Here are excerpts from recent editorials in Arkansas newspapers:
Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Oct. 21, 2018.
The special interests that want to build up a more powerful state Legislature, where they can predictably wield more of their own influence, probably regret they didn’t beat President Donald Trump to the punch in using the phrase “enemy of the people.”
Arkansans for Jobs and Justice, the temporary ballot question advocacy group, is among those special interests, and it would love nothing more than to convince Arkansans that the judicial branch of state government is the enemy. Why? Because the courts won’t toss aside the Constitution, law and precedent to let lawmakers have their way.
The message they’re selling is that the state’s courts are a barrier to the legitimate expression of the people’s will, and that will, they will naturally say, is most accurately reflected in the Arkansas General Assembly. Of course, in representative government, the House and Senate are flawed but important expressions of the people’s will, but let’s not imagine for a moment that everything lawmakers do perfectly expresses the desires of their fellow Arkansans.
Just look at how our lawmakers have resisted, and succeeded in changing, term limits supported by the people. Arkansas term limits were first adopted in a grass-roots campaign of the people in 1992. The people spoke, but legislators’ efforts to quell term limits’ impact have been steady. Finally, in 2014, state lawmakers wrote up an “ethics” amendment and tucked inside an extension of term limits that nobody in the public was clamoring for. But it was passed as a result of the subterfuge. That lawmakers have dishonestly gone about undoing the state’s term limits is why there was a new effort in 2018 for an initiated act to re-establish strict term limits and to bar the Legislature from trying to undo them again. The measure got tossed by the Supreme Court last week because some signatures of registered voters were improperly gathered by canvassers. Trust us: Term limits will be back in a couple of years.
Arkansans don’t need to make the Legislature the more powerful branch of government and should never fall for the very Trumpian tactic supporters of Issue 1, the “tort reform” amendment, employed. The president likes to find someone or something to vilify so that he can churn up emotions and steer people toward whatever solution he wants. Issue 1 supporters don’t appreciate one of the co-equal branches of government tripping up the unbridled desires of another. Issue 1 was about giving the Legislature more control by limiting “judicial power.”
Last Thursday, the Arkansas Supreme Court took the only reasonable action it could against Issue 1 when it ordered that no votes for or against it be counted when the Nov. 6 election is completed. Why? Because in proposing an amendment to the state Constitution, the Legislature tried to do too much within a single amendment.
The state Constitution allows our General Assembly to propose no more than three constitutional amendments at each general election for senators and representatives (every two years). The Constitution requires that the amendments “shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment separately.” In prior court cases, the Supreme Court held no violation of the separate issue requirement occurs as long as all parts of an amendment are “reasonably germane to each other and to the general subject of the amendment.”
Doesn’t that make sense? If voters are going to be asked to change the state’s Constitution, they should be empowered to cast a ballot for or against a clearly delineated proposal that makes either a single change or a set of changes so reasonably related that they constitute one basic idea the voter can support or oppose. Without such a limitation, our legislators could refer an amendment that pairs a popular notion to an unpopular notion, all part of manipulation to get the unpopular part passed. Without requiring that germane linkage, lawmakers could go wild, proposing a single measure that (1) establishes term limits and (2) require judges to wear red clown noses and pink robes when they preside over cases that challenge the constitutionality of a legislative act.
Not everyone sees the value in having a judicial branch as a real check on legislative power. The pro-Issue 1 group mentioned above had this to say after last Thursday’s Supreme Court decision: “This very ruling demonstrates the need for the reforms contained in Issue 1 that seek to restore the balance among our branches of government. Six members of the Court have once again reinforced, and indeed protected, their position as the ultimate and unchecked authority in Arkansas government. This kind of power demonstrated by the Court is without limits and has been wielded in an arbitrary fashion.”
It does nothing of the sort, but let’s cast them as enemies of the people anyway, right? Let’s not forget this important fact when it comes to responsiveness to the public: Arkansas’ Supreme Court justices are elected, not appointed. The Legislature aren’t the only ones who can claim power from the people.
Here’s what the Arkansas General Assembly owes to the people of this state when its members refer constitutional amendments to the ballot: Clear, single-issue measures for which a vote “for” doesn’t force voters to swallow something else they don’t want. It is not in the people’s interest to be forced into voting for or against omnibus amendments full of unrelated or distantly related changes.
If the Legislature wants a cap on Arkansans’ right to contract with their attorneys for fees they believe to be appropriate, make that one proposal. If they also want a cap on punitive damages in court cases, make that a separate item. If lawmakers want to create new powers for itself, make that a single-issue amendment.
The General Assembly gets three amendment proposals every two years, which should be plenty if one accepts the idea that the state’s Constitution shouldn’t be easily and routinely changed. And we believe that.
Whether one is for or against Issue 2 - which would install in the state Constitution a requirement for photo ID before any citizen’s vote can be counted — at least it’s a clear, concise, one-issue amendment the people can vote up or down. No hidden and unrelated changes in that one. Arkansans can let their voices be heard on that measure without having their “for” or “against” vote hijacked for some other matter unrelated to voter identification.
Lawmakers have every right to propose amendments to the state Constitution, but in a fair and responsible manner that respects voters. Issue 1 did not do that.
___
Texarkana Gazette. Oct. 21, 2018.
A local man serving five years’ probation for fighting dogs apparently didn’t learn his lesson.
Last week Jaquavian Jaqwon Jones, 20, had his probation revoked and was sent to state prison to serve three concurrent five-year terms after another dogfighting arrest.
Maybe this time it will sink in.
It’s probably hard for most readers to imagine that the cruel and inhumane practice of dogfighting still exists. But it does. Some individuals - it’s hard to even call them human beings - get a thrill out of watching pit bulls tear each other apart. And for some it’s a moneymaker.
Big money. It costs a lot to breed and train their animals. And both dog owners and spectators bet big bucks on the outcomes of matches.
Dogfighting and its cousin, cockfighting, have been around a long time. The “sport” of fighting roosters was still legal just a few years ago. Oklahoma voters made it illegal in 2002. Louisiana didn’t get rid of legal cockfighting until 2008.
But dogfighting fell out of favor much earlier. Most states passed laws against it more than 100 years ago. And if you cross state lines to fight dogs or view the bloody spectacle, then you’ve committed a federal crime.
We wish we could say those laws put an end to dogfighting. But they just drove it underground. We have seen several cases in our area over the past few years. In the Jones case, animal control officers received a tip from the public. We salute the tipster for taking a stand and doing the right thing. We encourage any citizen who sees something that leads them to think dogfighting might be going on to do their part and call the proper authorities.
___
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Oct. 23, 2018.
America, land of the free. Sometimes it’s worth taking a moment to say that out loud and remember it. Life is good here. Every four years we get together and decide who’ll be the most powerful man or woman in the world. And if you don’t like him/her? You can protest until you’re blue in the face. Strong economy, new technologies, freedom. Yup, life is good.
It shouldn’t surprise that many others around the world want to come here. Some want to study, some want jobs, and some want to be near their families and friends. And this country’s laws in that regard are pretty reasonable. Our government offers quite a few ways to come to this country: student visas, employer or family sponsorships, heck, there’s even an immigration lottery of sorts. But people have to be patient. There’s paperwork and bureaucracy and paperwork and regs and more paperwork. After all, this is a government operation.
It’s not hard to imagine the surprise of many Americans when thousands of migrants started marching north with the intention of entering our country, many with less than legal methods. This “caravan” was supposed to be stopped at the Mexican/Guatemalan border, but many folks therein continued onward, crossing over rivers, surging past Mexican police and moving further north.
Yes, most of these migrants come from terrible conditions back home. Bad economies, authoritarian governments, roving gangs and more push them onward. And it’s easy to sympathize with a single mother who wants nothing more than a better future for her children. We’ve got plenty of single parents right here in the US of A that are working hard to gain the same.
Mexico and America have something in common, as do most nations. It’s called an immigration system. In fact, we have whole agencies dedicated to the enforcement of laws relating to immigration and customs. Nations have the sovereign right to determine who can come into their countries, especially non-citizens. So when thousands of migrants form a caravan, go to the television cameras, and announce their intentions to enter our nation, whether Americans like it or not, some of us get understandably antsy.
You want to create a permanent solution for Dreamers brought here illegally as children? Fine. But that’s not a green light for every other migrant to storm our border. If people want to immigrate to the U.S., they need to follow the rules like everyone else.
There’s a long line of folks who have waited years, completed mountains of paperwork, passed multiple security checks and are more than eager to get a certificate of naturalization. (We’d encourage everyone to attend a naturalization ceremony. All that hard work paid off. Now they have a home here, a hard-earned legal home. It’s moving stuff.)
Now imagine telling those people that came here the right way that thousands of others cut in line without consequence. That’d be a slap in the face to those who waited patiently in line.
We have a process for legal admittance to this country. Our asylum process is not to be abused or manipulated. And if it takes our military being called to defend our southern border, so be it. Contrary to the cries of “no human is illegal!” we do not have open borders.
Feel free to begin your paperwork and get in line like the millions before you. We’re not monsters. Just sticklers for the law.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.