answer that question, sorry.
Representative Steve Unger
Unverified
3:51:06
Representative Unger, for what purpose? You're recognized on page 1030, it says the governmental entity shall take
reasonable steps. To stop this. What could you explain a little more what reasonable steps that you have a bath in that designated male and female, and
you also make sure we follow along with the American Disabilities Act. So if we as long as we're doing that,
then we're covered. follow up. And I did the best I'll just say
Speaker 503
3:51:28
that's gonna have to be defined more rules
just like we did with the K through 12 bill that we passed. There's some rules that follow through to make sure this is to give clearer definitions for you. I did the best I could
Representative Steve Unger
Unverified
3:51:43
to read this, and I'm, I'm tired. Uh, so during the ice storm, a number of years back. People lost power for their houses. And so churches and the Salvation Army and the National Guard Army opened up warming centers and put out cots. Uh, does your bill prevent men and women from sleeping in the same Salvation Army shelter in an open bay. Sleeping on cots thing.
If you read on this, it provides for a threat of a natural disaster serious threats Bill. Thank you. Appreciate it. Good vote. Representative Bentley
has explained the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? Representative Hudson, you're recognized to speak against the bill.
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
3:52:51
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. Before I get started on my prepared remarks, I did want to point out that We do in fact have a criminal statute against exposing yourself in public. Um, so for those of you concerned about that, that is a crime right now. Um, and would apply regardless of whether someone was exposing themselves in a bathroom or not. So this bath, this bill is being sold as a safety bill, and it's
being sold as a way to protect women and girls. From something. Fear Standing next
to somebody they think is weird. I don't know. But nothing in this bill has criminal penalties. Let me repeat that. Nothing in this bill has criminal penalties. This is a civil cause of action. So you want to talk about a bill that opens the doors to the courthouse and lets people file
frivolous lawsuits. This one is it. There is no requirement for any sort of damages. And you'll recall that when Representative Brown came down here earlier, he said that is an essential element of any claim. You could walk into a bathroom and see a trans person in there going into a stall, never talked to them, never. Say anything to them, never encounter them in any way, and you have a cause of action. Under this bill There's no limit on the amount of damages for that cause of action. You could go into court
and ask for a $1 trillion because you watched a trans person walk into a stall, or maybe someone you think is a trans person. Maybe it's someone that you think looks like a guy? There's nothing in here that says who's going to make this determination. So we're not talking about a public safety bill. What we're talking about is a litigation bonanza bill. Testimony yesterday in committee talked about the fact that women and children need to feel safe in
bathrooms. Well, I have great news. We passed that bill in 2023. Acts 6:15 of 2023. Made it a crime for someone to enter
a bathroom assigned to the opposite sex when they know that a minor is present if they entered that bathroom for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification. There was testimony yesterday in committee that we don't have anything to protect women and
children in bathrooms, and we do. That is an absolute falsehood under Act 6:15, that conduct is a
class D felony, which carries a prison sentence of up to 6 years and a fine of up to $10,000
for every occurrence. If that doesn't feel like protected, protection enough. Arkansas has no less than 13 other laws already on the books that explicitly. prohibit physical contact, physical assault, rape, sexual assault, and sexual violence
against women, children, men, and every person in the state. And yet for some reason, those laws don't go far enough. The
point was made yesterday during testimony that there is not a single person bathroom available
in this building, the people's house. And that point was made in part by an almost 80 year old woman who came to testify and who has mobility issues.
Rather than acknowledge that there will be a
cost if we're gonna require all of these public buildings to retrofit and to create these single-use bathrooms that there will be a significant cost to the state. The response from the sponsor of this bill was they can go
up to the 4th floor. There are single-use bathrooms up there. I wanna know from all of you thinking about your grandparents, what it would take for them if they have mobility issues, if they're on a scooter or a walker to get from downstairs up to the 4th floor. Where those bathrooms are not
even labeled. There's no sign out there that says it's a restroom. If you don't know they're there, You're not going to be able to find them, but that, that's, that's the, the, the solution that was offered, those are the types of solutions that are apparently being offered in this bill, um, and those are the types of things that, that in my mind, as someone who tries ADA cases do not account as a reasonable accommodation. Now, I admit that I myself am not afraid of trans women. Not afraid of them. Never have
been. Never been threatened by one. But I also acknowledge that maybe y'all might think I am. She woke, liberal, leftist, and so I reached out to a
bunch of women who are practicing attorneys all over the country. Who are practicing in the federal system and state systems in private practice, big firms, little firms, all of
them. And I asked them, are you afraid of encountering trans women in bathrooms. Are you afraid of your children encountering trans women in
bathrooms. And I discovered that women are afraid of a lot of things. They're afraid of straight men in bars, straight men who take, don't take no for an answer. Straight
men who stare too long at their children, who touch women without consent, straight men who assault women and children in bathrooms and elsewhere, a really horrific story at one point by a woman who was assaulted in the bathroom her first year of law school. They're worried about whether their children or they themselves will one day be policed for looking too
masculine if they use a restroom based on someone's personal assessment of what that means. They're worried about assaults being assaulted in parking lots, home invasions, online predators, sending their sons into men's bathrooms because they're afraid that men will sexually assault their boys because they can't go in with them. They're worried about sending their kids to sleepovers, contact with unrelated men like coaches, teachers, uncles, stepdads. Pastors, others in authority. They're afraid of the dentist. Some of them are afraid of spiders.
One mention being afraid of running out of toilet paper. Girls' drinks being spiked, fit and all, whether they're gonna get fired, unsanitary public restrooms in need of cleaning, abusive spouses, discriminates against their children because they're black or biracial or Mexican or pretty much any other racial background other than white. They're afraid of going on dates with someone new who may hurt them. Going on jogs by themselves in their own neighborhoods being abused by their partner. People show
up unexpectedly at their doorsteps and on and on. As one woman said, why would any man bother to put on a dress to go into a woman's bathroom and assault them when they can do it in broad daylight almost anywhere and get away with it. The most common response that women said they were afraid of was sending their kids to school or to church
or to a concert and not having that child come back home.
They're also worried for trans people. And they're worried about the fact that bills like these will subject trans people to more violence, and
those concerns are likely merited. Since increases in violence and harassment of trans people are noted in almost every single jurisdiction when these types of laws are enacted. Finally, I've come down every session since I started in 2021 now. To talk about the fact that these bills are harmful to trans
people and that the incidence of suicide attempts goes up every time one
of these is on our calendar. I've been dismissed every session as being hysterical or
making it up. Because my information has been largely anecdotal. Very sad to report that there is now a 2024 study peer reviewed, published in a peer-reviewed journal that documents this phenomenon and reflects that every time a state legislator,
legislature hears or passes one of these bills, the trans-suicide attempts go up by Up to 72%. I can't think of any other thing that we do up here, that causes people to try to kill themselves. And for what? For political theater. I'm tired
of bringing Trans people into this conversation to score political
points. I'm tired of people's lives being used as talking points, and I would urge you to
vote no on this bill. Representative Dalby, for what purpose? You're
Representative Carol Dalby
Unverified
4:01:44
recognized. If there is harm done to someone, we can already sue in civil court. Is that correct, without the need for this bill. That's correct. I'd appreciate a no vote. Representative Hudson
has spoken against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Representative Brown, you recognized to speak for the bill.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
4:02:11
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A few years ago,
I was traveling. And I stopped at one of those little quick stop places, and that's I don't know the, I'm not trying to pick on quicks, the kind of shop I place I stopped. And I went into the ladies' room. And I was In the ladies' room with this
door to the stall. There were 3 stalls in that room. I heard the door, the main door opened and I heard what sounded to me like cowboy boots, walking into that restroom. And I thought, well, you know, that could be a woman. When I Open the door to my stall. Cowboy boots Makeup on.
Standing right in front of my door. As I habit would have it. I walked right over to the sink and washed my hands. I dried them and I left and I thought, Carolyn, today would have been a perfectly good excuse not to wash your hands. You should have just gotten the heck out of there immediately, because why in the world did he stop? Right in front of my door. Why was he staring me in the face as
I came out. Why? I feel very fortunate that he did not hurt me. But I was terrified and ready to get out of that town. Representative Brown has spoken in favor of the bill. Would anyone like to
speak against the bill? Representative Clowney, you are recognized to speak against the bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I noted yesterday in committee,
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
4:04:21
I genuinely believe that the intent of this bill is to protect people. I genuinely believe that that is the intent of the sponsor of this bill. It may seem simple and obvious to y'all. I believe that all of you all want to protect children, and I hope that you know me well enough to know by now that that is also what I wanted to do. So I came down here today to ask that you will believe me. That this, this bill, if it becomes law. Will not protect anyone, and it
will, in fact, do the opposite. Believe me when I explain to you how. So, this bill was presented to us um as necessary because women are afraid to use the restroom. I want to say that as we've seen with a lot of these bills, yet again in committee yesterday, we did not hear from one. person who has been assaulted in a bathroom. By somebody gaining access by claiming to be transgender.
We didn't hear about one person. Who had been placed in that situation, not one, and trust me. The people pushing for these bills, the people behind the scenes pushing for these bills. Make their living. Off of getting these through. So trust me when I tell you if those people existed, we would have heard about him. We would have heard from them. The most we've heard, I hate that our colleague was afraid. But the most we've heard Is that somebody was standing in the restroom with her.
What we did here. was from, I didn't count, maybe upwards of 20 Arkansans. Trans people who have been assaulted, sexually and otherwise. In bathrooms, they were forced to enter. By law I know many of you in this chamber haven't spent a lot of time around trans people, or at least you don't know that you have, but I am really lucky to say that I have.
Since I was in middle school and I met my first trans friend. We didn't have the words for it yet. We didn't know what it was. We just knew that he felt Better. More comfortable In women's clothes, and hair, and makeup. And so when we weren't in school, that's what he did. He was beautiful. One day in high school, this friend, like so many teenagers decided to go to the mall and have themselves a day. And that day at the mall,
The reality of my friend's identity came out. When it did, a man he had met that day, brutally assaulted him. When the fact that he was trans was exposed. His life became an immediate danger. If this bill passes, We are forcing every trans Arkansan in a public building to reveal the same thing about themselves.
We are forcing every trans Arkansan to be in the same day. We are being told that this bill is to keep men out of little girls spaces. But I really want you to stop and think, what do you think will happen? If a big burly bearded person. follows, a little girl follows one of your daughters into the restroom. Because As this bill requires, they had
A female reproductive system. That person will have to use the girls bathroom. Do you truly believe that that person will be safe doing so. Conversely, What do you think will happen? When a brunette Woman Somebody who you would never know. Anything about their
reproductive organs being otherwise. A beautiful brunette in a dress, walks into a men's restroom. Do you think that person is safe? Now that they have revealed that fact about themselves. They will be forced by law. To do so. They will have to make the decision to expose themselves to the risk of real violence or break the law. That's not a position any Arkansan should be in, and this
isn't an abstract hypothetical. We know that it's real. I know that it's real because I lived it. With my friend. We also know that it's real because we heard from numerous members of the public. Who told us yesterday that they have already experienced violence in these situations. This isn't abstract. At the end of the day, this fight really does boil down. Um, this bill really does boil down to a fight between two groups of people.
Both groups of people are scared. And I acknowledge that. One Non-trans people. who are afraid of being assaulted in the bathroom. I can tell. Today that that fear is real. 2 The second group Trans people who are afraid of being assaulted in the bathroom. Both of those fears are real, but I am standing before you today begging you to believe me
that even though they are equally felt, they are not equally substantiated by real life. I have no doubt that people are scared of people assaulting them in the bathroom by claiming to be trans. There have been no instances of this in our state. People aren't scared because this is actually happening. People are scared because we keep bringing laws like this, bills like this, pretending that it is. The fear, that trans-Arkansans have. Is supported by fact.
There have been many instances of assault against trans people in the bathroom. That's real. We heard many personal stories last night to this effect, but the data also back it up. Trans people are more than 4 times as likely to be the victims of sexual assault. Then they're non-trans counterparts. These numbers grow. In states where bills like this become law. I want to close with this story and I'll be quick, but last
night after this bill barely passed out of committee. There were no and present votes from both parties, by the way. Many of you may have noticed that I came back to committee. Quite emotional. I want to tell you why. When I walked out after this vote, one of the trans people who has showed up to committee day after day after day, waiting for this bill to be heard. Said something very kind to me and it made me a little bit emotional. And so I walked away from the room. I went into, um,
a quiet corner of the Capitol to breathe and compose myself and get myself ready to get back to work. As I was doing that, I felt a tap on my shoulder. I turned around and it was another trans person who had come to watch the hearing. This person Wasn't there to ask me for help. They weren't there to thank me. Instead, they just asked if I was OK. And they took out a handkerchief. Which I didn't bring up here cause no props allowed, but I brought it with me today.
They took out a handkerchief and handed it to me and told me that I could keep it. On a day when this person knew that this legislature Had gotten one step closer. To putting them in a real physical danger for no reason. They were more concerned about me. These are real people. They are good people. And passing this bill will put them in danger. Please vote no.
Representative Clowney has spoken against the bill. Would
anyone like to speak for the bill, Representative Crawford, you
Representative Cindy Crawford
Unverified
4:13:06
are recognized to speak for the bill. Hello Fran. I do.
That since I've been at the, not this session, but last. There was a huge man in a dress. With a ponytail. Using the women's bathroom. I couldn't go to the bathroom. Because a man was in my and all this bill is asking is signs. If we have, which we do on the 4th floor. I didn't know it.
If we have individual Restrooms. Once this law is passed, signs will have to be put up. Am I correct in that? Signs will have to be put up to where people will know where those individuals Little girls don't need to go in a bathroom.
And even when that man came in, I heard other legislators talk. That when he went in the stall, he used it like a urinal. mess. If you're going I'm just saying, I'm gonna quit. We're all tired. I don't want to go in a bathroom with a man. I don't want my granddaughter to go in a bathroom and see a man. I would ask you to vote for
this. Representative Crawford has spoken in favor of the bill. Would anyone like to speak against the bill? For
the bill. Representative Mayberry, you recognize to speak against the bill? OK, you are recognized. Mr. Speaker, I didn't
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
4:15:11
want to get in the middle of this. I really didn't. This is not an issue. I want to have.
Any conversation but I've got to tell you, This weekend. I was at an event.
And I used the man's restroom. There were extenuating circumstances, but me. And probably 2 or 3 other ladies. Went over to the men's restroom. Because there was a man there who had a baby and he needed to use the diaper changing table. So he was going into the women's restroom. So we went into the men's restroom.
And when I came out, I thought, oh my, did I just do something illegal? It was very innocent. But the way I interpret what this is. Yeah, I did. I just think that there might be some unintended consequences with this, and I think we need just a little bit more thought. I'm very thankful for the bill that was passed last session. Um, I, I, I, it was like to
blend in with me now. I think we very much needed that. That indicated intent. My intent was not to go and do harm in the That's why I'm a no today. Thank you. Representative Mayberry
has spoken against the bill. Would anyone like to speak for the bill? Against the bill. Representative Bentley,
would you like to close for your bill? You are recognized to do so. OK, colleagues, just to clear a
few things up. Last year, we passed the privacy bill with K through 12. And what did we find? We found that everybody was safer. We didn't hear any, any increases of uh transgender children being hurt at school or in the bathrooms actually cleared things up and made it better for those students. What we did for K through 12 has worked great, and I want to institute that across, uh, to bring up as far as exposure, that person had criminal intent in the bathroom. If you can't prove that they had criminal intent, then that exposure is
not a crime. They have to prove criminal intent. So, the exposure thing still stands. Do we need to wait until a female inmate in Arkansas has been raped, like they have been in California when biological males were allowed in the correctional facilities before we protect them. Is that what we need to do? Do we need to expose women in domestic violence shelters to more potential violence by allowing men into their shelters because that's they're gonna be forced to do. And that's what's happening in other states. It's our domestic violence shelters that may need this to be passed.
This bill is very simple. It does just what President Trump did on the national level. It's gonna make things safer for everyone. I wish we weren't here. I wish to goodness we didn't have to do this, but I'm going to protect my daughters and I'm going to protect my granddaughters and hope that all of you will do the same. Thank
you. Representative Bentley is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate Bill 486. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. As everyone voted.
As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 60 years, 22 nays, and zero present, the bill is passed. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Bill 569. 569
Chair
Unverified
4:18:50
by Representative Wright, an amendment to the Arkansas Constitution concerning ballot titles of proposed measures and amending the Arkansas Constitution under the authority of
Representative David Ray
Unverified
4:18:57
the Arkansas Constitution, Article 5, Section 1. Ray, you are to
explain the bill. All right. Thank you, Mr.
Representative David Ray
Unverified
4:19:07
Speaker. Colleagues, uh, Amendment 7 to the Arkansas Constitution allows the General Assembly by a 2/3 vote of both chambers. To amend any measure voted on by the people. That amendment also goes on to define the word measure. To include both initiated acts as well as constitutional amendments. If you're not familiar with the background on this issue, I'd encourage you to read through the legislative intent and on pages 1 and 2 of this bill.
Senate Bill 569 utilizes this authority to add a very short section onto Amendment 7. There's two sentences. The first sentence or the first sentence. Um, limits the length of a ballot title to 500 words or less. For contexts, the entire bill of rights in the United States Constitution is 463 words. And that 500 word limit applies only to the ballot title, not to the entire text of the measure. Uh, the other sentence that
we're, that this, this bill would change in Amendment 7. Um, gives the legislature the ability to establish a standard for the readability of the title, similar to the bill, uh, that Representative Rose passed through this chamber earlier this session. You all probably remember that. Even though the plain language of Amendment 7 authorizes the General Assembly by a 2/3 vote to amend any measure voted on by the people. The Arkansas Supreme Court ruled in 1951 in the
Edgemon case that That, uh, sorry, that that did not apply to constitutional amendments. The court reached that decision despite the plain language of the Constitution being to the contrary. In recent years, uh, the court, there have been court decisions that have cast doubt on whether or not the reasoning behind the Edgemont decision would withstand scrutiny if it were revisited today. You can look at the 2020 decision, uh, in the, in the case that dealt with the
I-30 widening, um, as an example. The court held that in Amendment 91, When the legislature said four-lane highway, they meant four-lane highway, not a six-lane highway. Last year, Senator Dodson requested an attorney general opinion about this issue. If you haven't read that opinion, uh, I would encourage everybody to read it. That 4-page opinion includes the following response,
quote, In my opinion, that decision referring to Edgemon. Employed an erroneous form of reasoning that was wrongly decided. If this issue were raised today, I believe the Supreme Court would overturn that case and hold that the plain language holds or controls, excuse me. It goes on to say, Amendment 7's plain language gives the general assembly. Power to amend initiated constitutional amendments. In my opinion, if the Supreme Court were faced with your question
today, it would most likely hold that Edgemon was wrongly decided. Employed a form of reasoning that is now rejected. And should thus be overturned. So we have this. 75 year old president from the court. And there are legal opinions today, uh, that that opinion was wrongly decided. And so there's an open question, a really important question, I think, as to our, what our authority is as a general assembly in this area.
What this bill does is it gives us an avenue for the court. To revisit this issue. Um, so I know the background and the history of this are sort of extensive. We talked about it quite a bit in committee yesterday. Uh, but I'll summarize it by saying this as, as succinctly as I can. If you think that, if you agree with a 500 word limit to the ballot title. And to, for the General Assembly to be able to establish a readability standard.
And if you think it would be prudent for the court. For us to ask the court. To seek clarity on this issue. Um, then I think a good vote for this bill would be in order. It would take 2/3 to pass this bill. And with that, I would be happy to answer
Speaker 482
4:23:34
a couple of questions. Representative Eaves, for what
Representative Les D. Eaves
Unverified
4:23:36
purpose? Question. You're recognized Ray, are you saying that the bill is going to ask the court to revisit the, the idea that this general assembly
can modify or amend a citizen initiative that got, got installed in the Constitution, or is it confirming that we have
Representative David Ray
Unverified
4:23:55
the ability to do that now. Well, that's a good question. It would, this
bill would amend the Constitution. The practical effect of this bill passing would be that it would be almost certainly challenged, and the lower courts adhering to the precedent would Probably strike it down, and then, uh, upon appeal, it would be elevated and it would give the court the opportunity to
revisit this issue. So similarly to how other states have, you know, Um, for many years, states like Arkansas and Mississippi and many others passed pro-life laws. Um, that were unconstitutional at the time under the Roe v. Wade precedent, those bills or those laws created a test case that gave the court
opportunities to revisit those precedents. And so this bill would do something similar. Follow up. You recognize? I just want to make sure I'm understanding you, you're.
Representative Les D. Eaves
Unverified
4:24:52
The idea of this bill is to clarify that perhaps we have the ability. To amend Quote unquote, direct democracy. Um, ideas that make it to the Constitution. I think,
Representative David Ray
Unverified
4:25:04
I think based on the plain language of Amendment 7, which, by the way, Amendment 7 was brought to us by the people. It was a, an initiated constitutional amendment. And I, based on the plain language of Amendment 7, yes, I believe that we have that authority.
Representative Wooldridge, for what purpose? You're
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
4:25:25
recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and to start this off, I have an immense amount of respect for you and Senator Johnson, um, as the sponsors of this. I have concerns with, um, 135 members or a percentage of those members circumventing what has been voted on, uh, by the will of the people, but my question would be, has this been utilized in Arkansas and then for whatever reason, dismissed, have, have the legislature tried to
I guess reverse course on an initiated act and not
Representative David Ray
Unverified
4:25:58
been able to do so. Well, an initiated act
is very different than a constitutional amendment constitutional amendment, I'm sorry. OK, so you're asking if we have done
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
4:26:06
this in the past? Have they utilized this in the past and a court deemed that it was not able to be utilized the, the
Representative David Ray
Unverified
4:26:16
power of this legislature. Uh, I do not believe that since 1951, the Edgemon decision has been revisited. There are some constitutional amendments that
prescribe that the legislature has the ability by a 2/3 vote of both chambers to amend.
Um But those are, there are, those are specific amendments that authorize that. So no, I don't believe it's been revisited by the
court since that. Representative Rose, for what purpose? Question you recognized. Thank you. Representative Ray, could you revisit and just discuss a little
bit more, uh, or maybe just reiterate that this provision was actually brought by the people through an
initiated act that then had to have been voted on and passed to become a part of our
Representative David Ray
Unverified
4:27:00
Constitution. Yeah, through an initiated constitution or initiated constitutional amendment. It was a citizen initiated constitutional amendment, and I believe 1920 that created Amendment 7. So that's where it
comes from. I'd appreciate a good vote. Representative Ray has explained the bill. Would anyone
like to speak against the bill? For the bill. Represent Ray.
Are you closed for the bill? Representative Ray is closed for the bill. The question before the House is the passage of Senate
Bill 569. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. Has
everyone voted? As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 32 years, 54 nays, and 4 present, the bill has failed. Representative Meeks, for what purpose?
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
4:27:58
Motion. Let's hear your motion, Mr. Speaker, haven't voted on the on the uh prevailing side and consideration of Senate Bill 585. I move reconsideration. How did you vote? No. That's a proper motion and
it is debatable. Please come to the well and explain your motion.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
4:28:30
I'm gonna assume I'm red and I'm just gonna jump right into this. Uh,
Speaker 540
4:28:35
so, uh, colleagues, uh, Thank you. Thank you. You
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
4:28:37
were recognized before. Thanks, uh, so, uh, uh, uh, Representative Gonzalez Worthen has some additional facts that she would like to share that, uh, she, uh, didn't have the opportunity to share on
this before, uh, I don't know if I'll change my vote or not, but, uh, I want to at least give her that opportunity to uh come down here and do so. So that was a point of my motion. Representative Meeks has spoken
in favor of the motion. Would anyone like to speak against the motion? Or the most uh Represent Beatty, you're
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
4:29:16
recognized to speak against the motion. Oh, this is uh Senate Bill 585,
Madam Clerk. Members, I, I, I think the body was pretty resounding and the
feet of this, of this pill, and I would just encourage y'all. Representative Beatty has spoken against the motion. Would anyone like to speak for the motion? Representative Collins,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
4:29:52
you recognize to speak in favor of the motion. Thank you Mr. Speaker. There was a lot of discussion, but it only failed by a handful of votes and uh we talked to several members who didn't realize that actually it just requires the information on the pay stub to be furnished, doesn't have to be paper, it can
be electronic, whatever form the employer wants to do just to make sure that this minor gets the information about what they worked and what was taken out as far as taxes. So it's a good bill, simple bill.
I appreciate. Representative Collins has spoken in favor of the motion. Representative Perry, you're recognized to speak against the motion. So I
have two issues with this. It imposes more rules on private employers and making it a two-tier system. If it's good enough for miners, it's good enough for everybody. And the second thing is, you
know, I have, I have to argue that it might need a fiscal impact since Representative Perrier has spoken against the motion. Would anyone like to speak for the motion? Against the motion Representative
McAlin and you're recognized to speak against the motion. Thank you. I, um, just want
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
4:31:06
to reiterate what Representative Perrier said this does add a burden on the taxpayers, and it does set a different standard for minors than it does for people who are not minors, and for that reason, I would ask you to vote against the motion.
Representative McAlinden has spoken against the motion. Would anyone like to speak for the motion? Against
the motion. Representative Meeks is. Close for the
motion. The question before the house is the motion to reconsider Senate Bill 585. All in favor say aye. All opposed say no. the nose happen. Members, we're going to move now to page 2 of the red calendar.
Concurring in our Senate amendments. Madam Clerk, please read House Bill. actually, Representative Meeks recommends that we concurry in Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1877. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Amendment number 1 Amendment
Chair
Unverified
4:32:06
1877 to explain Amendment one. Thank you, Mr.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
4:32:13
Speaker, back again, colleagues. So, uh, in, uh, the technology world, there are what are known as red, uh, hat teams
or red teams. And the purpose of these teams are whenever you develop a technology, you put up your firewall and then you send out these teams to purposely attack that wall to look for vulnerabilities that you can then make sure are taken care of before the bad guys find them. So what this bill does is you might remember 1877, this is a CSA bill. This is the bill that outlaws AI generated child pornography. And what this amendment does is this allows these entities to send out these red teams to try to, uh, purposely get these, uh,
Uh, programs, if you will, to generate the child porn to make sure that there's no loopholes or, or, uh, uh, a way for it to be generated. So this is uh an opportunity for them to be able to do so without running afoul of the law. Uh, happy to answer any questions, saying none. Appreciate a
good vote. Representative Meeks has explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment. the amendment, Representative Meeks is closed for the amendment. The question before the House is concurrence with Senate Amendment number one to House Bill 1877. Prepare the machine, madam clerk.
Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 92, 0, nay, and zero present the you have concurred in Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill
1877. Representative Lundstrom, for what purpose? Let's hear your
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
4:33:56
motion. Motion to send HB 1354 and HB 1911.
To independent study motion is debatable. Please come to the well and explain
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
4:34:22
your motion. Both these bills need some work during, uh during offseason, and I would appreciate a good vote to send those to independent
We'll take them one at a time. House Bill 1354. That is the motion. Would, would anyone like to speak against the motion? For the motion. and lunch from his clothes for that motion. All in favor of sending House Bill 1354. Withdrawing House Bill 1354 and sending it to the committee, say aye. And he opposed say nay. motion is passed. Now we'll do the same thing.
With House Bill. I know you've already explained that, but please come back to the well so we can do this properly. House
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
4:35:39
Bill 1911. You're recognized for that motion, House Bill 1911 was on property taxes and it also needs some more work and I would appreciate a motion to send it back. Thank
you. Representative Lunstrom has spoken, uh, for the motion. Would anyone like
to speak against the motion for the motion. Question before the house is the
withdrawal of House Bill 1911 to send back to committee. All in favor say aye. Place, placing back
to independent study. All the papers say I. And your post, say no. All right. Push and carries. Representative Long, for what purpose? Same kind of
motion, all right. Let's hear your motion at the well.
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
4:36:35
Colleagues, I'd like to, um, Make a motion that we withdraw HB 1687 and I send it to, uh, interim study. Representative Long has explained the motion. Would anyone like to
speak 1678. I'm sorry 1678. Let's get that put up on the board.
I. Representative Long has explained the motion to send House Bill 1678 withdraw it and send it to interim study. Would anyone like to speak against the motion? For the motion Representative Long, are you closed for your motion? Question before the house is House Bill 1678 to withdraw and send to interim study. All in favor say aye. And he would say no. Motion is carried.
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
4:37:50
Representative painter for what purpose? Uh, let's do this number 3. I'd like to make a motion to withdraw 1897 and send that to
interim study. That's a proper motion. It is debatable. Please come to the well and explain your motion.
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
4:38:09
You are recognized. Sorry, colleagues, uh, I figured since everybody came to the well, I didn't, I would have my turn too. Um, just sitting HB 1897, the original 2.0 towing
bill, uh, since the compromise got passed in the Senate. I wanted to follow through my commitment and pull this down and put this in interim study because that way in the next legislative session, this will be uh part of
the comprehensive towing bill that this state needs. Appreciate a good vote. Representative Painter has explained the motion. Would anyone like to speak against the motion. For the motion, Representative Painter is closed for the motion. The question before the House is to withdraw House Bill 1897 to send to interim study. All in favor say aye. I posed say nay.
The motion carries. Mr. parliamentarian, you are recognized to explain the previous activities of that what we
Representative Rebecca Burkes
Unverified
4:39:06
do at 8:30 every morning. That was it. Uh, we just don't have a, we don't have a withdrawal calendar, members own calendar after today. So those bills that want to go to the interim study, we sent. So in the future, if you're around at 8:30, we take care of those
matters, uh, most mornings under the
direction of house management. All right, we will go back to our red calendar page two concurring in Senate amendments, Representative Vaut recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number one to House Bill 1865. Madam Clerk, please read Senate
Chair
Unverified
4:39:42
Amendment number 1. In Amendment number
1, the House Bill 1865. Representative, you are recognized to
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
4:39:48
explain amendment number one. It's co-sponsors. Representative Vaut has
explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment for the amendment, Representative Vaut is closed for the amendment. The question for the house is concurrence with Senate Amendment number one to House Bill 1865. Wear the machine, madam clerk. As everyone voted Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 900 nay, and 0 present. you have concurred in Senate
Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1865. Representative Vaut recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment #2 to House Bill 1865, Madame clerk, please read Senate Amendment
Chair
Unverified
4:40:33
number 2. Amendment 2 to 1685161865. Representative Vault, you're recognized to explain amendment number 2.
Speaker. We had some spots, uh, in the
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
4:40:42
bill that actually might have conflicted with the ProTE Act, and we didn't want that to happen. So
we made the amendments to make sure that there's no conflict and with that, I'd appreciate a
good vote. Representative Vaugh has explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment for the amendment, Representative Vo is closed for the amendment. The question before the House is concurrence with Senate Amendment #2 to House Bill 1865. Prepare
the machine, Madam Clerk. Has everyone voted? As everyone
voted. Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 91 0 nay, and 0 present. You have concurred in Senate
Amendment #2 to House Bill 1865. Representative Underwood recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number one, the House Bill 1685. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Amendment number 1. Amendment 1, the House Bill 1685. Representative Underwood,
Chair
Unverified
4:41:38
you are recognized to explain amendment number one.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This, uh, amendment just corrected an
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
4:41:44
engrossing error that we had on amendment we had on our side. I appreciate a good vote. Representative
Underwood has explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment for
the amendment. Representative Underwood. You closed for the amendment. The question before the House is concurrence with Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1685. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. As everyone voted As everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 95 years, zero nay, and zero present. You have concurred in Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1685.
Representative Underwood recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number 2 to House Bill 1685. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Amendment number
Chair
Unverified
4:42:33
2. Amendment 2 to House Bill 1685.d to
explain amendment number 2. Thank you. Previously, we amended this bill
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
4:42:40
to ensure that local municipalities could still have taxing authority, uh, on the Senate and we clarified that the border city tax, uh, would be clarified in the bill to ensure that they could still collect that tax as well. And I'd appreciate a good
vote. Representative under Wood has explained the Senate
Amendment number 2. Would anyone like to speak
against the amendment for the amendment, Representative Underwood is closed for the amendment. The question before the House is concurrence with Senate Amendment #2 to House Bill 1685. Prepare the machine, madam
clerk. As everyone voted Has everyone
voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 93, 0, nay, and 0 present. You have concurred in Senate
Amendment #2 to House Bill 1685. Representative Brown, for what
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
4:43:35
purpose? Um, I would like to withdraw House Bill 1664 and send it to is debatable, please
come down to the well and explain your motion. You are recognized.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
4:44:05
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe this bill needs some work, and I, um, would like to work with the um. Representative
Brown has explained the motion. Would anyone like to speak against the motion?
the motion, Representative Brown is closed for the motion. The question before the House. Is the motion to withdraw House Bill 1664 and put it into interim study. All in favor say aye.
And he opposed say nay. The eyes haven't.
The motion has has passed. Kind of clerk, let's see, Representative Holcomb recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1845. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Amendment number 1. Amendment number
Chair
Unverified
4:44:53
1 to House Bill 1845. Holcomb, you're
Representative Mike Holcomb
Unverified
4:44:58
recognized to explain the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Colleagues, uh, this bill actually in the future when technology is available allows DFNA to do some electronic
signatures. They're not ready yet. They mistakenly put in the bill that it's ready for the for our constituents to apply for and so we're amending and taking that out. It's just not, it's not ready yet. That's all it does. Appreciate
a good vote. Thank you. Representative Holcomb has explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment for the amendment. Representative Holcomb is closed for the amendment. The question before the House's concurrence with Senate Amendment number one to House Bill 1845. Prepare the machine, madam clerk.
As everyone voted As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 91, 0 nay, and zero present you have concurred in Senate Amendment number 1 with House Bill 1845. Representative Steimel recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1606, Madam Clerk, please read
Speaker 332
4:46:02
Senate Amendment number 1. Amendment 1, 1606. Steel,
you're recognized to explain the amendment.
Representative Trey Steimel
Unverified
4:46:10
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, colleagues, this is a, uh, simple amendment requested by Senator Dismay to allow you, uh, the electric, uh, you that. I'll answer any questions and if I don't see any, I appreciate a good vote. Representative Steinel has
explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment for the amendment, Representative Steinel is closed for the amendment. The question before the House's concurrence with Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1606. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. As everyone voted?
Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 90s, 0, nay, and 1 present. You have concurred in Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1606. Representative Lee Johnson recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number 1, the House Bill 1841. Adam Clerk, please read Senate Amendment
Chair
Unverified
4:47:03
number 11 to 1841. Representative Johnson, you
are recognized to explain amendment number one. this is
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
4:47:10
just changing up to clarifying some language around
some funding that was in the bill and, uh, there's no
objection to the Senate. Appreciate a good vote. Thank you. Representative Johnson has explained
the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment for the amendment, Representative Johnson is closed for the amendment. The question before the House is concurrence with Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1841. Repair the machine, madam clerk. As everyone voted Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk.
With 81, 4 nay, and 6 present, you have concurred in Senate Amendment number 1 with House Bill 1841. Representative Vaught recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number 1, the House Bill 1186. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Amendment number 1. Amendment
Chair
Unverified
4:48:01
1186. Representative Vaut, you're recognized to explain the
amendment.HS had a little change that they
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
4:48:07
wanted us to make, and we went ahead and made it for them to make the bill a little bit, uh, better. So with that, I'd appreciate a good vote.
Representative Vaugh has explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment for the amendment, Representative is closed for the amendment. The question before the House is concurrence with Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1186. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. Has everyone voted? As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot, Madam Clerk. With 90, 0, nay, and 2 present,
you have concurred in Senate Amendment number 1 with House Bill 1186. Representative Moore recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1801. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Amendment number 1. Amendment, the House Bill
Chair
Unverified
4:49:01
1801. Representative Moore, you are recognized to
explain the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This just
allows the board of Pharmacy to promulgate some rules on labeling. Appreciate a good vote. Representative Moore has explained
the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment?
For the amendment, Representative Moore is closed for the amendment. The question before the House is concurrence with Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1801. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. Has everyone voted? As everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 91, 0 nay, and 1 present, you have concurred in Senate Amendment number one with House Bill 1801. Representative Gonzalez recommends that we concur in
Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1963. Madam Clerk, please read Senate
Chair
Unverified
4:49:54
Amendment number 1. 1963. Representative Gonzalez, you recognized
to explain amendment number one. Colleagues, this is at a
Speaker 570
4:50:00
moment that, uh, I said, Representative Johnson made me do, we would do it, and here we are, he made me do it, so. Take any questions. Representative
Gonzalez has explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment? the amendment, Representative
Gonzalez is closed for the amendment, the question before the House's concurrence with Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1963. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 84 years, 1 nay, and 4 present. You have concurred in Senate Amendment number one with House Bill 1963. Representative Hall recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number 1 to
House Bill 1762. Madam Clerk, please read Senate
Chair
Unverified
4:50:54
Amendment number one. Amendment number 1, the House Bill
1762. Representative Hall, you are recognized to explain amendment number
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
4:51:02
one. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We're
almost there, folks. Uh, all it does, it added a definition on what surface application meant. Thank you. Representative Hall has explained
the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment for the amendment. Representative Hall is closed for the amendment. The question before the House is concurrence
with Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1762. Prepare the machine, madam clerk. Has everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 92, 0, nay, and 0 present you have concurred in Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1762. Representative Pilkington recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment number 1, the House Bill 1131. Madam Clerk, please read Senate Amendment
number 1, 11:31, you are recognized to explain amendment number one.
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
4:51:56
Thank you. This was added by uh by the Senate to make them feel better. Appreciate a good vote. It doesn't really do anything
to change the bill. Representative Pilkington has explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment? For the amendment, Representative Pilkington is closed for the amendment, the question before the House is concurrence with Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1131. Cas prepare the machine, madam clerk.
Has everyone voted? As everyone voted. Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 92 yeah, zero nay, and zero present. You have concurred in Senate Amendment number 1 to House Bill 1131. Representative Pilkington recommends that we concur in Senate Amendment #2 to House Bill 1131. Madam Clerk, please
11:31. Representative Pilkington, you're recognized to
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
4:52:53
explain the amendment. Thank you. Clint Penzo to the bill. So
I appreciate a good vote. Representative Pilkington has explained the amendment. Would anyone like to speak against the amendment. For the amendment. Representative Piltic in his closed for the amendment. The question before the House's concurrence with Senate Amendment number 1, the House Bill 1131. Prepare the machine, madam clerk.
As everyone voted? Has everyone voted? Cast up the ballot, Madam clerk. With 8064 and 1 present, you have concurred in Senate Amendment number 2 to House Bill 1131. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to go into recess for about 10 minutes.
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
4:54:04
Representative Vaut will recognize you for some announcements.
You want me to go down there? If your mic's on right now, go ahead. It's finally on. So in your mailboxes, you have these cards for, uh, serving up solutions. Please make sure that you get them filled out and give to either, uh, Representative Hudson or myself, uh, so we can get them turned in. Uh, and serving up solutions is on June 12th.
Uh, the other thing, there's a couple of more, and they're kind of important, so everybody just listen to me for just a second. Just 1 2nd. So, please clean out your mailboxes, because you won't be here all the time, there'll be stuff being put in those mailboxes, so we need you to clean those out today. On this floor, we have Girls State and Boys State. So make sure that you take anything off your desk that you don't want to be messed with, anything out of your drawers that you don't want to leave here just in case.
Um, And then I want to thank everybody who did the The donations to Du Pas Denim, we raised $1430 for the Veterans Cemetery.
The house will come to order. Speaker Evans, you
Speaker 28
5:05:41
are recognized. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, as we begin, uh, this ceremonial
Chair
Unverified
5:05:45
step to closing out the ninety-fifth General Assembly.
On this ninety-fourth day of session, I reflect back to challenges that I accepted. And challenged myself with and joined together with each of you to spend our time practicing sacrifice over self. However, regardless of the effort that each of us put into this session, we could not have done it with our work.
Speaker 24
5:06:13
For the people of Arkansas without the incredible and first-class performance of our amazing staff. Yeah.
Chair
Unverified
5:06:47
Oh, but wait. Oh, but wait, you remain standing because there's more. I would ask at
this time that each of our staff members, please join us in the House chamber.
Speaker 397
5:07:23
There they come. Come on. Come on, Jackie, Amber. Eg. Our
Speaker 586
5:07:54
Members, please join me in thanking them for the service that, uh,
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
5:08:16
they have provided. Bingo. Now while you're standing, I, I want to recognize a couple of, uh, particular staff members,
Speaker 586
5:08:24
uh, first, I believe I saw him slip in linen.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
5:08:39
Where are you? Come here, buddy. Mm Members for over 35 years, Lennon has served with the highest level of service, integrity, And endurance. I believe all of you would say he is the definition of a true gentleman. He is a statesman and a true
Chair
Unverified
5:08:55
servant of the people of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, please have the clerk read the
citation in its entirety. Madam clerk, please read
the citation in its entirety. Whereas Arkansas is
Chair
Unverified
5:09:06
blessed with an abundance of citizens whose life experiences provide a wealth of wisdom that serves the To guide and influence our state on the road of continual progress and whereas Mr. Lennon Jones started his career with the Arkansas House of Representatives in 1989. He has held the position of properties and facilities manager and whereas Lennon has been an
invaluable asset to this institution after 36 years of unwavering service and dedication to the House of Representatives. He deserves to be celebrated. He has been an outstanding state employee who has consistently demonstrated commitment that is truly inspiring. His absence will certainly be felt. throughout these marble Capitol walls by members, staff, and many friends as he embarks on a well-deserved retirement, new adventures await, as well as savoring special moments with his wife, Catherine and daughter Rita. And whereas the House of Representatives of the ninety-fifth General Assembly of the state of Arkansas take great
pride in recognizing Mr. Lennon Jones on the occasion of his upcoming retirement and wishes him the very best and all his future endeavors. Now therefore pursuant the motion of Speaker Brian Evans, the Arkansas House of Representatives directs this citation be presented on the 16th. day of April 2025. Members, Lennon Jones. you
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
5:10:53
And secondly, Miss Amber. Since 1998, Amber has been a tremendous staff member of this institution.
Chair
Unverified
5:11:09
She has worn many hats during that time and provided the house exemplary service. She is a professional and a true example of selfless service. Mr. Speaker, please have the clerk read the citation in its
entirety. Madam Clerk, please read the citation in its entirety is blessed with an abundance of citizens whose life experiences provide a wealth of wisdom that serves to God and influence our state on the road of continual progress and whereas Miss Amber Prather started her career in state government with a disability determination for Social Administration in 1997, in 1998, the Arkansas House of Representatives hired her where she held many positions within the legislative branch, such as working in member services, build books, clerk, calendar clerk, and travel coordinator. And whereas Amber has been an
outstanding state employee who has consistently demonstrated her commitment to serving the people of Arkansas. She deserves to be commended for many years of selfless service and dedication to the House of Representatives. The members and staff will miss her and hope that she enjoys the freedom that retirement brings, especially being able to spend more time with her husband Lou and furry friends. And whereas the House of Representatives in the 95th General Assembly, State of Arkansas take great pride in recognizing Miss Amber Prather on the occasion of 28 years of service and her upcoming retirement and wishes her well. Now they're pursuant to the
motion of Speaker Brian Evans, the Arkansas House of Representatives directed the citation be presented on the 16th day of April
Speaker 286
5:12:33
2025. Remember 30 years and 35 years, please give it up for these two incredible servants. Mm
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
5:12:58
Members, I believe that, uh, I can say without a doubt that
Chair
Unverified
5:13:02
each of you also during this session have rose to the challenge. I've asked staff, Where they are. I've asked a couple of staff members if they would, uh, to pass out to each of you a special ordered challenge coin, uh, just as my gift to you. Uh, it is engraved with your district number, uh, because I believe you've exceeded the expectations in rising above the challenges placed this session
before you as you were sent here by the people of your district to serve them admirably. So thank you very much for your service. staff, if you'll pass those out, please.
Members, again, I applaud each of you for your work, very well done for your districts. Your district should be proud of you for your service in this ninety-fifth General Assembly. As you depart the chamber today, I ask that you please, uh, pick up around your desk. Uh, we have groups that use, uh, this chamber in the interim, and we want to make sure that we protect your business and personal belongings. Please continue to monitor your emails and text messages. There will be announcements coming soon about ALC subcommittees,
uh, as well as boys and girls state service and about Sonya. Uh, these should be coming out to you prior to
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
5:14:41
May 5. And for the last time of
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
5:14:47
the ninety-fifth General Assembly. Representative Meeks, you are recognized. You, Mr. Speaker. I move that in accordance with House concurrent resolution 1006 that the House stand in recess at the close of business today and remain in recess until we are called to reconvene for certain purposes
or to adjourn signing die on or before noon, May 5th, 2025.
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
5:15:08
That's a proper motion. It is non-debatable. All those in favor say aye. Osna. Representative Bennett,
Speaker 28
5:15:17
I believe the ayes have it. We are in recess.
Agenda
Call to Order
Prayer
Pledge
Roll Call
Morning Hour
RESOLUTIONS
Number Sponsor Subtitle
SCR5 Irvin Barker TO CONTINUE TO ENCOURAGE THE PURSUIT OF NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE DESIGNATION BY THE WINTHROP P. ROCKEFELLER CANCER INSTITUTE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES.
HR1115 Wooldridge TO RECOGNIZE THE IMPACT OF COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCIES IN THIS STATE AND TO COMMEND THEIR DEDICATION TO IMPROVING THE LIVES OF ARKANSANS.
SCR7 J. Scott Ennett TO RECOGNIZE THE MILLS UNIVERSITY STUDIES HIGH SCHOOL COMETS BOYS' BASKETBALL TEAM AS THE CLASS 4A STATE CHAMPIONS.
SCR8 J. Scott Ennett TO RECOGNIZE THE MILLS UNIVERSITY STUDIES HIGH SCHOOL LADY COMETS BASKETBALL TEAM AS THE CLASS 4A CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS AND TO REMEMBER HEAD COACH JOE GREGORY'S WIFE, CYNTHIA GREGORY.
SJR15 J. Dismang Beaty, Jr. A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS; AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO PROVIDE FOR THE CREATION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
End of Morning Hour
CONCUR IN SENATE AMENDMENT
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1877 #1 S. Meeks CONCERNING CRIMINAL OFFENSES RELATED TO POSSESSION OF SEXUALLY EXPLICIT MATERIAL THAT DEPICTS A CHILD; AND TO INCLUDE A COMPUTER GENERATED IMAGE THAT IS INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE IMAGE OF A CHILD.
HB1865 #1,2 Vaught TO CREATE AN ENHANCED PENALTY FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES AGAINST A CHILD.
HB1685 #1,2 Underwood TO CREATE THE GROCERY TAX RELIEF ACT; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE SALES AND USE TAXES LEVIED ON FOOD AND FOOD INGREDIENTS, AS AFFIRMED BY REFERRED ACT 19 OF 1958; AND TO EXEMPT GROCERIES FROM STATE SALES AND USE TAXES.
HB1845 #1 Holcomb TO ALLOW THE ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATION OF DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE OWNERSHIP OF MOTOR VEHICLES; TO AUTHORIZE ELECTRONIC LIEN, TITLING, AND REGISTRATION SYSTEMS; AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CREATION OF A SECURE DIGITAL TITLE SYSTEM.
HB1606 #1 Steimel TO ALLOW A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO AUTHORIZE THE OPERATION OF A UTILITY TASK VEHICLE ON A DESIGNATED PUBLIC STREET OR HIGHWAY WITHIN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT'S JURISDICTION SUBJECT TO CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.
HB1841 #1 L. Johnson TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS REVENUE INVESTMENT IN VITAL EMS SYSTEMS (ARRIVES) ACT; AND TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS REVENUE INVESTMENT IN VITAL EMS SYSTEMS (ARRIVES) FUND FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES AGENCIES.
HB1186 #1 Vaught TO CREATE THE PAIN RELIEF PARITY ACT; AND TO REQUIRE PAIN RELIEF PARITY IN THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM.
HB1801 #1 K. Moore TO AUTHORIZE AN OUTSOURCING FACILITY OF LEGEND DRUGS AND CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES THAT COMPOUNDS A PRODUCT TO SELL THE COMPOUNDED PRODUCT TO CERTAIN ENTITIES.
HB1963 #1 Gonzales TO CLARIFY THAT AN ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED NURSE WHO PRESCRIBES A STIMULANT MAY SUBSTITUTE A THERAPEUTICALLY EQUIVALENT MEDICATION.
HB1762 #1 Hall TO REQUIRE REVOCATION OF A PERMIT FOR THE DISPOSAL OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE IN AN AGRICULTURAL OR PASTORAL APPLICATION FOR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS.
HB1131 #1,2 Pilkington TO AUTHORIZE AN ADVANCED PRACTICE REGISTERED NURSE TO DELEGATE CERTAIN TASKS TO MEDICAL ASSISTANTS AND OTHER UNLICENSED STAFF.
REGULAR BILLS
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1897 Painter TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS TOWING AND RECOVERY REFORM AND EFFICIENCY ACT OF 2025; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE ARKANSAS TOWING AND RECOVERY BOARD; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
HB1295 L. Johnson TO CREATE THE HEALTHCARE COST-SHARING COLLECTIONS TRANSPARENCY ACT.
REGULAR SENATE BILLS
Number Sponsor Subtitle
SB459 G. Leding Hudson TO AMEND THE MINIMUM AGE NECESSARY TO ADJUDICATE A JUVENILE DELINQUENT.
SB325 A. Clark Brooks TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS JUVENILE CODE OF 1989; TO AMEND THE CHILD MALTREATMENT ACT; TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING REINSTATEMENT OF PARENTAL RIGHTS; AND TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING THE CHILD MALTREATMENT CENTRAL REGISTRY.
SB326 A. Clark Brooks TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS JUVENILE CODE OF 1989 AND THE CHILD MALTREATMENT ACT; TO MODIFY GUIDELINES FOR A JUDGMENT MADE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF A CHILD; AND TO AMEND PROCEDURES AROUND REPORTING CHILD MALTREATMENT.
SB149 J. English Brooks TO AMEND PUBLIC SCHOOL FUNDING AMOUNTS UNDER THE PUBLIC SCHOOL FUNDING ACT OF 2003.
SB638 J. Boyd L. Johnson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE COLLECTION OF SALES AND USE TAX ON THE SALE OF A NEW OR USED MOTORBOAT; AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE DIRECT PAYMENT OF SALES AND USE TAX ON A MOTORBOAT SOLD BY A MOTORBOAT DEALER.
SB621 Irvin L. Johnson TO CLARIFY ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS AGAINST A HEALTHCARE INSURER; TO RETROACTIVELY APPLY TO A HEALTHCARE CONTRACT FOR THE BENEFIT OF A TEMPORARY HOSPITAL FACILITY; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB625 B. Davis Brooks TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE CONCERNING THE ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S EDUCATIONAL FREEDOM ACCOUNT PROGRAM; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB437 Hester Hall TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ACT.
SB491 K. Hammer Achor TO REQUIRE A VENDOR THAT CONTRACTS WITH THE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS DIVISION TO SUBMIT DATA FOR VERIFICATION BY AN INDEPENDENT AUDIT; TO IMPOSE A CIVIL PENALTY ON A VENDOR THAT PROVIDES INACCURATE DATA; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB441 Hester Pilkington TO CREATE THE JUNK LAWSUIT PREVENTION ACT OF 2025.
SB355 J. Bryant Underwood TO AMEND THE CRIMINAL OFFENSE OF OBSTRUCTING GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS.
SB444 K. Hammer L. Johnson TO AMEND THE MEDICAL ETHICS AND DIVERSITY ACT.
SB601 Hester L. Johnson TO CREATE A PATHWAY FOR A GRADUATE OF A FOREIGN MEDICAL SCHOOL TO BE LICENSED IN THIS STATE IF HE OR SHE IS OFFERED FULL-TIME EMPLOYMENT AS A PHYSICIAN FROM A HEALTHCARE PROVIDER.
SB554 C. Tucker Wooldridge TO CREATE THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM.
SB347 C. Penzo Mayberry TO REQUIRE THE ARKANSAS MEDICAID PROGRAM TO INCREASE REIMBURSEMENT RATES FOR CERTAIN DENTAL SERVICES AND TO SET AN ANNUAL REIMBURSEMENT CAP FOR ADULT DENTAL SERVICES.
SB121 C. Penzo Long TO AMEND THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR OUT-OF-STATE LICENSURE ACT; TO APPLY THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR OUT-OF-STATE LICENSURE ACT TO PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS.
SB122 C. Penzo Long TO AMEND THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR OUT-OF-STATE LICENSURE ACT; TO APPLY THE AUTOMATIC OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE FOR OUT-OF-STATE LICENSURE ACT TO PHYSICIANS.
SB217 C. Penzo Bentley TO REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES TO REQUEST A WAIVER TO EXCLUDE CANDY AND SOFT DRINKS FROM ELIGIBLE FOODS UNDER THE SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
SB262 C. Penzo Pilkington TO AMEND THE CORPORATE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE DOCTRINE; AND TO AUTHORIZE A LICENSED MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL WHO OWNS A MEDICAL CORPORATION TO MAINTAIN OWNERSHIP UPON AN INACTIVE LICENSE OR RETIREMENT.
SB585 G. Leding Gonzales Worthen TO REQUIRE CERTAIN RECORDS BE PROVIDED TO AN EMPLOYEE WHO IS A MINOR.
SB591 C. Penzo K. Brown TO PROHIBIT RACE-SELECTION ABORTION IN THIS STATE; AND TO CREATE THE RACE DISCRIMINATION BY ABORTION PROHIBITION ACT.
SB596 M. McKee McAlindon TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING ENERGY; TO ESTABLISH A STATE ENERGY POLICY; TO REGULATE RETIREMENT OF DISPATCHABLE ELECTRIC GENERATION FACILITIES; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB538 Gilmore Wardlaw TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS PROCUREMENT LAW.
SB486 B. Johnson Bentley CONCERNING SAFETY AND PRIVACY IN CERTAIN ENTITIES; AND CONCERNING THE DESIGNATION OF MULTI-OCCUPANCY RESTROOMS, CHANGING ROOMS, AND SLEEPING QUARTERS IN CERTAIN ENTITIES BASED ON AN INDIVIDUAL'S SEX.
SB569 M. Johnson Ray AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION CONCERNING BALLOT TITLES OF PROPOSED MEASURES; AND AMENDING THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 5, SECTION 1.
Budget Calendar
Bills and their Emergency Clauses to be considered which have been introduced by Joint Budget Committee
SB54 AN ACT FOR THE AUDITOR OF STATE - DEPUTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2025- 2026 FISCAL YEAR.
SB67 AN ACT FOR THE ARKANSAS PUBLIC DEFENDER COMMISSION APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2025-2026 FISCAL YEAR.
Bills and their Emergency Clauses to be considered which have been introduced by Senators
SB362 AN ACT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION - DIVISION OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION YOUTH ORGANIZATION GRANTS APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2025-2026 FISCAL YEAR.
SB636 AN ACT TO TRANSFER FUNDS; DEFINE THE MONIES TO BE AVAILABLE IN THE RESTRICTED RESERVE FUND; AND ALLOW ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR STATE DEPARTMENTS, AGENCIES AND INSTITUTIONS; AND TO DECLARE AND EMERGENCY.
SB637 TO AMEND THE REVENUE STABILIZATION LAW; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
Motion to Adjourn
Announcements
Adjourn
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Chair
Unverified
Speaker 9
Representative Brian S. Evans
Unverified
Speaker 21
Speaker 24
Representative Tracy Steele Chair
Unverified
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
Speaker 45
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
Speaker 47
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
Speaker 71
Representative Marcus E. Richmond
Unverified
Speaker 77
Representative John P. Carr
Unverified
Speaker 84
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
Representative Zack Gramlich
Unverified
Representative Johnny Rye
Unverified
Speaker 100
Speaker 101
Scott Richardson
Unverified
Chair (Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.)
Unverified
Speaker 26
Representative Randy Torres
Unverified
Speaker 111
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
Speaker 119
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
Speaker 124
Representative Dolly Henley
Unverified
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
Representative Carol Dalby
Unverified
Speaker 148
Speaker 95
Representative RJ Hawk
Unverified
Representative Rick McClure
Unverified
Representative David Whitaker
Unverified
Representative Jim Wooten Chair
Unverified
Representative Austin McCollum
Unverified
Representative Rebecca Burkes
Unverified
Representative Keith Brooks
Unverified
Representative Carlton Wing Chair
Unverified
Speaker 177
Representative Brad Hall
Unverified
Representative David Ray
Unverified
Representative Jack Ladyman
Unverified
Representative Matt Duffield
Unverified
Representative Kendra Moore Chair
Unverified
Representative Sonia Eubanks Barker
Unverified
Speaker 19
Representative Lee Johnson
Unverified
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
Speaker 104
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
Speaker 288
Speaker 80
Representative Mark Perry
Unverified
Speaker 296
Representative Aaron Pilkington
Unverified
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
Speaker 315
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
Speaker 328
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
Representative Richard McGrew
Unverified
Speaker 342
Representative Les D. Eaves
Unverified
Representative Mary Bentley Chair
Unverified
Speaker 340
Speaker 116
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
Representative Chad Puryear Chair
Unverified
Representative Lane Jean
Unverified
Speaker 410
Speaker 414
Speaker 415
Representative Ryan A. Rose Chair
Unverified
Representative Tara Shephard
Unverified
Speaker 468
Speaker 466
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
Speaker 486
Representative Tippi McCullough
Unverified
Speaker 498
Representative Steve Unger
Unverified
Speaker 503
Representative Ashley Hudson
Unverified
Representative Cindy Crawford
Unverified
Speaker 482
Speaker 540
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
Representative Mike Holcomb
Unverified
Speaker 332
Representative Trey Steimel
Unverified
Speaker 570
Speaker 287
Speaker 28
Speaker 397
Speaker 361
Speaker 586
Speaker 286