Votes cast on a proposed constitutional amendment that would have imposed the nation's strictest term limits on state lawmakers won't be counted in the Nov. 6 general election, a divided Arkansas Supreme Court ruled Friday.
It was the second proposal knocked off the ballot in two days, leaving voters with three to choose from, with early voting starting Monday. Constitutional amendments on voter ID and adding four casinos, and an initiated act to raise the minimum wage are still on the ballot.
In a 4-3 ruling written by Justice Shawn Womack, the high court concluded that special master Mark Hewitt was correct in his findings that there were insufficient valid signatures of registered voters on petitions submitted by the Arkansas Term Limits committee to Republican Secretary of State Mark Martin's office.
Martin's office had determined that there were no more than 93,998 valid signatures submitted by the Arkansas Term Limits committee to meet the 84,859 minimum required to qualify for the general election ballot.
But then Randy Zook, chairman of the Arkansans for Common Sense Term Limits committee, challenged the signatures.
Womack has been on the state Supreme Court since 2017. His previous public service includes serving as a state lawmaker.
The proposed amendment would have limited state representatives to three two-year terms, senators to two four-year terms and a maximum of 10 years in both chambers. The current Arkansas limit is 16 years, except in the aftermath of redistricting, which can add two years to the limit for senators.
The nation's strictest term limits are in California and Oklahoma, which both limit lawmakers to serving 12 years, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Voter approval of the proposal could have left the 35-member Senate with only a handful of current senators, starting in 2023, and would have forced the departure of the current 100-member House of Representatives by then, some lawmakers warned.
The proposed ballot measure had been widely expected in political circles to be approved by voters in the wake of the five former state lawmakers either pleading guilty to or being convicted of federal charges in the past two years amid continuing federal investigations.
OFFICIALS PLEASED
Gov. Asa Hutchinson said Friday, "This opinion was expected in view of the special master's findings on signature problems.
"In Arkansas, early voting begins on Monday. I am pleased that the Supreme Court made its decision on this ballot issue before Arkansans have begun casting their votes," the Republican governor said in a written statement.
House Speaker Matthew Shepherd, R-El Dorado, said in an interview that Issue 3 "would have put the Legislature in a weakened position compared to the departments, boards and commissions and the other branches of government.
"Ultimately, I think it is a good thing that it is not going forward," said Shepherd, who has served in the House since 2011.
Rep. Michael John Gray of Augusta, who also is the state Democratic Party chairman, said in an interview that the ruling "was the right decision.
"Nobody wants career politicians, but experience does matter," said Gray, who has served as a state representative since 2015.
"This is bigger than politics. ... It's about what's best for the state," he said.
Zook, who challenged Issue 3, said, "We're grateful for the court's decision to keep this harmful measure off of the Arkansas ballot."
"It was being pushed by out-of-state interest groups, and it was NOT in the best interest of our state," Zook said in a written statement.
"Not only did Issue 3's supporters fail to properly collect the signatures required by law, but the measure would have stuck Arkansans with the most restrictive term limits in our country -- a step in the wrong direction," he said.
'VOTERS DENIED'
Tim Jacob, a spokesman for the Arkansas Term Limits committee that sponsored Issue 3, said, "The same forces behind the fraudulent ethics amendment have now denied the voters a chance to vote on real term limits.
"Lobbyists have ensured that for two more years our state Legislature will not have real term limits but instead have the self-serving term limits sponsored by a convicted felon," he said in a written statement. He was referring to former Sen. Jon Woods, R-Springdale, who sponsored Amendment 94 that voters approved in 2014. That amendment increased term limits for lawmakers. Woods was found guilty in a public corruption case.
"Corporate censorship of the Arkansas voter has won today, but respect and justice for voters will eventually win," Jacob said.
The Arkansans for Common Sense Term Limits committee reported raising $60,000 in contributions and spending $3,620 through Sept. 30. It received $50,000 from the Arkansas Farm Bureau in Little Rock and $10,000 from Nabholz Construction in Conway.
The U.S. Term Limits committee reported raising $495,483.30 from the U.S. Terms Limits general fund and spending the same amount through Sept. 30. With offices in Florida and Washington, D.C., U.S. Term Limits advocates for term limits at all levels of government, and its board of directors includes Jacob, according to its website.
Nick Tomboulides, U.S. Term Limits' executive director, said Friday that "today, Arkansas politicians, lobbyists and judges should be hanging their heads in shame.
"This decision was a miscarriage of justice. After tricking the people into gutting term limits, the Arkansas General Assembly unleashed a wave of dishonesty and corruption that would have made Dick Nixon blush," he said in a written statement.
He was referring to Amendment 94, which increased term limits, and created a citizens commission that has boosted the salaries of state elected officials; barred state elected officials from accepting certain gifts from lobbyists; prohibited direct corporate contributions to state-elected officials; and extended the cooling-off period for lawmakers to become lobbyists for private clients from one year to two years.
Before Amendment 94, lawmakers were limited to serving up to three two-year terms in the state House, plus up to two four-year terms in the Senate under Amendment 73, which was approved by voters in 1992. Some senators were able to serve longer if they drew two-year terms tied to once-per-decade redistricting.
SIGNATURES EXCLUDED
In its 4-3 ruling Friday, the Supreme Court said Hewitt correctly excluded 4,371 signatures because the canvassers attached false affidavits to the relevant petition parts.
"The special master used Larry Bradshaw as an example and noted that the sponsor registered him with a Bentonville address with the secretary of state," the court said.
"However, on the petition parts he collected, Bradshaw signed an affidavit that his current resident address is in Florida. He executed documents that he understood Arkansas law. Bradshaw executed his sworn-canvasser statement on June 8, 2018, and listed Florida as his current residence.
"On that same date, [the Arkansas Term Limits committee] registered Bradshaw with the secretary of state using a Bentonville, Arkansas, current residence address. The two residential addresses are in direct conflict. Further, Bradshaw later executed a sworn affidavit that the affidavit on the petition parts he collected was false to his current resident address."
The court said Hewitt correctly excluded 1,998 signatures collected by Courtney McDuffie and Jennifer Norwood because they failed to execute a sworn statement before working as paid canvassers.
The court said Hewitt also correctly excluded 3,088 signatures because the Arkansas Term Limits committee failed to provide a list of paid canvassers to the secretary of state before the signatures were collected by paid canvassers.
Hewitt also correctly excluded 479 signatures because that canvasser, Gregory Lee, had a felony conviction.
Chief Justice Dan Kemp and Justices Courtney Goodson and Rhonda Wood agreed with Womack's majority opinion.
But Justices Robin Wynne, Josephine Hart and Karen Baker dissented.
DISSENTING OPINION
Wynne, who authored the dissenting opinion, wrote, "I believe that Arkansas Term Limits submitted a sufficient number of valid signatures to the secretary of state for its proposed amendment to the Arkansas Constitution to appear on the November ballot.
"When the number of signatures erroneously excluded by the master is added back into the signature count, the petition contains a sufficient number of signatures to remain on the November ballot," Wynne wrote.
Attorney Chad Pekron, who represented the Arkansas Term Limits committee, said, "Despite finding that not one of the more than 93,000 signatures of Arkansas voters was tainted by fraud or forgery, the court relies upon hypertechnical paperwork violations to invalidate 10,000 valid signatures -- just enough to keep Term Limits off the ballot."
He said the ruling strips "Arkansans of their first right under the Arkansas Constitution, the right to petition the government. We are continuing to review the opinion and consider our next options," he said.
POSSIBLE CHANGE
Meanwhile, Shepherd said lawmakers have discussed whether they should "refer out [a proposed constitutional amendment] that maybe is further restrictive" than the current term limits.
"Obviously, a lot of people signed the petition. There was a significant effort to put it on the ballot this time, so I think anytime that occurs as a Legislature you pay attention to that. But it remains to be seen as to whether that is something that we would want to do," he said.
Senate President Pro Tempore Jonathan Dismang, R-Searcy, added, "I don't think there is any agreement on what that would look like."
A Section on 10/20/2018