Senate
January 29, 2025
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:00:11] The Senate will be called to order at this time. Are there any requests for leave? Madam Secretary, please call the roll. Thank you, Madam Secretary. For everyone in the chamber and in the galleries would please rise and remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. Prior to that, we will have a prayer and Senator Blake Johnson will introduce our pastor the day. Senator Johnson, you're recognized.
Senator Blake Johnson [00:01:13] Members, if you would allow leave for Pastor Derrick Collins and his wife Elizabeth. Derrick has pastored Gethsemane Baptist Church in Walnut Ridge for 24 years. And he's here to say our prayer and we appreciate him coming. And Senator Payton and I share his membership and he is a great guy. [prayer]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:04:48] Thank you, Pastor, for those words. Appreciate you being here today. Ladies and gentlemen in the galleries, welcome to your Arkansas State Senate. It is our expectation that each of you will exercise proper decorum and govern yourselves accordingly during today's proceedings. Without objection, the rules will be suspended and the Senate will dispense with the reading of the Journal. Morning hour has now begun. Are there any announcements or introductions at this time? Madam Secretary, are there items at the desk?
Secretary [00:05:20] Yes, ma'am. A letter from Senator Dan Sullivan. Dear Miss Cornwell, I am submitting this letter to close that my wife, Marie Sullivan, is a member of the Arkansas Educational Television Commission. Please read this letter aloud and record it in the Senate Journal. Sincerely, Senator Dan Sullivan.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:05:41] File it.
Secretary [00:05:42] [Engrossed Bills, SB 17].
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:05:53] Public Health.
[00:05:54] [Engrossed Bills, SB 106].
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:06:02] Joint Budget.
Secretary [00:06:05] Notice of the withdrawal of Senate Bill 47 by Senator Boyd from further consideration.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:06:15] File it.
Secretary [00:06:19] [Education, HB 1005, Do Pass]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:06:26] Calendar.
Secretary [00:06:28] [Judiciary, SB 14, Do Pass]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:06:33] Calendar.
Secretary [00:06:35] [Judiciary, HB 1006, Do Pass]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:06:40] Calendar.
Secretary [00:06:42] [Education, SB 58, Do Pass].
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:06:47] Calendar.
Secretary [00:06:48] [Senate Bill 139]
Secretary [00:07:10] Public Health.
Secretary [00:07:12] [Senate Bill 140]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:07:28] Insurance and Commerce.
Secretary [00:07:30] [Senate Bill 141]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:07:37] State Agencies. Any further business to come before the body in the morning hour? If not, the morning hour has expired. We will now begin the business agenda, beginning with Senate Resolution 6.
Secretary [00:07:57] Senate Resolution 6 by Senator Irvin to recognize and celebrate January 29th, 2025, as mental health day at the state Capitol.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:08:08] Senator Irvin you're recognized.
Senator Missy Irvin [00:08:11] Thank you. Thank you, members. We have several providers with us in the gallery. If you could stand. There are mental health providers and we're happy to have you here today. If you'll stand and if you're in the galleries, I think over in the side. So thank you for being here. So today, today, members in the rotunda, I think you had a very large presence of mental health providers. And so I'm happy to be able to present this resolution today just to recognize and celebrate January 29th, 2025, as mental health Day at the state Capitol. You can read the resolution.
Just one of the few things that I just want to highlight is how critical mental health is, obviously, to our citizens across the state of Arkansas, particularly our children and our youth. And I think that, you know, there's so many examples of great legislation that we have passed that really have highlighted the need for policy work in this area as it relates to our children and youth and their mental health and their ability just to have a good, successful, happy, healthy life. And so Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders has highlighted the mental health crisis facing America's youth and called for action to address this critical issue.
And I know that the Senate and the House has been in partnership with her on really trying to craft the correct policy to do that. And so, again, today is just advocating for mental health Day. We want to thank the providers that are here with us today, but all the providers across the state of Arkansas and honestly, any adult that comes in the pathway of a child or a youth particularly, or an adult when they're in a point of crisis, I think it's just so important that we recognize that this is an issue that's just as severe, just as detrimental as alcoholism or drug addiction. When you are suffering from a mental health crisis, it is critical and incumbent upon us to address it and to step in with good, thoughtful policy to prevent that person that's in crisis from harming themselves or harming others. And that's really what we should be here about celebrating today. So with that, I would just ask you for a good vote for the resolution and to, again, thank them for the work they do.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:10:33] Thank you, Senator Irvin. All those in favor of Senate Resolution 6 to recognize and celebrate January 29th, 2025, as mental health Day at the state Capitol, please signify by saying aye. Any opposed. Ayes have it. Senate Resolution 6 is adopted. We will now take up Senate Bill 3.
Secretary [00:11:00] Senate Bill 3 by Senator Sullivan, To prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment by the state of Arkansas and other public entities.
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:11:10] Thank you, Madam President.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:11:12] Senator Sullivan, you're recognized.
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:11:14] Thank you. Remember, we talked about this bill last session two years ago. Made it through this chamber and all the way to the House chamber. It's pretty much the same. The legislation, I want to go through it in a minute, but I want to make a couple of opening statements. We had 2.5 hours of testimony yesterday. But preference and preferential treatment and discrimination have always existed. And this bill is not trying to get rid of preferential treatment. It is getting rid of affirmative action.
But to say that we're trying to get rid of that nationwide and statewide is just a straw man and not true. This bill only affects procurement, hiring and higher ed. That's all it affects. And there is no attempt in this bill to end it in the private sector. I want to walk through the bill real quickly with you and make a few points. If you've got the bill in front of you or if you don't, I'll explain it. But on page one, it talks about its only basis for race, sex, color, ethnicity and national origin. Those are the only areas of discrimination.
On page two, it talks about it's more effective, it scratches out civil rights and replaces that with desegregation and nondiscrimination. And you'll note it does not reference case law or the law in civil rights. So it's just talking about civil rights in generic terms. And actually, the desegregation and nondiscrimination are actually more descriptive of what the bill does than just a generic term of civil rights. And you're going to see civil rights scratched through several times. So know that when it mentions civil rights, it's not canceling any law. It's only talking in generic terms.
And you'll notice in section five, on page three, we cross out a lot of language. Those were all requirements for affirmative action. And you know that the president has made an executive order ending affirmative action and DEI. And while that's effective at the state level, at the federal level, it is filtering down to the state level and anyone who receives funding from the feds. We've also had our governor say several times that the state of Arkansas will be in compliance with federal law, and this is federal law. So whether you agree or disagree with ending affirmative action, it is now and going to be federal law.
And the next few pages cross out language that were all compliance issues with affirmative action. And we no longer have to do that reporting. In Section nine, it talks about the subchapter on page seven, the Arkansas Geographical Critical Needs minority teacher scholarship. Folks, and we change that to the critical needs scholarship and strike out minority. Critical needs is a more inclusive word than minority. So if you have a minority population and let's say you have a population like at Arkansas State University, I don't know how many students they have. I'm going to say 10,000.
If they have a minority population of 8,000 and we're going to change the wording to critical needs. We're going to cover all 10,000 people. So the actual population of people that are covered with critical need is higher than a minority population. We're actually including more people, not fewer. And in testimony yesterday, you heard many people say we are removing opportunity, we're taking away opportunity. That couldn't be further from the truth. We're actually allowing more people, people who are not necessarily a member of a minority community, we're actually allowing them access too.
And I've talked with the chancellor at Arkansas State several times, talked with Chancellor Robinson again today at U of A. And several years ago, I think about two and a half years ago, he eliminated DEI at the University of Arkansas. Now, is it perfect? No. Are they still working? Yes. It's going to take a while. But Chancellor Shields at ASU and I, we have talked several times and Chancellor Shields has a marketing philosophy, I'm going to term it, of belonging. And they are pushing belonging.
And if you read the paper recently, the same term came out with Walmart, belonging. And if you asked Chancellor Shields what that means, he'll tell you that every student is important. They don't want to lose anybody. And if you are a young, pregnant teenage mother at Arkansas state university, they want to help you. It doesn't make any difference if you're a minority, if you're a majority, what you are, they want to help. If you're a student struggling in class, they want to help. Everybody is important. They don't want anybody to leave. We're struggling to recruit engineering students at ASU for the burgeoning steel industry there, folks. We don't care what you are.
Everybody is important and every engineer is important. And we're not going to discriminate or give preferential treatment to any group. And what the people that are opposed to this bill are saying is we want to roll back. We no longer want to give everybody preferential treatment. We only want to give certain people preferential treatment. I'll go on through the bill, but you'll see us scratch that minority word several times. And again, it refers to critical need, whatever that is. And if you have a need, then our universities, our private businesses, they want to help meet that need.
This subchapter does not affect any preferences given to veterans. And I'll touch on that veteran's issue in a minute. Again, on page nine, it talks about critical need. On page ten, the state of Arkansas does not discriminate in access to employment opportunities or in employment practices on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or generic information.
Folks, that's with our state agencies. And if we have a state agency that struggles with that, they have a responsibility to go to their boss, which would be the governor, express that problem they're having, and then come to meet and talk about the bill. We had an agency call about 20 minutes ago, and they are misreading the bill, I think, critically. They need to come and talk to us about what their issues are. I'll leave that to the side right now. Again, on page 11, it talks about veterans.
On section 21 prohibition of discrimination or preferential treatment by state entities. And folks, it's really important we understand what preferential treatment means. That means some people are treated better than others. And this bill says no more preferential treatment. Everybody belongs. Everybody is equally important. It says at the bottom of page 11 and going on to page 12 that people that violate this law could be guilty of a misdemeanor. Now, there's been some concern about what that entails, folks. In order to be guilty of a misdemeanor, you have to, by the law, you have to knowingly violate that law.
Let me read the section. For a person to knowingly violate the law, he must both know that he is discriminating and must take action to affect that outcome. This knowledge is not imputed up the chain of command, nor are the actions. Each person must be assessed individually as to whether he knows of the discrimination and has done something to bring it about. So if you are the head of an agency and you have someone beneath you violate discrimination law, it doesn't impute guilt all the way up the chain to the secretary of that division. It just doesn't do that. Everyone's judged on their own merits.
It talks about remedies later on there and it talks about a civil opportunity for civil action. If you think you've been violated and whether or not the state has sovereign immunity is a valid point. However, the judge is capable of making that determination at that point. I'm going to tell you what the bill does in general. It's equality for all individuals. This legislation firmly rejects discrimination based on race, color, sex, ethnicity or national origin. It's merit based systems by ensuring that discrimination and preferential treatment are not the norm. It preserves veterans benefits.
Now, listen, this is an important part because it came up yesterday. Why are our veterans special? I'll tell you why they're special, why they're different. This legislation maintains preferences for veterans acknowledging the sacrifices made by specific individuals. It doesn't compute a whole group of people based upon their race, their sex, their religion. It doesn't impute special preferential treatment to veterans other than their individual sacrifice.
This bill strengthens competition and innovation by removing unnecessary or enforced diversity over merit within the commercial framework. It adds transparency and accountability. It rejects divisive situations. It empowers institutions to focus on excellence. You know, some are confusing this bill with the DEI Bill. This is not a DEI Bill, although the two are very similar in their impact. You know, the city of Little Rock has a DEI division. I have their budget, $433,000. One city. The purpose of this bill is for us to focus on helping people directly. It adheres to common American values.
This acts closely to the ethos laid out by Ronald Reagan, emphasizing dignity and opportunity for all. Never condescending for any. It's time our systems reflect the shared vision of unity and fairness. It has firm consequence and a legal framework, and it promotes a society where the rule of law correctly acknowledges contributions based on freewill capabilities. And this legislation stands firmly to protect freedom and common sense values.
You may have seen the president several days ago issued an executive order. And that executive order says to end illegal discriminatory actions and restore a merit based opportunity. Folks, that's SB3, ending illegal discrimination and restoring merit based. I'm not going to read all the executive orders, but there are a number of executive orders that this canceled. You know, I thought I knew what affirmative action was. Affirmative action was just an executive order. And there were a couple of executive orders that were implemented. And everybody said that's the law. And if you violated them, you got in trouble with the courts.
And now all of a sudden, President Trump eliminates those executive orders. And you may hear today some say that that's not law. It's just as much law as it was when other presidents issued executive orders. But there are a number of executive orders that are ended here. I want to wrap it up and leave time for comments and questions.
You know, someone asked why religion wasn't in the bill. You can't discriminate based on one's religion. But as far as affirmative action goes, affirmative action is not. It's based on those race, color immutable characteristics, where religion is not an immutable characteristic. So it's not included in that bill. That's all I have for now. I'd be glad to answer any questions.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:24:48] Questions for Senator Sullivan? Senator Flowers, you're recognized for a question.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:24:57] Thank you. Senator Sullivan. What do you mean by merit based?
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:25:06] Merit based. Merit would be, many businesses, colleges hire by your quality of work. So merit based would be your quality of work. We judge our students all the time on their merit to enter medical school, to enter college. Many businesses hire based on merit. Attorneys hire based on the merit. There are other factors, but merit is certainly one.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:25:37] But you would limit hiring based on merit. So is merit, do you consider that your experience, your work experience or your education or both? Or if one person has more experience, lacks education, credentials, college degrees or whatever, but has an outstanding work record and experience. How do you do that?
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:26:14] Well, we do it now. I mean, we have tests to do that. You have credentialing. People have at different education levels. It's done right now. And it's based on all of those, not just any one single. But we base things on merit all the time.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:26:32] Well, if we do it already, why are you doing this bill?
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:26:35] Well, we're just repeating what's already the case.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:26:39] Well, the other question I have as this relates to State of Arkansas, public entities, your state agencies, your colleges, public colleges. I'm just trying to figure out what exactly are you intending here, because when I look around at many state agencies and I'd say most state agencies, you don't see much diversity. I don't. Maybe you do.
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:27:18] Yes, I do. I mean, Arkansas State has-- the minority population in Arkansas State is very high. Matter of fact, I don't know exactly what you mean by diversity, but Arkansas State is primarily women. I don't know what their black population is, but it's very large. And that's true of UA too.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:27:39] So and you mentioned in your comments that you made earlier, you said race and color. I didn't hear you say women. Is a woman and women, are they a target of your Senate bill 3 to prohibit discrimination or preferential treatment toward women? Is that part of it?
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:28:03] The law says you cannot give preferential treatment to women. So if there are two people bidding on a contract, you can't give priority preference to a woman. It has to be based on their merit, who's the best one for the job.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:28:22] So have you taken into account any history of the state of Arkansas in terms of hiring practices, lawsuits that have been filed alleging discrimination filed by a minority, whether it be a woman or a person of color or a black person or Hispanic person? Have you even looked back at the history of Arkansas hiring practice?
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:28:58] Yes, ma'am. That point was made yesterday. Talked about 300 years of--.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:29:03] I asked you, have you looked back?
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:29:08] Have I? Yes.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:29:08] And you don't see the need for having our laws as they're written on the books now?
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:29:16] I think there is an arc of history. And I think we are at a critical time in our nation. You know, I went to a-- good example. I went to a six year old's birthday party a couple of weeks ago. There were about 20 kids there, all from different nationalities, all from different heritage, mixed marriages. And they were six year old kids playing together.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:29:40] what does that have to do--.
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:29:41] You ask me a question, I'll try to answer your question.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:29:43] I'm asking you--.
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:29:44] I'm trying to answer your question.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:29:46] To your bill. I'm not talking about a six year old birthday party. I'm talking about people that are applying for jobs or already are on jobs that are of a particular race or color or gender. I'm not talking about little kids.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:30:03] Senator Flowers, I would respectfully request that--
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:30:07] Ask him to answer the question.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:30:07] Senator Flowers, I'm going to allow and encourage Senator Sullivan to continue on with his analogy. And perhaps it will answer your question or address the question, one of the questions that you asked. Senator Sullivan.
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:30:24] Yeah. Thank you. Yes. You asked if I was aware. Yes, I'm aware. The other day in the Big Mac, we had a group of students from U of A who were the student government, and there was about as group as mixed race as you would want to be. And I asked them, I said, are you all aware of what affirmative action laws were?
Very few of them even knew what affirmative action was. They thought they knew. But when I described it or they described it, it wasn't affirmative action at all. They reached their positions for merit. I talked to the sponsor. These were all top students, and they were from multi cultural, different cultures, different backgrounds, different races, different genders all across the board. That's the group that we're making this law for.
You know, I hear a lot of talk about what happened in 1970 and 1980, and it's true. I understand that. I grew up in those years. I know it's true. But I know what we need to do moving forward. And I know what students, whether they're six years old or 26 years old or 16 years old, that's what this law is trying to have a nondiscriminatory policy that bases what happens in the state of Arkansas on merit. And we've had our governor say as recently as today, I think that the state will comply with federal law and that we are concerned that we do not have a state where we have discriminatory practices. And discriminatory practices work both ways. You're either discriminating against someone or you give preferential treatment to someone. And we're saying that both of those are wrong.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:32:13] Last question.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:32:15] Senator Flowers, you're recognized for a question.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:32:18] Where in state government have you seen this, the law that's presently on the books abused? Tell me something about why you brought this bill. Are there people that are black or are female, Hispanic, Asian, that you think lack merit for their job? Tell me where you see it.
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:32:51] Yes. I mean, I ran on this bill, ran for election on this bill. My people in my district knew that I ran this bill. I was going to run it again and I won by about 60-40. The governor ran on ending discrimination. The president ran on discrimination. So if the question is, do the people of Arkansas want to see us end discrimination and treat people equally and fairly, I'd say yes, of course. I think people disagree. And they're certainly welcome to and you'll hear from them today.
But if you ask the people of the state of Arkansas if they're ready to end discrimination, I think the people of Arkansas overwhelmingly say yes. And we saw a great example. Again, you had the chancellor at the University of Arkansas ended DEI on his own, no pressure. And the reason he did that in my conversation with him, he said every student needed our help. We had students of every gender, every race, every color, every ethnic background that needed help. And we're going to help them. The same thing in Arkansas State.
And I couldn't be more proud. Todd Shields has been recognized statewide as one of the best leaders in the state. And he says every student needs help and everyone that needs help we're going to give them. We're not giving preferential treatment to anybody. You heard private businesses say that the other day when they said, all of our employees are important, all of our consumers are important. And you heard people say, well, we're going to boycott you because we want our population to have preferential treatment. That's wrong.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:34:33] Any other questions for Senator Sullivan? Anyone wish to speak against? Senator Flowers you’re recognized to speak against.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:34:55] Thank you. I'd just like to say this. I'm voting against this bill. I don't think it's necessary. I think it's mean spirited. I think it ignores the history of Arkansas, the history my people have been dealt with discriminatorily. And I'd like to say you do a heck of a job of being nonresponsive to questions. If you were in a courtroom, all of that would have been stricken because it didn't respond to the question.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:35:40] Senator Flowers.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:35:40] You don't have the same skin and color that I have.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:35:43] Senator Flowers.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:35:44] Yes.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:35:46] You may speak against the bill. You may not attack personally another senator.
Senator Stephanie Flowers [00:35:52] I don't think I'm attacking him. I'm just saying. I mean, he gave examples of things, but, you know. Okay. No attack intended. But I've been feeling attacked most of my life. And it's because of my color. Sometimes it's because of my gender. I've had eight brothers and sisters. Three of my brothers were in wars, the Vietnam War. My brother would go overseas to Vietnam. Because he was a black man, he couldn't go to the club that the white soldiers went to. Talk about preferential treatment.
Teachers in the history of Arkansas that were black weren't paid the same wages as white teachers. So many things. And those things haven't disappeared. That discrimination is still present. I know people, black people that have trained individuals to take positions in state government and on different types of jobs only to be asked to train a white person that comes in with less qualifications to take their position.
You know, there's something to be said about walking in somebody else's shoes. And when I'm down here and you say we don't discriminate, you discriminated against me because I'm a Democrat, I guess, or because I'm black or because I'm a woman, I don't know. But I know I've been down here longer than any one of you all sitting in here. But yet, the rules were changed just to restrict my ability to be involved and to give my perspective on different issues. If you don't want to do better, don't do better.
But I hope the people of Arkansas will do better and be better. I hope you understand the preacher that came down here today talking about God all this. And nobody knows what God wants. But I know he's fair. In the scripture I read this morning from Luke 18 says, Always cry continually for justice. I'm voting against it. I would ask that you vote against.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:38:57] Anyone wish to speak for? Anyone else wish to speak against? Senator Murdock, you're recognized to speak against.
Senator Reginald Murdock [00:39:12] Thank you, Governor. Colleagues, I come before you today with much, really chagrin and care for you. I'm sorry that many of you that I respect and know, I'm sorry that you've been put in this position again. I understand the politics of the day. I understand human relations. I understand so much of where this puts you. So the challenge for me is that I'm able to articulate to you things that you already know by living in the same America that I live in, the same Arkansas that I live in.
It's absolutely not a question to any member of this body the unnecessary need for this piece of legislation. When my colleague says the word preferential treatment and discrimination, ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, the only thing that we're talking about with the practice is the policies that have been put in place over the years have dealt with opportunity and access. Not at all preferential or discriminatory. We can't as minorities in this country. We're not in a position to discriminate at all.
If we keep it at 100 with one another, you know when you walk in the building and there's a choice to be made. And the numbers look as though they look in this room and there's a minority with a degree in engineering, has not had a chance to work. Have no experience on the job as of yet. They just walk in the room and they apply. Whether it is at the bank, whether it's on the farm, whether whatever it is, whatever industry it is, we both know, though we've made strides. Listen, I applaud us for the strides we've made. But now this mess take us back.
But we've made strides. So you walk in and we see a degreed individual. More times than not the individual that's going to be a chosen, that has been chosen has not been the minority before these things were necessary. These policies were put in place years ago to try to level the playing field, because this is what you must know. The Constitution was not enough. It said we shall be created equal. The Bible, the Scripture was not enough, good Christians. Because the Bible says to seek first those that are the most lowly and underserved among us and treat them the best. That didn't happen.
We know about slavery. I don't have to go through all of that. It's an insult to even have to have this conversation. Let's continue to go forward, ladies and gentlemen. Unless like you did last time this came up, SB 71, let's move forward. There's no way you can have relationships and people love each other like we should when you get behind something that says take away, stop, prevent. We're not being. And we're not promoting discrimination. We're not promoting anything that says give someone an unfair advantage.
What we're saying is let's continue to work to give all an opportunity. You don't need no help. White folks in America have an opportunity. You don't. That's fact. I ain't mad. But when someone brings something like this, as though we have gotten equal, as though the playing field is level now, and now let's just go forward on a level playing field. We know it's not there. How do we know? Look in the mirror. Look around us in every community. Racism is still real everywhere. Not just white folks. It's everywhere.
Some people say, can't nobody be racist. But my point is, there are people that have biases. I'm acknowledging that right now. What this bill does is take away a lot of good work, a lot of good work that has been done by people that have acknowledged what has happened in the past. And has tried to help us grow forward to a new tomorrow. It only takes people to stand up like myself and like you did as a General Assembly last session and say, No, we're not going to do this. There is no reason for this. Who is hurting because of the opportunity and access?
I got to go to the University of Arkansas on the Transition Retention Minority engineering program. I would have never gotten an engineering degree, ladies and gentlemen, but I couldn't afford it. But there is a program at the University of Arkansas that Lonnie Williams came got me. And others said, we have a program for minorities, for poor people that need help. And then I took advantage of that. I graduated, got some merit, and then was able to thrive. Without that, I don't know what would have happened.
So my point to my friends and to my colleagues, why do this? Why is it necessary? He says words to create something. The argument. He creates the argument with discrimination, preferential treatment. We're not asking for that, Senators. We're not asking for nothing preferential. We're asking for opportunity and we're asking for chance. And there's so much more. I got all kinds of notes.
But what I'm going to do because there's others coming behind me. I just want you to please consider what you would do if you were me. I just want you to flip this. Flip it. And you're me and I'm you. This would not be necessary. You would not vote for this if you was in my shoes. You would not say this is okay if you were in my shoes. Please consider the words I say to you. It can make us better. We can grow, you guys. We can grow. But if this passes. This is not helping any of us. I yield. Any questions? Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:47:15] Thanks, Senator. Anyone wish to speak for? Anyone wish to speak against? Senator Clark, you're recognized.
Senator Alan Clark [00:47:42] I appreciate Senator Sullivan bringing this bill. In private, I've complimented him on this bill. And let me tell you the things that I like about it. I like that this nation's based on, Senator Murdock mentioned the Constitution. The preamble, all men are created equal. A lot of us want to, if we're not in a post-racial America, we want to be. I don't think you ever get to the point that people don't see color, that people of all kinds do not have prejudices.
But I can tell Senator Murdock and I think that you'll know this is true, that when I hire it does not matter your gender and it does not matter your color. It matters whether I can depend on you and you will do the job or not. I'm not alone. I'm not living in a place that I see everything that Senator Murdock sees. So I appreciate his point of view. The other thing is, I agree with Senator Murdock. I'm glad that not just he but many like him, received opportunities that they would not have received otherwise.
I'm not against affirmative action of the past, but many of us ask how long. And unfortunately, the answer we get to how long is, we don't see an end. And many believe, I believe the majority believe, there's got to be an end. There's got to be a time where we're just all equal, where we're treated the same. And yeah, there is going to be bad actors. There's going to be people. You know, when I was in high school, top student in my class but when they chose Boys State, I wasn't chosen. And so the ones that were chosen came to me and said, this isn't fair. You're obviously the one that should go. And I said, Don't worry about it. If it's something that I achieve, I will get it. If it's something that other people have to choose, and especially my teachers, I won't.
Y'all know my personality. So you might be able to see why that might be true. I think I get more of a balance with the bill because I don't think any-- in fact, I know no one has bad intentions. And I know Senator Sullivan doesn't. I think that something like this has to be done in broad strokes. And when you do things in broad strokes, it's hard to get it all right. But the problem I have is Section five, and it's not all of Section five. It's actually the first paragraphs of Section five. Congressman Westerman before me, but then myself and Senator Elliott worked very hard early on on K-3 reading.
That was the primary thing we needed to solve. And I am so glad to have a governor and a legislature that have got behind this 100% and we're going after it. Because of we can teach kids to read and we can teach poor kids to read whatever their color they can be so they have many, exponentially more opportunities to be successful, not only in education, but in life. I'm glad we're tackling the problem, but that's not our only problem. And let me tell you, one of our major problems, I realized this before I was a senator. I was participating in school choice, and I was checking the school scores in my county as to where I wanted to send my children.
And what I discovered, to my dismay, was that even though what we called the best schools were failing with black males. Probably true in all 50 states. But we're failing with black males. Everybody is. There are many reasons for that. And if I got into all the reasons, I'd have a lot of people against me. A lot of times truth is hard to speak.
But where we have black male teachers, they're only 2% nationally. They're hard to find. It's getting them into the teaching profession. But where we have black male teachers, the black males have lower dropout rates. They have fewer disciplinary issues. They're more positive about schooling. They have better test scores and increased college aspirations. But I asked Senator Sullivan and I asked my good friend, Professor Rob Steinbeck, both, until I got a clear answer, would this stop me, would this bill stop me if I was a superintendent in the Delta from actively recruiting black male teachers. And they said yes. I see both, again, that's one thing overall.
I'm not like most of the opponents because I'm not an opponent. I'll really like the bill, but I can't get past that point. And I think it's an extremely important point. One of our problems is special ed, trying to get special ed teachers. We ought to be able to do whatever we have to do to get special ed teachers on merit. We ought to be able to do what we have to do to get science teachers, including paying them more, and recognition that we're competing with industry for science teachers. But we also ought to be able to get black male teachers where we get black male teachers without apologizing for it, and especially without breaking the law. So for that reason, as much as I want to vote for this bill, I can't.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:53:55] Thanks, Senator. Anyone wish to speak for? Against. Senator Scott and Senator Tucker. Senator Tucker. Do you want to speak for, Senator Payton? Senator Payton's recognized to speak for. Senator Tucker, you'll be recognized to speak against.
Senator John Payton [00:54:14] Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues, I'll be real brief. The way I look at this bill, our society had a horrible disease. Discrimination, racism. And laws were put in place to cure that disease. And the argument we're having today is, are we over the disease and addicted to the cure? Or is this a disease that we need a forever ongoing treatment? I'd like to think that we're over the disease. And we're going to break the addiction to the cure. So I'm voting for this bill. Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:54:53] Senator Tucker, you're recognized to speak against.
Senator Clarke Tucker [00:55:03] Thank you, Madam President, and thank you, colleagues. I can tell there's some thoughtful listening going on today. And I just want to tell you how much I appreciate that. I want to talk for a moment about preferential treatment, because that's what the bill is about. And what does that mean? Well, there's actually no definition of preferential treatment in the bill. It's kind of important because if this bill becomes law and you engage in preferential treatment, then you're charged with a crime.
But we don't actually know by definition what that language means in the bill. The best guess we can take from what that means in the bill are the programs that the bill has explicitly either changed or eliminated. And I'll just give you a few examples and to me what preferential treatment means. And Senator Murdock went over this, and I'm not going to repeat what he said. It means opportunity. Let's talk about a few of these programs. The one Senator Clark was just talking about, minority teacher recruitment program. This is to recruit minority teachers up to the racial and ethnic makeup of your district.
This came up in committee yesterday, Senator Payton. It's not above that. It's up to the racial and ethnic makeup of your school district. This helps teachers. This also helps minority students. Who does that program hurt? Who does that program hurt? Not a soul. Okay. Another one listed specifically in the bill. Higher Education Minority Retention Program. This doesn't actually help anyone get hired at a higher ed institution or admitted. All it means is that once you get to campus, we're going to do our best to keep you here. Who does that program hurt? Not a soul.
Another example. Minority teacher scholarship program. Who does that hurt? Not a soul. And the list goes on. Well, let's take another take a look at another piece of code that's changed today in the awarding of state contracts. It requires agencies to encourage the participation of minority owned businesses or women owned businesses. As Senator Murdock said, this is not mandating any outcomes. This is really about opportunity and that's it. Now, all of these programs were carefully crafted over a period of decades, very thoughtfully.
These programs were created surgically to where they could have the most impact. This bill is not surgical. This bill, to Senator Clark's point, is a blunt instrument. And the truth is, we have no idea how broad the impact of this bill will be. I believe it will impact every public employee in the state of Arkansas. I don't care if you're a teacher or if you work at DFA or if you're a police officer. If you engage in preferential treatment, which is undefined, then you're going to be guilty of a crime. But there's a few agencies in particular I would be worried about working at if it were me. The Minority Health commission, for example.
Now, Senator Sullivan can give you his opinion that this won't apply to the Minority health commission, and the attorney general can do the same. I can give you another opinion, but no one, not me or anybody else, can tell you for certain how a judge is going to rule about that. The Mosaic Templars Cultural Center. I can tell you I'd be real worried about working there if this bill passes. It's a museum to celebrate African-American history in Arkansas.
I don't see how you can celebrate African-American history and have items in your gift shop created by African-Americans in Arkansas without giving preferential treatment. If I'm working there, I think I got criminal liability coming up. What about the portion of AEDC that helps women and minority owned businesses? Now, again, no one knows for sure whether this bill will impact those. But if I were a hungry lawyer, after this bill becomes law and I wanted to get some attorneys fees, which this bill allows for, I know what I would be doing next.
Senator Sullivan said this doesn't end preferential treatment, period, just on the basis of race and sex. It does say that we have preference for veterans, which, by the way, I support. I'm not against that. And as he mentioned, religion is not included in the bill. So there still can be preferential treatment to the extent it exists now under Arkansas based on religion or veterans. We're just saying we're ending preferential treatment based on race and sex.
Now, about 20 years ago, I mentioned this in committee yesterday, I heard a presentation by Dr. Terrence Roberts. And what he said was the end of the Civil War did not create equality under the law for race in America. It was not until the Civil Rights Act was signed in 1964 and the Voting Rights Act was signed in 1965. And it started well before the United States itself existed in the mid 1600s when white people started being brought to this land. So there was over 300 years of oppression, enslavement, imprisonment, lynching.
And at that point there had been about 40 years on the other side of that, 60 years today. And women have endured their own forms of oppression and abuse during that time frame. The point he was making was, is that enough time? And that's the question that we're asking here today. When Terrence Roberts speaks, I listen. Now, I don't know if you all know who Terrence Roberts is, but there's a bronze statue of him on the North Lawn of the Capitol. Him and eight of his classmates.
Before we vote on this, I would just ask you all to consider two questions. One is to consider life experiences and life circumstances outside of your own. Consider Senator Murdock's circumstances or Senator Flowers. Now, I'm far from perfect, but I endeavor to think outside of my own experiences with every day that God has given me on this Earth. And the second question is the question that Dr. Roberts raised. Have we done enough? Is that ledger balanced out?
The irony with that question to me is for 300 years, racism and sexism were not only allowed, they were in law. And it's only after we're trying to make up for that, after the fact that we say, no, sorry, racism is wrong. Sexism. Sexism is wrong when we're trying to balance out on the other side with opportunity. The question for you all is, do you believe that a black child born in Arkansas or a little girl born in Arkansas has the same opportunities that I do or that most of us in this room do?
All you have to do is look around the room to get the answer to that question. A yes vote on this bill does not put the painful histories of America at your feet. But a yes vote on this bill does say that as a state, we stand for ending economic and education opportunities for women and racial minorities in this state. For that reason, I'll be voting no.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:02:19] Senator Stubblefield, do you have a question for Senator Tucker? You're recognized.
Senator Gary Stubblefield [00:02:24] Senator Tucker, if I were arrested for preferential treatment, what would this charge be?
Senator Clarke Tucker [00:02:31] I think that's a question for Senator Sullivan. It's in the bill. I don't believe the law as proposed carefully answers that question. And that's why if I were a public employee in Arkansas, I would be real nervous because I don't think there's a clear answer to that question.
Senator Gary Stubblefield [00:02:50] So you think this bill will bring on an onslaught of legal cases?
Senator Clarke Tucker [00:02:58] Well, it creates both civil liability and criminal liability. On the civil side, if I were a lawyer, I'm not going to-- I don't currently plan on-- I am a lawyer. But I don't plan on bringing any of these cases. But there are lawyers out there who like to sue the state, as you know, and get attorney's fees, which this bill explicitly calls for. I'm not sure if they can get them against the state because of sovereign immunity, which the bill also doesn't deal with, address properly. But yes, if I were inclined to bring these sorts of cases, I would be bringing all sorts of lawsuits if this bill becomes law and I would be asking for fees if I won.
Senator Gary Stubblefield [00:03:34] Thank so, senator.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:03:40] Any senator wish to speak for the bill? Any other senator wish to speak against? Senator Scott, You're recognized.
Senator Jamie Scott [00:04:06] Good afternoon, colleagues. I rise today as someone whose family fought to integrate North Little Rock High School, the beloved institution that shaped me and who I am today. Their fight about dismantling the system, the systemic barriers that excluded people based on race, gender and background. Senate Bill 3 threatens to undo the progress they fought for and the progress we've made collectively in my opinion. This bill doesn't just impact minorities. It impacts women and it affects people from diverse backgrounds. It threatens Arkansas as a whole, and it endangers first generation college students striving to lift their families out of poverty.
I was a first generation college student. It impacts minority and rural students who already face limited access to resources and scholarships and opportunities. I benefited from minority scholarships at Arkansas State University. It will impact small businesses and entrepreneurs who rely on this state support to foster innovation and create jobs. It will impact our economy because diversity drives growth, innovation and competitiveness in the global market. Considering someone's sex, race and background when providing them an opportunity, it's not a handout and an unfair advantage.
It's about a chance to break down barriers. It's about breaking down barriers in a system that has historically excluded far too many people. For example, eliminating programs for minority women and girls reinforces those barriers. It hinders progress while denying Arkansas the full potential of its talent as a state. Diversity isn't just a moral imperative, it's a practical necessity. It strengthens our schools, our workplaces and our economy by ensuring that everyone, no matter their background, has a chance to succeed. It creates a state where the best ideas rise to the top. And where every Arkansan has a seat at the table.
Now, I have the utmost respect as the newest member in this chamber for my colleagues, and you will know that if you get a chance to know me, the majority of the men in this chamber are white men. I cannot walk in your shoes. I do not have your shared life experiences, nor do you have mine. But I struggle to really understand the notion that white men have faced systemic discrimination simply because of the color of your screen, or that affirmative action has hurt you as a white man. I don't understand that.
Discrimination is not about an individual hardship. It's about a long history of systemic barriers, of violence and exclusion. If you cannot look back in your family history or find a relative who was lynched in the state of Arkansas because of their race, then your experiences simply don't compare to my ancestors or me as a black woman in this chamber. That is real and undeniable discrimination that my people have faced in this state. The struggles you may have faced, though, are valid, and I won't discredit those. But they are not the same as a generation of people who have been denied opportunities, who have been brutalized and even simply killed because of the color of our skin. I can't change that.
I'm a black woman when I walk in this chamber. And when you say you don't see color, that's offensive. I'm black every day. Every day that I wake up. So affirmative action was never about an unfair advantage. It was about breaking down barriers that were intentional, about keeping people like me and minorities and women out of opportunities and being called out for taking advantage of a system that benefits you and keeps marginalized people from advancing. It's not discrimination, it's accountability.
The passage of Senate Bill 3 would represent a step backwards, a retreat from fairness and opportunity. I urge you to reject the harmful legislation and choose a future where Arkansas thrives because it longs to be strong and inclusive and justice. And let us stand on the right side of history even when it's hard and uphold the values to move our state forward. Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:09:09] Any senator wish to speak for the bill? Any senator wish to speak against? Senator Love, you're recognized. Senator Love, you're still recognized.
Senator Fredrick Love [00:09:37] All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. Colleagues. I pledge allegiance to the flag of a country who has yet to truly love me. Colleagues, some of them may have been offended by what I just said. And while I don't mean to offend you, I want you to consider my perspective. You know, I was old enough to have known and lived with my grandparents, who were both born in 1910. I also had a grandfather who was alive in 1897 and who lived to be in his 90s.
And we had multiple conversations of their lives as young children. And as I stand here today, I consider my grandparents and the history that they have passed down to me for generations. And all I can say is, here we go again. We can continue to pass laws like these. We can continue to relive the past, but it doesn't make for a stronger America to consider the experiences of every American and provide people with a chance to enjoy the promises of the Constitution is the least we should all strive to do.
We are operating under a false narrative. We are operating under a false narrative. The policies that ask you to consider a person's race, sex or nationality are wrong. Look around the room and consider who is missing. What voices have we not heard from now? Not having the voices in the room, how does it impact us? Just consider. This is what we are asking for and this is just the least we can ask for as children of the most high to consider our brothers and sisters.
Until we do this, we will not deliver on the promises that are in our preamble of the Constitution. We the people of the United States in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice for our African-American brothers, ensure domestic tranquility for undocumented children, provide for the common defense of our LGBTQ community, promote the general welfare of women and secure the blessings of liberty for all God's children. Colleagues, This is not the foundation of SB 3. The bill actively works against these things, and I ask you to consider voting no on SB 3. Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:13:01] Any senator wished to speak for the bill? Any other senator wish to speak against? Senator Leding, you're recognized?
Senator Greg Leding [00:13:12] Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues, I know I walk through the world with privilege. I haven't always seen it. I still don't always see it. But I do know that it's there. It doesn't mean my life is easy. Doesn't mean I don't have to work hard. Doesn't mean I have things handed to me. But I know that in most any situation I walk into, whether I recognize it or not, I carry an advantage.
And it doesn't mean people are always knowingly giving me that advantage. But that's why protections are so important. They serve as a check against our worst impulses because has been pointed out by my colleagues today for most of our country's history, discrimination was policy. And so it is important that no matter how far we think we've come, we're always going to have further to go. And so it is important to have protections in place to guard against some of our worst tendencies. Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:13:59] Any senator wish to speak for? Any senator wish to speak against? Senator Sullivan, you're recognized to close.
Senator Dan Sullivan [00:14:20] Thank you, Madam President. Folks, a couple of things I just need to correct. One, you've been told that programs will end, the program that the senator said he took advantage of when he was in college, that got him through and the scholarships that he received. Those don't end. They'll still continue. More people will be able to effect those scholarships than fewer. But they want to convince you that those opportunities no longer exist.
Yesterday, a woman-- God has been mentioned several times, and I appreciate that. You know, I was asked yesterday what God I serve. Folks, I only know of one. And that God says he's no respecter of persons. And it's been phrased another way that we will be known by the character, by the heart of our character, not by the color of our skin. That's where we're headed. It was said that 300 years passed and now only 40 or 50 have passed.
You know, I've got a friend that had a heart valve problems for probably 30 years, 40 years. And the doctor kept saying, someday you got to go in and fix it. Someday you got to go in and fix it. And he said, Today's the day. And in two hours a big valve was there and he's all better. So just because 300 years have passed doesn't necessarily affect the arc of history. You have a chance to change it. The other thing you need to understand, many of the arguments today said we're arguing against affirmative action.
The senator, the last speaker, said we need to continue to give preferential treatment and discriminatory treatment to women and minorities by their race. That's a good thing. Folks, it's over. The president said it's over and we're done with it. Think about this. Racism will never cure racism. If racism is the problem, continuing racist discrimination and preferential treatment will never solve that. Courage was mentioned a few times today. It's going to take courage to vote yes on this bill, because I can guarantee you the pushback is going to be vicious and hard. I could play a couple of voicemails I have.
But it's the time in history to change that. Because it's time for us to treat everybody equally. That's what this does. The point was made about preferential treatment. Folks, that's the job of the court. We need to define preferential treatment better. That's what the court does. This bill allows you to seek civil action. And if you seek civil action, you file a claim and you go to court. The judge says, yes, you were discriminated against, or no, you weren't. That's their job. We're not going to have a 1,000 page bill doing that.
I don't think it was mentioned today, if we have preferential treatment for black teachers in black areas, the point was made yesterday, that black kids learn better from people who look and talk like them and see them. They said there's many studies to prove that. Yeah, that's probably, that's true. But that's only true for a certain set of circumstances. Folks, we need teachers in southeast Arkansas. We don't care what color they are. We don't care if they're men or women. We need good quality teachers. And we don't need to be picky about who those folks are as long as they have the merit to teach.
And if you're going to say black teachers teach better to black kids, you got to say white teachers teach better to white kids. Now we're going to start having white teachers in white schools. Nobody would advocate for that, but we'll advocate the other. It's inconsistent. The attorney general helped draft this bill, looked over the bill. And the attorney general is very comfortable in defending it.
And let me ask you, folks, there are at least 10 or 11 other states that have a very, very similar bill, the same bill that allows civil penalties, same bill that says no discriminatory practices. I wonder if you could name who they are because they haven't fallen off the world. And to hear my fellow senators talk, you would think if we passed this bill, Arkansas is going to fall to the bottom of the heap. Folks, we're going to be at the top of the heap. We are ending discriminatory practices as our president said we would, as our governor is leading that way. And it's time that we head there.
Some would have you kill this bill and keep affirmative action in place and Arkansas would be a sanctuary state for affirmative action. Think about that. Are we going to continue affirmative action and have the federal government coming down here and trying to enforce and getting rid of affirmative action? That's not where we want to be. Sandra Day O'Connor, very liberal judge in 2003, said in 25 years there will be no more need for affirmative action. Folks, that's just a year or two from now. It's time to take decisive action and for the state of Arkansas to lead the way there.
There are probably 12 or 15 states working right now on similar legislation to this trying to end affirmative action and preferential treatment. Our Colleges, the University of Arkansas and Arkansas State have been doing this for several years. They've been treating everybody equally. But you don't hear of all the lawsuits and problems and things going on. You just don't hear of it. Why don't you hear of it? It works. Treating everybody equally works. And with that, Madam President, I'm closed.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:20:39] Senator has closed. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. [Roll call] I'll start on this side. Any senator who did not vote who wishes to vote or wishes to change his or her vote? See no one on this side, anyone on this side? Senator English, Not voting, present. Senator English, present. Any others? Please check the board. Seeing no others, please cast up the ballot. By a vote of 24 yea,7 nay, 2 not voting and 2 present, Senate Bill 3 passes.
No: Clark, Love, Tucker, Flowers, Murdock, Leding, Scott; Not voting: Crowell, Rice; Present: Dismang, English]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:22:28] Transmit to the House. We will take up Senate Bill 63. But before we take up Senate Bill 63, I would like to recognize Senator Love to introduce our doctor of the day.
Senator Fredrick Love [00:22:47] Colleagues our doctor of the day is Dr. Donald Golden. He's an ophthalmologist from Little Rock. And we also have our nurse of the day. Is she still here? Lee Fazio. You are welcome.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:23:14] Thank you. Senator Love will now take up Senate Bill 63.
Secretary [00:23:19] Senate Bill 63 by Senator Hickey to amend Arkansas law concerning reports by secretaries of Cabinet level departments of State of their departments.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:23:31] Senator Hickey, you're recognized.
Senator Jimmy Hickey [00:23:32] Thank you, Madam President. Members, I believe it was four years ago we had passed a bill that requires the secretaries to come before ALC that says 'shall' to give a macro report on their agencies. Good intentions whenever this bill was done. But after we watched this in practice, again, it says shall. And we know that those ALC meetings sometime are very, very lengthy and these are given at the end of that ALC meeting. Interest has went away.
We have the ability to do this anyway on more of a macro level, which is a lot of what you all are interested in. If there is a certain issue before us all that we want to find out, we can direct the agency to either come before a subcommittee of ALC or possibly even a standing committee. So what this does will take this out and we'll just proceed as we had before this was passed.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:24:32] Any questions for Senator Hickey? Anyone wish to speak against or for? The senator has closed. Any objection to rolling the vote? Madam Secretary, please roll the vote. [Vote] Any senator who wishes to vote or change his or her vote? I say Senator Flowers, present. Any others? Seeing no others, please cast up the ballot. By a vote of 34 yeas, 0 nay, 1 present, Senate Bill 63 passes. Please transmit to the House. Senate Bill 97.
Secretary [00:25:40] Senate Bill 97 by Senator Hester to authorize the issuance of additional retail liquor permits to certain existing holders of retail liquor permits.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:25:50] Senator Hester, you're recognized.
Senator Bart Hester [00:25:51] Thank you, Madam President. Members, you may have heard a lot about this. We had a good discussion yesterday in committee. The first thing I want to make clear about this bill in no way increases the amount of licensors overall that are in the state of Arkansas. What we're going to do is say that if you currently hold a license or one day hold a license, you are able to purchase other licenses from someone else. You can have up to three, one per county in counties of 200,000 or more. Now, there are currently three counties in Arkansas that would qualify for that. Benton, Washington and Pulaski. Maybe one day others will qualify. But you can go from one license ownership to three license if you buy another store out. And that's really about as simple as it gets. I'm happy to answer any questions and.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:26:49] Questions for Senator Hester? Senator Clark, you're recognized for a question.
Senator Alan Clark [00:26:56] Senator Hester, who wants to have up to three licenses?
Senator Alan Clark [00:27:00] Well, anybody that currently holds a license would be eligible to have up to three licenses.
Senator Alan Clark [00:27:06] I know who will be eligible. Who wants to do it?
Senator Alan Clark [00:27:07] Well, currently, retailers are asking.
Senator Alan Clark [00:27:10] Retailers, as in?
Senator Bart Hester [00:27:13] Well, okay, Walmart is one of the-- Walmart from my district is asking.
Senator Alan Clark [00:27:17] Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:27:19] Any other questions? Senator Hammer. Senator Sullivan.
Senator Kim Hammer [00:27:25] Thank you, Mr. President. Senator Hester, but that only applies to counties of 200,000 and more. It's not like all the counties are going to be able to exercise this. Is that correct?
Senator Bart Hester [00:27:38] That's absolutely correct. Only three counties that this would currently apply to.
Senator Kim Hammer [00:27:42] And this would in no way, shape or for?m interfere with the petition process, as far as a wet, dry issue in a county. This wouldn't have anything to do at all with that. Is that correct?
Senator Bart Hester [00:27:53] It does not. And that's why I said it's a very short bill. About a half a page. Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:28:00] Any other questions for Senator Hester? Anyone wish to speak against or for? Senator has closed. Any objection to rolling the vote? Objection is noted. Madam Secretary, please call the roll. [Vote] Any senator who wishes to vote who did not vote. Senator Dees, No. Any other senator on this side wish to change their vote? Senator Murdock, yes. Any other senator on this side? Senator Blake Johnson, yes. Senator Hammer, no. Any other senator on this side? Senator Hill, yes. Senator Flowers, present. Any other senator on this side? Please check the board. Seeing no other hands, please cast up the ballot. By a vote of 23 yea, 10 nay, 1 not voting and 1 present, Senate Bill 97 passes.
No: Clark, Hammer, Penzo, Tucker, Dees, King, Rice, Gilmore, Love, Stubblefield; Not voting: Crowell; Present: Flowers].
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:30:13] Please transmit to the House. We will now take up House Bill 1050.
Secretary [00:30:19] House Bill 1050 by Representative Tosh to separate the offices of sheriff and tax collector in Poinsett County.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:30:27] Senator Wallace, you're recognized.
Senator Dave Wallace [00:30:29] Thank you, ma'am. Members, very simple bill. Poinsett County would like to separate the office of Sheriff and Tax Collector into a separate office of sheriff and a separate office of collector. 51 counties already do that. You're going to see other counties come forth and do that. Probably 150 years ago, we probably needed the sheriff to collect taxes in some places, probably where my ancestors were. But this is just another case of local control by local government. The local county would like to separate those offices. Everybody at the county level is in agreement with that. And I will stand by for your questions.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:31:15] Any questions for Senator Wallace? Anyone wish to speak against or for? Senator has closed. Any objection to rolling the vote? Seeing no one, Madam Secretary, please roll the vote. [Vote] Any senator wish to change his or her vote? No one. Please cast up the ballot. By a vote of 35 yea, 0 nay, House Bill 1050 passes. Please return to the House. House Bill 1075.
Secretary [00:32:25] House Bill 1075 by Representative Ray and Senator Bryant to prohibit the local government from regulating the sale or use of a lawn care device or imposing a tax or fee on the use of a lawn care device in certain circumstances.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:32:41] Senator Bryant, you're recognized.
Senator Joshua Bryant [00:32:43] Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues, this bill, just to get right to the meat of it, prevents a local government from restricting the personal purchase and use of lawn care equipment that's powered by a specific source. So if you want to go down to Home Depot or Lowe's or Walmart and get a gas powered, get electric battery operated, that should be your choice to operate on your personal property and in your business. This does not prohibit a city or a county from implementing their own policies for, say, their own maintenance department, from purchasing a specific power source. But it prevents them from prohibiting you as a user and a purchaser from doing that.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:33:22] Questions for Senator Bryant? Senator Mark Johnson, you're recognized for a question.
Senator Mark Johnson [00:33:27] Thank you, Madam President. Senator Bryant, I think I know what this bill is about and I support that. And of course, Representative Ray is one of my representatives and my friend and I support what he's trying to do. I do have a question concerning the language in the next to last paragraph. And you mentioned this about not prohibiting local government from levying a sales and use tax.
I'm concerned about that language, because while local government can levy a tax rate, they don't set forth in their ordinance what items are taxable or not. Those are uniform across the state, except for, of course, the A&P taxes, which are also collected locally, not by DFA. And the fact that this is a House bill and we're about to send it to the governor, I just want to call that to your attention. Do you share my concern that perhaps we're authorizing the local government to tax lawn care devices in addition to their general sales tax?
Senator Joshua Bryant [00:34:43] I do not. I shared that concern with Representative Ray, and his concern was not to tax it beyond what is naturally occurring inside the sales tax.
Senator Mark Johnson [00:34:51] Do you understand my question? And I will talk to him and see if maybe we need to clean this up later because I certainly don't want some communities to say, well, we don't want people out there using gas lawn mowers or diesel lawnmowers, so we'll just put a 20% local tax on them. And I question whether we might be inadvertently doing that. And as you know, if it weren't for the law of unintended consequences, we could get through a session in about 30 days. Thank you. Senator. Thank you, Madam President.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:35:25] Any other questions for Senator Bryant? Senator Love, you're recognized.
Senator Fredrick Love [00:35:31] Thank you, Governor. Senator Bryant, I'm not as enlightened as our colleague, Senator Johnson. What is the backstory to this bill? What is the backstory to this bill? I'm not as enlightened. Like, why are we-- what makes this a necessity?
Senator Joshua Bryant [00:35:51] So if you look broadly at the states as a whole and cities as a whole, there's a little over 100 cities nationally that have implemented these policies. Some would say they've just naturally done it on their own accord. Others might contribute it to EPA incentives. I know certain regions of Arkansas got several near $100 million of EPA funding to implement policies and procedures, and this is one of those incentives that might be utilized. So this is preemption to make sure that we as individuals can purchase and use our own gas powered equipment or electric equipment. Let the market dictate this, not not the government.
Senator Fredrick Love [00:36:36] Okay. Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:36:39] Senator Hammer, You're recognized for a question.
Senator Kim Hammer [00:36:42] Okay, Senator, I'll think of a situation in another state where like a POA limited the use of power equipment for like leaf blowing because they were doing it on the basis that it was noise and they were trying to do it. As far as like a POA or some other form, does this capture all of those to where--
Senator Joshua Bryant [00:37:01] It would not affect what a POA does on civil terms with their residents. This is just for cities and county governments to not impose those restrictions.
Senator Kim Hammer [00:37:09] Okay. So entities that are not cities or maybe a POA outside of the city or they have a POA arrangement, they could still operate?
Senator Joshua Bryant [00:37:24] Within the bounds of their property owners association. Yes.
Senator Kim Hammer [00:37:27] Is there any reason you wouldn't have included them in this bill?
Senator Joshua Bryant [00:37:30] Well, we tried to just let those be civil matters within the POA. And Representative Ray didn't approach me about that concern. His more concern was just broadly underneath local government.
Senator Kim Hammer [00:37:39] Okay. All right. Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:37:45] Senator Hickey, you're recognized for a question.
Senator Jimmy Hickey [00:37:47] Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, Senator Bryant. A couple of mine are the same way as Senator Johnson right there. You know, from my standpoint, I think it would have been a whole lot better if we put that they would be consistent or something if they were to do it. I think we've got a little bit of an issue with the way that's written.
As your intent, I'm in favor of what you're trying to do. The only other thing that I've kind of read through here, and I know it's not your intent, but we say on page two, line six, restrict the use or sale of lawn care device. So what we're doing is, is we're saying that they cannot do that. And we say 'use.' There could be a certain circumstance, and I believe Senator Hammer was trying to touch on it with POA, by doing that, we're not having an unintended consequence so if there's something that exceeds the decibel level that's allowed within that city, if somebody has some piece of large equipment or something like that that exceeds that.
You know, I'd hate to somebody to say, no, you can't restrict my use at all. So I understand what you're doing with power source, but the power source could possibly be combustible engine. So I don't know if we need some additional language is the way I'm looking at this, not only for what was brought up by Senator Johnson, but just to kind of clarify that a little more.
Senator Joshua Bryant [00:39:17] Yeah. My personal interpretation, a noise ordinance is a noise ordinance regardless of its source. But I understand your concerns.
Senator Jimmy Hickey [00:39:35] If I may continue, we're early in the session and as somebody pointed out, this is the final step of this bill. It's not like it's going to go back to the House and get amended or whatever. So personally, I would like for us to pull it down, and on those two questions, just to make 100% sure that we're not having some unintended consequences.
Senator Joshua Bryant [00:39:56] I'll get with you offline. Madam President, I'd like to pull this down and address these concerns just make sure we got a good product for Arkansas.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:40:07] All right. Thanks, Senator. Next, we will take up House Bill 1137. Senator Irvin.
Secretary [00:40:34] House Bill 1137 by Representative Walker and Senator Irvin an Act to separate the offices of sheriff and tax collector in Searcy County.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:40:44] Senator Irvin, You're recognized.
Senator Missy Irvin [00:40:47] Thank you, members. Simple Bill. The title describes the bill. I'm happy to answer any questions.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:40:52] Any questions for Senator Irvin? Anyone wish to speak against or for?
Senator Missy Irvin [00:40:56] Appreciate a good vote for the people of Searcy County.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:41:01] Senator has closed. Any objection to rolling the vote? Madam Secretary, please roll the vote. [Vote] Any senator wish to change his or her vote? Seeing no one, please cast up the ballot. By a vote of 35 yea, 0 nay, House Bill 1137 passes. Please return to the House. Senator Davis, you're recognized. Senator Davis is recognized for a motion.
Senator Breanne Davis [00:42:02] Thank you, Madam President. I'd like to make a motion that we suspend the rules and withdrawal Senate Bill 98 from City, County, Local for the purpose of amendment.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:42:14] Thank you, Senator. All those in favor of suspending the rules to withdrawal Senate Bill 98 from City, County, Local for purpose of amendment, please signify by saying aye. Any opposed. Ayes have it. Motion passes.
Secretary [00:42:34] Amendment 1 to Senate Bill 98.
Senator Breanne Davis [00:42:55] My bill. My amendment.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:43:06] No questions. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Any opposed no. This is to send it to engrossing in order to bring it back up.
Senator Breanne Davis [00:43:33] Sorry, members. I make a motion that we adopt Amendment 1 and send it to Engrossing and re referred back to City, County, Local.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:43:45] And that is the motion on the floor. We will now vote that motion. All those in favor please signify by saying aye. Any opposed. Ayes have it. Motion passes. Send it to Engrossing. Amendment is adopted. Senator Hill is recognized for a similar motion.
Senator Ricky Hill [00:44:11] Yes. So, colleagues, I'd like to suspend the rules and withdraw Senate Bill 60 from City, County, Local for the purpose of an amendment.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:44:24] All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye. Any opposed. Ayes have it.
Secretary [00:44:32] Amendment 1 to Senate Bill 60.
Senator Ricky Hill [00:44:36] Colleagues, I'd like to send the amendment over for engrossing and refer back to the committee, City, County, Local.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:44:46] Heard the motion. All those in favor and for adopting amendment 1. Any opposed. Okay ayes have it. Amendment is adopted. Send to Engrossing. Senator Hester, You're recognized.
Senator Bart Hester [00:45:19] Hey, members. We'll go at 11:00 tomorrow and it will be my intent that we do 11:00 on Thursdays until we can't. At some point, things are too busy and we'll talk about that. But the current expectation is Thursdays will be 11:00 as tomorrow. Thank you.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:45:39] Any other announcements? Senator Irvin, You're recognized.
Senator Missy Irvin [00:45:49] Yeah, I mean, point of clarification. I'm sorry. Point of clarification. You don't have to suspend the rules to withdraw a bill from the committee. You have to suspend the rules to place it on today's calendar for purpose of amendment. Is that correct? Ethics Committee is meeting upon adjournment.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:46:14] Senator Stubblefield, You're recognized.
Senator Gary Stubblefield [00:46:19] City, County, Local will meet in the morning at 10:00. I don't think it will take very long. But anyway, we'll meet at 10.
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:46:29] Thanks, Senator. Are there items at the desk?
Secretary [00:46:39] [HB 1046].
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:46:45] Transportation.
Secretary [00:46:47] [House Bill 1074]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:47:03] Revenue and Tax.
Secretary [00:47:04] [HB 1204]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:47:16] Judiciary.
Secretary [00:47:19] [HB 1214]
Lt. Gov. Leslie Rutledge [00:47:35] Public Health. No other announcements, the Senate will stand in adjournment until 11:00 tomorrow, January 30th, subject to the clearing of the desk.
