State Agencies & Govt'l Affairs- House
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (66)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1037
· 4 mentions in chapter, agenda, transcript
Matched: “HB1037 A. Collins AN ACT TO CREATE THE PREREGISTRATION TO VOTE ACT…”
|
AN ACT TO CREATE THE PREREGISTRATION TO VOTE ACT; AND TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF ARKANSAS … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1753
· 4 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…LS, AND COMMISSIONS. REGULAR AGENDA Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1753 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION; TO OPT…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION; TO OPT-OUT OF THE NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION ACT … | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1041
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1041 R. Scott Richardson TO PROHIBIT DECEPTIVE AND FRAUDULENT DE…”
|
TO PROHIBIT DECEPTIVE AND FRAUDULENT DEEPFAKES IN ELECTION COMMUNICATIONS. | R. Scott Richardson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1365
Act 938
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…E ARKANSAS CODE THAT RESULTED FROM INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1990. HB1365 K. Brown TO REMOVE RACIAL AND GENDER QUOTAS AND QUALIFICATI…”
|
TO REMOVE RACIAL AND GENDER QUOTAS AND QUALIFICATIONS OF MEMBERSHIP FOR CERTAIN BOARDS, COMMITTEES, COUNCILS, … | K. Brown | Notification that HB1365 is now Act 938 |
|
HB1614
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1614 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DESIGNATIONS RELATED…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DESIGNATIONS RELATED TO CERTAIN CRIMINAL JUSTICE GRANT PROGRAMS. | Lundstrum | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1632
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1632 Wardlaw TO REQUIRE REIMBURSEMENT TO THE ARKANSAS STATE GAME…”
|
TO REQUIRE REIMBURSEMENT TO THE ARKANSAS STATE GAME AND FISH COMMISSION FOR FREE OR DISCOUNTED … | Wardlaw | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1683
Act 924
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1683 McAlindon TO PROHIBIT THE PROCUREMENT BY A GOVERNMENTAL ENT…”
|
TO PROHIBIT THE PROCUREMENT BY A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY OF AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE OR A COMPONENT … | McAlindon | Notification that HB1683 is now Act 924 |
|
HB1773
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…END PROVISIONS OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51, § 5. HB1773 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR BA…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR BALLOT QUESTION COMMITTEES AND LEGISLATIVE QUESTION COMMITTEES. | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1800
Act 998
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…PROGRAMS. RE-REFERRED TO COMMITTEE Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1800 McAlindon TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DISCLOSURE FOR CAMPAI…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DISCLOSURE FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE; TO REQUIRE DISCLOSURE BY A REPRESENTATIVE … | McAlindon | Notification that HB1800 is now Act 998 |
|
HB1837
Act 999
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1837 McAlindon TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DISCLOSURE FOR MATTER…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DISCLOSURE FOR MATTERS REFERRED TO VOTERS; AND TO BAN FOREIGN … | McAlindon | Notification that HB1837 is now Act 999 |
|
HB1846
Act 946
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ignating areas as 'Members and Staff Only'. ACT 1 OF 1996. HB1846 S. Meeks TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS 2036 COMMISSION. HB1849 Gra…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS 2036 COMMISSION. | S. Meeks | Notification that HB1846 is now Act 946 |
|
HB1849
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…96. HB1846 S. Meeks TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS 2036 COMMISSION. HB1849 Gramlich TO ALLOW FOR THE CROSS DEPUTIZATION OF MUNICIPAL,…”
|
TO ALLOW FOR THE CROSS DEPUTIZATION OF MUNICIPAL, COUNTY, STATE, AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ON … | Gramlich | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1867
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1867 B. McKenzie TO ESTABLISH THE NO GOVERNMENT TRESPASSING ACT;…”
|
TO ESTABLISH THE NO GOVERNMENT TRESPASSING ACT; AND TO PROHIBIT GAME WARDEN TRESPASS ONTO PRIVATE … | B. McKenzie | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
HB1870
Act 840
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…CT; AND TO PROHIBIT GAME WARDEN TRESPASS ONTO PRIVATE LAND. HB1870 Wing CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION LISTS; AND TO ALLOW THE…”
|
CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION LISTS; AND TO ALLOW THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO PROVIDE A VOTER … | Wing | Notification that HB1870 is now Act 840 |
|
HB1878
Act 978
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ATE TO PROVIDE A VOTER REGISTRATION LIST TO FEDERAL COURTS. HB1878 McGruder TO ENSURE EARLY VOTING ACCESS FOR ARKANSANS RESIDI…”
|
TO ENSURE EARLY VOTING ACCESS FOR ARKANSANS RESIDING IN POPULATION CENTERS; AND TO REQUIRE A … | McGruder | Notification that HB1878 is now Act 978 |
|
HB1883
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ERS TO CONDUCT EARLY VOTING IN A CITY IN CERTAIN INSTANCES. HB1883 Long TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS FOURTH AMENDMENT PROTECTION ACT…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS FOURTH AMENDMENT PROTECTION ACT; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE … | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1884
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…CONCERNING THE COLLECTION OF ELECTRONIC DATA AND METADATA. HB1884 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE MARKING AND COUNTING O…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE MARKING AND COUNTING OF PAPER BALLOTS. | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1891
Act 715
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ISSION FOR FREE OR DISCOUNTED HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES. HB1891 Ray TO ALLOW A PERSON FILING AS A CANDIDATE FOR THE OFFICE…”
|
TO ALLOW A PERSON FILING AS A CANDIDATE FOR THE OFFICE OF JUSTICE OF THE … | Ray | Notification that HB1891 is now Act 715 |
|
HB1896
Act 716
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1896 B. McKenzie TO CREATE THE JUNK FEE ELIMINATING ACT OF 2025;…”
|
TO CREATE THE JUNK FEE ELIMINATING ACT OF 2025; TO ABOLISH THE INFORMATION NETWORK OF … | B. McKenzie | Notification that HB1896 is now Act 716 |
|
HB1898
Act 837
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1898 Painter TO CREATE THE REGULATORY DIVISION AND THE REGULATOR…”
|
TO CREATE THE REGULATORY DIVISION AND THE REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT DIVISION IN THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE … | Painter | Notification that HB1898 is now Act 837 |
|
HB1925
Act 846
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1925 Beaty Jr. TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE BALLOTS; AND…”
|
AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE BALLOTS; TO AMEND THE ABSENTEE BALLOT VOTER … | Beaty Jr. | Notification that HB1925 is now Act 846 |
|
HB1929
Act 797
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TEE BALLOTS; AND TO REQUIRE AN OATH FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT. HB1929 McAlindon TO CREATE THE RECOGNIZING JUDEA AND SAMARIA ACT;…”
|
TO CREATE THE RECOGNIZING JUDEA AND SAMARIA ACT; AND TO PROHIBIT STATE AGENCIES FROM USING … | McAlindon | Notification that HB1929 is now Act 797 |
|
HB1934
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HB1934 McAlindon TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS FORWARD ENGAGEMENT COMMITT…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS FORWARD ENGAGEMENT COMMITTEE ACT; AND TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS FORWARD ENGAGEMENT … | McAlindon | Died in House at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1009
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HJR1009 K. Brown AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO BE KN…”
|
AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO BE KNOWN AS THE ARKANSAS VICTIMS' BILL OF … | K. Brown | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1014
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HJR1014 Beaty Jr. A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING ECONOMIC DE…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CONCERNING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS; AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL … | Beaty Jr. | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1016
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…OMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. HJR1016 Ray A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO REPEAL THE PROVISION OF A…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO REPEAL THE PROVISION OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 5, § 1, ALLOWING … | Ray | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1017
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…TIVE OR REFERENDUM PETITION TO CORRECT OR AMEND A PETITION. HJR1017 Ray A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A PROPOSED ST…”
|
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A PROPOSED STATE-WIDE INITIATED ACT OR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT SHALL BECOME … | Ray | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HJR1018
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “HJR1018 Ray THE CITIZENS ONLY VOTING AMENDMENT.”
|
THE CITIZENS ONLY VOTING AMENDMENT. | Ray | Approved by the Governor |
|
SB12
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB12 B. King TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING … | B. King | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB241
Act 885
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…'S TOTAL SERVICE TIME FOR ANNUAL LEAVE ACCRUAL CALCULATION. SB241 J. Scott TO AMEND THE UNIFORM ATTENDANCE AND LEAVE POLICY A…”
|
TO AMEND THE UNIFORM ATTENDANCE AND LEAVE POLICY ACT; AND TO GRANT PAID LEAVE TO … | J. Scott | Notification that SB241 is now Act 885 |
|
SB343
Act 734
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB343 Irvin TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING STATE-OWNED MOTOR VEHICLE…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING STATE-OWNED MOTOR VEHICLES; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC PROPERTY; … | Irvin | Notification that SB343 is now Act 734 |
|
SB351
Act 592
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…MMITTEE WORKING GROUP. SENATE BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle SB351 J. Dismang TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CAMPAIGN…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE; TO AMEND PORTIONS OF INITIATED ACT … | J. Dismang | Notification that SB351 is now Act 592 |
|
SB357
Act 572
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB357 J. Bryant TO AMEND THE UNIFORM ATTENDANCE AND LEAVE POLICY…”
|
TO AMEND THE UNIFORM ATTENDANCE AND LEAVE POLICY ACT; AND TO APPLY MILITARY SERVICE CREDIT … | J. Bryant | Notification that SB357 is now Act 572 |
|
SB376
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…THE DISPLAY OF THE NATIONAL MOTTO AND THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. SB376 A. Clark TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; A…”
|
TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING … | A. Clark | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB433
Act 573
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…OF THE DEATH OF A PUBLIC EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY MEMBER OR CHILD. SB433 J. Dotson REGARDING THE DISPLAY OF THE NATIONAL MOTTO AND T…”
|
REGARDING THE DISPLAY OF THE NATIONAL MOTTO AND THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. | J. Dotson | Notification that SB433 is now Act 573 |
|
SB445
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB445 K. Hammer TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE LICENSURE OF ELEC…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE LICENSURE OF ELECTRICAL INSPECTORS. | K. Hammer | Died on House Calendar at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB471
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…THE LAW CONCERNING THE LICENSURE OF ELECTRICAL INSPECTORS. SB471 A. Clark TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CANDIDATES FOR NONPART…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CANDIDATES FOR NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS; AND TO ALLOW CERTAIN CANDIDATES FOR … | A. Clark | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB479
Act 593
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB479 K. Hammer TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER ASSISTANCE; AND…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER ASSISTANCE; AND TO REQUIRE A PERSON ASSISTING A VOTER … | K. Hammer | Notification that SB479 is now Act 593 |
|
SB491
Act 956
· 2 mentions in chapter, agenda
Matched: “SB491 K. Hammer TO REQUIRE A VENDOR THAT CONTRACTS WITH THE OFFIC…”
|
TO REQUIRE A VENDOR THAT CONTRACTS WITH THE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS DIVISION TO SUBMIT DATA FOR … | K. Hammer | Notification that SB491 is now Act 956 |
|
SB508
Act 756
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “AGENDA (Revised 4/2/25 @ 7:18 AM) Added SB508 House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs…”
|
TO AMEND THE FREQUENCY OF PAYMENT OF A STIPEND FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC … | Irvin | Notification that SB508 is now Act 756 |
|
SB510
Act 594
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…ICATION BY AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR; TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. SB510 J. Boyd TO ALLOW FOR THE CROSS DEPUTIZATION OF MUNICIPAL, C…”
|
TO ALLOW FOR THE CROSS DEPUTIZATION OF MUNICIPAL, COUNTY, STATE, AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ON … | J. Boyd | Notification that SB510 is now Act 594 |
|
HB1024
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…LY VOTING AMENDMENT. DEFERRED BILLS Number Sponsor Subtitle HB1024 A. Collins TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC EMPLOYEES; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC EMPLOYEES; AND TO REPEAL THE LAW PROHIBITING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1028
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…S; AND TO REPEAL THE LAW PROHIBITING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. HB1028 A. Collins TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE LAW CONCERNING OBSCEN…”
|
TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE LAW CONCERNING OBSCENITY AND THE PROCESS FOR CHALLENGING MATERIALS INCLUDED … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1035
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…PROHIBITING BOOK BANNING IN ORDER TO RECEIVE STATE FUNDING. HB1035 A. Collins TO CREATE THE ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION ACT OF 2…”
|
TO CREATE THE ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION ACT OF 2025; TO ALLOW ONLINE VOTER REGISTRATION; TO … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1036
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…MENT 51; AND TO AMEND THE DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE. HB1036 A. Collins TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION;…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION; TO ALLOW VOTER REGISTRATION DURING EARLY VOTING AND … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1038
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51. HB1038 A. Collins TO CREATE THE NO-EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING ACT OF 2…”
|
TO CREATE THE NO-EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING ACT OF 2025; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1039
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…NG; AND TO REPEAL VOTER QUALIFICATIONS FOR ABSENTEE VOTING. HB1039 A. Collins TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE BALLOT…”
|
TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE BALLOTS; AND TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING ELECTIONS. | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1040
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…EE BALLOTS; AND TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING ELECTIONS. HB1040 A. Collins TO CREATE THE WATER IN LINE ACT OF 2025; AND TO…”
|
TO CREATE THE WATER IN LINE ACT OF 2025; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1042
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…RNING PENALTIES FOR MISDEMEANOR OFFENSES RELATED TO VOTING. HB1042 A. Collins TO CREATE THE DIRECT DEMOCRACY ACT OF 2025; TO R…”
|
TO CREATE THE DIRECT DEMOCRACY ACT OF 2025; TO REPEAL THE ENSURING ACCESS FOR ALL … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1043
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…NG OF A BALLOT INITIATIVE PETITION AND REFERENDUM PETITION. HB1043 A. Collins TO REQUIRE DISCLOSURE AND REPORTING OF NONCANDID…”
|
TO REQUIRE DISCLOSURE AND REPORTING OF NONCANDIDATE EXPENDITURES PERTAINING TO APPELLATE JUDICIAL ELECTIONS; AND TO … | A. Collins | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1058
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ield TO ESTABLISH GOOD FRIDAY AS AN OFFICIAL STATE HOLIDAY. HB1058 Unger TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF I…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES; … | Unger | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1059
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…GIVING ADVANCE NOTICE TO ENTITIES OF REQUIRED INSPECTIONS. HB1059 Unger TO PROVIDE THE OPTION FOR A FREE LIFETIME HUNTING AND…”
|
TO PROVIDE THE OPTION FOR A FREE LIFETIME HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSE TO A COMMERCIAL … | Unger | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1069
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES TO FOREIGN EXCHANGE STUDENTS. HB1069 S. Meeks TO OBSERVE STANDARD TIME YEAR ROUND IN ARKANSAS; A…”
|
TO OBSERVE STANDARD TIME YEAR ROUND IN ARKANSAS; AND TO ELIMINATE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME IN … | S. Meeks | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1078
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…PROVIDES CERTAIN INFORMATION RELATED TO HUMAN TRAFFICKING. HB1078 Long TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING RUNOFF ELECTIONS; AND…”
|
TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING RUNOFF ELECTIONS; AND TO PROVIDE FOR A RUNOFF ELECTION FOR … | Long | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1162
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TO ADOPT NEW LAWS CONCERNING APPELLATE JUDICIAL CAMPAIGNS. HB1162 Duffield TO ESTABLISH GOOD FRIDAY AS AN OFFICIAL STATE HOLI…”
|
TO ESTABLISH GOOD FRIDAY AS AN OFFICIAL STATE HOLIDAY. | Duffield | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1281
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…CANDIDATES FOR THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. HB1281 McAlindon TO AMEND REPORTING FOR A CANDIDATE FOR CERTAIN MU…”
|
TO AMEND REPORTING FOR A CANDIDATE FOR CERTAIN MUNICIPAL OFFICES AND FOR COUNTY OFFICE; AND … | McAlindon | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1415
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ge 4 of 5 CODE THAT RESULTED FROM INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1996. HB1415 L. Johnson TO REQUIRE LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TO RESPOND TO A…”
|
TO REQUIRE LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TO RESPOND TO A REQUEST FOR A FIRE INQUIRY. | L. Johnson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1459
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…TATE AGENCIES TO PUBLISH FEDERAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS ONLINE. HB1459 L. Johnson CONCERNING RECURRING REPORTS SUBMITTED TO THE GE…”
|
CONCERNING RECURRING REPORTS SUBMITTED TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. | L. Johnson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1461
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…ERNING RECURRING REPORTS SUBMITTED TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. HB1461 L. Johnson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE EVALUATION OF NE…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE EVALUATION OF NECESSITY OF VARIOUS COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS. | L. Johnson | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1494
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…LAW ENFORCEMENT TO RESPOND TO A REQUEST FOR A FIRE INQUIRY. HB1494 Hawk TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS GUIDANCE OUT OF THE DARKNESS AC…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS GUIDANCE OUT OF THE DARKNESS ACT; AND TO REQUIRE STATE AGENCIES … | Hawk | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1621
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…MENT TO BECOME OR BE EMPLOYED AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. HB1621 Wardlaw TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO EXEMPT PERSONAL INFORMATION OF … | Wardlaw | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1631
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…S, ELECTED MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS, AND THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILY. HB1631 Wardlaw TO ADDRESS THE ISSUANCE OF HUNTING AND FISHING LICE…”
|
TO ADDRESS THE ISSUANCE OF HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES TO FOREIGN EXCHANGE STUDENTS. | Wardlaw | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1667
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…AND THE STATE LIBRARY BOARD TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. HB1667 Bentley TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AN…”
|
TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING … | Bentley | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1720
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…RKANSAS; AND TO ELIMINATE DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME IN ARKANSAS. HB1720 Vaught TO CREATE THE BABIES AT WORK ACT; TO ALLOW STATE AGE…”
|
TO CREATE THE BABIES AT WORK ACT; TO ALLOW STATE AGENCIES TO PERMIT PUBLIC EMPLOYEES … | Vaught | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
HB1769
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…BLIC MEETINGS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967. HB1769 Barnett CONCERNING LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER STANDARDS; AND T…”
|
CONCERNING LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER STANDARDS; AND TO REQUIRE A PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION OR ASSESSMENT TO BECOME … | Barnett | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB184
· 1 mention in agenda
Matched: “…EVALUATION OF NECESSITY OF VARIOUS COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS. SB184 D. Sullivan TO TRANSFER THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE ARKANS…”
|
TO TRANSFER THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE ARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION AND THE STATE … | D. Sullivan | Died in House Committee 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
I think we're good. Um As soon noticed yesterday that my intention was to hear regular bills this morning and we want to prioritize House bills. And so we're gonna just start at the top of the regular agenda. House Bill 1753 Representative Long. Go ahead. turn your mic on.
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
0:43
We put that one on deferred, sir. Put
it on deferred. OK. You've got the next 1, 1773. That's
the one you're waiting on an amendment on now that was 1884 was the amendment. What about 1773 go further with that one too, sir.
Then we have House Bill 1037, Andrew Collins. Representative Collins.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:24
Thank you, Mr. Chair Committee Andrew Collins. Um, so this bill is, is real
simple. This is pre-registration to vote. Um, currently in Arkansas, you can register to vote if you're going to be 18 by the time of the next election, but actually a lot of states register people who are 17 or even 16. This bill would move it to 17, um, and it might seem like a um small change and, and it may be a little unclear why this would even be. something that would be
beneficial, but somewhat to my surprise, it actually has a really positive impact on youth voter turnout and it's been studied somewhat extensively and the, the results, you know, in, in scientific studies that have been published in journals or that it really does increase by a significant amount youth voter turnout, and it does so, um, across party line. It doesn't bring out more of Democrats or more Republicans, it does both. And some of the reasons for
that, I think that the, the principal reason is that when you extend that pre-registration time, um, you increase the chance that a student is going to encounter an event that will get them excited about politics and government. It may be something that's happening in their school, a civics class or history class, it may be um something going on in the world that is of interest to them and um if they're 17 years old and want to
register, um, there's really no downside to them registering, um, and if this bill would allow them to do that as a high school senior, um, the mechanics of it are very simple. You would register the same way that you would to, you know, if you were anyone else, but the clerk would then put a flag on the as they do currently, the clerk would put a flag that suspense status is what they would call it, uh, so that they could not actually. vote and that would
be done the same way that it's done for
somebody who is going to be 18 by the next election. They also get that suspense status and so they can't vote until they're 18, and at which point the flag is removed and they become an active voter when they're in suspense status, they don't even show up in
the poll books, so that there is no possibility that they will be able to vote at that point. Um, and again, this is a well traveled path. There are, I believe 20. two states, 28 states that do this, most of them go with 16, but at the request of the clerks
we did 17 and um that's the bill. All right,
Representative Collins has explained his bill. Are there any questions by the committee? Representative Ray, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr.
Representative David Ray
Unverified
4:11
Chairman. So this is, this doesn't allow them to vote in the Like, say, the primary election, is that correct? You cannot
Speaker 21
4:17
vote until you're 18, and that's federal law and that doesn't change with this all that stays the same. So it um it just allows them to register, yeah.
Representative David Ray
Unverified
4:30
Yeah, OK. All right, and this is this would require amending the Constitution. This, so this would be a, this is the amendment that we Amendment 51. This would require a 2/3 vote of both chambers. That's right. OK. I just want to be clear on the procedure. All right, any other questions by the committee? Seeing no representative, right?
I guess, I guess I would just follow up but.
Representative David Ray
Unverified
5:01
I mean, everybody can register once they're 18. I mean why do they need the ability to register when they're. I remember. It wasn't that difficult to it's easy to register to vote. Why do you, why do you need a head start in
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
5:16
order to register. Well, it's for those reasons I mentioned, and again, I was somewhat surprised by this too,
but it really does have a a improvement in youth voter turnout when people are allowed to register earlier, um, they're at a time of life when they're getting excited about politics
they have interests, they're obviously not allowed to vote and you know, you've been around kids, you probably understand that there often excited about things they can't yet do, um, this is another one of those things and so when you're a senior, when you, when you're going through a civics class when things are happening in the world and you want to register to vote, um, you can't right now if you're, you know, younger, but under this, you could, and then of course you would be able to vote without having to a new register once you turn 18.
Representative David Ray
Unverified
6:04
Follow up, you know, 11 thing that I worry about and I've, I've seen this happen a little bit in central Arkansas where um some of the schools have actually let in, um, partisan or partisan leaning groups, uh, to register high school students, but not let in anyone from You know, a differing political persuasion. Do you, I mean, I could foresee this leading to more of that type of behavior if uh if a um
You know, if, if a larger pool of students were allowed to register before they were 18. Do
Speaker 21
6:40
you foresee issues like that or no? I really don't. I mean, because again, you
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
6:45
can register now if you're gonna be 18 by the next election. Um, I don't, you know, think that that kind of partisan leaning activity should happen, but I don't think that's affected either way by this bill. Representative Meeks. Thank you, uh, and, and I came in
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
7:02
a few minutes late, so, uh, forgive me if you've already
covered this, um, the, uh, where the, the, the clerk stand on this because it seems like we're gonna be creating a lot of extra work for them to register 17 year olds, kind of keep track of all that, and then, you know, switch them from um you know, the
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
7:24
temporary status to the full status once they reach that age. Clerks are neutral on this, and
they do this already again with people who register. before they turn 18, so um they didn't raise any concerns about that aspect of it. So people already registered before
they're 18. Yeah, if you're, you can register before you, you're 18 if you are gonna turn 18 by the next election. OK. I think we've
Caroline Cole
Unverified
7:48
got a witness who can help answer that question. You just recognize yourself for the record to be recognized. Thank you. My
Speaker 44
7:54
name is Caroline Cole. I'm a law clerk with the Association of Counties, um, Lindsay's in a different committee, but
Speaker 45
7:58
she told me that the clerks are OK with this as long as it's only applied to 17 year olds, so. All right, Representative
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
8:08
Underwood, you're recognized. my question for you, sorry. You said that they're OK with it if it's only applied to 17 year olds. What's the reason for limiting it to just 17 year olds. Um, I am not. Sure, I can
Speaker 50
8:22
ask Lindsay, um. I can text her. I'm not, I'm not really sure the details. Is it more work if it's 16 or 15 or I'm
Speaker 51
8:28
not sure. I couldn't answer that, but I can, I can text her and
Speaker 50
8:32
ask. Yeah, we talked about it and I think that maybe there were some
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
8:39
individual clerks who had questions about it at 16, and so we moved it to 17
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
8:47
at their request, but do you know what those que what the questions were that they had for 16. No. if I may, I'm gonna switch to something else. You mentioned that there were some studies that increased I guess, um participation, right? At this age, what were those studies? That Sure,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
9:06
um, If you, I mean, you're welcome
there are several, there's one here that was published in the American Journal of Political Science, um, whole being at Duke University, making young voters the impact of pre-registration on youth voter turnout. Um, They, uh, if you're interested, they use the state of Florida, they leveraged a discontinuity based on date of birth to estimate the effect of increased pre-registration exposure, uh, they
also implemented different and Difference and lag models to bracket the causal effect of
pre-registration and in both approaches they found that pre-registration, this is a quote, increases voter turnout with equal
effectiveness for various subgroups in the electorate. So, um, other, there's other studies, NCSL has resources. that um kind of summarize those, but this is one that I just happened to bring the abstract for. Representative Wooldridge, you're
Speaker 56
10:00
recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you,
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
10:10
Representative Collins. I, I don't think I'm opposed to this bill. I'm just trying to kind of satisfy my curiosity on a couple of different things. So I understand, I think the thought process behind if you're 17, but you're gonna be 18 during the next election, you're kind of in the queue, you're ready, you're gonna be a voter this cycle, but moving that to 17 uh for those for those 17 year olds that aren't going to vote in this cycle. I guess I don't know what's the added benefit there? I mean, other than just you're catching a a little bit broader group with this net, is that kind of the intent? That's, that's the
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
10:41
intent. You're catching a broader group. You've got, you
know, more people who are going to be eligible to do it, you know, I think pretty much every high school seniors going to be 17, uh, so if they've got a, a class, you know, the civics class, and they all want to get registered together as a class project, they can do that. And you're also getting a full, you know, exposure to more current events, and I think that's the thing that some of this research showed is that current events are part of big drivers when there's things happening in the news and people see it and they're excited about
politics, that's when it happens. So to increase that slightly has that increase in turnout. Yeah, and that and that
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
11:17
makes sense to me. I understand that and I'm not, I don't want to hold your bill up for sure, but I would be curious just to know why 17 is the age instead of a junior in high school, um, to Representative Underwood's point, you know, what, what is the thought process there? And I think that we may have an answer. To some of that, but uh again, I'm not opposed to it per se. I just, I am curious of why that's the magic kind of number that we're shooting for, but I think
your explanation makes sense and I appreciate you bringing
it. Representative Rose sorry hang on just a second, Representative Rose. It looks like there was another response to Representative Wooldridge's
Speaker 45
11:54
question. You're Lindsay texted me back and said 16 year olds are too far removed from being able to vote and it would just create unnecessary confusion, so that's why 17 year olds. That's fair. I appreciate that. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Rose, you're recognized.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
12:13
I have a question, but it's on a different vein, so if, if somebody else has a question on the age. That
we're just discussing right now, I'd be happy to hop out and then jump back in. Representative
Underwood's in the queue. Yeah, I guess I just, uh just
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
12:30
to follow up on that. So the the answer to that is it's 16 year olds are too far removed, but the determination is made that 17-year-olds are not too far removed because they're just one year away from being able to vote rather than to.
Speaker 44
12:44
As far as much as I understand it, that's, that's the reasoning, yes. I mean, I don't
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
12:48
mean to, I understand. I appreciate you trying to give me an answer on that. Representative Rose. Thank you.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
12:56
Representative Collins, and I'm sorry if I just over overlooked it or missed it when you mentioned it. Is there a requirement for a parental consent? To register? No. There's not either currently when you're a 17 year
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
13:09
old, you can register to vote if you're going to be 18 by the next election without your parents' consent.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
13:19
But we are lowering the, the, the age requirement in a sense. Right, it, it's, it's, yeah, it's not, if you're gonna turn 18 before the next election is now, if you're 17 period. Um, I guess, you know, I'm not, I'm not crazy about that component, um, you know, my dad took me to register to vote, uh, my kids, I would like to take them to register to vote and I guess as a parent, I don't know how much it's not like I want to restrict them, but that's an experience I want to have with them, I guess
that would, I would kind of feel robbed of that if someone's able to come. at school and I didn't get any kind of notification or anything like that and they're registered and I missed out on that moment as a parent and getting to talk with them
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
14:04
through that. Do you, do you see the merit of that concern at all? No, I think you could still take them to
register to vote, um, when they're 17 if this bill were to pass, so I, I, I just don't. I'm sorry. I, I don't, I don't agree with parental consent to register to vote being something that we should put in place, OK. you and I disagree on that
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
14:22
point, but I, I, I appreciate what you're doing. Thank
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
14:29
you. Representative Underwood, you're recognized. I, I think this is just my last question, but do you, are, will there be any additional cost? Do we have to change any kind of applications or anything like that or if you had
any conversations regarding that? Uh, no, I can't imagine there would be any, any cost to this,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
14:48
um, you know, there's a voter registration application form would be different, but I don't
think that there's a production cost of that, that's just something that's available online and elsewhere so I don't, I don't think cost is a consideration on this one. Representative Hawk, you're
Representative RJ Hawk
Unverified
15:07
recognized. Thank you. Going to the cost thing. I mean, There would be a cost, so wouldn't it, for more registration forms, more, uh,
more processing files for our clerks. I mean, it seems like there would be a little bit more cost if we're, we're
if we're now adding another age group in there to to then register
though, wouldn't, wouldn't you agree? I mean,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
15:27
there are, I guess incremental costs with everyone registering to vote, but I
think that's just what they do. I mean, that's their job, so if we're asking the clerks to register voters. I don't really consider that a cost to the state. It's just their main hours. I was thinking more like even at
the local level, like if you, if you're going to a clerk's
Representative RJ Hawk
Unverified
15:48
office to register to vote, you got people processing that. There, there's just, there's, there's paperwork that
has to be done. It, from what I've heard from like my county clerks and stuff that there would be a little bit of a cost for, for to doing this, to expand this a little bit. That's why, that's
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
16:06
the only reason why I'd ask. The only cost would be more people registering, and I guess, I mean, if I think it would be so incremental and almost, I don't know how you would even detect it, uh, but the
benefit, of course, would be that you've got people registering to vote and voting, which, you know, I believe is something that we
should strive for. I mean, Arkansas's 2nd worst in voter registration and 3rd worst in voter turnout and when people are connected to their democracy and have a voice in it. There's all kinds of benefit. people feel legitimized and like they have a voice in the process, but yeah, I, I, I guess maybe she's here to address that issue. Uh, yeah, I guess I should
Speaker 72
16:46
have stayed up here you might want to just stay
Speaker 45
16:49
there, yeah, OK, so Lindsay said no, there wouldn't be any additional costs because um As Representative Collins
explained there are automatically flagged as ineligible and there's no additional cost because 17.5 year olds are already being allowed to register and it's the same paperwork. Got you. OK,
cool, thank you. Representative Long. Thank
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
17:11
you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Andrews, um, are you familiar with any municipalities in the country that are lowering the age below 8 below 18. I'm sorry, could you say that again. That's OK. I was
wondering if you're familiar with any uh municipalities in the, in the country that have lowered the voting age below 18 to vote in local elections. I'm not aware of that this bill would
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
17:37
not do that. I that may happen. I, I, I just don't know,
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
17:40
but uh some West Coast um metropolitan areas had looked into doing that, and I basically what I was wondering was, was this the first step that they took was, you know, getting the folks in the, the kind of in the queue to vote I
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
17:52
don't know about about any of that, but I do know
that this bill would leave the voting age at 18, it
was my intent and all the other states, the 28 or so states. Uh, you know, Voting at 18 is the federal standard. I have no intention to do anything as far as any kind of next steps, this is the step I someone else wants to make that step, I'd vote against it. I'm for 18. Thank you, sir. Thanks. What All right,
uh, Representative Collins, this proposes to amend the Arkansas Constitution, is that right?
And so, uh. would take a 2/3 vote
of each house. Is that correct? OK. All right, Representative Underwood, you're recognized. Thank
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
18:40
you, Mr. Chair. I, I keep harping on this, I guess, but you just said, so 17.5 year olds can register currently. Is that, is that what you said? If you're going to be 18 by the next election, so approximately so this will move it to 17, which we think is OK, but 16 is too far removed. I don't think 16 is too far
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
19:00
removed. I did this, you know, sometimes you do incremental changes. This was in response to some people who felt like 16 was too far removed. I think a lot of other states do 16 and it works out great, you know, but I'm fine with 17 because I'm fine with something that's incrementally better rather than the, the whole piece. OK. All right, any other questions about the committee?
Saying no other questions by the committee, we have no one signed up to speak for or against the bill. Wait, we do have someone here who'd like to speak for the
bill. Sir, did you sign up? Uh, no, sir, I did not. OK, well, that's our protocol
but uh without objection to your recognized to present your remarks, if you would state your name, any organization you may be here representing, then you'll be recognized to present your remarks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, one of the things on this bill right here, so I'm s slain. clerk, sorry about that state
your name. Um, one of the things you state your name Doug Curtis. OK, thank
Speaker 109
20:08
you very much about that. Uh, one of the things on this bill that I that I really like is the 17 because a lot of times we will go into the high schools. And do a voter registration. A lot of them are not there, will not be 18 by the time the elections there, but they're already registered and it, it also creates once they're registered, they're looking forward to vote, and if you can
get on it and I would love to see the young people because if you look at the demographics of the people that vote. The 18 year olds to 22 years old, they just don't get out and vote. So when you think that we can do to promote, I don't think it's gonna cost uh as far as the cost to our office, uh, it might be just a very small printing cost for the extra. The extra voter registrations, um, but I'm in favor of this bill and the clerk said talked
to her is in favor of this bill. All right,
thank you very much. Any questions by the committee? Seeing no questions by the committee, thank you for those remarks. We have no one else signed up to speak for or against the bill,
Representative Collins are recognized to close for your bill. Um, closed for the bill, and I'd make a motion to pass. Representative Collins is closed for his bill. He's made a motion to pass. Is there any discussion on
the motion? Seeing no discussion on the motion, all those in favor say
aye. All those opposed.
The eyes have it. No.
Speaker 112
21:56
See two hands call the roll. Representative Meeks, Representative Meeks, yes. Representative Wardlaw. Representative Wardlaw. Representative Barry, Representative Barry, yes.
Representative Mayberry. Representative Mayberry. Representative Crawford, Representative Crawford, no. Representative Clowney. Yes. Representative Clowney, yes. Representative Collins. Representative Collins, yes. Representative Evans. Representative Evans. Representative in it. Representative in it, yes. Representative McIlroy
Representative McElroy, yes. Representative Ray. Representative Ray, no. Representative Beatty. Representative Beatty. Representative Carr Representative Carr, no. Representative Underwood. Representative Underwood? No. Representative Long, Representative Long, no. Representative Hawk. Right Representative Hawk present. Representative Rose?
Representative Rose, no. Representative Wooldridge. Representative Wooldridge. Representative Beck Representative Beck present. Sorry, Representative Collins, the bill's failed. All right, next we have House
Bill 1041 R. Scott Richardson. Not seeing him present this morning. Uh, Representative Wing, you
and I talked last night. I believe you had a bill that
Representative Carlton Wing
Unverified
23:40
He wanted to present quickly. Yeah. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm right We have a procedure here that we will need to vote. We'll need a motion to expunge the vote of the amendment that we passed on Monday because we, since we pulled the bill down, we have to represent that amendment, so. And we have a new amendment. To
join into that. See a motion, uh, Representative
Rose to expunge the vote on the amendment on. The House Bill 1870. Is there any discussion on that motion, seeing all those in favor say aye. All those opposed. All right, the motion to expunge the amendment has passed. My understanding is we have a new amendment. Staff is going to going to pass out that amendment. And once the amendment has been passed out and
everyone's had an opportunity to review it. Representative Way, you'll be recognized to present the amendment and go.
All right, everyone should have a copy of the amendment. Everyone
should have had an opportunity to rebu at this point and so Representative Wing with that, I'm gonna recognize you
Representative Carlton Wing
Unverified
25:34
to present the amendment. OK. The bulk of the amendment that you received is the same amendment that you passed on Monday. Uh, the only addition to that is the is one new line which is Page 2, line 24. Right after and this was to uh. Clear up that concern that we discussed on Monday, and I appreciate Representative Collins for bringing that to our
attention, so we were able to make it crystal clear here. This uh phrase voter. So after it says um uh I read once uh after verifying that someone has been disqualified or potentially disqualified as a registered voter, and then we insert the phrase, but is ineligible to be a voter under Arkansas law. Then we continues on the Secretary of State shall forward that information to the clerks, and so that's uh that's what that amendment does. Happy to answer any questions.
All right, Representative Wing has explained the amendment. Are there any questions about the committee? Seeing no Representative Meeks has made a motion to adopt the amendment discussion on the motion seeing none. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, the odds have it. The amendment's been adopted.
Representative Carlton Wing
Unverified
26:40
Representative Wing, you're recognized to present the bill as amended. Thank you very much and uh committee, we've discussed this bill already, so with that amendment, I believe we've resolved any concerns that uh revolve around this issue. We just hope to make sure that we've got an opportunity to get some more data and help our voter rolls.
Representative Way, are you closed for the bill? Closed for the bill. Representative Wing has Actually he's not, we're not to that point yet. Representative Wing
is explained this bill as amended. Are there any questions by the committee, Representative Rose, motion at the proper time. OK.
Uh, seeing no questions by the committee, we have no one signed up to speak for or against the bill, Representative Rose, let's hear your motion. Motion to pass as amended
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
27:19
actually not as amended, I guess motion to pass with the, yeah, that's correct, sorry. So Representative Rose made a motion to pass
as amended. Is there any discussion on the motion?
Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. All those opposed. The odds have it congratulations, Representative Wing you
passed your bill as amended. Thank you committee. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
All right, continuing on, uh, Representative McAlinden I've not seen her this morning, but she and I have
talked. She has several bills she intends to present this morning. Representative Meeks, we have House Bill 1846. Are you prepared? All right.
Representative Meeks, you're recognized. All right, thank you, colleagues. So I, I had actually hoped that this was gonna be
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
28:47
the last bill that I would ever present. Um, this is gonna be sort of my last, last gift, if you will, to the state of Arkansas before I was termed out. Unfortunately, as you all know, this time of uh session, those kind of plans hardly ever work out, so I wanted to go ahead and run this bill to make sure that uh it does get considered. So, um, what I'm, what I'm
looking for is what is something that we as a state can do for the next generation. Uh, I had someone, uh, a former congressman told me that the difference between a politician and a statesman as a politician is somebody who only looks for the next election, whereas a statesman is looking for the next generation, and that's what I'm hoping to uh to do with this bill. Um, as you all know, uh, or may not know. Um, are, uh, 200th birthday as a state is coming up in 2036. Uh, which is about 10 years
away. The uh current freshman class, we don't have any freshmen in on this committee, but the current freshman class, they will become the senior class by the time this rolls around and so they'll kind of, this will be kind of my gift to them from the senior class to the freshman class because they'll be the ones overseeing this project. So what this bill does in a nutshell is it sets up the 2036 commission and the purpose of this commission is to begin making plans for our state. 200th birthday again coming up
in less than a decade. some of the basic stuff that I'm hoping that this commission will do is Um, develop, um, You know, programs that can go to our schools to uh encourage kids about our state history. I don't know if any of you have had the chance to go over to the state archives. We have a lot of history over in our state archives, but nowhere to display it. And so my hope is is we can develop programs so that those
um you know, artifacts and go around the state to encourage our students, uh, about our state and our state's history, um, I'd love to you know, teacher exchange programs, um. But the biggest thing that I'm hoping to do with this is if I were to name a national monument. Y'all could tell me where that was located at. So for example, if I were to say the, the, the arch, y'all would know it's Saint Louis if I said the Space Needle, Seattle, uh,
if I said, um, the. Mount Mount Rushmore back 100 years ago, we used to build these uh great monuments, uh, this Capitol building was built back 100 years ago. We don't do any of that kind of stuff this today. And so what I'm hoping to do here is this is kind of my, my big dream for the state of Arkansas. What are we gonna do with our modern generation for our 200th birthday, that's still
gonna be here for our 300th birthday. I don't know what that is, and that's the point of this commission. What I would love to see happen is, you know, send out a challenge to all the East labs across the state and let high school students come up with a plan, architecture firms, let them come up with a plan. What could we do as a state dream big to uh create something that our generation is going to leave for the next generation, um. Yeah, the, uh, you know, a lot
of states that I visit, they have state museums and maybe it's we're gonna, we, we would build and create a state museum because like I said, we have a lot of wonderful archives in our state, but we've got nowhere to display it. If I were to ask y'all, uh, have you ever seen the state's original constitution from 1836 or even know where it's at. I mean, we all know where the US Constitution's at. Well, have any of you ever seen it? Uh, it used to be on display down the basement. It's not there anymore. When I asked them
about it, they said it was locked away in a closet somewhere. Wouldn't it be great if we had somewhere to be able to display that. And again, and, and, and, and I don't know if that's what this project would be, uh, but what I wanna do is I want to open it up. Let's dream big. What can we as a state do in our generation to leave a legacy for the next generation, uh, and so what this commission does is in the Department of Heritage, um, and has someone from the uh Department of Education, the
governor, speaker, prote, each appoint two people to this commission, um, they will be housed in the Department of Heritage. Uh, I've spoken with the director of Department of Heritage, um, they're good with this bill. They're ready to get started on this should the committee pass that would decide to pass this and uh so with that, I will uh try to answer any questions from the committee. All right. Thank you, Representative
Meeks. Representative Hawk, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
33:52
Representative Meigs, I mean, I love the idea, um, the party planning commission. I think that's what we
Representative RJ Hawk
Unverified
33:58
could name it, um, but, you know, I really take issue, I guess, with the paying of per diem, uh, on this because when we've got the Department of Tourism or Heritage in this kind of their job in the first place, like in this kind of the stuff that they do to promote
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
34:16
Arkansas. So the, uh, the bill states they won't be compensated. So this would just be the
expenses incurred by doing this because, uh, you know, if we go to a meeting, we get expenses for that, right? And so I just felt it was reasonable that if we're gonna ask citizens to come and participate in this, that they be given, you know, uh, time of travel. The rest of what they're they're, they're doing would be on a voluntary basis. Um, and kind of to your point where, you know, doesn't the Department of Heritage already do this. To some extent, yes, but what I'm hoping to do is I want The Department of Education to be involved because I, I want
to, you know, like I said, my hope is that we'll be creating educational materials that can go to schools, promote our state. Uh, I'm hoping when the the governor and the pro tem and all that that uh they would appoint, uh, you know, business leaders, uh, architects to try to bring as many people to gather to be have a voice and uh getting ready for this. So like I said, it's more than just a celebration, you know, we, we could say, OK, 2 years out, We're gonna start planning fireworks and all that stuff. That, that's great. I want this
to be and go way beyond that. Because it, so for example, in what I was talking about, if we wanted to build a state museum, for example, if that's what, you know, should this go through. You can't do that in 2 years, right? That takes years of, of planning and construction and so forth. And so if we're gonna, if we're gonna create some grand again, a blank slate. I don't know what that could be. It will take this amount of time. And again, they
could study this and find, you know what, this is just not a good time to do it. maybe for our 250th birthday, maybe that generation will be in a better place to do it, but I, I want
us to look at what can we do to leave for, for the future. What was done for the 100th, do you know?
Representative RJ Hawk
Unverified
36:11
with the capital. The capital, yeah, no, no, but what I'm saying that like, was there any outside of that, was there any big, big celebration? Oh, I'm sure, I'm sure there was. I mean, because I just look at this and I, I think that, you know, anytime you're planning
something of this man, there's going to be tax dollars involved. I know that it's not in here, but we're, we're and we're already with the bills that are in place currently, you know, we've got, we've got a lot of, a lot of things on the agenda to spend taxpayer dollars, and I, I think that if we do this now, you agree, like, we're basically saying that we're mandating you to spend taxpayer dollars in in 2036 for this, for this celebration essentially. I mean, I like the idea. I'm not saying I don't like the idea. I just
think that we're, we're kind of mandating them to do something that
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
37:01
you're not gonna be here and some of us may not be here and we're telling somebody they got to do something at that point. Well, the, the, the commission has come up with the idea, any tax dollars that would be spent would still have to come through the General Assembly and I, and I, and This, this last week, I read an article where some, you know, it's one of those top 5 destinations in the US to go to, and I was actually surprised that Arkansas was on that list
of top 5 states to go through, because it was a, a hiking kind of deal. And when I scroll down through the comments, all the comments related to our state, as you can imagine, we're we're not glowing, right? There's nothing to do in Arkansas. There's no reason to, to come to Arkansas. And so, you know. People can say, hey, while you're in Arkansas, you know, go visit Crystal Bridges while you're in Arkansas, go to the Clinton library, whatever. Wouldn't it be great if we gave people a reason. You've got to
go to Arkansas to see this, right? To give people a reason to come to our state, you know, unfortunately, uh for too much of the country, Arkansas's flyover country. What can we do to change that? And that's what I'm hoping this would be as a catalyst for. And of course, that's going to require investment, you know, you know, when they built the arch in Saint Louis, that required a huge investment, but it has paid off for generations and generations and generations. It's, you know, people go to, go to Saint Louis just to see that, uh, people drive, you know, why else would you go to South Dakota? People drive there just
to see that, uh, see Mount Rushmore and they got a great motorcycle rally too, yeah, exactly, yeah, yeah, and I got to be there. during that. So, but, but so what I, what I'm seeing this is, is not only is it something for us to leave to the future, but it's also a could be a potential economic driver for the state. So, you know, if we were to look back Uh, you know, kind of using that mentality. This capital never would have been built because we could have built, uh, you know, a nice square building and been
done with it, right? That's what we do a lot with our architecture. There's square buildings, they're, they're very utility focused, but nothing beyond that. And I'm thinking again, what could, and again, they, they may look at this, they may study this and they may say, you know, we can't come up with anything. Now it's not a good time. Just the economy's not good, but you know, every year as a state, we generally have 100 $200 300 million dollars surpluses. What if we took $100 million and again, I don't know what the project
would be. What if we took $100 million we coupled that with, uh, you know, uh, private partnerships, got sponsorships. Something magnificent for the state and uh left a legacy that was still gonna be here in 100 years. Makes sense. Thank you. Representative
Meeks, I love your idea, um. I think you're right. I think you're right on. I think this is something that we should do. Um, I'll only support your bill
if you promise to Prohibit postmodern brutalism architecture and require classical Greek architecture. Is that something that you would consider, yes, I, I, I don't anticipate being appointed to this commission, but if I
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
40:15
was Mr. Chairman, I will, I will make that uh. I will, I will definitely agree to that. All right, very
good. It's postmodern architecture is killing the soul of humanity. Yes, indeed, Representative Ray, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I Representative
Representative David Ray
Unverified
40:31
Meeks, I, I love your passion and vision for
where this could go. I was in um
uh I traveled last year to Anchorage for a work trip and um got a chance to see the Museum of Alaska that they have in Anchorage, and I think your idea about Ultimately building some sort of state museum would be a really neat addition, um, I know it's a minor thing, but it, it does give me some heartburn that this includes per diem, I, I know that we just have a million of these type things and it all
adds up and it's just, I don't think I don't think it's necessary to pay people for per diem on this because this is such a good idea. I think there are tons of talented Arkansans that would be willing to volunteer their time. to serve on something like this and um we just, we just have so many of them that would be my, that would be my feedback. So,
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
41:27
uh, having heard that from, from a couple of you, uh, what, uh, I'd be willing to
do is, should we pass this out, uh, and I get it down to the Senate and I'll be happy to amend that out.
All right, I haven't heard anything about classical Greek architecture yet, but we'll come back to that Representative Hawk, you recognized and this
Representative RJ Hawk
Unverified
41:51
is for the chair, really, I think, um, question being that we're short on time and Representative Ray and I both have issues with the per diem. I know we are hearing constitutional menace this afternoon. Could we have Representative makes amend this and we just get that done before we start that because it seems like it'd be pretty simple, and then that way we could pass it out this afternoon today rather than
passing it and going to the Senate, uh, if he's open to doing that,
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
42:19
the chairman's willing to do that, I think it'd be a cleaner way to uh
to do it. It it's Representative Meek's bill. I'll leave that totally up to him. I personally think that that's a good idea. I also think you should
consider an amendment about uh banning postmodern. I architecture, so just please consider that hopefully that one is
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
42:38
a, a given, so, uh, so chairman, I'll, I'll go ahead and
I will pull the bill down. I'll get with, get an
amendment prepared and be ready to present that this afternoon. Uh, thank you, colleagues, thank you very much.
Next we have House Bill 1849, Representative Gramley. Um, Chair, if it pleases
Zach Gramli
Unverified
43:01
the committee, I'll do 2 for 1 today if you'll allow me to run SB 510. I will defer 1849, that the same bill, um, identical language. I always appreciate a good deal. Yes sir, you're that's what I like to hear.
Uh So to be clear, we're going to be presenting Senate Bill 510, which is identical language to the House bill, um, 1849, uh, Fort Smith has a really novel issue um in the state, but not nationally. There's a lot of these issues that are easily fixed in other states, but we actually have tribal land in the state of Arkansas. Um, it was recognized in I think February of this year. It's the it's a parking lot, um, that is right outside the Pecola casino. The
casino itself is in Oklahoma, but the parking lot itself is in Fort Smith and what has happened is it's created a gray area in in who actually has jurisdiction here because it's tribal land, so tribal nations should have jurisdiction to be able to um really patrol their parking lot and make sure that it's safe, um, but they'd be entering into Arkansas and into Fort Smith, and on the other side of that, we have tribal land where Fort Smith would like to be able to enter in and protect citizens and, and enforce the law and stuff like that. And so what this bill does
is it really allows the conversations to happen between Fort Smith and um a tribal nation to allow them to have a uh Clarity on what happens and how to respond to a situation, um, and like I said, these agreements are very common in other states, it's they're just not common here because we haven't had. we haven't acknowledged tribal land in the state before, um, so again, Fort Smith is really asking for this. They really need it just so that we can know
how to respond to respond appropriately to incidents. All
right, Representative Gramick has explained the bill. Are there any questions by the committee? Representative
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
45:12
Collins, you're recognized. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair, and you know I this seems fine. I, I, I did get some correspondence regarding um some
significant concerns. Do you know of any concerns regarding this? Is, uh, and, and like
Zach Gramli
Unverified
45:23
I said, to be clear, like you would, you would expect these conversations to already be happening. This is
just like allows it, um, so, OK. OK, thank you. All right.
Any other questions by the committee? Seeing no other questions by the
committee, we have no one signed up to speak for or against the bill. Representative Graham like you
recognized a close for your bill. I'm close for my bill, and I would appreciate a good vote. Graham like it's closed for his bill. What are the wishes of the committee? I think I saw Representative Rose actually first with the motion. Representative Rose makes a motion to pass. Is there any discussion on the motion? Seeing no discussion, all those
in favor say aye. All those opposed, yeah I have it. Congratulations, you passed your
Speaker 157
46:07
bill. Uh, thank you, Chair, thank you for, thanks for making a you're up. No, no, what's, what's next? You got another 1 1849 was identical language, so we passed 5:10, so I don't need to run 1849, so
you got a deal the not even
understanding what's going on, so my fault. Good job. All right, next. My understanding, Representative McKenzie is here, uh, 1867,
you're not gonna run that, is that correct, Representative
Speaker 167
46:39
McKenzie right, so 1867, we're passing over. OK. Uh, Britt McKenzie, uh,
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
46:46
District 7, State Representative Rogers, Arkansas, um, ladies and gentlemen, I'm extremely happy to be here today to present House Bill 1896. It's a dense spill, um, and it's got a lofty name, which is called the junk fee Elimination Act of 2025. Um,
probably like a lot of you over the interim, you find things that you fixate on as a legislator. You find, you know, a constituent brings an issue to you, you come back during session, you try to resolve it. Um, during the interim, I was made. aware of an issue, um, and I don't, you know, this is the quiet part out loud. I'm on a recorded thing, but it's important to say, um, during the interim, DFA announced that um the department was going to have a renewed processing payment fee for anyone that did a transaction either at a state
level or through a county-based revenue office for the purposes of like a DMV. Uh, it was going from 3% to 1.9%, which is I believe the governor even put out a press release because that was a very large decrease. And a savings to taxpayers within 10 days I got notification from a constituent. That, uh, they had gone to register their car to get it tagged and titled and that there was still online, not in person, it was the, the updated services that DMV provides that they were assessed a 3% transaction fee,
um, also confused because they understand that this information had come out and what the what the really there there was. I elevated this like probably anyone else in this room would do to the governor's office and said, hey, can you help me get some information on this? Um. I got word back in about 5 days that that that processing fee had not taken place in the back end of our internet internet technology services and that for over 2 weeks citizens were um uh charged the incorrect processing fee of 3% returning $40,000 back
to all of our constituents across the state, um, that led me down a very long rabbit trail that I will avoid to talk to you about today, but it uncovered for me something that um I think a lot of us wouldn't understand is that uh back in 19 985, uh, when the internet was this weird thing that government even still today can't get right, but thought of something maybe as a hindrance, let's go create um a board or a commission and then they'll figure out how we need the government needs to play, the state government needs to play a role in the internet. They created what's called the uh uh
the information network of Arkansas, which was a public-private board, um, with the purpose of which was for that board to provide oversight to what a role in statute is called the network administrator. That person, that role, not person sorry, that company or entity is supposed to basically in a very, very clunky analogy, supposed to make sure all the pipes and wires behind the walls here connects technologically um so that if the Secretary of State, as you go to incorporate your business, the information that you put into it then
connects to the data consolidation that happens on the publicly accessible Secretary of State website, um, and so forth, so on, and now replicate uh 30 years later that times 30 something agencies over 100 boards and commissions, and then every locality or municipality that exists that has a uh a processing fee or information that is required to get back to the state. It's a very large portion of what our state government does and how our constituents interact with them, um.
You'd be surprised to know that that network administrator role obviously is important because it's the conduit to which our agencies communicate with our constituents, um, that is a single entity, a company based out of Texas, um, and in the process of doing so has created and promulgated rules that allow for them to be the sole source vendor of a lot of the contracts that are asked of them or information that's brought to them as a network administrator, hey, you know, parks and tourism and we'd like to do X. Well, we can help facilitate
with why. It does not go, so anytime an agency commissioner board goes um to the network administrator for help or for services. It doesn't go through standard Office of State procurement processes. There is not a standard RFP process. There is not a 2 bucket 5 point um procurement um board that's impaneled or RFP members that are um that are brought to help, you know, on an objective basis, evaluate contracts for the purpose of competition. So why this eliminates junk fees?
And that's a very lofty term, I understand that, but it does it in two parts. This is not sexy. This is not really going to be an awesome boon for general revenue. These are fees that our taxpayers and our constituents face directly out of their pocket and into the pocket of a service provider. So anytime that we can promote transparency and promote competition, it's going to be the benefit of our constituents. The second is, uh, it's going to help promote, uh, like I mentioned previously, a standard procurement process through the Office of State.
Uh, procurement so that any new bid that comes through, any new website, any new widget, any new data collection that that takes place has to get the same level of attention and scrutiny that the Department of Education would for a service contract or DHS would for any type of a provider or insurer, um, I believe this is a really, this promotes a little bit of a lot of transparency, um. So what the bill does, it it will abolish the information network of Arkansas board. Um, that board is, uh, just in my humble and and uh my humble
opinion is outmoded. It has prescriptive board members from associations that I believe were really relevant in the 1995 that thought, uh, it would be important for these entities to be, you know, close to this new thing called the internet. Members of the bar association, the state library board independent insurers, um, the Secretary of State is technically the. chairman of this board, um, as well as um I believe the um director of the business division, the Secretary of State has as a prescribed seat on the board. So without uh updating
that board, it really isn't a true reflection of the constituencies within state government that use them best, um, as well as associations that may not have as much sway or influence or significance in how we judge the internet, um. So, uh, let me be quick about this. What this will do is this will put things back to the way things are supposed to be, uh, promote legislative oversight so that we can in the interim through through counsel, um, promote transparency in the procurement process as individual agencies come to us
for requests or supplemental appropriation requests or contract approvals or claims relevant to information technology services and um and I don't, I'm, I'm really passionate about this because I've spent a lot of time working on it, but just to, to add some um significance. There were 1.7 million transactions, credit card. transactions that took place in fiscal year 2024 $7.3 million were collected in credit card fees, so this isn't an insignificant amount of money, um, and none of these contracts were used to to compete against one another. Um, they're pretty
standard and uh there's a large national debate going on about exchange fees and that um the market standard of 3% actually incorporates about 80% of profit, um, because the, the ability for uh banks and uh independent processors to to. Make these transactions happen in a fluid way has become much more efficient and they're much more larger clearing houses now, so we have the opportunity to um to really do something great here which is promote transparency through putting contracts as they start to go out to build out services within
our state government, go through the standard procurement process and then hopefully and again through competition breeds excellence, put these contracts or uh uh put these contracts through that procurement process, so ultimately we can drive down that processing payment fee um on our constituents, uh, and. And we all have a little bit more money in our pocket. Um, it's dense, um, I understand that, um, but I'd be happy to take any questions. So that makes. Thank
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
54:39
you. uh, and I, I appreciate you bringing this
bill. I've been aware of the Information Network of Arkansas for quite a long time and have been kind of confused as to what they do and, and so forth, uh, only question I have is we're, we're transferring their duties over to DIS or now the Office of State Technology, um, I'm guessing you visited with them, no problems or ready to absorb whatever those duties
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
55:02
are this initially this bill was a repeal of
the uh information network Act of 1995, but we worked uh TSS helped. Write this bill. So I don't know what they're called now, but um they helped write the bill so
that it was in concert because there is a title transfer of current appropriation. There's a million dollars that we all appropriate to INA each year for the purposes of that that uh contract and enticements to state agencies to be a part of Tyler. So and and the reason I actually really know about this is because as an alternate for two terms now on communications, we get a quarterly report of updates on the transaction fees, but it's, as you could probably attest, there's no volume there. There's nothing behind it, um, uh, it doesn't go in so far as
to say, did we even think about recruiting a third party or a white label service to promote an efficiency. It just says, hey, it's 33% plus $1 for this one county for this revenue office, yeah right, thank you, sir. I appreciate it, yeah. Representative Collins.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
56:09
Thank you. Um, and thank you for this, uh, it's interesting, uh, idea. Is there anybody at this
point that you're aware of who's not for this or opposed to
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
56:18
this, uh, one would think that the network administrator who has a large percentage over 50% of of the services
to our state agencies would be opposed. I met with them yesterday and they were supportive of it. They believe because this isn't, this is um niche. This isn't like Visa or Mastercard can swoop into Arkansas and, and, you know, give us a better rate on all of it and move on and move on with their day. Um, doing work with the government is particular and that's why a lot of the larger process uh processors and banks try to avoid it, um, because of
the laws that we pass on them in terms of uh requirements, IPP, um, uh, data termination, stuff like that, or sorry, PII and data termination, so um they, the current incumbent believes that they can compete in the world because they've been doing it from a seat of incumbency for 30ish years, um, so to, to my knowledge, you know, and I've talked to the Secretary of State, they're the larger contracts, um, uh, you know, I'm not gonna say they're in favor of it, but they are neutral on the bill and that they are currently in the process of evaluating their contracts with some of these
companies anyway. OK. Yeah, thanks. Seeing no other questions. I, I don't think anyone has signed up to speak for against the bells or anyone in the audience that would like to. Speak for against the bill. Alright, seeing none, uh, Representative McKenzie, are you prepared to close for your bill? I'm prepared to close. Thank you, committee. I know this was like
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
57:39
very riveting and it kept you at the edges of your seats, but this is gonna be good, your constituents will see the benefit from this, so I'd appreciate a good vote.
All right, do we have a motion? So a motion from Representative Collins, uh, Is there any discussion on the motion motion to pass, I'm assuming. No discussion on the motion.
All right, all those in favor say aye. Any a pose. Thank you. Thank you. You've passed your bill. Back up.
All right, we're gonna back up and we're gonna back up and pick up HB 1800, uh. Please identify yourself for the committee and you're good to go. Thank you, Mindy Michael Lindon, House District 10.
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
58:40
All right, so this is HB 1800, we're bringing this back. Y'all had some questions
which I think we have addressed them all. Uh, they've been
engrossed into the amendment. What we have done is we have ensured that
um well let me start back here. HB 1800 basically says that if you have a client or someone is paying you that is outside of the US that you just need to make that clear to Arkansas citizens and so um for people who are lobbyists, if you are a representative of a non-US entity, then you will need to go ahead and amend Your form on the SOS website and acknowledging that yes indeed. You have a client who is from
outside the US that um you'll identify where their residence is, where your office is in the US and then what your duties are. So it's very simple. We cleared out a lot of the requirements that we had before, it made it very simple, um, and then if you're an organization that is being paid, you will file that with ethics, uh, just like you would if you were, had a BQC or something like that. And so that will sit with ethics, um, and it will be the same disclosures, funding sources, expenditures. Affiliations and those kinds of things, and that is really the
sum total of this bill. Um, again, we cleared up a lot of the questions that we had last time in terms of cost to the SOS, that is something that they can absorb within their budget. It looks like it won't be that much money to amend the website and ethics is comfortable holding the organizational filings. Happy to take
Representative David Ray
Unverified
1:00:14
any questions. Representative. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I apologize, I was not here when you presented the
bill the first time, so is this, is this just apply to like representing the
interests of foreign governments or if you, if you represented like Volkswagen or Husqvarna, that what you'd have to register that as well registering it and it's just an
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:00:35
expansion of your current form that you're filling out for as a lobbyist, just acknowledging that their headquarters are in other countries so that if anyone is interested of why Volkswagen um. is lobbying
Arkansas legislature, they can say, oh well, they're from Germany here, you know, at least I have an understanding of it. We
just want some transparency to the fact that there is someone outside of the US who was impacting Arkansas.
OK, all right. Say no with questions for the committee, um. Is there anyone, no one
signed up to speak for against the bill. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak for against the bill. Aren't saying none, uh, Representative, are
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:01:20
you ready to call free will? I'd love to. So again, um, I appreciate you letting me bring this back. This
bill prioritizes transparency, accountability, and helps to
protect Arkansas's democratic process, and with that, I asked for a good vote. I
don't have much to do pass by Representative Crawford. Uh, did you have a question, Representative Car? That's about right. Is there any discussion on the motion? You recognized Representative Ra. Yeah, and I'm
Representative David Ray
Unverified
1:01:53
sorry, I'm just, I'm, I'm. I didn't think of this question
before we moved into the discussion, so maybe another
member of the committee can answer my question. What about, I'm just trying to think through this, what about a a foreign company that has a US division. I, I just don't know, maybe that's not a big concern. I just, something that I thought of and mentioned it, thought someone may have an answer to it. OK. Representative
Collins. I don't have an answer to it,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:02:30
but um, you, you reminded me, Representative Ray, something I, I've
said in here. I've tried to quote you and I butchered it, but I think it applies here, and I think I'll not butcher it this time. Transparency is for government privacy is for people, and I think this bill really goes the other way, and uh I'm opposed to the bill because it's just a lot of undue disclosures that is gonna chill people from participating when
there's no real basis for it, so I Appreciate, uh, I appreciate no
but thanks. Seeing no other discussion on the bill. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed. The eyes have a congratulations, Representative, you passed your bill. Did you want to go ahead and do 18. 37 while you're there. Is there a OK, we have an amendment, um.
Pass that out. Give everybody
a moment to take a look at it and. Your You'll be recognized to uh Present your amended. OK.
All right, representative, you're recognized to present your amendment. Thank you, Representative Mindy McAlinden, House
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:04:21
District 10. So this amendment, uh, we brought this bill a couple uh last week and this amendment just clears up some of the issues that we had, some of the questions
that we had on the foreign ballot measures and so with that, I would ask for a
good vote. So I have a motion to adopt all those in favor say aye. All right. Is all those poses right.
So, you'll recognize, so go ahead and present the bill
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:04:52
as amended. Thank you, Chairman. So again, we brought this bill last week. We had a couple of
questions on the bill. Representative Collins specifically had questions about uh section 5 of the bill and so they were, they were good questions. We went back and looked, it's on, I'm sorry, section 3, on page 2 if you're following along and um we went back and clarified that and one of the big clarifications was to change the word funds on line 11 to donations to be clear that if you're receiving income or interest from a foreign
organization that that was not part of this, nor was it intended to be captured. And so it truly is receiving a donation from um hostile entity that is then expected, expecting you to pass that along and influence the the ballot measures in the United States, um, we also added a couple other things just to make sure that we had clarified language while we were amending, um. And one of those things was to make sure on page 5 that we did, um, if you were a ballot question that if you receive
donations in excess of $10,000 that that was the trigger there. I don't think it was as clear as it could have been, and um I also want to point out that there is a little bit of Um, question from ethics about exactly how donations should be defined, and that is something that ethics will be clarifying within the rules promulgation to make sure that it is encapsulating exactly what we want it to say. And with that, I'll take any questions. Uh, Representative
Speaker 190
1:06:09
Rose. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I had a quick question.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:06:22
Um on page, I think it's page 6. Page 5, page 6, There's, there's some retroactivity that can take place here. Um Is there any chance that This could penalize an
individual or organization. Say that made a contribution that at the time, say today that it's legal. And then after the fact,
We can now go back 4 years. And, and then penalize somebody for something that was legal at the time? No, I don't
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:07:01
think so, because at that time, they would not be considered a hostile entity, right? So they wouldn't be on the list. Um, it prohibited, so when they gave the donation, it was not prohibited. OK, uh, follow up, Mr. Chair. OK.
Speaker 220
1:07:13
and I'm not sure if I'm looking at the
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:07:20
right version of the bill. Thank you. Um.
I think it's page 5 line 1011, 1213. Um, but it
says, Prohibited sources within the four-year period immediately preceding the date the contribution was made. So is that Would that, could that be a month from now, then you can go back 4 years. Correct. So if you, yes and no, if you
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:07:46
gave to a prohibited source, say 4 years ago, um, if they weren't a prohibited source, then then it wouldn't be captured. OK, so if they're designated in one now,
Speaker 223
1:07:58
it doesn't go back. They're not bad guys 4 years. It doesn't
count, yeah. OK, alright, that was, that was, thank you. All right,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:08:14
any other questions about the committee, Representative Collins, you're recognized.
Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you for the amendment. I think that is a very helpful improvement. Um, I just wanted to clarify something you said, um, you referred to receiving contributions from hostile
countries. This, this one just, it, it doesn't have to be a hostile country, that is correct. It does not, it's just
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:08:33
foreign funding. You're thank you for that correction. That's it applies equally
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:08:36
to all countries. OK, thanks. All right, any other questions by the committee? Seeing no further questions by
the committee, we have no one signed up to speak for or against the bill. Representative
McAlinden, you're recognized to close for your bill. Well, thank you again for letting me bring this bill back and for letting
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:09:00
me clarify some of the um the language in the bill. I think that it's just really important that this bill seeks to amend existing laws to make sure that we are banning foreign funding from ballot measures
and so there's no undue influence and that the will of Arkansans is what is coming forth in our ballot measures, and with that, I'm closed.
MacAloon has closed for her bill. What are the wishes of
the committee, Representative Ray, motion to pass. Representative Ray has made a motion to pass as as amended, is that right, Representative Ray?
Yes. All right. Is there any discussion on the motion? Seeing no
discussion on the motion, we have a motion to pass as amended. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, yeah, I have it, congratulations, you
passed your bill. Representative McAlin. Do you have another bill? I have one more. I have electric vehicle bill if I can present that. Let's go ahead
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:09:47
and do that. Give me just a second Yeah. I can't find my phone. Thank you.
All right, um, Representative McAlinden this House Bill 1683. All right, you're recognized. Thank you, Mindy McAlinden, um, House District 10. So House
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:10:20
Bill 1683 is a critical measure to ensure that Arkansas taxpayers do not support industries that are built on forced labor. Yes sir. My understanding is you have an amendment on this bill.
I probably do, yeah. OK, we've got one that was brought to the committee, so we're gonna pass that out. give everyone an opportunity to review it.
Unknown speaker
1:10:45
Go ahead of ourselves a little bit, I think. Sorry about that. I'm excited. No problem. I have one. Thank you.
All right, Representative McAlinden, we first we have an amendment. So before we uh Go into the presentation of
the bill. You're recognized to present your amendment. Thank you.
Speaker 236
1:11:30
Um, so this amendment just, I just make a couple of quick changes
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:11:34
adding in good faith provides and knowingly provided at the recommendation of the Auto Alliance. Uh, we worked closely with them to make changes in the bill, and they had asked those changes. The last change, I worked with Representative Collins just to clarify some um some enforcement issues and I think we made some
good changes there. All right, Representative McAlinden has explained her amendment. Are there any questions about the amendment by the committee, saying no questions by the committee. Uh, is there a motion to adopt the amendment? The motion to adopt the amendment Representative Barry, is there any discussion on the motion, seeing none. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed. The amendment's been adopted. Representative McClendon, you're recognized to present your bill, House Bill 1683, as amended. Thank you. Um, so, House Bill 1683 is a
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:12:22
critical measure to ensure that Arkansas taxpayers do not support
industries that are built on forced labor. This bill specifically prohibits governmental entities from procuring electric vehicles or the components if they are manufactured using forced labor. Uh, this is not a hypothetical issue. This is an issue that is happening right now, a significant portion of the world's cobalt a mineral essential for electric vehicle batteries is mind using children
as young as 4 years old. According to a congressional commission in the Congo, these children spend up to 12 hours a day in dangerous gravel mines
and perilous mine shafts, not by choice, but because they, because the demand of cobalt has skyrocketed. Driven largely by a global push for more batteries. Likewise, in China, where over 60% of the world's lithium and coal water refined, Uighurs and other ethnic minorities are subjected to forced labor under a state imposed labor transfer programs. These programs involve coercion, mass detention, constant surveillance, and workers forced into mining and refining operations for critical minerals. I am a firm believer in a free market, an educated market can
and should regulate itself, but there are moral lines we must never cross. One of those lines is allowing children to be exploited for the sake of electric vehicle production, especially when ethical alternatives exist. Just as the diamond industry took steps to eliminate blood diamonds, automakers are working to source minerals responsibly. Leading manufacturers are shifting towards battery technologies that reduce or eliminate the need for cobalt. For example, Tesla uses a lithium-ion phosphate battery, and some of their models which require absolutely no cobalt. General Motors is transitioning
to a nickel magnesium cobalt aluminum, as well as the LFP batteries, uh, which significantly reduced cobalt as well. In Rivian is another that is investing in ethical source. and developing bat battery technologies that minimize these reliances. Federal guidelines already encouraged the shift. By 2025, at least 60% of battery components must be manufactured or assembled within North America and critical minerals must be sourced from US or other free trade partner countries. This transition is already underway and House Bill 1683
ensures that Arkansas leads by example. As legislators, we are entrusted with taxpayer dollars. We have a duty to spend them wisely and ethically. This means ensuring that we do not fund industries that exploit and enslave children. House Bill 1683 upholds Arkansas's commitment to human rights and moral responsibility. The Auto alliance has engaged extensively in discussions on this bill and remains neutral. The governor's office supports this bill. with that, I would be happy
Speaker 190
1:14:52
to take any questions. Thank you, Representative
McAlinden, Representative Clowney, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:15:00
McAlinden, I'm all for this shift. I guess my question is, why does this bill target EVs in particular. In other
words, these batteries show up in a number of other things, laptops, tablets, smartphones, why are we targeting EVs with this bill? It's a great question. One, it takes a lot more
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:15:15
of the uh core minerals for the EV batteries and for other batteries, um, and 2, because I think it is a great place to start putting a stake in the ground. Thank you.
Representative Collins, you're recognized for a question.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:15:31
Thank you Mr. Chair. So, of course, Representative, we talked about this and, and I, you know, this amendment does contain some, one of the things we talked about, um. So I mean, I still have a lot of questions about the, the way that this uh is set up with the civil fines, and I, I guess the first question is, um, was there going to be another amendment that would address some of these
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:16:00
issues, or is this is this the only amendment you're intending to make here. So this was the only amendment. I spoke with the AG's office extensively after you and I chatted and you chatted with them and um we felt like that that covered the bulk of what they wanted. to say, we actually, and I didn't mention this, but we actually deleted uh for your reference on page 4 lines 26 and 27. I felt like that addressed some of your concerns as well. And then the other issues as we talked about who could bring those, it looked like it looked like it was written well enough in the bill, um. You will know when we made the
the adjustment on lines 19 through 21, we actually changed that civil penalty to up
to $5000 leaving that more in the hands of the courts and of the governmental entity that was aggrieved. OK, so
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:16:45
then, um, so now we're answer me I guess this are we gonna be doing this through a court or doing this by an administrative fund. I think they can do it
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:16:55
either way, as I understand it. So
you could come back if um and I guess reprimand, for example, an
employee, you could fire that employee, um, you could send a letter if you don't get a response, I think then you could take it to court. I don't think it's any different than any other um violation that someone does. And I think it's, as I understand it, I'm not a lawyer, but as I understand it from speaking with the AG's office this morning that this is How this would be handled. Well,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:17:26
I, you know, I think it is, it is a little unusual to me because you're talking about a, a civil penalty on a government agency.
Uh, and you know we have sovereign immunity. Is this intended to waive sovereign immunity. I don't think that it is. Well, will there be a civil penalty on a government agency and government employees acting in their governmental role. Well, for example, under the
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:17:51
employee, the amendment states that they have actually acted outside of their role. And so I think that waves that, is that not correct? Uh, it says they shall be found to be acting outside of the course and scope of his or her employment and is personally. for the civil penalty.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:18:08
Well, but I believe there's also um a fine on the government entity itself, would that go through? Claims commission or or would that be, you're saying that would
be through a court? I'm saying it could be through a court, yes. Uh, but
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:18:22
there's no private right of action because
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:18:25
you struck that. So who's supposed to be bringing these actions in. So for example, if um If the,
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:18:31
if it's a state agency or if it's
a city agency that buys it, then the city could
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:18:39
bring that course of action, a city would be suing a
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:18:44
state agency in court would be suing the city agency, right? The city manager who made that decision.
That's who would be suing. It's whoever is aggrieved by that. And then,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:18:55
and then they would sue, but they wouldn't get any damages because the the fine would be paid to the state. So why
would anybody sue if they don't get damages. Uh, because they don't want forced labor with small
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:19:10
children, and so they were being ethical and moral. OK,
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:19:15
and then to just stay on this a little bit,
you also have uh a civil penalty against the manufacturer or seller of these EVs or their components. How would that be done if that could be an administrative fine, what agency is going to assess a fine against the seller, what jurisdiction would they have? So again, if they knowingly gave false information, then I
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:19:40
assumed that that would go to the AG's office, who would then Reach out to them and bring a lawsuit of some sort. Like I feel like the AG is very comfortable with this language. I am not a lawyer, so I'm a little bit out of my depth, but having spoken with them and having them looked at this when I was crafting the bill, as well as yesterday after we spoke and then again this morning, I feel like they're very comfortable with the parts of the bill, and I, I wish I could give you more detail. Unfortunately, Alexander was sick this morning and unable to make the
committee meeting, but I feel like they're very comfortable and so I will lean
on them and their expertise. OK. The All right, any
other questions about the committee? Representative Beck, you're recognized. And this, I, I made
missis in the bill, but I was looking. The, the use of the word vehicle could this apply to a drone or something Because we buy a lot of drones and I suspect that.
I, I, I I was reading the definition, the legal definition of drone of a vehicle and it says it's Operated on land, but then it goes into a thing. It also says that it's something that has a a motor to propel it so.
We'll, we'll just say it doesn't apply. All right, any other questions by the committee? Seeing
no other questions about the committee, we do have one person signed up to speak for
the bill, Samantha Vick. Mr. Vick, if you
would identify yourself, state the name of any organization you may be here representing. And then you, you are recognized to present your remarks.
Samantha Vick
Unverified
1:21:33
Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Gosway and members of the committee. My name is Samantha Vick. Sorry, I'm gonna push this closer. My belly won't let me scoot in anymore. I'm sorry. OK, thank you.
Um, sorry, thank you, members of the committee. My name is Samantha Beck. I am a senior state government relations manager for Heartland Impact. We are a nationwide a nonprofit think tank. Um, I am primarily here on this issue because I have worked on this legislation in other states, um, and very happy to speak for it, uh, with Senator McAlin or Representative McAlinden, um, to first understand this issue, the core principle of it is to understand what rare earth minerals are, despite their name, they're not rare in abundance. They're rare in the ways in which they
are found. So they're found in very small ores that have to be picked apart, they're not found in major veins like a lot of other minerals that we have in the United States or that we typically mine like lithium. Um, so the circumstances that surround rare earth minerals create extreme difficulty in mining and refining them. This manifests in problems with environmental damage, sustainability, and the labor used to produce such intensive labor intensive products. I will mirror but be brief with some of my because it's basically
everything representative McAlinden said, um, the mining of these rare earth minerals is frequently done among children, um, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uighurs and that region of China. At this time, China has a dominant hold on the market with 60% of global production, and 85% of processing capacity capacity. According to the International Trade Administration, the the Democratic Republic of the Congo was the world's largest cobalt mine in 2022. With the production of 41% of
the world's cobalt. It's universally understood that this cobalt is mined by children. Concerns about these aforementioned points prompted the federal government with bipartisan support to pass the Uighur forced labor Prevention Act, as well as restricting the application of tax credits for electric vehicles. By prohibiting the procurement of EVs and prohibiting government contracts from procuring electric vehicles that may be made through forced labor. Arkansas can follow suit with federal guidelines and use the power of the Arkansas's purse and the power of state contracts to lead with a clear
conscience. Additionally, this legislation fits perfectly into Governor Sanders' expressed wishes to create more distance between Arkansas and China. The forces of the free market can and will absolutely mold around legislation such as this. We have seen companies such as Tesla Ford and Rivian as representative uh previously mentioned, increasingly adopt lithium iron phosphate batteries as opposed to nickel magnesiate cobalt batteries that are commonly used. As a pro, these
Speaker 265
1:24:16
batteries are also safer, more affordable, and have improved life spans compared to the other
Samantha Vick
Unverified
1:24:23
cobalt batteries. They are also made without the morally compromised components that are featured in the cobalt batter. It's proven that economic and political stipulations work and they nudge manufacturers and consumers into decisions that can be very effective. Just last week, we saw Hyundai Motor Group announce a $21 billion investment in the United States with pending um threats of tariffs looming. This is exactly how the free market is designed to work. This is exactly how rules like this and stipulations are designed to work and all of the companies associated
that do create electric vehicles, can find ways to work around this, such as the ways that Tesla, Ford and Rivian have. Um, at the end of the day, there's no price too high for the prevention of child or slave labor. Arkansas has an opportunity to be a leader in the abolition of this movement in the country, and through this policy you can ensure that Arkansas taxpayer dollars are not being used to pay for electric vehicles that even partially use oppressive labor. Um, on the topic of why this is a good starting point. So many fleets
are used for so many governmental purposes, um, and this is a good place to start. And if any one of you do want to sponsor legislation or work on legislation that eventually gets to what's in our in our laptops and phones, I'd be happy to come down and do the same thing again when that happens. Um, but thank you so much.
All right, thank you very much, Ms. Vick. Are there any questions by the committee, Representative Collins? Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:25:51
for being here. Um, does, does your organization have a
position on climate change? Do you accept the scientific consensus that climate change is real
Samantha Vick
Unverified
1:26:02
and primarily caused by humans. The organization with which the C4 that I work for is associated with, um, Understands that climate change is. Something that we humans have contributed to, but there are also larger standards and larger cycles in the In the world that I have indicated, um. That we get to this point and other science and data that
follows that. I'm not sure how that's particularly relevant to this topic,
Speaker 266
1:26:29
um, but yes, that's. That is. Well, I'll follow up by
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:26:33
saying that I think I'm starting to understand why it's relevant, um, your organization that my understanding is a is a leading advocate of climate change denial.
And here we have a bill that only targets electric vehicles and makes it more difficult to sell them and use them in our state.
And you know, if I were an organization that uh you know. wanted to put forth an agenda, this would be a crafty way of doing it, so, um, I, I appreciate your time and and I I understand what's
Samantha Vick
Unverified
1:27:14
back please, chair. Yes, you're recognized. Thank you, um, this legislation does not particularly prohibit the use of electric vehicles. It actually just incentivizes the market to use more concise and um clear conscious means to do
that. Should, should we have universal electric vehicles that don't rely on cobalt mine by small children, my organization would absolutely be for that. Um, so that's more of that, that's the content of this issue, um, again, the United States has cut its carbon, um, it's carbon dioxide more than most other countries without a lot of the stipulations, Canada has a lot of EV mandates, and they also have carbon taxes and the carbon emissions compared to Canada in the last 10 years has substantially gone down. So this
is uh not real, not. Yes, I've, I'll just leave it at that before I can if I
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:28:05
could comment on that too, um, I just want to be clear, this is not a climate bill. This is a bill to protect children, and so
I, I don't actually appreciate the implication that just because it is a it is an electric vehicle versus a coal powered vehicle that that is a climate issue, it is truly, as I said in my um presentation that is truly about let's not exploit children for the purpose of having more
electric vehicle batteries when we have options. And so I just want to bring back to the actual purpose of what this bill is and why I brought
it. All right, any other questions by the committee? Seeing none, thank you, Ms. Vick, for your comments. Appreciate you being here. Seeing
No further questions by the committee and no one signed up to no one else
signed up to speak for or against the bill. Representative McAlinden, you're recognized to close for your bill. Thank you. Thank you so much for your tolerance of me
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
1:29:02
bringing 3 bills today. Again, I just want to reiterate that this bill,
um, the goal of this bill is to be sure that we are having ethically sourced vehicles, um, just like the diamond industry eliminated blood diamonds. We need to be looking to
source minerals responsibly, and this is something that Arkansas can do to step forward into that. Um, we can lead by example. We as legislators are entrusted with taxpayer dollars to spend
them wisely and ethically, and I think this means ensuring that we do not fund industries that exploit and
enslave children when, especially when we have other options. And with that, I'm closed for my bill. Representative McAlinden has
closed for her bill. I will remind you there is an amendment on the bill. What are the wishes of the committee, Representative Crawford. Yeah I make a motion to pass. As amended as amended. Representative Crawford has made a motion to pass as amended is there any discussion on the motion, Representative Crawford, you're
Representative Cindy Crawford
Unverified
1:30:00
recognized. Representative McAlinden, thank you for bringing this bill, um,
I think anytime we can protect children across Arkansas or across the world. It is something that we as legislators should stand up and champion and thank you for doing this. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other discussion on the motion? Seeing
no further discussion on the motion, we do have a motion to pass as amended. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed,
the eyes have it. Congratulations, Representative
McAlenon, you've passed your bill. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you. believe we have Representative Painter
here. Hiding in the corner. Representative Painter, this House Bill 1898. If it's OK with you, Mr. Chair, I have a couple of people from ABC that would like to join me, of course. This is House Bill 1898, correct? Correct. All right. Representative Painter, you're recognized. Representative Stetson Painter District 3, Baxter County in Fulton County,
and if your guest would introduce themselves and the name of the organization
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
1:31:10
they're here representing, David Potter, DFA regulatory enforcement
Speaker 274
1:31:14
Division. Christie Bjornsen, I'm the director of the alcoholic Beverage Control in Arkansas
Tobacco Control. All right, Representative Painter, you're recognized
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
1:31:22
to present your bill. All right, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, HB 1898, uh, this bill establishes the regulatory division as an agency with DFNA creates structure and gives certain oversight authority to the administrator and enforcement
director, both these positions and all agent positions already exist and appropriation and have been for several years. It combines ABC enforcement and ATC enforcement into the regulatory enforcement division. These agencies have been working together since 2020, sharing the workload. The regulatory enforcement division will comprise of existing agents no new positions or appropriations are needed. Outlines what areas of law and the rule of the regulatory division will oversee
and who they report findings to. which is current practice also ensures that existing law enforcement ABC ATC language is applied to regulatory division agents, so they have the proper authority to carry out their mission. Um, why is this is important, provides licensee, permit holders, and industry stakeholders, clarity by knowing who they're interacting with in the field and who to call if they need assistance. It creates an identity and unification for
agency work for both ABC and ATC and allows them to refer themselves with a clear name and with clear responsibilities and have a chain of command. It provides structure for the agency at the legislature adds additional responsibilities for regulation. What this bill does not do, it does not add additional personnel or positions. It does not require additional funding, change any special revenues or increased general revenue
and uh folks have uh from Arkansas Chiefs of Police Association, Sheriff's Association,
commission on Law Enforcement Standards and training in Arkansas grocers and retailers are all supportive of this bill and uh if you guys have any question or make any statements you can. Thank you committee. I appreciate your time
Speaker 279
1:33:19
and hearing this. This is A, uh, in-house bill where it uh organizes us internally and it gives us some structure moving forward so that we're better positioned to take on any additional responsibilities that this body may pass our way. It also provides some clarity for our retailers, our, uh, uh, any of our uh stakeholders that they
know that they're dealing with an agent from the regulatory division. Well, we've currently been very successful with merging ABC and ATC as much as we can, uh, we've added. More to our plight we're doing more now than we ever have. We're about to reach 4000 compliance checks, uh, for sales to minor compliance we're doing more inspections and more active in this field than ever and so this actually just helps us and solidifying who we are as an agency and so I would be happy to answer any questions.
S B Ornsson, did you have any remarks? Um,
Speaker 274
1:34:16
no, I would really just kind of echo what Director Potter said, I am the director of both ABC and
Speaker 276
1:34:21
ATC, our agents work together and if we think of this from common sense, think about grocery store, convenience stores, you can generally or a consumer can generally go in and buy both tobacco products and alcohol products, so this kind of does just create unification within what already exists inside of DFA. All
right, any questions by the committee, Representative Rose, you're recognized. Thank you,
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:34:43
Mr. Chair. Representative Painter, do you know, do all the agents who are currently under these divisions, do they already have full law enforcement authority across
the state. If it's all right, I'm gonna let Director Potter answer that question.
Uh, yes, sir, they, they do. They're, uh,
Speaker 279
1:34:57
both agencies are full law enforcement agencies, uh, tobacco control has been a law enforcement agency since over 20 years, and I believe ABC has been one since the 1950s and they currently have uh state law enforcement authority in the language in this bill mirrors existing statute, and I brought
Speaker 280
1:35:14
those statutes as well. So if this passes, what, what happens to both of you? How does your how does your position change?
Speaker 279
1:35:22
We remain, sir, of course, our appropriation has been going through for a couple of years, uh, Director Bornson will remain in her position and
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:35:33
I will remain in my position. I was looking at uh the language that is uh stating that Personnel assigned as agents of the regulatory enforcement division, etc. etc. etc. will be
considered full-time law enforcement officers by Standards. It's on page 3. Is there anything in this bill that says that those individuals have to already be considered law enforcement or have had to have passed, uh, any, any kind of training,
uh, being given any kind of law enforcement certification. Uh, yes
Speaker 280
1:36:03
sir, there is actually an ABC uh statute, which I've got both of which
Speaker 279
1:36:08
here, it is a requirement that these uh agents are fully certified law enforcement officers, uh,
It is a requirement and then we do it here to the standards of training. So, and
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:36:21
I, I appreciate that you said it's in statute under ABC. Is, is it in this bill that anybody who is given that position will have to meet those same standards. We would,
Speaker 280
1:36:36
we would be subject to, to quest, and that is our over uh overarching governing body
Speaker 279
1:36:42
that requires uh that we do our annual trainings and which
we far exceed and do that so we are governed by class as far as law enforcement certification. so is so uest
Speaker 280
1:36:54
would, would oversee that we would be compliant with this section. Does that answer your
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:37:00
question? No, and I, and I maybe I'm not asking it well. I think you're answering
well, maybe I'm not asking well. Uh Page 3 line 7 says personnel assigned as agents.
And then if you go down line 13. Be considered full-time law
enforcement officers by classed But it doesn't say that cleft will certify. This is saying that they will be considered. So simply being assigned as an agent. It seems like this is saying that once they're assigned, then le has to recognize that. No, sir, that's actually existing language out of the tobacco statute, so that
Speaker 279
1:37:40
is, that's, that's taken directly from the law enforcement statutes of tobacco control. So it's your
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
1:37:49
position which would give me great comfort
that no matter what, some somebody being assigned as an agent or being given one of these positions, they, they will have to already be qualified as a law enforcement
Speaker 280
1:38:02
agent. Yes, sir, that is correct and does have the ability if we do not meet minimum
Speaker 288
1:38:07
standards to decertify officers or so forth. OK, right, yeah, thank you. Yes, sir. Representative Mayberry, you're recognized.
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
1:38:22
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I'm just trying to understand, um. You have an
agent that. was overseeing tobacco and knew all that you had an agent that was overseeing marijuana and knew all that. He had one who was overseeing alcohol and knew all that. Does that mean now you haven't one agent that would do all three things and would have to become that more knowledgeable of all that or I,
I'm trying to simplify this from my little brain. Yes,
Speaker 279
1:38:53
ma'am, that's a great question. Uh, when we all merged together, uh, currently, uh, we were able to do more and so the goal was that our same agents that are out doing compliance checks for sales to minors would be able to do alcohol, would be able to do tobacco. What that is, uh, over the last few years, what we've done is we've merged into 5 internal divisions, ones that specialize in medical marijuana, one's that specialize in sales to minor compliance. We have investigations division and intelligence analysts. po s ition So, uh, those same agents rotate between those
divisions for cross training. So yes, ma'am, the goal is to have agents that do everything, uh, so, so one agent going to,
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
1:39:32
as you mentioned, the, the supermarket that perhaps sells uh alcohol but also sells, um, the tobacco product, you now have just one person
going there and, and. Checking on all of it, ma'am, that's correct. OK. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Representative Wooldridge, you're recognized.
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
1:39:56
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this just basically streamlines the process, gives you more eyes out there in the field. We're looking for more bad actors. We're taking away those opportunities to sell to miners regardless now of a division, right? We're just putting. More eyes out there in the field. That is exactly correct. I have a motion at the proper time, Mr. Chair. All right.
I, I do, uh, I guess I have a couple of questions, Mr. Potter, so what is your position, beverage control? I'm the uh regulatory enforcement
Speaker 279
1:40:27
director and by statute I'm the alcoholic beverage control enforcement director. And then Miss Bjornsen,
Speaker 274
1:40:36
what's your position? I'm the director of Alcoholic Beverage Control and Arkansas Tobacco Control. So
what's the distinction between your two positions? Director Potter's a
Speaker 276
1:40:45
cop. I do not carry a gun. Um, I'm an attorney, so we have an administration side of ABC and ATC and we have an enforcement side of ABC and ATC. Medical marijuana was tasked to ABC as
well, so our enforcement agents are all the same body of certified law enforcement agents. Some do focus on medical marijuana versus tobacco or alcohol, but since transformation, the agencies under DFA have kind of been operating. in sync with each other, and we think that's going well. So this really
just creates an identity for us. OK, interesting. And then why is the Y
is uh enforcement of Alcoholic beverage control, tobacco control. Why is that under DFA?
Speaker 305
1:41:30
What's the justification for that? I believe it's with the licensing and the taxing and everything like that, but
Speaker 279
1:41:37
I wouldn't, uh, that was in, in play a long time before I came around, sir.
I wouldn't want to speculate too, too much kind of seems like you guys are, of course, are doing a law enforcement type function, you know, we've
got Department of Public Safety, we have other things. I know we did transformation. I'm old enough to remember that was around here when we did that and I'm guessing. If you weren't already there when transformation took place, they put you guys under DFA. I'm
guessing there's good reasoning for that, um. That is correct. It
Speaker 274
1:42:06
is by understanding that we were combined at the time of transformation because ABC's regulatory framework is so similar to what tobacco control
Speaker 276
1:42:12
was already doing, um, so I think when that happened in 2018 we just never really got a name, so unfortunately the enforcement division has kind of failed to give a concise identity. Sometimes people are like, well, you got a tobacco agent in here and I sell alcohol and it kind
of just gets confusing for permit holders. Got you. All right. Very good. All right, any other questions by the committee? All right, seeing no questions by the committee. We have no one signed up to speak for or against
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
1:42:45
the bill. Representative Painter, you're recognized the clothes for your bill. I am closed. I appreciate the questions from the committee and respectfully ask for a motion to pass. Representative
Painter has closed for his bill. Representative Wooldridge, motion to pass. Is there any discussion on the motion? Seeing no discussion on the
motion, all those in favor say aye. All those opposed, yeah, I have it, congratulations, you passed your bill.
All right, I see Representative Elissa Brown, uh, actually, I don't see her.
I did. There she is. had seen her earlier. She's been patiently waiting. And my understanding is she has a Senate bill to present. We're looking down upon Senate
bills today, but we're gonna make an exception in
Speaker 307
1:43:37
this case. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Melissa Brown, District 41. Do you
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:43:42
have a guest, um, and then can I let my guests introduce themselves for the
record and uh You may Representative Brown, uh, to be clear, which, uh
Senate bill are we Senate Bill 433.
Senate Bill 433. All right, um. You have a guest if you would, uh, state your name and any organization you're here representing. Good morning, Mr.
Stephanie Taub
Unverified
1:44:10
Chair. My name is Stephanie Taub. I am senior counsel with First Liberty Institute. right. And my
Timothy Barton
Unverified
1:44:15
name is Timothy Barton. I'm the president of WallBuilders. All right. Good to see you both here this
morning. Representative Brown, you are recognized to present Senate bill. 433. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you committee um members SB 4 to
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:44:33
33 is just amending the current national motto Display Act to also include the 10 Commandments, um, and with that I will let my guests make some remarks. Good morning and thank you for the
Speaker 314
1:44:46
opportunity to testify and support of this Senate bill and to give a legal analysis of the bill and its constitutionality. I'm senior counsel at First Liberty Institute, a nationwide nonprofit law firm dedicated to defending religious liberty for all Americans. Past few years, my firm has had several
victories at the United States Supreme Court, including two key cases addressing the establishment clause. We successfully represented the American Legion against the American Human. Association to defend a World War One war memorial shaped like a cross. We also represented Coach Kennedy against the Bremerton School District. That case clarified how lower courts should analyze questions of whether government displays or other. with religious elements are constitutional under the First Amendment.
So I've been asked to give a legal analysis of this bill. It provides that a display of the 10 Commandments will be posted in classrooms and other government buildings in the state along with the national motto, which is currently being displayed. So the question is how will courts analyze whether this is constitutional under the Establishment Clause. To do that, I'll give a very, very brief history of Supreme Court opinions on the subject. In short, the analysis has changed significantly over the past several years.
with the Supreme Court moving from what was called the lemon test to what today is known as the history and tradition test. The Supreme Court began applying the stablishment Clause to the states in the mid-1900s in the 1970s, the Supreme Court created a test called the lemon test. It looked at the purpose, effect, and entanglement with religion. It was heavily criticized as arbitrary, difficult to apply, and not consistent with the original meaning and understanding of the Constitution, so in, in practice, in fact, under lemon.
Even long standing practices or displays were often declared unconstitutional if they had religious elements. Sometimes cultivating. Um, an extreme intolerance for mentions of religion in public life and sometimes misleading government to infringe on the free exercise of religious rights. So the Supreme Court has addressed the constitutionality of the 10 Commandments displays and has come out different ways over the years. The case uh that applied the lemon uh the cases
that applied the lemon test, the court found it unconstitutional. And when the court looked to the history and tradition, it found the 10 Commandments to be constitutional. Very brief summary. Recently, the Supreme Court has clearly stated that the lemon test is no longer good law, and instead, courts should look to history and tradition to see whether a practice is deeply rooted in the nation's history and tradition. So Mr. Barton will is an expert on history and will speak to that in in just a moment. um, so in short, we believe that if this bill is challenged in court, courts will
ultimately conclude that the posting of the 10 Commandments is constitutional and one point to note is that the Supreme Court has mentioned In the American Legion case that the 10 Commandments has historical significance as one of the foundations of our legal system. So thank you for the opportunity to speak to this issue today, and I welcome your questions. And Mr. Chairman, committee, it's my pleasure to be
Speaker 317
1:48:00
with you. Uh, I am from Wall Builders. We are an organization that focuses on American history. We have what's considered the largest private collection of original
documents from early America, and I've brought several of them with me, recognizing the Supreme Court has acknowledged that the history and tradition is the current standard with the idea being that if there's something we've always done in America, it's probably fine to keep doing it and when you look at the history of education, the very first education law in America was passed in 1647. That was known as the Old Deluder Satan Act, the very textbook printed in English in America was a New England premier. The first one was printed in 1690. This is an original from 1777. This is one from Massachusetts, as John
Hancock's face on the opening page. Very cool textbook, but what's worth noting about this, this was a first grade primer used again in public schools starting in 1690 all the way through the early 1900s and in the end of this little textbook, there's 43 questions dealing with the 10 Commandments. You literally as a First grader could not make it through first grade without having learned what the 10 Commandments were and surrounding questions adjacent to it, when you go to things like McGuffy's Reader, one of the more famous readers in
American history, more than 100 million copies of McGuffy's readers were sold in multiple of McGuffey's readers, depending on the age level and the grade level. There were inclusion or includings of the 10 Commandments, uh, for example, in the back of this one, the very last thing in this McGuffy's reader is a copy of the 10 Commandments for students to read and even people like Noel Webster noted for his dictionary. This is his history of the United States and in its history of the United States, it actually includes the 10 commandments in it as well. The reason I bring this up is the 10
Commandments we can go from literally the pilgrims all the way through public education, even in Arkansas, when back when Eisenhower's president and he came and worked to desegregate schools in Arkansas, the 10 Commandments were posted on classrooms in Arkansas. This has been a long standing history and tradition of our nation. It wasn't until 1980 in a case Stone v. Graham, when the US Supreme Court determined that uh the 10 Commandments no longer met the religious litmus test of the Lehman decision, but that's now been overturned and so from a historic standpoint, there is
no question that the 10 Commandments were utilized in education to go further, when you look at American law, the Foundation of American law from all the early colonies. We could talk about the influence of Blackstone or Montesquie, even John Locke, but what is interesting is in all of the original 13 colonies, the 10 Commandments were enshrined in civil code in every one of the colonies. So even from a legal standpoint, the 10 Commandments have been a foundation in America with the laws that we do coming forward and as we look at
where we are today, just from a moral thought we are, we are seeing kids having a very hard time navigating and world and culture because we've removed some basic moral standards. If we ask basic questions, are there rights and wrongs? Of course we'd say, well, yes, of course there's rights and wrongs, but if we ask, well, what standard are we using to determine rights and wrongs. This is where there's a lot of confusion in culture. Is it subjective? Is it up to the individual? In fact, when we look at some of the major problems with young adults with teenagers, there's no doubt that violent crime is a major issue one of the leading causes of
death is gang violence, is gun violence, and there's a level of irony when for the last Several decades we have believed or told students it was inappropriate to display the 10 Commandments, which that very things like thou shalt not kill, the notion that students can be arrested and go to jail for violating the 10 Commandments when they're not able to see the 10 Commandments seems incredibly inconsistent, but coming back to the history and tradition, there's a long standing history and tradition from an educational standpoint, but also from a legal and a moral code
standpoint when it comes to the 10 Commandments. So we would encourage that this is something. following the history and tradition standard from the US Supreme Court is absolutely within the realm of history and tradition, and I close and I'm open for any questions.
All right. Thank you, Mr. Barton. Representative Brown, did you have any additional remarks? I think that covered it. At this time, We'll open the Florida questions by the committee. Representative Clowney, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Representative Brown and Senator
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:52:16
Dodson, I apologize because this is not um necessarily you're doing, but I, I feel like I'm
hallucinating right now because I sat through a very long committee meeting yesterday with um I'm sorry, I have forgotten your last name. Um, it's Miss Taub. Miss Taub representing your organization fighting for religious freedom, and I want to be very clear that what we're doing here is not talking about whether students can see the 10 Commandments in their classroom. We are talking about a state mandate that every classroom must display the 10 Commandments. I'm a historian and a lawyer, so I actually
really enjoyed the um the background there, but the Supreme Court has been very clear. It is coercive for public schools to promote religious messages to students. The Supreme Court has been clear in that. The Kennedy decision had a lot of um A lot of differences from from what is before us right now, but I think what's very important is that we are promoting our religious message with this bill, um, of one religion, only one religion, and we are doing it to a captive audience, very different than we saw in that
case. Supreme Court precedent is far from settled on this, but more than precedent, more than all of that, I think we really need to take a step back and ask ourselves if what we're fighting for is religious freedom, which is what we heard so much about yesterday, we are mandating that every classroom in Arkansas post this document from one religion and only that one religion on its walls to a captive audience. Nothing about that sounds like freedom. Can you please respond
Speaker 314
1:53:47
to that? You go ahead. Um, yes, if I may respond, uh, so res respectfully representative, uh, I do disagree with your interpretation of the law. I will agree, I do agree with a few of your points. Um, one is that the case law is not necessarily settled in how the courts will look at this case in light of the new history and tradition test. So I agree that the history and tradition test was, um, has been implemented with greater frequency over the years and was um.
Clearly overruled lemon in the Kennedy versus Bremerton test. So these issues are working, are working their way through the courts, um, but. Overall, these questions are very context-specific and so we firmly believe that an interpretation of the establishment clause that is so hostile to religion that does not even permit long standing historical practices with legal significance, um, to be displayed. That was, that
Speaker 319
1:54:44
is a incorrect reading of the establishment clause and
Speaker 317
1:54:52
Yes, and, and if I can add, I think it's interesting the this is understood that there would be conflict on this, but it's interesting how much we have straight away from historic understanding where the founding fathers unequivocally said in the Declaration, we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain rights. The the reason government exists to secure these inanimable rights. And so if the idea is that it would be wrong to have any religious content in front of a school, then it would seem that your position. would say students shouldn't
read or study the Declaration either, because if the very notion of American government, that the thing that as representatives and I'm so grateful that y'all are here working to protect your citizens and your constituents, but the reality is the reason that you are here is trying to protect their God-given rights, and if we can't acknowledge there's a God, there can be no God-given rights, which means the very nature of why government exists fundamentally would be different than what the Declaration laid out from the founder's principles, the same founding fathers that wrote wield. Shrews to be self-evident are the same ones that promoted and
encouraged the Decalogue, the 10 Commandments to be the moral code and the moral foundation and are the same ones that did textbooks that included 43 questions on the 10 commandments, so it doesn't seem that it's inconsistent with any of the founders's ideals, number one, and certainly #2, it wasn't inconsistent with the history and tradition of education until 1980 when the Supreme Court made a brand new decision and not basing it on any original constitutional ideas. On on the current precedent of that time.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:56:25
I never ever said and wouldn't say that we should not be able to use the word God in school or talk about the history and tradition ever. What you're talking about is what is allowed in schools, what the bill is doing is what is mandated in schools. Those two things are very, very different. This film mandates, it doesn't allow it mandates in every classroom, a durable poster or framed copy shall be displayed, um, that is very different than what we're talking about and I just don't want my words to be misrepresented on the records. I wanted to clarify.
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:56:56
Representative Collins, you're recognized. Um, OK, to the gentleman, I, I forget your name, but uh did you say that someone can be arrested for violating the 10 Commandments. I'd like to know more about
Speaker 326
1:57:08
what you meant by that. Absolutely. You can be arrested for killing somebody. You can be arrested for stealing. Yeah, I think that those are uh laws, those are statutes that you can be arrested for, and the origination of those statutes were derived from the 10
Speaker 317
1:57:22
Commandments, which is one of the things I addressed at all of the original 13 colonies when those laws were first brought
in, and you can go back to William Blackstone, who was one of the most cited individuals in American law, but you can look at John Jay, the original Chief Justice. You can look at James Wilson, one of the justices who was one of the first leaders of the first law school in America and they explained to their students that this is the basis of our moral code, the basis of our legal code and so those things, where did those ideas come from in American law. It certainly was influenced by the 10 Commandments. So I think it's interesting because it, it really gets to the sort of the
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:57:58
meat of this whole thing, um, I think we're confusing. Maybe you're confusing correlation or even causation with identity, right? So you're saying that you can be arrested for violating the 10 Commandments because one of the commandments is the same as a as a criminal statute. Well, that's just not right. You're arrested for violating the criminal statute, and similarly your whole point is that the 10 Commandments were, you know, observed by the founding fathers and they were part of American life, and I'm sure that's true,
but that doesn't mean that the 10 Commandments are are the foundation of our law. That's the Constitution and so I just think that this whole concept is, is You're bringing two things together and saying because they're similar or because they're in the same situation that we can establish religion as we would with this bill. So I guess that's not necessarily a question. I do have a question for Representative Brown. What is the, what is the purpose of posting the the 10 Commandments. What's your purpose?
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:59:00
My purpose is to make sure that we have a full complete
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:59:05
education for our children and to uphold the historical document that is the
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
1:59:10
10 Commandments. That's my purpose. Do you think that there's any possibility that by having it In large font on a placard in a room, the classroom that has other classroom rules and other things that uh are typically, you know, held to be Established in the educational
context that we're not just teaching about what the 10 commandments are, but we are in fact saying these are the 10 Commandments that are to be honored and respected by students in this classroom. No,
we're not saying that. I don't think that
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
1:59:44
anyone could infer that. I don't think so. I again, this is a historical document that we're posting when I was in uh DC this summer, there was multiple government buildings that I stood at our Supreme Court, and I was on the US House of Representatives floor and I looked up there and there's a depiction of Moses holding the
law. Also, every day as members, we stand on the House floor and we take a pledge of allegiance to one nation under God. We have the In God We Trust motto in the same classrooms, we're not telling every student. They have to believe in this God, but we are um upholding what those historical documents mean and that historical national motto. So we're not going to allow the 10 Commandments, then why do we allow In God We Trust on our money, the same principle
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
2:00:30
applies. Do you, do you know if any educational
organizations, superintendents, teachers have a position on having yet another item in their classrooms. Being mandated. I've only heard positive feedback from
Speaker 307
2:00:43
this bill. From teachers. Thanks. Representative Rose, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:00:56
Mr. Barton wanted to give you an opportunity uh to maybe elaborate a little bit on this and Um, it was said earlier that
this was specifically focused on just one religion, and I thought that that might be inaccurate because there are multiple religions that actually hold the 10 commandments to be foundational in their tenets of
faith. So I just wanted to give you an opportunity to
Speaker 317
2:01:19
speak on that. Yeah, I appreciate that it's something that um multiple religions have a very high and favorable view of Moses, but there are then inside of even some of those religions, there are several, whether it be Jews or Christians specifically that uphold the 10 Commandments and then even side of Christianity, there's multiple different
denominations, whether it be a Protestant or a Catholic, etc. and so this is something that is a little more broad reaching than was identified and even as was pointed out, the US Supreme Court, whenever they're in session and their doors are closed on the back of their two doors are the 10 Commandments and the idea that this might be a problem for school children to see what is literally on the doors of the US Supreme Court. If you go to the Jefferson Library of Congress. There's a depiction of Moses holding the tin. May, as was mentioned, even in the US Capitol and the House of Representatives and the floor there's Moses, so this is
something that is far more universal than just one specific religion, but also it's something that's very deeply rooted in American history and tradition. Thank you very much. Representative in it
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
2:02:24
to recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I do apologize for, um, I didn't hear all of the testimony before because I was running a bill in agriculture, um, committee, um. I have a question, um.
How is this mandating the 10 Commandments, different from Indoctrination. We've done a lot of um bills in the past session about What is adoctrination and all these things and it learns act and other bills, um, so can you explain to me how this
different if we have this displayed in the classroom has this different from that.
Speaker 317
2:03:12
I, I think it would be the same thing as looking at the fact that if, if students take a trip to Washington DC, most students do it in their 8th grade. This is the very thing they will see on significant numbers of government buildings, and we would not consider that indoctrination for them at the US Supreme Court to see display of the 10 Commandments for them to go to the Library of Congress and see display of the 10 Commandments. I don't think from a history and tradition standpoint, showing students what has historically, traditionally been significant in American education and American law, that would not be indoctrination to teach American history any more. So then it would be to teach the
Declaration of Independence that teaches the principles that there's a God who gave us rights in government exists to protect those rights. That's not indoctrination as much as understanding the American framework for our thought, our belief, and our structure of even governmental systems. Represent a minute, you have a follow-up.
OK. All right. Representative Clowney, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And again, I feel like
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
2:04:07
the argument is being framed, the argument against this bill is being framed as we somehow want to shield children's eyes from the 10 Commandments. That
is not true. Nobody on this committee has said that, um. The argument is about what we mandate to be in every classroom, what message that sends? And so I want to come back to Representative Collins's point about what message it sends to have this in every classroom. Um, Representative Brown, he asked you the purpose for the bill, and you said that it was to create a complete historical document. So with the 10 Commandments displayed in every classroom, do you consider that historical document complete? I don't remember saying that I
was referencing a complete education when we don't teach true history and and the historic and showed the historical documents, then we're limiting the education for our children. So I think that's what I was
referencing right there. OK, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to misquote you. I just, I guess my question is, is there anything else? That needs to be part of that complete education that is posted, um, does the 10 Commandments take care of it, you know, I think that's my concern is that there aren't other things that are posted that way in classrooms to to
provide a complete education. Does this check the box for you? Is it now done or will there be other things that
are also added to make the education complete. Um, It's, it's a good point, Senator Dodson said there
Senator Jim Dotson
Unverified
2:05:32
always could be more, yeah, Adam. Mr. Chairman, if I may, you're recognized, uh, Senator Jim Dodson, Senate District 34, for the record, um. So I think we're debating this specific bill. And this
Obviously this is adding to the current statute that talks about the national Motto Display Act, um, I can't begin to tell you what future Bills might look like Seymour filed every day right now, so as far as debating this particular bill, I think this The question on this is this is appropriate. In our opinion anyway, we may have a different opinion on that, but this is appropriate and uh it's part of that display that
should be done. Um, we'll have that debate on anything else as they come up, and there may be some things that I agree that should be in the future, and I reserve the right to to to bring those forward for consideration in the future if, if that's the case, and there may be some things that are uh put forward that I disagree with and I also reserve the right to say no to those. So but as far as this particular bill is concerned, um, that's, that's what's before us here and. And I, I think that's what
we're, we should be considering
specifically. All right. Representative Mayberry, you're
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
2:07:04
recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. My question comes with page
3. Line 13 and I'm just concerned because if I understood the way that In God We Trust was done, it's always provided by volunteer organization, you've
raised money to get these framed um copies of In God We Trust, and it looks like this now we'll open it to public funds and I just want some clarification on that. Maybe I'm misunderstanding it, but we've added in the words that it can
be used, you know, public funds could pay for it, which then makes me wonder if it could be challenged more and I want to make sure that this, you know, can be. Held up if there is a challenge, so those words to me are a
little concerning and maybe, maybe I'm just reading it wrong. I'll
Speaker 344
2:07:58
let the attorney speak to the legal. Defensibility of it,
Senator Jim Dotson
Unverified
2:08:02
but as far as if you look at that section uh on line 11 it says may replace. so we're talking about not the initial donation of frames, but one of the things over the last several years, as you notice, we're adding to the existing national motto Display Act, um, that has happened is some of these donations have
taken place. They've been displayed, but things get damaged, uh, and so if something needs to be replaced, uh, here's the question, do you have to? uh Oftentimes there's there's not a fund where people have donated money, they've just donated the framed copies of, of something, so can the school uh or uh entity. Fix a frame. Or can they not? Can they, can they rehang it, um, so those are the that that's kind of what the
the question of this particular section contemplates is just to make it clear that they may replace or they may do it with private funds, so there's two different options there, um, OK, I, and, and
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
2:09:04
that is actually how I was interpreting it, that the donation was made and then this is to replace it, there's something wrong, but, but again I just kind of worry that that um does that Crossover into whether it could be held
up in court. Because now you're using public money for it. Thank you very
Speaker 319
2:09:24
much for the question. Our understanding our position is that if the government action, the underlying government action on the
Speaker 314
2:09:30
merits is constitutional, then it is constitutional to spend taxpayer funds on, um, so the main reason that this issue comes up in the context of the establishment clause is due to legal questions surrounding who has standing to sue, um, and so who has standing to bring a lawsuit and that is a different question from the underlying issue of whether the bill is const regional on the merits. So I think it will ultimately turn the success of any lawsuit will
ultimately turn on the history and tradition test. I guess
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
2:10:00
my question kind of then is if. by taking that part out. are in God we trust. Hasn't It has been able to remain up there and I just am concerned by putting that line in there, it opens it up to some challenge and I'm just trying to make sure that there
is less of an ability to challenge it. That's all.
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
2:10:26
Can I mention um one part on that, Mr. Chair. Uh, to answer your question, representative Mayberry, I did go ahead and pull up the original uh In God We Trust, um, Bill, and so it reads at the bottom, uh, the copies or posters that we mentioned at the beginning, the section of code, said the copies are post posters authorized under this section shall either be donated or shall be purchased solely with funds made available through those contributions. So we do already have that language in the earlier code that was mentioned.
It just wasn't quoted in this bill. Well, but that's
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
2:10:59
not public funds. Sure, so it just said funds and this specifically says public funds. So I'm, I'm just raising the awareness. I, you know,
I, I, I wanna make sure that it's not challenged the the In God We Trust has not been challenged. We still have them
and all that and that that's what my concern is, so.
Senator Jim Dotson
Unverified
2:11:29
Senator Dodson, do you have a response to that? Well, that, that question was contemplated and um. When the bill was Actually, I, I re-ask that question after it came out of the Senate and had some legal Opins on it, saying it's defensible either way. What a court may or may not do. It is completely unpredictable,
so, um, but they feel like all the attorneys I talked to regarding this particular language said they feel like it's defensible either way if it's going to be uh struck down it'll probably be for some reason other than that line. Representative in it, you're recognized.
Don't have a question anymore, OK. So Representative Meeks, you're recognized.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:12:32
Well, thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman. Um, so kind of on, on the, the, the, the lot of discussion here, um, but, uh, on, on the point of public funds going to this, if you go back again to the founding era, there are plenty of coats for the founding fathers say that religion and morality should be encouraged by government as long as it doesn't violate the rights of consciousness because the founding fathers, uh, even in the Arkansas Constitution, it says religion, morality, and education being necessary for good government.
It's religion comes first to create the morality. Morality creates opportunity for education, education then leads to good government. There's, there's, there's a a a process there. So, so getting to kind of my, my question or my point here is, and, and Mr. Barton might could elaborate on this. Uh, Representative Collins had mentioned, you know, our, our laws are based on the Constitution, but there have been studies on uh where did that, where did that actually come from? Where, what is the, the principles that those are
built on. And if you go back and you look at those principles of law and again our founding fathers reiterated this time and time again, um, you end up going all the way back to an argument could be made that our Western society, our republic. Go all the way back. It's built on what's found in the 10 Commandments. That is the foundation that the rest of society is built on. So I'm wondering if you might uh elaborate on, am I correct in
that and elaborate on that because if that's the case, if the 10 Commandments is the foundation of our society, then I think it's right that that foundation should be known and seen by our kids. And then the second question I would say on the indoctrination piece. When we read the 10 Commandments that the mentions of God obviously his first couple of commandments, thou shalt have, you know, no, uh, you know, shall not use the name of the Lord in vain, all that. There's nothing in there that says, hey, if you don't accept Christ as your savior, you're, you're not
going to heaven. There's none of that that it's kind of like in the national model, God is, we all understand it comes from Christian and Jewish religion, but it's not, there's nothing in there that's saying that you have to follow this religion or else you're condemn. Right? So I'm wondering if you might elaborate on those two
Timothy Barton
Unverified
2:14:49
points. Yes, sir, to the first point about the Constitution being influenced with a religious and moral foundation. There was a
Speaker 317
2:14:55
group of professors who did a research study back in the 1970s and 1980s, their, their finding was released in the book called
The Origins of the American Constitutionalism. What they identified, they went through 15,000 representative writings from the founding era, and they identified that 34% of all quotes from the founder's writings came from the Bible and the majority of the quotes in those quotations came from the Book of Deuteronomy, where Moses has repeated the law, the commands, and the 10 Commandments, and there's no question the greatest influence historically on the founding fathers was the Bible, and again this was documented by professors at the University of Houston and LSU working
together, and this is something that is held up to lots of thoughts and challenges and reaffirmed as people have redone those studies and surveys with it coming forward, you have guys like George Washington in his farewell address considered the most significant political address ever given by any president where he says that of all of the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion, and morality are the indispensable supports, meaning that you can't be politically prosperous if you remove religion and morality and the founding fathers were very clear
that the foundation of our moral code was the Decalogue, as they called it, which is the 10 Commandments. So those things are absolutely correct in your understanding as far as where those ideas came from, the number one influence in the founding fathers was the Bible again documented by secular historians and professors and even the founding fathers themselves, they identified the basis of that moral foundation came from the 10 Commandments. Representative Meeks. All right. Any other questions
by the committee? All right, saying no other questions by the committee. We do have individuals signed up to speak for and against this
bill. Believe Joshua Irby speaking against the bill. Mr. Irby, if you would identify yourself for the record, state
the name of any organization you may be here representing. And then you are recognized to present your remarks. Joshua Irby of Bryan, Arkansas,
Speaker 354
2:17:07
uh, just representing myself and my family and
Speaker 355
2:17:09
friends and their opposition to this bill. Uh, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak for you today on this important issue, as previously stated, I stand in opposition to SB 433, which mandates the display of the 10 commandments in public schools, while faith is a vital part of American life, government imposed religion is not. This bill represents an unconstitutional overreach undermining the very freedoms it claims to uphold.
History warns us that when government entangles itself with the religion, neither emerges stronger, both are compromised. John Adams cautioned, Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion. If the state can dictate religious displays today, what stops it from regulating religious practices tomorrow. The founders understood this danger, and the Treaty of Tripoli signed in 1797 unanimously ratified by the US Senate. It affirmed the government of the United States is not in any sense. founded on the Christian
religion. This shows that true faith forges when it remains independent of government influence. Both the US and Arkansas constitutions explicitly prohibit government favoritism and religious matters. The First Amendment's establishment Clause ensures that government neutrality and religion, while the Arkansas Constitution of states in Article 2 Section 24, no human authority can in any case or manner whatsoever control or interfere with the right of conscience and no preference shall ever be given
by law to any religious establishment denomination or mode of worship above any other. There Mandating the 10 Commandments in public schools is a clear violation of these principles, as Thomas Jefferson wrote, building a wall of separation between church and state is absolutely essential in a free society. James Madison, the principal architect of the Constitution warned the same authority. Which can establish Christianity exclusion of other religions may establish with the same ease any particular sect.
Proponents argue that the 10 Commandments are foundational to American law. Yet several commandments thou shalt have no other gods before me, thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. Remember the sad day and keep it holy are explicitly theological, not legal. And closing, ate the strongest one is freely chosen, not imposed by the state. History proves that when government takes hold of religion, it does not protect it. It manipulates, weakens, and eventually destroys
it. Roger Williams, a great Puritan preacher and founder of the First Baptist Church, along with being the founder of Rhode Island stated when church and state are joined, it is church that suffers most. Today SB 43 allows the state to dictate religious expression. Tomorrow it may dictate religious practice. No government has the rightful power to decide which faith deserves recognition or how it should be observed. If we allow the state to seize that authority, we are trading away the very religious.
Liberty, our founders fought to secure. SB 433 does not defend faith. It puts it in the hands of politicians. I urge this committee to reject this dangerous overreach and uphold the constitutional principles that ensure faith remains where it belongs with the people, not government. And if I may, I do have one rhetorical question to ask this committee. Would any of you want the state to dictate morality to your children, or is that a responsibility that remained with you and your family. If so, I ask you to reject this bill.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Irby. We
do have a question by the at least one committee member, Representative Rose, you recognized. Thank you,
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:20:55
Mr. Chair. remind me your name, I'm sorry. Joshua Irby, sir. Erby, yes sir, Mr. Irby, you
referenced uh President Madison, uh, in your presentation just a minute ago and I think it was alluding to separation of The church and the state something along those lines. I
was curious if you would comment. Were you aware that Madison attended church services in the US Capitol while he was President of the
United States. Yes sir, I'm aware of that and that the US Capitol was the site of a church during a long period of time in the history of the United States. Yes sir, I'm aware of that. OK, that's all. Thank you. All
Speaker 354
2:21:32
right, seeing no other questions by the committee, Mr. Irby, thank
you for being here and thank you for those remarks. Thank you, sir.
Next we have time to speak for the bill, Tony Rose.
Rose, if you would state your name in any organization you may be here representing and you're recognized to
Tony Rose
Unverified
2:22:01
present your remarks. Thank you so much. My name is Tony Rose. I'm with the National Association of Christian Lawmakers, and I also coordinate all the distribution for the national motto, uh posters throughout the United States. So we placed about
50,000 of those in classrooms around the country. So thanks for the opportunity. I know I'm between you and lunch, so I'll be brief, um. Every bill that this body produces, has a kernel of uh Genesis and our value system that was generated from the Judeo-Christian values that formed our our our country. So
What we're doing with with almost every piece of legislation is it's in a uniquely American point of view of what is right, what is fair, what is consistent with our laws, our constitution, and what will sustain a just society. At the seat of our American government, you will find the 10 Commandments and dozens of locations more than 50. Those of you that have been to Washington DC as Tim referred
to, we'll find it in dozens and dozens of locations that he, uh, mentioned. It's everywhere at the seat of the Arkansas government, we have a monument to the 10 commandments on our very own grounds. The 10 Commandments have a long-standing history and tradition, the basis of many rulings, including the display of the national motto that both justify and legalize its display. Our NACL member, uh, Dody Horton
in Louisiana passed the 10 Commandments law there, which will be and is now being implemented by 66 of the parishes there. The claim that there should be no signs of anything biblical in our schools may suggest that our civics education may be lacking in regarding to the genesis of our founders and Congress's influences. Something I hope that our legislator, uh, might correct on the floor, uh, today.
You know, Christian, uh, Clayton Christensen, uh, of the Harvard Business School once said you can't hire enough police to manage a free people. Without a moral foundation. Since you've taken moral foundations of our government out of our schools, the Bible, the 10 Commandments, prayer. Nothing has improved. The 10 how terrible would it be for people, students,
Um, administrators, teachers to see every day on the wall, do not kill, do not lie, do not steal. Do not be jealous of what other people have. The NACL and the American History and Heritage very much support this bill. And we very much hope for a good vote on this. Thank you so much for your time and if you have any questions, I'll answer them. Thank you, Miss Rose. Are there any questions
about the committee? Seeing no questions about the committee, thank you for being
here and thank you for those remarks. Thanks for your time. Next we have signed up to speak against the bill, Reverend Brittany Stillwell. Still, if
you would just state your name for the record, any organization you may be here representing, and then you'll be recognized to present your remarks. Hi, good afternoon. I'm Reverend
Speaker 362
2:26:00
Brittany Stillwell. I am an associate pastor at Second Baptist Church downtown Little Rock.
Speaker 363
2:26:06
And Just Monday, I delivered a letter to your inboxes, um, on behalf of over 50 faith leaders in Arkansas asking that you vote no to Senate Bill 433. And since delivering that letter, we've had several more faith leaders um of many different religions sign on. I'm a pastor who works primarily with students and I'm extremely opposed to this bill. But I'm here today first and
foremost to talk to you as a Christian. I take the 10 Commandments very seriously and I'm having a hard time listening to them be talked about as a moral code only. They are holy words given to us by our Creator and are worthy of careful study and deep contemplation. Speaking of them as purely a moral code and having them posted in public spaces cheapens their words and turns them into a kitschy symbol of a shallow faith.
Different faith traditions interpret the 10 Commandments differently. There are multiple versions of the 10 Commandments, and there's much theological debate about the correct translation and interpretation of the commandments. The text of the display mandated by SB 433 is a cobbled together version. And it fails to reflect the belief of many Christian and Jewish communities. The version that I read from my Protestant Bible, the new revised Standard Version begins, I am the Lord your God who
brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me. The 10 Commandments are part of a broader story of a liberating redeeming God. When we separate the commandments from the story, they are on the verge of becoming idolatrous and thus go directly against the second commandment, which reads, You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above or anything that is on the earth
beneath or anything that is in the water under the earth. Taking all of these commandments out of their context diminishes their meaning and importance. I'm also here to speak as a student pastor who works with children and youth in our congregation, and I'm particularly concerned about the posting of the 10 Commandments in our public schools. My students don't need to learn about the 10 Commandments from a state compiled interpretation printed on the walls of their schools. We discuss it in depth as part of their faith formation at
church with the reverence they deserve and within the greater context of God's redeeming work. If we want students to understand and honor these words, they should be introduced, discussed, and taught with a faith community, not posted on the walls of a 7th grade math classroom. I was discussing this bill with one of
Speaker 366
2:28:53
my students, a senior in high school, and he said, I have grown up in church and
Speaker 363
2:28:59
I am a Christian, but I believe that posting the 10 Commandments and any other religious symbols are
harmful to the development of my faith and the faith of my peers. I think we can say with confidence that no one in this room wishes to cause youth harm, especially when it comes to their faith. We want them to experience the life-giving power of scripture. Posting government translated commandments in public spaces, especially public schools, demeans the sacred book that many of us hold so dear. And in the words of my student is harmful to their faith development. So please vote no to SB 433, and thank you for your time.
All right, thank you. I'm sorry, uh Reverend Stilwell, we do have a question by the committee,
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:29:51
Representative Rose. You're recognized. Thank you. Uh You said, uh, the letter that you submitted was signed by How many? I think
Speaker 363
2:29:59
we're looking, uh, it's there's several more that have been added on. I think we're in the 50 or 60s at this point. OK, and you
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:30:05
said they were faith leaders. How do you define that? Um, there are
Speaker 363
2:30:11
rabbis, um, imams and lots of different pastors and leaders of faith organizations of different ecumenical backgrounds. Did you reach out to the Catholic diocese of Little Rock. They've been included in
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:30:19
all of our communications to sign on. I'm unclear if they, if I can't remember
Speaker 363
2:30:22
off the top of my head. I don't have a list. Did you reach out to the Arkansas Baptist Convention. They've been included in all of our communications as well, yes.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:30:29
Did you reach out to the Arkansas District Council, the Assembly
Speaker 363
2:30:32
of God I also think it should be noted that several
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:30:38
Baptists have signed on. Did you reach out to the Arkansas District council, the Assemblies
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:30:46
broad faith network. Um So just anybody who signed on, you're considering to be faith leaders.
Speaker 363
2:30:52
We, we reached out to several like Several different religious traditions and organizations, so cooperative Baptists, the Arkansas Baptist Association, all the different kinds. So yes, faith leaders from many different backgrounds. So I guess Clarify this more.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:31:05
You reached out to pretty much everybody that our interfaith that we can
talk to and only about 50 or 60 again, Clarify
Speaker 370
2:31:16
this more. You reached out to pretty much everybody that our interfaith that we can talk to and only about 50
or 60 on this popped up pretty quickly, so we had to move fast and they've been signing on since we sent
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:31:29
the email. Alright, thank you. All right, any other questions by the committee, Representative Meeks, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just curious your opinion on something. You you'd stated that uh the, you know, 10 commandments should be taught in church and all that, and I, I, I don't disagree with that. I'm a fellow Christian, uh, but there are uh uh large number of students who
don't go to church. They're not involved in any religious activities and so would you rather them have zero exposure to this. Or have it in their classroom so they can at least have some exposure, but isn't there exposure to this um
Speaker 363
2:32:00
left up to their parents and their how their faith is formed in their families. I'd rather our families be um have the ability to decide how their children's faith is formed, a moral code talking about the laws that make up our Constitution and our
schools, that makes absolute sense to me, but teaching children whose
Speaker 362
2:32:19
parents don't want them exposed to this doesn't feel very fair. I'll just say
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:32:23
atheism is a faith too, so thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right. Any other questions by
the committee, Representative Wooldridge are recognized. I do have one,
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
2:32:34
I think Representative Mae's question kind of triggered it for me. I guess I would ask you, um, as a, as a pastor, would you feel the same about like the distribution of the Bible if a parent didn't want a
child to have access to the Bible, would you not want them to have access
Speaker 363
2:32:52
to it either or I would want faith, I think the faith development of our students is part of our family's um prerogative and so I would want families to be. involved. I don't, it's not for them
Speaker 372
2:33:00
not to have access to it by what I don't believe the public schools should be the ones providing that access. Understood. I think just
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
2:33:08
to follow up, I think that I guess I would agree with Representative Meeks, um, you know, I, I think that obviously that would be great too if it were initiated at the family and
I don't think that we can legislate morality from here, but I think that anything we can do to try to increase access to or spread that gospel, I guess would be something that I would want us to do as a person of faith. I guess I'm a little bit shocked that you as a pastor would not have that same view, but anyways, to each their own I of course I do
Speaker 363
2:33:36
have that same view. I just don't believe that it belongs in the public school system, so there's many opportunities for that to be shared, character development, morals as absolutely can be taught in the public schools,
Speaker 376
2:33:47
but it can be done so without Christian scripture. Any other questions by the committee? Seeing no other
questions by the committee, Reverend Stillwell, thank you for being here and thank you for those remarks. Thank you for your time. Next we have signed up to speak against the bill, Reverend David Freeman.
Speaker 382
2:34:19
My name is David Freeman. I am the senior pastor of First United Methodist Church in Little Rock, Arkansas. Uh, my remarks are focused not on SB 433's effects on civic life, uh, but on its negative effects, I believe it will have on our religious life. As a devout Christian and pastor, I believe the 10 Commandments, our foundational to our faith and to our Christian ethics. I believe they should be studied and followed, and I believe God's grace is sufficient when they are not followed.
The third commandment is you shall not take the Lord God's name in vain. The intent of this commandment as I interpret it is not about refraining from using God's name as a curse word, as it is most often interpreted. It's about using God's name improperly or for one's own vain purposes. As in using the name of God to manipulate or control others to say that God commanded you to do something when God did not or things like saying God sends hurricanes to punish certain people for sin or to use the
name of God to justify any personal or political action. It is a commandment against anything that co-opts the name of God and God's teachings. completing a copy of the 10 Commandments in every classroom or government space, I believe, causes the state of Arkansas to break this third commandment. It is a distortion of the name of God because it is being instituted by the government. It seems the state of Arkansas is co-opting the name of God and its teachings worked on purposes, not the purposes and calling of the Lord God.
Passing this legislation would ironically break the very commandments it seeks to promote. And while the creators of this legislation and others like it are well-intentioned, perhaps trying to promote Christian values and undergird support for the Christian faith. The majority of people who receive these actions as manipulative. They see it as a way of directing faith upon them. It's well studied and documented that more people are turned off by the Christian faith as it is aligned with government and political processes than
anything else. Again, the irony is that these attempts to strengthen Christianity's influence in society are actually doing more harm to it. And is one who wants to preserve this faith. I implore you to vote no on SB 433. Thank you for your time. All right. Thank you, Reverend Freeman. Are there any questions
by the committee? Saying no questions by the committee. Thank you for being here. Thank you for those remarks. And
then last it appears we have signed up to speak against the
bill, Holly Dixon. Miss Dixon, if you would, of course, state your name, any organization you're here representing, and then you're recognized to present your remarks. Good day and thank
Holly Dixon
Unverified
2:37:18
you. My name is Holly Dixon. I serve as executive director of the Arkansas Civil Liberties Union,
a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting and preserving our constitutional rights and civil liberties. Um What this bill is is an invitation to drag every public school and public agency into court to try to upend 50 years of precedent. It opens them all up to the possibility and even likelihood of being sued. One of the most sacred rights that we have in this nation is
to control our own and and our family, our children's religious. Upbringing. Please do not confuse the nation, the national motto In God We Trust. With the 10 Commandments. They are two very different. Matters that are analyzed separately. under the law. The Louisiana law that was mentioned earlier that has been implemented in, I forget, 40 or 50 parishes.
Has been enjoined. By the courts in Louisiana. It is likely that would happen in Arkansas as well. But it is also likely it would not be enjoined unless and until someone's rights had been violated and specific jurisdictions end up seeking to defend this law in court. The 10 commandments. On the
Speaker 387
2:38:56
Capitol lawn. Has been challenged in court.
And that challenge is still pending.
Holly Dixon
Unverified
2:39:08
The court has not ruled that that monument is or is not. Constitutional, so I would urge you to consider getting input from a court about the 10 Commandments on the Capitol lawn before proceeding with a bill that mandates their placement into classrooms and all public buildings. I appreciated the question about
public funding, I agree, I don't think that's gonna be determinative. On the question of constitutionality, it would be considered evidence and a factor that the court would consider in analyzing this bill. And so just in short, please vote no on this bill on behalf of the State of Arkansas and all of its people. Thank you. All right, thank you, Ms. Dixon. Do we have any
questions about the committee, Representative Meeks, you're recognized. Thank
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:40:05
you. So are, are, are you implying that we should go to the courts and get their opinion before we file any kind of bills or legislation because that's kind of what it seemed like you said, that we should go to the courts to get their input on this. I
Holly Dixon
Unverified
2:40:20
mean, that's not how our system works. We don't have to go to court, nor would they give an advisory opinion, but we have 50 years' worth of precedent saying that uh mandated display of 10 commandments in the classroom. is unconstitutional. We know what the courts have said. What this bill does is ask the courts
to come in and up in that wall and use Arkansans as guinea pigs and the, the effort to in established law regarding the
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:40:47
establishment Clause. OK, so what we're going to disagree. I think there's 150 plus years of
precedence to support the display of the 10 Commandments and only in the last 50 years and then that was overturned by the current court saying that what they did 50 years ago was, was wrong. Can,
can you quote for me the exact language of the Constitution that would make this unconstitutional. Can you give me the, the phrase within the Constitution that you think makes it
Holly Dixon
Unverified
2:41:19
unconstitutional. It has been the opinion of federal courts
Speaker 387
2:41:22
that laws just like this that are joining Louisiana violate both the free exercise and the establishment clauses of the
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:41:29
First Amendment. OK, so the, the, the establishment calls Congress shall make no law establishing a religion or
prohibiting or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. So I was displaying the 10 commandments of violation of that because Congress is not, Congress shall make no law. Not the Arkansas legislature. Well, the 4 the free exercise thereof, so, and we might just have to disagree on this. I'm sorry I
Holly Dixon
Unverified
2:41:55
didn't mean to interrupt you. I was just gonna add the 14th Amendment applied the Constitution to the states. So the Constitution does restrict the federal government, state, local government, you
know, local governments, it applies to the government. I did appreciate the uh comment earlier as well. Reminding us that the Arkansas constitution actually has greater protections for religious liberty than does the US Constitution, which would also affect the analysis here. All right, any other questions by the committee?
Seeing no further questions by the committee, thank you, Ms. Dixon, for being here and thank you
for those remarks. Thank you. All right, we have no other individuals signed up to speak for or against the
Speaker 167
2:43:00
bill. Representative Brown. She was for many talk about Uh Representative Senator Dotson, give me just one second here.
All right, uh, Representative Brown, so before you begin, I understand that you have an amendment. Is that correct? Yes. All right. And so in order to uh. Ensure the orderly presentation of this bill and an amendment at this point because we've advanced this far I'm told by staff who has checked that in order for you to present an amendment at this stage, we, you would have to pull the bill down and we would have to begin the
presentation and the process again, and you could present your amendment at that time. Um I don't know if you want to do that. It's, it's your bill and any decision, you know, as to how to proceed is certainly your decision, but if you want to offer that amendment, you'll have to pull the bill down and we'll have to start the process anew in order for you to present that amendment. So if you, if I may, if you'd like to move forward with a vote, then I certainly am. Uh, you're certainly welcome to
Senator Jim Dotson
Unverified
2:44:25
do that and Senator Dodson, I guess technically this is your bill and so you're recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, uh, obviously at this point we're kind of At the mercy of the committee and I would like to, to kind of ask the committee how they would like to proceed the amendment that we're talking about is in response to um Representative Mayberry's question regarding that line 13 on page 3, which would strike that line out of
the bill and it also adds a couple other co-sponsors if we were going to do an amendment that wanted to be on the bill, um, so that's what the amendment in its entirety does. Um I I know committees in the past have, have taken up amendments at this point, um, in the, but that's entirely up to the committee and the chair how they want to proceed with that. Senator Collins, I appreciate that, and of course,
you guys do things kind of your own way down
in the Senate, but uh we, we try to be a little more orderly down here. You may recall from your service in the house, 10 years of it, yeah. Uh, with that being said, um, I'm happy to. Again, I, we had staff call and check uh with. With upper administration staff if you will, and what you, what you would have to do and they also just check with our parliamentarian. In order to do this properly,
you would have to uh pull the bill down, start the presentation over, make the amendment then, and then we'd have to, we can go through the process again now, given that there's already, it's already been presented that may
not take very long, but that, that would be the orderly way to do it is what I'm being told, so I do see some microphones lit up, representative Ray, if
Representative David Ray
Unverified
2:46:20
I might make a suggestion just for consideration if they want to admit, if they want to pull the bill down and represent it. I House Bill 1891 on the agenda that would literally take 60 seconds to present, they they
could. pull the bill down. I could present that one minute later they could bring their bill back and amend it. OK, I'm gonna
leave that uh question whether or not to pull the bill down. I am open to, you know, we go into session
at 1:30. I am open to allowing you to it this morning before we go into session, but the decision to pull the bill down is lies solely with Senator Dodson and Representative Brown. So Senator Dodson, I hang on one second,
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:47:02
Representative Rose, just quick discussion point for the committee. For you, Mr. Chair, the presentation they've already presented the bill, so in, in
In theory, it would simply be them presenting the amendment, the amendment. Being approved and then asking for a vote on the bill that's already been presented. Is that correct? We're gonna go through the
same procedure that we do with any bill from the beginning to the end, how they choose to
present it to the extent that they choose to make comments will be solely to what Senator Dodson
and Representative Brown. All right, thank you. Representative
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
2:47:36
Beatty, uh, I just want to say that looking at that that language um line 13, and I'm assuming that that was on page 3 of the bill. Um, you know, my, my concerns it has ore in there so it makes it, it's not mandatory, it's permissible, uh, and I don't share the same concerns that Representative Mayberry, um, so unless you just feel that that's a a a necessary adjustment to your bill. I'm happy with your bills the way it's been presented.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:48:06
All right, Representative Meeks. Uh, yeah, I'm just gonna echo or representative. I'm happy with the bill the way, the way it is ready to take a vote. What I would, I'll throw it down there again for, for food for thought for you, as you know, you can always call for a vote if it fails, you could bring it back, do the amendment, and then have a second vote if that would get you the extra votes you need to get it through, so we could proceed as is and if you fall 1 or 2 short and that will get you your 1 or 2, then we can come back and add the amendment and
get those last 1 or 2 for you, so. Again, your bill, but I'll just another way you could handle it. Representative Underwood Well, I think that a lot of people kind of shared what I was gonna share, but I
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
2:48:47
would say I agree with Representative Beatty. I don't have concerns with the bill. If the sponsors are wanting to know that if they want to move forward with it now, if they choose to pull it down, I would also echo, I think what Representative Rowe said. I think we've already heard the presentation. I think we could move that along quickly. Obviously that's at the chair's discretion, but all right, uh,
Representative Brown, you have an amendment here with you? been sent over by the
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
2:49:14
bureau. Yes, um, after hearing some of the concerns from the committee, um. I think we're we're good to go ahead and move forward and close on the bill and take a vote on it without
the amendment. All right. Uh, Representative Brown, you're recognized to close for your bill. Thank you. I
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
2:49:31
know we've taken a lot of um your time here today committee, so would appreciate a good vote.
Representative Brown has closed for a bill what are the wishes of
the committee, Representative Rose, motion to pass. Representative Rose has made a motion to pass. Is there any discussion on the
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
2:49:51
motion, Representative Collins, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. um. So, uh, you know, I am a fan of the 10 Commandments. I, you know, I'm a Christian, and I actually a couple of years ago, put it up in my house on my refrigerator, uh, when my oldest son got old enough to read, um,
and I can tell you why I did that and it was um to Establish the religion in my own household and indoctrinate my kids in something I think is really important. I wanted them to read those 10 Commandments, internalize them, believe in what they say and and adhere to them. Um, and I think this bill attempts to do the exact same thing in every classroom in this state. It is clearly an establishment
of religion. It would clearly prevent the free exercise of religion. And I, I just, I, I, the arguments to the contrary are very unconvincing, um, and I think that's why courts have clearly found that uh Things like this do just that. They are clear constitutional violations. But beyond that, uh, this is another mandate obligating our schools to occupy
more real estate with um things which, you know, again, I uh I'm a supporter of the 10 Commandments in my home, certainly with my children and our church, uh, we talk about them quite a lot, but in a public school. classroom, they, um, should not be posted, should not be mandated,
and um I know on this bill. Thanks. Representative Ennett, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um,
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
2:51:42
I find it highly hypocritical when you all are talking about Christian values and morality and our forefathers were not of more character there were slave owners, and I hate to say that, but that's true. So for us to be mandating these things in our public school is just I don't understand why we're doing this, um, you mentioned true history. Uh, we can't talk about true history no more, um,
because if we did talk about true history, we wouldn't be talking about our forefathers, how moral they were, and for that reason, I'm gonna vote
no. All right, is there any other discussion on the motion
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
2:52:26
Representative Rose, you're recognized. Thank you,
Mr. Chair. Uh, I'll be voting for this. I think it's a good bill and I appreciate what Representative Ennett just said, uh, slavery is awful, was awful, um, and to that 0.10 Commandments were brought down by Moses, who freed Egypt, uh,
from slavery, and I think that that is echoed in those 10 commandments that that is what's right. And um I'll be voting for this. Thank you. Representative Meeks,
you're recognized. I'm sorry, Ross, did you have? OK, yeah, I,
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
2:52:59
I'm gonna take exception to my colleagues. I think our founding fathers were, were very moral. Uh, did they have faults? We all have faults, right? Um, but John Jay, who was the original Supreme Court justice says it is the duty of all wise, free, and virtuous governments to countenance and
encourage virtue in religion, uh, Fisher Ames, and most of you probably have never heard of, he was one of the people who actually came up with the wording for the First Amendment. So if anybody should know what it means, he says our liberty depends on our education. our laws and habits, it is founded on morals and religion, um, and, uh, Benjamin Rush, again, another one of our founding fathers said that he thought it was important that we uh do a uh form of religion that uh weighs the virtues of uh
responsibility for, for, uh, students, whether it was Christianity or any other than to have them devoid of any religion because uh what we've been pushing here in America is atheism and atheism. as a religion and ever since we took God out of the schools, we see all the problems that have come in. You, you look at the statistics, yeah, when, when the Supreme Court took God out of the schools, all the problems and violence started flooding into our school systems and so until we get back, I mean, these, our
founding fathers built our system. They understand the foundations that make it strong and uh if we don't uh firm up those foundations for the next generation, then we risk losing our country, so I'm fully supportive of this bill and look forward to voting for it. Representative Mayberry, you're
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
2:54:39
recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, I appreciate y'all being willing to to put that amendment on there and um
I I'm gonna be voting no, simply
because I, I want it to fail so we can put that amendment on there because I think it will make it a stronger bill and I think if we look beyond what's happening right in this section, um, at the very end of session, we could make this bill a whole lot stronger and, and I, I would fear that if this moves forward, that then we're putting at risk what we already have out there within God We Trust, um, and, and that Because
this refers to public funds being used for that, and I
think It's been voluntary funds and so we're talking 3 extra minutes to to let this And pull it down and then put the amendment on there. I just think it makes it a much stronger bill, and I don't really see why we can't do that. So I, I'm a no and that's the reason why, so. Representative Beatty, you're recognized.
Well, I was going to say
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
2:55:51
anything, but, uh, in light of some of the comments that have been made while we've been sitting here, what I find hypocritical is that we can sit here some of the very members and and some of the folks have spoken against the posting of the 10 Commandments on the wall of our schools are the same individuals that fought and take issue with some of the filth and trash that we have available that our children can access in our school libraries. So that's hypocritical to me. I'd much rather have the 10 commandments on the wall. that those children can read
and, and see good moral lessons that are there and, and virtues and qualities that we should all aspire to as Christians are just as common citizens, so I'll be voting for this and and I thank you for bringing this bill. All right,
any other discussion on the motion? Seeing no other discussion on the motion, we have a motion to pass by Representative Rose. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed the eyes have it. Congratulations, you've
passed your bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee. All right, we have Senator Ervin here. And
I, I do want to kind of caution everyone, Representative Beatty asked me what time we would be taking a break and I said one, but Senator Irvin texted me and
asked me if she could run her bill this this morning and I told her yes and so she came over here specifically to run this bill. Um, get the heart.
Well, that was my, that was my expectation and intention representative Beatty. Um, I'm not sure how long this presentation is going to take. We only have 30 minutes before the House goes into session, and I know we all would like to get something to eat. The chair included. I'll make it super fast um We've got um. We are coming back this afternoon. So I'll say this, if it doesn't look looks like this is gonna take a bit, then, uh, Senator Ervin, would you be opposed to
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
2:57:55
coming back this afternoon? Not opposed. OK. But I,
I will make this very, very fast. All right Thank you. Um, members, this is Senate bill, uh, 343 and I'm Senator Missy Irvin, District 24. You're recognized. Thank you. Uh, so members, I, I brought with you, I brought with me today, um, all of
the documentation that has to be done by hand.
As it relates to vehicle fleet management. And so if you'll see, this is incredibly inefficient. And uh I actually started this process of trying to get the state of Arkansas to utilize fleet management software in 2011 when I was first elected, uh, and the reason why was because Governor Haley Barbour was uh really great in this arena of government efficiency, and he had uh directed the state of Mississippi to do that, and
I, uh, I worked, uh, worked to try to get something into the language, um, which, which is what is now in what we're trying to do with Senate Bill 343 is actually what is actually happening at the federal level with Doge is that they are looking at all the government inefficiencies and then figuring out how we utilize technology, uh, to make government processes more efficient. And so fleet management is a software and, and it's, um, I would say a very good spend of taxpayer payyer
dollars to, to try to eliminate um our people having to do this. right here, uh, by hand, um, and all the different agencies. So passing this bill will allow the people in the Department of Health and Human Services, um, Department of Health, Department of Human Services, Department of Education to focus on exactly what they're supposed to be focusing on instead of uh this bureaucratic inefficiency of hand, uh, filling out hand
reports on their vehicles for management. Um, Uh, to me, we should be following good business practices that we know work, uh, FedEx, CPS, and many other, um, logistics companies utilize fleet management software for their vehicles. Um, again, it's really for efficiency and saves money for those companies or they wouldn't be doing it, uh, and that's exactly why this bill is in front of us. Um, it was, um, part of the report and
recommendations from Arkansas Ford, uh. And that Governor Sanders, um, initiated and so I'm just really excited to see this come to full circle on work that I started in 2011 and I'm happy to answer any questions. Uh, I think the Department of Transformation and Shared Services are here, um, but they've done a lot of good work on, on this, this bill, um, but I just wanted y'all to see firsthand, uh, what we're dealing with and why we're trying to do the bill so we can
get rid of this, and we can get This all inputted very quickly on go on on management software, um. And I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. All right, do we
have any questions about the committee, Representative Beatty, you're recognized. Thank you, Senator for
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
3:01:23
bringing the bill. I, I'm looking over the fiscal impact on the bill, um, and just wondered if maybe there were any type of estimates this $858,000 that we'll spend
that is, that's per year, is that my understanding that this will be an ongoing annual expense and you basically they state that it would just be offset by reduction in mileage reimbursement. Uh, by having visibility to to actually allocate vehicles where needed. Is there any estimate on will that number and when that number will exceed that $858,000 cost and expense on these vehicles it is a question
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
3:02:01
that Department of Transformation Services can
specifically address. One of the reasons Representative Beatty, I ran the bill in 2011 because at that time, there were news reports that there were state vehicles over in the casinos in Tunic. During the day. And so I did not believe that it was good uh resources of taxpayer dollars for our state employees to be at the casinos during the day and state vehicles uh being in those parking lots. So, uh, that was one of the reasons I ran the bill. Um, the mileage is an issue and then tracking them.
Senator Payton did a great job of line of questioning as far as tracking these vehicles so that we can get a maximum return on return on our value and sell them. Before they depreciate too much and we're not doing that right now. That's gonna be a hard number to get an estimate on how much savings we would have if we turn those vehicles over quicker so we can get more money from them, that one I probably couldn't give you an estimate on, um, but the mileage issue is
another big issue that we can make sure that these vehicles are being utilized effectively and efficiently versus paying state employees to use. their own vehicles for mileage. And so we just really don't have a lot of ability to track that right now when you're doing this all by hand, but I, if they have a specific answer, I can have them come to the table. That's my initial, I, I think we can track that and give you the data and the information once we put this in place if you vote for the bill.
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
3:03:39
That just to follow up, uh, and I, I, I had read the bill before. I haven't, I
haven't read it because I wasn't expecting to hear it today. Um, so my question is in within your bill, is there a reporting requirement to come back and report the savings on an annual basis, uh, that will be realized by the state. Yes, there is reporting. Good deal. All right. Representative Rose, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
3:04:11
Senator Irvin, thank you, um, when we discussed this bill previously, uh, Representative
Clowney and TSS were at the end of the table, and they were gonna come back with a number of vehicles. I know there's a fiscal impact statement, but I was curious if we were able to make good on
that. So we can know how many vehicles that these tracking devices would be either added to or the subscription we pay, you know, how many vehicles this would incorporate. Leslie Fiskin. I'm
Speaker 414
3:04:38
Secretary of Transformation and Shared Services, um, there.
Speaker 415
3:04:42
Thank you. Uh, they're 25, approximately 2500 vehicles that are being utilized in the executive um branch. That are um just for the general state employees, there's, there are 1500 that are in law enforcement, so it's the 2500. Approximately. Is there any anticipation that number growing or shrinking,
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
3:05:04
do you have a, a, a, a rough estimate. We right now on the estimate
Speaker 415
3:05:13
we're we're hoping honestly to decrease the number based on the utilization. Those are the 300 vehicles we're looking right now that have been underutilized, um, and so we're, we're estimating that we're going to be able to do a better job collectively of, uh, you know, utilizing our resources and vehicles better, which would lead to a decreased number in the need of the actual number. OK. And so
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
3:05:33
that just to uh clarify, the 2500 vehicles and then um the optimism is that
it's gonna decrease from there. You're gonna be able to service out some vehicles and not need
them anymore. So it would start at 2500 kind of at a max and hopefully go down from there on the number of vehicles that would have the device or the technology that's roughly the anticipated $20 a month. That's correct. OK, all right, thank you, thank you. Representative Mayberry. Thank you. I think
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
3:06:06
much of Many of my questions just got answered. I'm the one that actually asked for the fiscal impact because there seem to be lots of discussion and I was
just trying to, we're not gonna solve this problem, very thankful we got the fiscal impact, um, great information here, ready to see this through. Thank you. Thank you. Representative
Long, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, so the
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
3:06:31
other day, the, the figure of $20 per unit was thrown out, is that Still, the thought that it's going to be like $20 per vehicle. And is there any other cost besides the 20, you know, the,
the, the subscription per vehicle. No. OK. Well, um, as a former state employee, um, you know, we would spend more than an hour each month, uh, filling out the paperwork and I got paid more than $20 per hour, so I think we're just on the the savings there will pay for that and anything that we saved for as far as getting the tires rotated, the whole changed, um, monitoring people that are not doing what they're supposed to be doing during the day. We'll just be profit basically, so.
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
3:07:18
I'll be voting for it. Thank you. uh, Mr. Chair, if I could speak, thank you, Representative Long for your insight. What I have learned too is about safety for our state employees, particularly those in DHS or DYS and DCFS that are going out for some of these visits on child welfare issues or foster care, they're in state vehicles. If they're especially if they're transporting children in our state vehicles, which happens, we want to make sure that that oil's changed, that there's air in the tires, just like.
exactly what you said. So it's a huge benefit for the safety of our state employees that are utilizing them as well. Thank you.
Representative David Ray
Unverified
3:08:04
Representative Ray, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, can you, Senator Irvin, can you repeat what
you said earlier about, you said something about selling vehicles before they're value depreciates too much. Can you repeat that? It was just
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
3:08:18
really a, uh, if you're not able to track them, not knowing if, if what we're doing here is 100% accurate or not, we don't know sometimes how old these vehicles are. And so, you know, there's a time limit, there's a time frame where you can actually need to be able to turn those vehicles over in order to, uh, get money from those get your better maximum resale value, Evan. And, and it's also a safety issue when it comes to mileage. you know, that, I'm sure, but, um, so I think those are things
that you're gonna be able to be very easily able to track when it's in a database and
Speaker 33
3:08:57
software system. Yeah, I guess I I always, I'm
Representative David Ray
Unverified
3:09:02
a little bit. Um, concerned about the practice of some of our agencies because you can go on, you know, for for instance, govdeals.com and you can see state vehicles that are being sold and my personal view is that sometimes Um, agencies sell sell vehicles
too soon when they still have plenty of operable life on them and then replace them with a new vehicle, which is, as we all know, the most expensive way to purchase a vehicle. So, uh, I, I just I would like to hear from the department if they could summarize all of the ways and I'm, I'm a big supporter. In, in general of moving. Uh, finding ways to save money through vehicle fleet management because I know a lot of other states have done this, but I, and I was not here,
unfortunately the day, the first day this bill was heard, but I did not hear anything in that presentation when I went back and watched the video. That gave me any confidence that the agency was had a plan to save money and could delineate the ways in which they would save money or had any idea of how much money might be saved. So I would just like to hear from the agency and outline of the plan, how this is going to be utilized. What's the, the ways in which they anticipate
saving money and Perhaps even an estimate of how much money could be saved through better, better utilization of our state vehicles. Go ahead. Yes, I, I think, um. Following up
Speaker 415
3:10:38
on what Senator Irvin has said, I think those are, are good, valuable questions. Part of the, the problem for us as a department is that we are not able to, to drill down and give you a
specific number based on the fact that we're dealing with um you know, antiquated, um, processes and, and paper. So but, but our goal is, uh, you know, clearly we've talked, we've identified, I'm talking about safety, um, the efficiencies and, and the best use of these vehicles, um, with our department. Um, we also have state surplus. M&R is, is a part of our department and so we're clearly planning on working hand in hand with our M&R and and our department is the one that is selling those vehicles. So once
we have this information that's in from a technology standpoint that we literally will have that data at our fingertips, we can do a better job on making sure we are saving money and, and we are timing it right to sell vehicles when it's time to sell them and to keep them when it's time to keep them. We also um have identified, we know that we, um, are reimbursing um state employees $7.5 million a year in for mileage reimbursement and so that for us is the clear number
that that number is going and can decrease, including we have, um, you know, some of the employees that we're talking about that are taking care of our most vulnerable citizens, these young children in remote areas with, you know, deep and in DYS that if they are if some of those are you are being reimbursed mileage that we can take some of our very safe underutilized vehicles and make sure that those employees have those to take care of themselves and children's safety at the same time we'll be saving the state money. So once we're able to
assimilate that data, we could put that together.
Representative Beck, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I was just kind I'm struggling a little bit with the numbers. I, I, I, it. There's a company that's gonna come in and do this. They, I'm assuming that we would say that that company had done this at other places, similar size plates and, and all of that and
and the fact that they can't give us some type of a projection that shows that this is how the money would be saved. Uh, you know, that, that, that bothers me, but, but, but beyond that, the question I have is that using the 58 000 A58,000 dollars number times 25, 2500 in the fleet. That doesn't equal $20 a month, by the way,
and there's, there's like about 210,000, I mean, give me $110,000 using the $20 a month, that's, that's going somewhere else, according to this projection is that Yeah, I, I can just tell you in, in my, in
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
3:13:46
my research in 2011 when the state of Mississippi did this under the leadership of Governor Haley Barbour, uh, there was drastic savings and I could go back and pull my file
from 2011. There were tons of savings that the state of Mississippi was able to realize because of the, the inefficiencies that Representative Long just pointed out of our state employees being paid more money than what the technology allow, um, but again, we have to, you have to pay, you're paying for the technology and the software and the ability for the government to upgrade its
processes away from manual to a technology-based solution. And so that, that's really what we're, we're aiming for and I mean in my, in my world, we, we, we as state government have put forward and, and supported. You know, contracts with think tanks that have been in the multi-millions of dollars when you're just getting ideas at the end of the day. This is actual real actionable systems upgrade, you utilizing computers and
technology, uh, you know, that you're that we're spending state dollars on, and I would argue that's a very, that this is a good use of state taxpayer dollars to make us more efficient where we can can save that money. But there, but again, there's no mandate for this to do this until the bill passes so that they can negotiate or I guess, you know, talk to those companies to, to, to get that. I, I
If, if I'm understanding your question correctly. Yes, but the the these companies are doing this for fleets right now. There, there, there, and they have they're demonstrating they should be able to demonstrate
or, or they have a horrible marketing group if they don't have something that says, hey, listen, usually on a fleet your size we would say 20% of your of your overall maintenance costs or something like that, some number that you could. time you hang your hat on and, and I think that doesn't require
any commitment from from the state at that point to get those type of numbers. The, the other question that I would have is, is once you get those numbers, you might possibly look at what about leasing a fleet, right? You know, let, let them handle all this, this money, and then, and then it's their cars that that we're utilizing and then and then finally the the only other question that I'll ask you guys to address is this. There was a lot of concern in this committee about tracking. Government employees, uh, and, and that you would be tracking
where they're at and how that information would be handled and I, I haven't heard you guys address that, and that was one of the concerns that led this committee last
Speaker 415
3:16:47
time. Thank you. Um For currently Representative Beck for um tracking employees I know in the previous committee meeting we had talked about as a state employee, um, you know, when we log into our computers every morning, that, you know, it states that everything that we're doing, um, is, um, is, you know, subject to the state reviewing everything, all of our emails, all of our
communications, um, and, and that's really that also applies to through um the, the system that we have right here, all of this is, is tracking employees. It's just through paper. So if I took a vehicle right now and I wanted, you know, to, to drive to Cersei and I stopped in North Little Rock on the way. That's, I have to log in exactly where I'm leaving, where I stop, what I'm doing at that stop and then where I start again. So if I stopped to get gas in our cars, I stop at Chick fil A. I have to
log that. So right now we have all of this. This bill does not provide for any more details than what's already in the law and what's required by law. It just would be from a technical standpoint and um all the information that we were not sharing any of that data with anybody other than if it's subject to, you know, it's all subject to a like audit. We have the manual right here that's 45 pages and, um, that information is subject to FOIA and those, those laws apply right now to
all this information behind Senator Urban. Thank
you. Representative Rose, and I will note that we've got. About 5 minutes before the house floor begins, so. We're going to, we're gonna have to wrap this up pretty quickly. Representative Rose, thank you,
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
3:18:26
Mr. Chairman. Uh, first I wanna say, um, Senator Irvin and Representative Clowney both presenting this bill. I thought did a very admirable job, um. What I will say is in this committee.
You need to be able to. To the department To provide us with, with details when you're talking about efficiencies or cutting or adding or subtracting and both times
we've heard this bill, it is not. That has not happened and Miss Fiskin, um, I, I really thought the questions that Representative Ray asked were very pointed and we're very um Pretty much exactly what we need
to know on whether we should support this or not. And if we want to get away from cost, I'm fine with that. Let's say, what are the savings before cost in your Report on the fiscal impact it references 73,000 hours that will be saved. Can you tell us what the average salary is of those positions and what that roughly translates into, into an hourly rate and what that would look like in terms of savings annually. And, and then how that will look
year after year, and then we can also talk. I understand that we can't say the cost is something specific because it hasn't been negotiated yet, but like those are things, and I don't know how all the other committees are, but this committee, you go around the table, um. We, if we, if we pass something out of here and there's all these questions, our colleagues are going to be frustrated. Why didn't this get brought up in committee? And so the 2nd time we've done this, and it's just kind of It's very vague and very broad and that's, and that's difficult to convince many of us to be
a yes on, no matter how good the senator or the representative do
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
3:20:14
in presenting it. OK, so doing the math at 73,000 hours at $35 an hour is $2.55 million. And is
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
3:20:21
that is that TSF says is the average salary of all those employees. I'm
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
3:20:25
using that as a number because Representative Long said that he got paid more than $20 an hour. So I mean minimum wage. Over $100,000. Every single person has to.
Speaker 418
3:20:33
I mean, I, I can do the math for you real fast, but, um, I'm at
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
3:20:47
$35 obviously is below $100,000 per hourly, $100,000 salary per year, and then you may have minimum wage people, but generally speaking in state employees, I don't think you would have many of those, so I mean just at $35 an hour is 2.5. $2,555,000 which far exceeds the cost of what is on your fiscal impact of the implementation of the technology. Can I. And as a follow up to
Speaker 415
3:21:18
that, that's why we have employees, um, if you check out a state vehicle, if you're authorized to check a state vehicle out, um, there are approximately 10,000 employees in state government. They can do that and they're, they range from the minimum wage all the way to employees making over 100,000, so we calculated about ours because we, we can't determine an exact average. I, I think the $35 an hour is a good ballpark for, but for us to submit information to DFNA that that's what um. We are required to do and, and as a follow up, I'm sorry we
haven't had all of the details. Part of this goes back to just we're working with paper, but outside of this bill that that would impact the spill. Also, it's, you know, we've learned from McKenzie and working with them, our fleet is an average of 10 years old and so by working on reallocating the employees that are getting the 7.5 in mileage and to utilize those vehicles better, um, that will lead to 500, between $500,000 and a million dollars of savings. I hate to interrupt,
but we are required to recess at 1:30. We cannot continue any longer. These are the rules of the house. So
this. Committee will stand in recess. We'll come back this afternoon to finish the presentation of this bill. Thank you all very much. We'll stand in recess. Thank you.
Agenda
CONCUR IN SENATE AMENDMENT
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1614 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DESIGNATIONS RELATED TO CERTAIN CRIMINAL JUSTICE GRANT PROGRAMS.
RE-REFERRED TO COMMITTEE
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1800 McAlindon TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DISCLOSURE FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE; TO REQUIRE DISCLOSURE BY REPRESENTATIVES OF A NON-UNITED STATES ENTITY; AND TO AMEND PORTIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE THAT RESULTED FROM INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1990.
HB1365 K. Brown TO REMOVE RACIAL AND GENDER QUOTAS AND QUALIFICATIONS OF MEMBERSHIP FOR CERTAIN BOARDS, COMMITTEES, COUNCILS, AND COMMISSIONS.
REGULAR AGENDA
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HB1753 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION; TO OPT-OUT OF THE NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION ACT OF 1993; AND TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51, § 5.
HB1773 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CONTRIBUTION LIMITS FOR BALLOT QUESTION COMMITTEES AND LEGISLATIVE QUESTION COMMITTEES.
HB1037 A. Collins AN ACT TO CREATE THE PREREGISTRATION TO VOTE ACT; AND TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51, UNDER THE AUTHORITY GRANTED BY ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT 51, § 19.
HB1041 R. Scott Richardson TO PROHIBIT DECEPTIVE AND FRAUDULENT DEEPFAKES IN ELECTION COMMUNICATIONS.
HB1837 McAlindon TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING DISCLOSURE FOR MATTERS REFERRED TO VOTERS; AND TO BAN FOREIGN FUNDING FOR BALLOT MEASURES; TO AMEND PORTIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE THAT RESULTED FROM INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1996.
HB1846 S. Meeks TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS 2036 COMMISSION.
HB1849 Gramlich TO ALLOW FOR THE CROSS DEPUTIZATION OF MUNICIPAL, COUNTY, STATE, AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ON FEDERALLY-RECOGNIZED TRIBAL LAND WITHIN THE STATE.
HB1867 B. McKenzie TO ESTABLISH THE NO GOVERNMENT TRESPASSING ACT; AND TO PROHIBIT GAME WARDEN TRESPASS ONTO PRIVATE LAND.
HB1870 Wing CONCERNING VOTER REGISTRATION LISTS; AND TO ALLOW THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO PROVIDE A VOTER REGISTRATION LIST TO FEDERAL COURTS.
HB1878 McGruder TO ENSURE EARLY VOTING ACCESS FOR ARKANSANS RESIDING IN POPULATION CENTERS; AND TO REQUIRE A COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTION COMMISSIONERS TO CONDUCT EARLY VOTING IN A CITY IN CERTAIN INSTANCES.
HB1883 Long TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS FOURTH AMENDMENT PROTECTION ACT; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE COLLECTION OF ELECTRONIC DATA AND METADATA.
HB1884 Long TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE MARKING AND COUNTING OF PAPER BALLOTS.
HB1683 McAlindon TO PROHIBIT THE PROCUREMENT BY A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY OF AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE OR A COMPONENT OF AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE THAT WAS MANUFACTURED IN WHOLE OR IN PART USING FORCED LABOR.
HB1632 Wardlaw TO REQUIRE REIMBURSEMENT TO THE ARKANSAS STATE GAME AND FISH COMMISSION FOR FREE OR DISCOUNTED HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSES.
HB1891 Ray TO ALLOW A PERSON FILING AS A CANDIDATE FOR THE OFFICE OF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT OR JUDGE OF THE COURT OF APPEALS WHO IS AN APPOINTEE IN THAT POSITION TO USE THE TITLE OF THAT POSITION AS A PREFIX WHEN FILING AS A CANDIDATE.
HB1896 B. McKenzie TO CREATE THE JUNK FEE ELIMINATING ACT OF 2025; TO ABOLISH THE INFORMATION NETWORK OF ARKANSAS; AND TO TRANSFER ANY REMAINING DUTIES OF THE INFORMATION NETWORK OF ARKANSAS TO THE DIVISION OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS.
HB1898 Painter TO CREATE THE REGULATORY DIVISION AND THE REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT DIVISION IN THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION; AND TO ALLOW PERSONNEL OF THE REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT DIVISION TO BE DESIGNATED AS AGENTS.
HB1925 Beaty Jr. TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ABSENTEE BALLOTS; AND TO REQUIRE AN OATH FOR AN ABSENTEE BALLOT.
HB1929 McAlindon TO CREATE THE RECOGNIZING JUDEA AND SAMARIA ACT; AND TO PROHIBIT STATE AGENCIES FROM USING THE TERM "WEST BANK" IN OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT MATERIALS.
HB1934 McAlindon TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS FORWARD ENGAGEMENT COMMITTEE ACT; AND TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS FORWARD ENGAGEMENT COMMITTEE WORKING GROUP.
SENATE BILLS
Number Sponsor Subtitle
SB351 J. Dismang TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING ETHICS AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE; TO AMEND PORTIONS OF INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1990; AND TO AMEND PORTIONS OF INITIATED ACT 1 OF 1996.
SB343 Irvin TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING STATE-OWNED MOTOR VEHICLES; TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC PROPERTY; AND TO AMEND THE AUTOMOBILE AND PICKUP TRUCK ACQUISITION ACT FOR THE STATE OF ARKANSAS.
SB12 B. King TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO AMEND ARKANSAS LAW CONCERNING COMMUNICATIONS REGARDING REDISTRICTING BY THE BOARD OF APPORTIONMENT.
SB357 J. Bryant TO AMEND THE UNIFORM ATTENDANCE AND LEAVE POLICY ACT; AND TO APPLY MILITARY SERVICE CREDIT TO A PUBLIC EMPLOYEE'S TOTAL SERVICE TIME FOR ANNUAL LEAVE ACCRUAL CALCULATION.
SB241 J. Scott TO AMEND THE UNIFORM ATTENDANCE AND LEAVE POLICY ACT; AND TO GRANT PAID LEAVE TO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES IN THE EVENT OF THE DEATH OF A PUBLIC EMPLOYEE'S FAMILY MEMBER OR CHILD.
SB433 J. Dotson REGARDING THE DISPLAY OF THE NATIONAL MOTTO AND THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.
SB376 A. Clark TO AMEND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967; AND TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING PUBLIC MEETINGS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT OF 1967.
SB445 K. Hammer TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING THE LICENSURE OF ELECTRICAL INSPECTORS.
SB471 A. Clark TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CANDIDATES FOR NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS; AND TO ALLOW CERTAIN CANDIDATES FOR NONPARTISAN ELECTIONS TO USE THE TITLE OF THE NONPARTISAN JUDICIAL OFFICE ON THE BALLOT.
SB479 K. Hammer TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING VOTER ASSISTANCE; AND TO REQUIRE A PERSON ASSISTING A VOTER WITH A DISABILITY TO PRESENT IDENTIFICATION.
SB491 K. Hammer TO REQUIRE A VENDOR THAT CONTRACTS WITH THE OFFICE OF STATE PROCUREMENT FOR SERVICES FOR THE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS DIVISION TO SUBMIT DATA FOR VERIFICATION BY AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR; TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
SB510 J. Boyd TO ALLOW FOR THE CROSS DEPUTIZATION OF MUNICIPAL, COUNTY, STATE, AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ON FEDERALLY-RECOGNIZED TRIBAL LAND WITHIN THE STATE.
SB508 Irvin TO AMEND THE FREQUENCY OF PAYMENT OF A STIPEND FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFIT ADVISORY COMMISSION AND THE STATE EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFIT ADVISORY COMMISSION.
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Number Sponsor Subtitle
HJR1009 K. Brown AN AMENDMENT TO THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION TO BE KNOWN AS THE ARKANSAS VICTIMS' BILL OF RIGHTS; AND TO PROVIDE RIGHTS FOR VICTIMS OF MISDEMEANOR AND FELONY OFFENSES, INCLUDING VICTIMS IN THE ADULT AND JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEMS.
HJR1014 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.
HJR1016 Ray A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO REPEAL THE PROVISION OF ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 5, § 1, ALLOWING THE SPONSOR OF AN INITIATIVE OR REFERENDUM PETITION TO CORRECT OR AMEND A PETITION.
HJR1017 Ray A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROVIDING THAT A PROPOSED STATE-WIDE INITIATED ACT OR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT SHALL BECOME A LAW WHEN APPROVED BY A MAJORITY OF THE VOTES CAST IN THE ELECTION AND A MAJORITY OF THE COUNTIES OF THE STATE.
HJR1018 Ray THE CITIZENS ONLY VOTING AMENDMENT.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — STATE AGENCIES & GOVT'L AFFAIRS- HOUSE, Apr 2, 2025 | Agenda | 5 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Representative Jimmy Gazaway Chair
Unverified
Representative Wayne Long
Unverified
Representative Andrew Collins
Unverified
Representative David Ray
Unverified
Speaker 21
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
Caroline Cole
Unverified
Speaker 44
Speaker 45
Representative Kendon Underwood
Unverified
Speaker 50
Speaker 51
Speaker 56
Representative Jeremy Wooldridge
Unverified
Representative Ryan A. Rose
Unverified
Representative RJ Hawk
Unverified
Speaker 72
Speaker 109
Speaker 112
Representative Carlton Wing
Unverified
Zach Gramli
Unverified
Speaker 157
Speaker 167
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
Representative Rick Beck Chair
Unverified
Representative Mindy McAlindon
Unverified
Speaker 190
Speaker 220
Speaker 223
Speaker 236
Representative Nicole Clowney
Unverified
Samantha Vick
Unverified
Speaker 265
Speaker 266
Representative Cindy Crawford
Unverified
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
Speaker 274
Speaker 279
Speaker 276
Speaker 280
Speaker 288
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
Speaker 305
Speaker 307
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
Stephanie Taub
Unverified
Timothy Barton
Unverified
Speaker 314
Speaker 317
Speaker 319
Speaker 326
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
Senator Jim Dotson
Unverified
Speaker 344
Speaker 354
Speaker 355
Tony Rose
Unverified
Speaker 362
Speaker 363
Speaker 366
Speaker 370
Speaker 372
Speaker 376
Speaker 382
Holly Dixon
Unverified
Speaker 387
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
Senator Missy Irvin
Unverified
Speaker 414
Speaker 415
Speaker 33
Speaker 418