Arkansas Legislature

More Budget Scrutiny for State Agencies? Why, Yes, Let’s Have Some of That!

February 13, 2012 David Kinkade Leave a Comment

Erroneous headline alert! Erroneous headline alert! A story over at the Arkansas News Bureau reports that “After Forestry Commission flap, state agencies’ budgets to get more scrutiny.” I’m sure that “more scrutiny” was supposed to read “some scrutiny,” since it’s hard to believe most of these state agencies get any scrutiny at all.

Now that the financial shenanigans at the troubled Arkansas Forestry Commission have been flushed into the open and the appropriate heads have rolled (Forestry Director John Shannon, RIP), the realization is settling in that the mismanagement at that agency may not be an isolated case.

Thus, the bureau’s John Lyon reports, Gov. Mike Beebe and state finance chief Richard Weiss are responding to the sensible calls for greater attention to just what the hell is going on at all these executive branch agencies:

Weiss said the [enhanced budget watchdogging] job should be possible with DF&A’s existing manpower. Asked why it was not being done before, he said that level of scrutiny was not previously seen as necessary.

“The system we’ve had up until this point has done us well,” he said. “We have kept out of trouble, we have kept out of having deficit spending or any of these other things. This illustrated, though, that you could have people go out and certify things that weren’t necessarily true, so we’re going to try to monitor it more closely, as audit suggested.”

Well, yes, the “system we’ve had up until this point has done us well” and “we have kept out of trouble” insofar as no one asked any questions about potential financial mismanagement, and so it didn’t come to light.

But this is a salutary development, if it means that we’ll get closer scrutiny of some of these agencies that have been misusing and abusing taxpayer funds. Especially those agencies that function that are pass-throughs for large amounts of federal funding. But I can’t think of any right now (cough*Department of Workforce Services*cough), can you? No, nothing comes to mind.

In the same story, House Minority Leader John Burris offers up a vision of the future tinged with dark foreboding:

Burris said that especially with large amounts of federal stimulus money at their disposal, state agencies see one-time federal money as a means “to prop up problems in state government instead of solving them.”

“Games with numbers isn’t new in state government,” he said. “I don’t think this is the last time we’re going to see this happen.” (emphasis added)

Good point, House Minority Leader John Burris!

On a related note, did you guys watch the opening of the 2012 fiscal session? I watched it on the teevee. It’s always a stirring occasion— lawmakers gather in the spirit of legislative bonhomie, Gov. Beebe delivers an utterly forgettable speech, and then everyone heads to the Capitol Rotunda for the ceremonial lighting of John Brummett’s mustache. Really brings makes you proud to be an Arkansan, it does.

After Forestry Commission Flap, State Agencies’ Budgets to Get More Scrutiny (Arkansas News Bureau)

Filed Under: Arkansas Democrats, Arkansas Legislature, Arkansas Republicans, Gov. Mike Beebe, State Government is Too Damn Big Tagged With: arkansas forestry commission, Gov. Mike Beebe, john burris, unemployment benefits, workforce services

Arkansas Dems on Income: Intentionally Misleading or Just Ignorant of the Facts? (PART 2: The Exciting Conclusion!)

February 3, 2012 David Kinkade Leave a Comment

(Part One of this discussion, which you can read here, took place yesterday. Part Two will be shorter, I promise)

So yesterday we had a too lengthy, too windy and too pedantic discussion of income statistics in Arkansas, sparked by a dispute between GOP Rep. Charlie Collins of Fayetteville and the Democratic Party of Arkansas (DPA).

Are you up to speed on the difference between per capita income and median income? Do you care? Of course you don’t, because you are a normal human being with healthy interests, and the only income stats you really care about are your own. I’m not sure I care that much, either. But if we’re going to discuss it, we should at least be clear on what we’re talking about, and don’t go about clouding up the issue, as the DPA did in their shoddy attack on Collins.

Anyway, Collins got the essential facts right:

Arkansas ranks low in income statistics, whether measured in per capita or median terms;
Household income in the state is stagnant (and has declined since 2007); and
A reasonable discussion of why that is, and how it might be changed, should occur.

He gets credit for raising the issue, and doing so in a measured and civil manner, which is more than we can say for DPA mouthpiece Candace Martin.

I don’t intend to make a habit of close readings of party news releases, because whether they come from Republicans or Democrats they all tend to be overwrought and hysterical and shot through with fallacious reasoning and are more or less immediately forgettable. I only focused in on this piece from the DPA because it was so terrible on so many levels.

And also because it reveals a tactic that we’re seeing more frequently from the defenders of the status quo in Arkansas, as well as one that you should be on watch for in the heated campaigny months that lie before us:

1) Defenders of the status quo in Arkansas politics and government will glom on to any ranking or study that ostensibly reflects well on the state, without taking a critical look at just what that ranking means. We saw it with the “income growth” measure; Gov. Mike Beebe’s office reported the ranking as a “historic high,” which is true, except the “historic high” is still pretty low, and median incomes in the state remain stagnant.

We saw it last month with education policy, when Beebe breathlessly trumpeted the state’s #5 ranking in “education policy” from Education Week, and ignored a (probably more accurate) study that ranked the state’s education system #45 in the nation.

A cynical type might think that all they’re trying to do is get you to remember the top line numbers (“Didn’t I see something about Arkansas being fifth in education?”) to obscure any lack of progress that has occurred under their long command (with a few brief interregna in the governor’s mansion) of the state’s government. Some might even call that “misleading.”

2) Arkansas Democrats are also keen to portray anyone who points out the facts about the state’s lack of progress as “out of touch” or “talking down” the state. Look back at Martin’s release attacking Collins from last week: She accuses Collins of “badmouthing” Arkansas and “deriding the state.” Goodness!

Then, boy howdy, she really works up a head of steam: “It is bad enough when people from other states talk down about Arkansas, but for an elected official to do so, and falsely, is inexcusable,” Martin writes. Say, isn’t Collins from another state? Expect more of this.

Martin believes that it’s “badmouthing” the state or “talking down” about Arkansas when someone points out verifiable facts about the state, as Collins did. That’s a nice appeal to sentimentality, but it doesn’t do much to advance the discussion of what will move the state forward.

By this light, it’s better to tell “useful lies” rather than “harmful truths” (see quote at top of post; you were just wondering how that would tie in!). The lies are more pleasant, whether they are about income stats or education or whatever, and they allow the usual suspects to maintain their positions of power and privilege, instead of taking careful stock of where we stand and figuring out how we might do better.

Nice little racket they got there. And one wonders why the state continues to lag in so many indices. But not really.

Filed Under: Arkansas Democrats, Arkansas Legislature, Arkansas Politics, Tax Reform Tagged With: Arkansas Democratic Party, charlie collins, Gov. Mike Beebe, tax reform

Arkansas Dems on Income: Intentionally Misleading or Just Ignorant of the Facts? (PART 1)

February 2, 2012 David Kinkade 2 Comments

Why are Arkansas Democrats exaggerating the Natural State’s progress on income growth? Or more to the point, just how damn stupid do they think we are?

I was thumbing through the Wall Street Journal this morning, in the manner of all good plutocrats everywhere, when I came across this story about declines in household income over the last few years.

Citing a study by a Maryland-based consultancy group, the WSJ reports that 38 states saw a decline in median household income from 2007-2010, according to an analysis of Census data. Arkansas was one of those 38—in the Natural State, median household incomes dropped 2.9 percent. (Meanwhile, Washington D.C. led the nation with an 8.1 percent income INCREASE, “in large part because of federal government employment.” If you need me, I’ll be sharpening my pitchfork.)

That got me thinking: Wasn’t there a to-do just a few days ago in which the Democratic Party of Arkansas (DPA) took a Republican state legislator to task on this very question? Why, it turns out there was!

Rep. Charlie Collins

Here’s the deal: Some weeks ago, GOP Rep. Charlie Collins of Fayetteville published a letter to the editor in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s northwest edition arguing that the state needs income tax reform to create jobs. Collins cited the slow growth rate in the state’s median income to suggest that Arkansas could be doing better. (For our discussion purposes, I’m pasting the text of Collins’ original letter below).

Last week, the DPA issued a news release charging Collins with “misleading” voters….

Actually, no, that’s not right. Let’s carefully read the lead of the DPA news release: it says that Collins’ letter “leaves voters to wonder if he was being intentionally misleading about Arkansas’s economy and deriding the state, or even worse, was he ignorant of the facts?”

Got that? They’re not actually suggesting Collins did all that bad stuff they just said; they’re not leveling a charge. It just “leaves voters to wonder” if there’s a charge to be made, by someone, maybe. Oh, my, this is an unprepossessing start.

Let’s read on. Here’s DPA spokeslady Candace Martin:

“What is worse, if Charlie Collins was intentionally misleading people and badmouthing Arkansas’s progress or if he was just ignorant of the facts? He owes the people of Northwest Arkansas an explanation,” Democratic Party of Arkansas Spokesman Candace Martin challenged. “Politicians shouldn’t use these lean economic times as an excuse to falsify facts or mislead Arkansans. Rep. Charlie Collins condemned Arkansas for making no economic progress when in reality USA Today ranked our state 11^th in the nation for personal income growth. It is bad enough when people from other states talk down about Arkansas, but for an elected official to do so, and falsely, is inexcusable.”

OK, here’s where it starts to get thornier. Martin invokes a USA Today ranking that says Arkansas is “11 in the nation for personal income growth.” But note the shift here: Collins in his letter writes about median incomes, not “personal income growth.” Moreover, if we follow the link to the Bureau of Economic Analysis data on which USA Today based its ranking, we see the data used is per capita personal income. So they’ve subtly changed the subject.

And here’s the thing: Per capita income and median income are not the same thing. Median numbers tend to be a more reliable measure because they aren’t swayed by extremely high or low extremes, and they’re more useful for comparing numbers over time.

If you look at per capita income, Arkansas does a shade better; moreover, if you look at the rate of growth in per capita income, you’re talking about something else entirely. So they’ve moved the discussion away completely from what Collins was talking about, and then they charge him with being “misleading.”

Candace Martin and the DPA seem confused on these issues (that’s the charitable interpretation). In paragraph 3 of the news release, they state that “Arkansas steadily moved up three rankings in the national average for median income at a time when other states were falling” (emphasis added).

Except that’s not quite right, based upon a reading of the data that they themselves provide. The news release points us to the Bureau of Business and Economic Research at the University of New Mexico, which reports that Arkansas moved up a few slots on per capita income, not median income, from 2007-2010 (from 47th to 44th).

Now, if you just go Google “state rankings median income,” you’ll get a number of results that show Arkansas languishing around 48th or 49th, which is in line with what Collins discussed in his letter. Like this. Or this. Go ahead, roll your own. Collins wasn’t “misleading” anyone.

I think Charlie Collins does know the difference between per capita and median incomes, since he’s careful in his letter to always refer to “median income,” and doesn’t sloppily swap the terms around.

Look back at that DPA news release, in which all the accusations against Collins are leveled as rhetorical questions, rather than actually flat-out making a charge that he was being “misleading.” It seems clear the Dems recognized they were on shaky ground, or they didn’t really care, because all they wanted to do was muddy the waters of the discussion, so the facts didn’t much matter.

Or we might put it this way: What is worse, if Arkansas Democrats were intentionally misleading people and exaggerating Arkansas’s progress on income levels, or if they were just ignorant of the facts?

You know, it really leaves voters to wonder.

WHAT YOU ARE PROBABLY THINKING: “Thank you, David, for that not at all fascinating discussion of a dispute over per capita and median income in a stupid party news release, which sounds like something Greenberg would write, because, ugh, Greenberg.”

But bear with me! There is, indeed, a point to all this! No really, there is! I think! But you’ll have to wait for the explanation as to why this matters in the EXCITING PART DEUX OF THIS POST (forthcoming!)

Collins letter follows.

Biz Tax Study Ranks Arkansas An Unimpressive 31st! (UPDATED!)

January 25, 2012 David Kinkade 3 Comments

We have established before how much I like the Tax Foundation’s studies and maps as a tool for exploring tax policy. In fact, when it comes right down to it, the Tax Foundation should probably be paying me for how frequently I pimp their work around here.

As Arkansas lawmakers gear up for a legislative session devoted strictly to budget matters, they should read this humdinger of a new study ranking all 50 states by the Tax Foundation “Business Tax Climate Index.”

The index is a magic alchemical stew of corporate, income, sales, property and unemployment insurance taxes used to determine how “which states’ tax systems are the most hospitable to business and economic growth.” That is of course a gross oversimplification of how the rankings were arrived at, but if you want to learn more then go read the study yourself, Mr. Technical Methodology.

Man, I’ll bet Arkansas comes out looking like a real peach, huh? Eh, not so much—your beloved Natural State checks in at #31. If there’s good news, it’s that Arkansas has climbed one slot since last year’s report, when we ranked #32. Why, should we keep up at this blistering pace, this state will be a veritable economic powerhouse by, uh, let’s see… 2044. Huzzah!

“But, but, but taxes aren’t the only thing that drive business decisions!” is what some of you might be sputtering right about now. Well, shut up, because economist Mark Robyn, who authored the study, covers that issue:

The modern market is characterized by mobile capital and labor, with all types of business, small and large, tending to locate where they have the greatest competitive advantage. The evidence shows that states with the best tax systems will be the most competitive in attracting new businesses and most effective at generating economic and employment growth.

It is true that taxes are but one factor in business decision-making. Other concerns, such as raw materials or infrastructure or a skilled labor pool, matter, but a simple, sensible tax system can positively or negatively impact business operations with regard to these very resources.

Furthermore, unlike changes to a state’s health care, transportation, or education system—which can take decades to implement—changes to the tax code can quickly improve a state’s business climate.

Oh, but read on, because there’s even more good stuff about the dangers of tax incentives and subsidies targeting specific businesses:

State lawmakers are always mindful of their states’ business tax climates but they are often tempted to lure business with lucrative tax incentives and subsidies instead of broad-based tax reform. This can be a dangerous proposition….

Lawmakers create these deals under the banner of job creation and economic development, but the truth is that if a state needs to offer such packages, it is most likely covering for a woeful business tax climate. A far more effective approach is to systematically improve the business tax climate for the long term so as to improve the state’s competitiveness.

Robyn also includes a nicely comprehensive review of the economic debate over just how much taxes matter (pages 5-9) that you should totally check out. Print and read! Or what, you’d rather read yet another goddamn article about the Republican presidential primary or mindlessly scan the pointless ephemera in Twitter feed? Ugh, you disgust me. I don’t know how you live with yourself. Read this instead.

UPDATE: Ha ha ha ha ha! Michael Cook, a lockstep Democratic blogger who has never been troubled by an interesting or intelligent idea, sees everyone talking about the Tax Foundation study on Twitter, and leaps into action with this dandy:

Good work, Michael Cook! You have indeed Googled a report suggesting that two counties of the state boast a relatively strong economy. Case closed! Of course, and I can’t believe I have to point this out, this doesn’t exactly contravene the findings from the Tax Foundation, for a number of reasons, including that two counties are not the same thing as a whole state.

Moreover, if we just want to wave around competing studies, here’s one from the Brookings Institution (PDF) ranking the Little Rock area as one of the 20 weakest performing metro areas over the course of the economic recovery. Your move, Michael Cook!

Oh, man, can you imagine what it must be like to be Michael Cook? I can’t help but to think that I’d just literally die from the sheer existential humiliation.

2012 State Business Tax Climate Index (Tax Foundation)

Filed Under: Arkansas Legislature, Tax Reform Tagged With: tax foundation, tax reform

Beebe On Arkansas Forestry Commission Financial Mess: “Not It!”

January 13, 2012 David Kinkade

Ranger Mike says, "Give a hoot, don't pollute your balance sheet by illegally commingling state and federal funds!"

Ranger Mike sez, "Give a hoot, don't pollute your balance sheet by illegally commingling state and federal funds, or at least don't get caught doing that!" Catchy slogan, Ranger Mike!

It’s Friday the 13th, which is bad news for you if you planned on spending the night at Camp Crystal Lake, or if you are one of the 36 employees of the Arkansas Forestry Commission losing your job today due to the agency’s epic mismanagement.

Oh, guys, this Forestry Commission story, with all its bumbling and bungling, can we talk about this a minute? Never did we dream when the story broke in early December that it would still be boiling along six weeks later, but here we are.

The agency is $4 million in the hole, hence the layoffs of three dozen workers, and in hock to the feds for some $1.2 million for misusing federal grant funds. Gov. Mike Beebe, eager to deflect any blame for the mess, is itching to show he’s in command of the situation by issuing a supreme edict for a legislative audit of the troubled agency. And he means business, boys, so get cracking!

One obnoxious theme in this story that continues to rear its head is the notion that the dispute is simply a function of partisan politics, with those dastardly Republican lawmakers trying to get the better of good ole reliable Mike with their Washington D.C.-style tactics. Boo! Hiss!

But really, decrying the “partisanship” in this dynamic rather misses the point.

OK, fine, Arkansas Republicans are seeking to exploit some political advantage here—because, you know, people in political arenas tend to have incentives to do that. But the more important fact is that without the relentless pressure from minority lawmakers like Rep. Bryan King, Rep. Kim Hammer and Sen. Missy Irvin to keep the story alive, it’s not likely that the facts of the Forestry Commission’s dysfunction and mismanagement would have come to light.

Or perhaps you would prefer the approach of those who would just chalk it up to “partisanship” and move on from all this unpleasantness, like one lawmaker who talked to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s Mike Wickline (subscription required):

Sen. Jimmy Jeffress, a Democrat from Crossett, wonders whether [Forestry Commission head John] Shannon will survive this controversy.

“I don’t want to put the governor on the spot, but it just depends on whether or not he is willing to sacrifice [Shannon] as a sacrificial lamb and get on with business or not,” he said. “I think if that should happen, some people think that that will get us over the hump. But then I think that, well, [the Republicans] will have the first bloodletting and will they look around for something else?”

I guess you could say that Sen. Jimmy Jeffress, Democrat from Crossett, can’t see the forest for the trees (“Good one, Dave!”—All Arkansas Project Readers).

Or maybe Jeffress is right: maybe the last thing we need in state government is for these legislators to go poking around “for something else” and turning up more examples of millions of dollars in mismanaged funds and dysfunctional management. That is something we simply do not want. Who knows what they might find?

Who knows indeed.

Lawmakers To Eye Forestry Commission Shortfall During Budget Hearings (Arkansas News Bureau)

Beebe Asks Legislative Audit to Review Forestry Commission (Talk Business)

Filed Under: Arkansas Legislature, Gov. Mike Beebe Tagged With: arkansas forestry commission, Mike Beebe

Doing Our Part: How States Can Shut Down Obamacare

December 8, 2011 David Kinkade

Last week we saw the not-at-all lamented demise of the Arkansas health insurance exchange. Following, we were treated to a spasm of recrimination from various quarters on the Arkansas left, accusing those who opposed the exchange of having doomed the Natural State to a future of grim slavery under the heavy boot-heel of a federally-run exchange.

But is that true? Will the feds, in fact, be running the Arkansas health benefits exchange?

Not so fast! The short (6 minute) interview at the top of the page with Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, casts doubt on that claim. Cannon argues that, should states decline to establish exchanges, it puts the feds in a bind, as they’re not authorized to offer “premium assistance” (tax credits, subsidies, etc., needed to make Obamacare viable) in federal exchanges under section 1321 of the law. The short of it is that the inability to provide premium assistance will drive up costs and undermine the exchange as people decline to participate in the system. That’s some section, that section 1321.

Cannon covered this issue in more detail in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last month, co-authored with Jonathan Adler, explaining how the premium assistance glitch could serve to undermine the entire law:

The law encourages states to create health-insurance exchanges, but it permits Washington to create them if states decline. So far, only 17 states have passed legislation to create an exchange.

This is where the glitch comes in: ObamaCare authorizes premium assistance in state-run exchanges (Section 1311) but not federal ones (Section 1321). In other words, states that refuse to create an exchange can block much of ObamaCare’s spending and practically force Congress to reopen the law for revisions.

The Obama administration wants to avoid that legislative debacle, so this summer it proposed an IRS rule to offer premium assistance in all exchanges “whether established under section 1311 or 1321.” On Nov. 17 the IRS will hold a public hearing on that proposal. According to a Treasury Department spokeswoman, the administration is “confident” that offering premium assistance where Congress has not authorized it “is consistent with the intent of the law and our ability to interpret and implement it.”

Such confidence is misplaced. The text of the law is perfectly clear. And without congressional authorization, the IRS lacks the power to dispense tax credits or spend money.

Oh, Obamacare, you are a disastrous gift that keeps on disastrously giving, in all your rickety, shoddily designed, half-assed glory. Don’t ever change! Just please go away, forever.

How States Can Shut Down Obamacare (Cato Institute Daily Podcast)

Another Obamacare Glitch (Wall Street Journal)

Filed Under: Arkansas Democrats, Arkansas Legislature, Arkansas Republicans, Health Care Reform, Uncategorized Tagged With: cato institute, health care reform, health insurance exchange, obamacare

Now Let’s Shed A Tear For The Arkansas Health Insurance Exchange! But Not Really (Update!)

December 2, 2011 David Kinkade

And it came to pass that there would be no state-run Obamacare health insurance exchange in Arkansas, and there was much gnashing of teeth and rending of garments.

State Insurance Commissioner Jay Bradford issued a tear-stained news release today (PDF) announcing the death of the (unlamented) state exchange, the demise of which he attributes to “legislative opposition” (read: opposition from minority Republican lawmakers).

Oh, but if only Arkansas had had a Democratic governor in the statehouse and Democratic majority in the legislature, who might have forestalled this sad development by selling voters on the urgent need for a state-level health insurance exchange!

Oh, wait…riiiiight.

Anyway, this is the end of an era and now the federal government is going to run the health insurance exchange, maybe? Except that’s how it was going to be all along anyway, for all practical purposes, because the feds would be writing all the regulations and calling the shots, really, and no one could actually explain just what the difference between a state-level exchange and a federal exchange might be. And Arkansas can probably take over the exchange later, right? There is no bad news, etc.

Meanwhile, Arkansas Democrats are weeping crocodile tears, as they think this development gives them a bully club to use against GOP candidates in next year’s campaigns. That is something they seriously appear to believe, because apparently Arkansas voters care very deeply whether the Obamacare exchange is administered by the federal government or state government, yes? It is a known fact that the 2012 election will turn on this very question, and no other.

I have casually spoken to several GOP lawmakers, asking if they are worried about this devastating line of attack. I found that a small percentage are worried about that. I estimate it as somewhere in the neighborhood of zero percent are worried about that.

Cue inevitable lament from superannuated liberal newspaper columnist about how the politicization of this issue by Republican lawmakers is utterly unconscionable, while the politicization of this issue on the part of Gov. Mike Beebe is the very mark of a savvy master straddler. Normally John Brummett would write that piece, but a couple of months back he retreated behind the walls of Fort Hussman. No one’s heard from him since.

Oh, Max Brantley at the Arkansas Times is worked up over this, too, with his customary mix of subtlety and carefully considered insight. He attributes the Republican opposition to Obamacare to “racism,” because that is an explanation that makes sense. Go read his post and then call 911, because, seriously, I’m pretty sure he’s having an aneurysm.

UPDATE: More from The Tolbert Report, including responses from GOP Minority Leader Rep. John Burris and Lt. Gov. Mark Darr. Jason also gets a couple of rogue Democratic lawmakers, Rep. James McLean and Rep. Nate Steel, on the record talking trash about setting up the exchange.

So wait, does that mean opposing the health care exchange is the bipartisan position, and supporting it is now the rigid partisan position? Sounds about right, but don’t tell Democratic-lockstep blogger and noted ridiculous person Michael Cook.

State Health Insurance Exchange ‘Quashed’ (Talk Business)

Filed Under: Arkansas Democrats, Arkansas Legislature, Arkansas Politics, Arkansas Republicans, Gov. Mike Beebe, Health Care Reform, Uncategorized Tagged With: Gov. Mike Beebe, health care reform, health insurance, health insurance exchange, Mike Beebe, obamacare

Terrible State Licensing Law Hammers Contractors!

November 16, 2011 David Kinkade

I gotta tell you, the thing about state government is, you can’t let your guard down for a second, or they’ll go doing something else more or less outrageous.

Today’s entry: The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette’s Alison Sider reports on the ongoing state effort to force licensing on home remodeling contractors (subscription required). A law passed in this year’s legislative session, Act 1208, requires residential remodeling contractors working on projects that exceed $2,000 to be licensed by the Arkansas Contractors Licensing Board. Those who fail to acquire a license face heavy fines of up to $400 per day.

Act 1208 and its attendant rules and regulations have been pitched as consumer protection measures, which is typically a good clue that something unsavory is afoot—politicos and bureaucrats invoke “consumer protection” as a smokescreen to disguise all kinds of depredations.

Given the low threshold of $2,000, which would require contractors to pay additional fees for licensing or risk fines, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that a key aim of Act 1208 is to create an unnecessary barrier to entry, keeping small players out of the marketplace and restricting competition. In fact, I’m not “avoiding that conclusion” at all. That is completely and totally what my conclusion is. The fact that the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Bruce Cozart, a Hot Springs Republican, is himself a building contractor does not inspire further confidence.

Sen. Jonathan Dismang (R) has been a leading critic of the law, and he’s leading the charge to have it repealed. But fear not—the state board won’t be going to be checking up on contractors, they claim, but only responding to consumer complaints:

Greg Crow, the board’s administrator, said until the law’s future is more clear, the board will pursue complaints from consumers. But the board will not actively seek out unlicensed home remodelers.

The board pulled down rules it had proposed to implement the law in order to clarify its aims for the next year.

“What we’re going to put explicitly in our regulations is that all we’re going to be doing for the next year, or more than a year, until you all reconvene again, is to deal with educating the public on their responsibilities to hire good contractors,” Crow said at a meeting Monday of the rules subcommittee of the Legislative Council.

With five inspectors for commercial and residential contractors, Crow said, that was never the board’s intent.

“As far as doing random checks to see if someone has a license, I don’t know if we have the time or the forces to do that in the next year,” he said.

That’s fine, I guess, but I think the lawmakers who want to repeal (or at least revise) this misguided legislation are probably on the right track. While it’s kind of Crow to promise not to enforce the law too harshly, it’s preferable to rein in the board’s power to harass contractors.

But that won’t happen anytime soon. “At some point, we need to repeal this and send the money back” to those who have already paid the licensing fee, Dismang told me today. “Unfortunately, we’re not going to be able to do anything before it takes effect.”

The occupational licensing racket has been an occasional preoccupation around The Arkansas Project. Our own Dan Greenberg, back in the days when he was doing everything he could to make himself persona non grata in the state legislature, was profiled by Reason magazine in 2008 for his war against the Arkansas Interior Design Board.

To apply remodeling law lightly, license board says (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette)

Filed Under: Arkansas Legislature, State Government is Too Damn Big

Right to Record: Little Rock Case Affirms Need for Protecting Citizens’ Rights

November 9, 2011 Dan Greenberg

On October 29 in Little Rock, a disagreement between an off-duty cop and a civilian at the upscale Ferneau restaurant erupted into a full-scale brawl—and a few days later, a lawsuit. The victim alleges police brutality. Nobody who wasn’t at the restaurant could have any idea what actually happened—except that a spectator videotaped the incident. The victim’s attorney released the video, seen at the top of this post, on YouTube.

The video tells us something, but it certainly doesn’t tell us everything: we can’t know whether we’re seeing a policeman use reasonable force—or going too far.

The fact is that even a video camera may not capture the whole story. The video gives us one perspective and some information, but it certainly won’t tell us what happened before filming started. Maybe a picture is worth a thousand words, but some incidents take more than a thousand words to explain (check out the weirdly compelling comments section at the Arkansas Times post on this affair, which contains a multitude of Rashomon-like multiple perspectives).

However, one thing this incident underscores is the immense importance of protecting citizens who record law enforcement actions in public. Regrettably, we are seeing a nationwide wave of arrests of citizens for doing nothing more than exercising their First Amendment rights. As smartphones with cameras become cheaper and more pervasive, this issue will only grow more pressing.

Consider just a few recent examples: [Read more...]

Filed Under: Arkansas Legislature, Arkansas Media Tagged With: bullying, civil liberties, cyberbullying, Dan Greenberg, first amendment, free speech

Ex-Dem Congressman: I ‘Should Have Supported Voter ID’

October 24, 2011 David Kinkade

Former Democratic Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama says voter ID laws are important to ensure integrity in elections

Here is your required reading for this Monday afternoon: an op-ed column by Artur Davis, a former Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Alabama, admitting that he now wishes he had supported voter identification laws when he was in office.

Critics of such laws argue that requiring voters to show ID is akin to “suppression” of voting. Davis, writing in the Montgomery Adviser, argues that the objections are overstated. He looks at a voter ID law passed in Alabama in 2011 to explain that “demanding integrity in voting is neither racist, nor raw party politics.”

He also suggests that vote fraud is more widespread and consequential than many are willing to admit:

The truth is that the most aggressive contemporary voter suppression in the African American community, at least in Alabama, is the wholesale manufacture of ballots, at the polls and absentee, in parts of the Black Belt.

Voting the names of the dead, and the nonexistent, and the too-mentally-impaired to function, cancels out the votes of citizens who are exercising their rights — that’s suppression by any light. If you doubt it exists, I don’t; I’ve heard the peddlers of these ballots brag about it, I’ve been asked to provide the funds for it, and I am confident it has changed at least a few close local election results.

Arkansas Project contributor Dan Greenberg has done a lot of work on voter ID laws, including developing this handy paper for the Advance Arkansas Institute. Critical point: Dan finds evidence suggesting that, in some cases, voter participation has actually increased following implementation of voter ID laws.

In this year’s legislative session, Arkansas Rep. Bryan King heroically shepherded a voter ID law (HB 1797) through the state House of Representatives, only to have it crash upon the rocky shoals of some Senate committee, the name of which I cannot be bothered to look up.

Filed Under: Arkansas Legislature, Arkansas Politics Tagged With: Dan Greenberg, election reform, vote fraud, voter ID