A.G. Rejects Marijuana Proposals, Term Limits and Ethics Amendment

Current Events,

Yesterday Attorney General Leslie Rutledge’s office rejected two ballot proposals related to marijuana and a third proposal repealing Amendment 94 to the Arkansas Constitution.

Both marijuana proposals were offered by Robert Reed of Dennard. One proposal would legalize marijuana for any purpose statewide.

The other would legalize “hemp” and “medical cannabis.” The proposal distinguishes between hemp and “medical cannabis” by defining hemp as cannabis with relatively low levels of THC. The goal appears to be to legalize hemp for industrial use which we have written about before; however, even cannabis with low levels of THC might be used as a recreational drug, and presumably this measure could allow that.

You can read the A.G.’s opinions rejecting the two marijuana measures here and here.

A proposal by Tom Steele of Little Rock repealing Amendment 94 to the Arkansas Constitution was also rejected.

As you may recall, Amendment 94 was passed by voters last November as Issue 3; Issue 3 extends term limits in Arkansas, and coupled with Issue 1, which voters also passed last November, it gives the Arkansas Legislature a great deal of control over the ethics regulations that govern Arkansas’ elected officials.

Presumably, the goal of “repealing Amendment 94 to the Arkansas Constitution” is to restore Arkansas’ ethics laws and more stringent term limits laws that existed prior to 2014.

You can read the A.G.’s opinion rejecting Mr. Steele’s proposal here. You can read Amendment 94 in its entirety here.

READ MORE

Group Pushing to Undo Term Limits Extension in Arkansas

Current Events, ,

You may have seen recent news about a group in Arkansas working to repeal the term limits extension measure voters passed last November.

In a nutshell, the proposal would limit lawmakers to no more than three two-year terms in the Arkansas House of Representatives and two four-year terms in the Arkansas Senate, with no lawmaker permitted to serve more than ten years total.

We wrote about the new term limits amendment last November, after it was passed into law. To summarize, under the new term limits system, lawmakers may serve up to 16 years in the Arkansas General Assembly (House and Senate).

If the lawmaker’s sixteenth year in office happens to fall in the middle of his or her term, the lawmaker is allowed to finish the term; this means many lawmakers may actually serve up to 18 years in office.

Additionally, the new term limits system includes special exemptions for time in office as the result of a special election or an assignment resulting from redistricting. It’s a little complicated, but suffice it to say because of these exemptions, a state legislator could serve as many as 20 – 22 years in office under the right circumstances.

To be fair, most lawmakers will probably only serve 16 years in the legislature; but many will serve 18 years, and a few will get 20 – 22 years in office.

You can read more about Arkansas’ current term limits system here.

You can read more about the proposed changes to the term limits system here and here.

READ MORE

Two-thirds of Arkansans Support New Religious Freedom Law

Religious Freedom, , ,

If you support religious freedom in Arkansas, you are not alone. Nearly two out of three likely voters in Arkansas support the state’s new Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and more than half believe a business-owner (such as a caterer or florist) with religious objections to same-sex marriage “should be allowed to refuse to those services to same-sex couples.”

The findings are the result of a poll commissioned by Talk Business, Hendrix College, and Impact Management Group.

The poll indicates Arkansans strongly support religious liberty; in fact, less than half of Arkansans under 30 expressed that businesses ought to be required to provide “services to same-sex couples.”

What’s striking about the survey are its findings despite its wording. According to the survey’s authors, one key survey question was taken verbatim from a CNN poll conducted last spring. The question reads,

“If a business provides wedding services, such as catering or flowers, should it be allowed to refuse those services to same-sex couples for religious reasons, or be required to provide those services as it would to all other customers?”

The phrases “refuse services to same-sex couples” and “as it would to all other customers” slant the question significantly, missing the point: That this is about the impact of same-sex marriage on religious liberty.

Here is what we mean:

(more…)

READ MORE