Family Council Supports Amendment Requiring Ballot Measures to Pass in a Majority of Counties

On Monday evening Family Council President Jerry Cox testified in support of a proposed amendment that would require ballot measures to pass in a majority of Arkansas’ counties in order to become law.

As we have written many times this year, the Arkansas Constitution lets canvassers circulate petitions to place measures on a general election ballot. Its original intent was to give citizens a way to function as a “legislative body.” Unfortunately, powerful special interests have used the initiative process to put flawedmisleading, and deceptive measures on the ballot in Arkansas.

If a campaign has enough money, it can hire hundreds of petition canvassers to collect signatures to place a measure on the ballot, and it can run deceptive advertising to support that ballot measure.

The way Arkansas’ ballot initiative process works right now, voters in a handful of counties can decide the outcome of a ballot measure that impacts every corner of the state, because the Arkansas Constitution only requires ballot measures to receive a simple majority vote in order to pass.

That means special interest groups who back a ballot measure can focus on campaigning for their measure in a handful of populated areas. A ballot measure that is really bad for rural Arkansans might pass if enough voters in the metropolitan areas support it.

H.J.R. 1017 by Rep. David Ray (R — Maumelle) and Sen. John Payton (R — Wilburn) would require ballot measures to pass with a majority vote statewide and in a majority of Arkansas’ counties in order to become law.

This means under H.J.R. 1017, a constitutional amendment, initiated act, or a measure referred by the Arkansas Legislature would need to receive at least 51% of the vote statewide, and it would need to pass in at least 38 of Arkansas’ 75 counties.

H.J.R. 1017 is a good measure that would keep metropolitan areas from running roughshod over rural communities, and it would help ensure ballot measure sponsors actually campaign statewide instead of focusing on Arkansas’ cities.

You can watch Family Council President Jerry Cox’s committee testimony on H.J.R. 1017 below.

Arkansas Legislature Passes Strong, Pro-Life Clarification Law

On Monday the Arkansas Legislature passed H.B. 1610, a good bill clarifying the state’s pro-life laws.

Since 2022, Arkansas has prohibited abortion except to save the life of the mother in a medical emergency.

H.B. 1610 by Rep. Robin Lundstrum (R — Elm Springs) and Sen. Jimmy Hickey (R — Texarkana) would clarify the definition of “medical emergency” in state law, strengthen legal protections for doctors who treat pregnant women, and close possible loopholes in the current abortion law.

Under H.B. 1610, physicians would use “reasonable medical judgment” to determine whether abortion is necessary to save a woman’s life. This is the same medical and legal standard used to make other important medical decisions.

H.B. 1610 also makes it clear that psychological or emotional conditions cannot be used to justify abortion. This would help prevent an abortionist or a judge from trying to broaden Arkansas’ exceptions for abortion.

The bill clearly says that a child should not be aborted when there are other ways besides abortion to save the life of the mother.

And H.B. 1610 clarifies that a doctor does not violate the law if an unborn child accidentally or unintentionally dies because of legitimate medical treatment the doctor provided to the mother.

The bill passed with unanimous support from the senators present in the Arkansas Senate chamber on Monday afternoon. H.B. 1610 previously passed with overwhelming support in the Arkansas House of Representatives.

Family Council deeply appreciates Rep. Robin Lundstrum, Sen. Jimmy Hickey, the state General Assembly, Arkansas Right to Life, and the pro-life leaders who championed this pro-life bill. H.B. 1610 is a good measure that will strengthen Arkansas’ pro-life laws and help protect women and unborn children from abortion.

The bill now goes to Governor Sanders to be signed into law.

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.

Bill Addressing Paid Petition Canvassing Heads to Arkansas Senate

On Monday the Arkansas House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a good bill clarifying the definition of “paid canvasser” in the state’s ballot initiative laws.

The Arkansas Constitution lets canvassers circulate petitions to place measures on a general election ballot. Its original intent was to give citizens a way to function as a “legislative body.” Unfortunately, powerful special interests have used the initiative process to put flawedmisleading, and deceptive measures on the ballot in Arkansas.

If a campaign has enough money, it can hire hundreds of petition canvassers to collect signatures to place a measure on the ballot.

Last month pro-life leaders testified in committee that canvassers for the 2024 Arkansas Abortion Amendment allegedly violated state law and were paid $500 bonuses for “altercations” with pro-lifers who opposed the abortion amendment.

H.B. 1714 by Rep. Ryan Rose (R — Van Buren) and Sen. Kim Hammer (R — Benton) clarifies the definition of a “paid canvasser” in state law.

Current law says that anyone who receives anything of value in return for soliciting signatures on a petition is a paid canvasser. Paid canvassers are subject to certain laws that do not apply to volunteer canvassers.

H.B. 1714 further clarifies that receiving anything of value includes receiving payment for items like food, lodging, travel, bonuses, fees, gift cards, and other payments associated with obtaining signatures on a petition. This will help bring better clarity to state law.

Arkansas’ ballot initiative process has become the opposite of what it was intended to be, and if lawmakers do not act soon, the problem is simply going to get worse.

H.B. 1714 now goes to the Arkansas Senate for consideration.

The Following Representatives Voted FOR H.B. 1714

  • Achor
  • Andrews
  • Beaty Jr.
  • Beck
  • Bentley
  • S. Berry
  • Breaux
  • Brooks
  • A. Brown
  • K. Brown
  • M. Brown
  • N. Burkes
  • R. Burkes
  • Joey Carr
  • John Carr
  • Cavenaugh
  • Childress
  • C. Cooper
  • Cozart
  • Dalby
  • Duke
  • Eaton
  • Eaves
  • Eubanks
  • Furman
  • Gazaway
  • Gonzales
  • Gramlich
  • Hall
  • Hawk
  • Henley
  • Holcomb
  • Hollowell
  • Jean
  • L. Johnson
  • Ladyman
  • Long
  • Lundstrum
  • Lynch
  • Maddox
  • McAlindon
  • McClure
  • McCollum
  • M. McElroy
  • McGrew
  • B. McKenzie
  • McNair
  • S. Meeks
  • Milligan
  • J. Moore
  • K. Moore
  • Nazarenko
  • Painter
  • Pearce
  • Pilkington
  • Puryear
  • Ray
  • Richmond
  • Rose
  • Rye
  • R. Scott Richardson
  • M. Shepherd
  • Steimel
  • Torres
  • Tosh
  • Underwood
  • Unger
  • Vaught
  • Walker
  • Wardlaw
  • Warren
  • Wing
  • Womack
  • Wooldridge
  • Wooten
  • Speaker Evans

The Following Representatives Voted AGAINST H.B. 1714

  • F. Allen
  • Barnes
  • Barnett
  • Clowney
  • A. Collins
  • Ennett
  • D. Garner
  • Hudson
  • J. Mayberry
  • McCullough
  • McGruder
  • Perry
  • J. Richardson
  • T. Shephard
  • Springer
  • Steele
  • D. Whitaker
  • Gonzales Worthen

The Following Representatives Did Not Vote

  • Barker
  • Crawford
  • Duffield
  • K. Ferguson
  • Magie
  • Schulz

Articles appearing on this website are written with the aid of Family Council’s researchers and writers.