Support for Arkansas Week provided by the Arkansas Democrat Gazette.

The Arkansas Times and Kuer FM 89.

And hello again everyone and thanks very much for joining us.

Party primaries are now less than a year distant and the campaigns for statewide office are already taking shape in a moment.

Will speak with one of the candidates who wants to succeed.

Our first guest in this edition.

And that would be the term limited governor ASA Hutchinson.

A former US attorney and leader of the US Drug Enforcement Administration, Mr Hutchinson, raised eyebrows earlier this week when he once again urged Congress to eliminate the disparities in sentencing for some drug offenses.

The pushback was predictable and immediate.

The governor joins us now, Sir, thanks very much as always for your time.

Let me begin with your testimony.

Your advocacy for an elimination in the disparity ban.

Of course, we're talking here about cocaine crack versus powder.

And the sentencing disparity between them.

You can take it from there.

Well, thank you Steve and this is an important issue for fairness in our criminal justice system.

And that's what it's all about.

An I've been supporting for 20 years that we treat crack cocaine and powder cocaine.

The same for sentencing purposes.

'cause they are the same substance but crack cocaine.

Defendants are largely African American and you have powder cocaine that's largely white Americans as defendants.

And so whenever Congress back in 1986, tried to toughen up on what was exploding as a crack cocaine epidemic, they created a 100 to one disparity.

In other words, if you have the.

You know an amount of crack cocaine you could be getting a mandatory minimum of five or ten years.

That's triggered because of a very small amount.

You have to have 100 times that amount of powder cocaine to trigger the same sentence.

And of course this disproportionately impacted African Americans.

And the greatest problem is it doesn't seem to be fair.

I was grateful that Congress in 2010 reduced that disparity down too.

18 to one.

But now we have the EQUAL Act that's in Congress, and I advocated that it's past that will eliminate that unfairness, and so that both sentence is would be the same and aligned the same, because they are the same substance.

That's the essence of it.

It's about fairness in the law.

It's about equal treatment and making sure that we're making sense in our criminal justice system.

And people have confidence in it that is fair.

You you seem to express the concern that the appearance of fairness was every bit as important a faith confidence in the criminal justice system was every bit as important as the.

As the sentences themselves as the offense themselves.

Whatever remedial action was taken on the offenses.

Well, I mean, that's true.

If people are going to cooperate with law enforcement, have confidence in our criminal justice system, then they have to have the sense that it's fair.

And first of all, there's substantively the argument that this makes the system fair.

There's equal treatment for the same chemical substance, and then, but as I said, it's not perceived as fair, and the perception of fairness is equally important, and so there's a lot of distrust.

In minority communities, the criminal justice system for unfairness and disproportionate impact on situations like this.

This is easy to remedy.

It is the right thing to do, and I think there's a good chance that we can get it passed.

I've made my case to conservative audiences.

I've heard some criticism, but this is the logical is the right thing to do.

It supports law enforcement and by and most importantly, to support our criminal justice system with some of the critics of the proposal.

Governor, including some within your own party, as you noted, and indeed some within your own state have said the real remedy here is to toughen the penalty on powder cocaine cocaine rather than lower it on crack cocaine.

What is your response?

These are.

These are pretty hard and criminals are there not.

Well, it depends on the circumstances.

Not always what we've seen is that some are peripherally involved because there's a small amount of crack cocaine that they get hit with a mandatory minimum there five years or 10 years in prison.

And so, yeah, people can get caught up within this now.

The key thing is that there there historically has been more violence associated with crack cocaine versus powder cocaine, but that can be taken care of and allowed.

4 by the sentencing grid in federal court that says if you've got a criminal record, the judge can sentence you to a longer period of prisonment.

If you have a firearm with you and you have a record of violence, there's victims involved.

All of those factors can be considered, but the problem is that it's unreliable just simply to take into consideration the quantity and right now it's a small amount of quantity in and of itself that triggers these mandatory minimums that even the judges do not have any.

Ability to change and so there's a lot of area of agreement.

Let's focus on fentanyl.

Let's focus on some of the drugs that are really creating the biggest challenge, and I'm former head of the DEA.

I'm not giving any slack to a crack cocaine or powder cocaine user, but let's be fair about it and provide equal treatment, and I think that's the right approach.

We have watched a governor over the past decade, American attitudes and I and presumably in Arkansas as well.

Witness, the polls witnessed the and I'm talking about the.

Election return a.

A lessening in criticism of marijuana.

A greater acceptance, I guess, of recr.

General and certainly medicinal marijuana Connecticut.

Earlier this week I think became the latest state to legalize recreational use.

Although it still remains, I think, a federal offense to possess and smoke the stuff is a broader assessment reassessment of US drug policy in order.

Where are US drug policy is in shambles right now?

Quite frankly, in particularly whenever it comes to marijuana, because it's still a violation of federal law to use marijuana for medicinal purposes or or for recreational purposes.

I think medicinal purposes have been carved out, but right now you have multiple states legalizing recreational possession and use of marijuana, and it's still a violation of federal law.

And so until the federal government is consistent in its enforcement action or it's in policy, it's going to continue to be in disarray in terms of marijuana.

Certainly there's always room for debate, but the inconsistency, the lack of federal guidance on this really leaves very difficult for local law enforcement.

And for governors like myself, to make sense of the federal law.

Do we need a debate on it?

I think it's fair to debate all the time.

I believe that you, the most important debate is the incarceration policy, but in terms of legal versus illegal, I don't like that debate.

I believe that these substances are harmful and should remain illegal even though we can look at the best incarceration policy or punishment or drug treatment courts to help with those that simply have addiction problems.

That was my next question, Sir, that is the focus to use or should it shift more from.

Enforcement to treatment.

You know they really work together.

You can't have treatment programs without enforcement of the law, because what drives people into treatment programs.

Well, it's usually an arrest confronting law enforcement officer that arrest you for possession or for dealing or burglary that support that have to be done for support your habit.

And so that's what triggers someone in many instances going into treatment voluntarily.

Or going into a drug treatment court.

And if you do away with the enforcement side, then you're just simply going to raise use.

You're going to raise addiction, and you're not going to be providing the solution of the treatment counseling to help them to overcome this over the past weeks.

In the past several days, Sir, as well, the Affordable Care Act was sustained by the US Supreme Court.

I think the third attempt to strike it down is will that be the last one in your estimation?

Is the Affordable Care Act now a part of the American?

Social fabric.

I believe it is.

Whenever the Supreme Court ruled on it, even though they ruled on a procedural basis and not on the substantive issue.

The fact that they have overwhelming majority affirmed the Affordable Care Act and dismissed the challenge to it.

I think that's pretty well going to end the legal challenges.

It's going to be hard to get this spring court on another challenge, and it's, you know, the Supreme Court.

Reads the newspapers they know we're in a pandemic.

They know that the Affordable Care Act in many parts of it has been ingrained into our healthcare system, so perhaps all of those were factors in them declining to rule on the real substantive, constitutional challenge.

But regardless, from an Arkansas standpoint, we've got a job to do.

We have our Medicaid expansion in place.

We've got a waiver request before the Biden administration.

That's really important to strengthen our treatment.

Programs are mental health counseling and the accessibility of our health care to low income residents that have never had it before, so we want to make it work.

We want to have good outcomes.

We want to make sure that they are accountable for it and that we can put some elements of responsibility with that provision of health care.

And finally, Sir, about that pandemic, it seems to be unfolding that in terms of increased hospitalizations and the severity, the gravity of the conditions themselves.

Seems to be unfolding exactly the way the experts had feared.

Given the low vaccination rate, I assume that you're not surprised by this, but do you plan any sort of administrative action?

You know, we've done everything we can.

We early on had a shortage of supply of vaccines.

Now we've got an abundance of supply, so the accessibility of vaccines that work is done.

We've done our education programs.

It's available.

We've got the programs out there, and so it's up to each individual citizen to take the vaccine to increase our coverage across the state.

And so we're going to continue to push this.

We're going to make sure that we educate.

We're going to make sure we work with employers.

In every way we can to encourage people to get vaccines, and I think you know Arkansans have human nature and so they postpone getting a vaccine whenever they see the risks that are low.

As you see the risk increase.

I expect the vaccination rates to go back up.

Hopefully we can balance this so they get vaccinated before we get into really high caseload and increased hospitalizations.

An even more deaths.

And that's the sad part of it, Steve.

When I see the statistics in their real lives of someone dying, go in the hospital, going on a respirator and the fact that they could have just simply gotten a vaccine and avoided that.

That's heartbreaking, Sir.

We've got about 30 seconds remaining.

Much of the resistance seemed to be in rural Arkansas.

Are you satisfied with the with the administration's outreach there its programs?

I am an if we could do more, will do more, but we have influencers.

We've got people that are real communities identify with we're using every different means of advertising and then it's not just that but it's our our pharmacies in our health care providers that are marketing themselves and saying the vaccines available.

There's just simply more resistance in Rule areas of our state and country.

Part of it is there they have more room and space and they don't think they're going to get it.

And they we have this variant now that Baxter County is a good example.

Our cases went up in Baxter County.

Part of the problem is our connections with Missouri and the interaction there.

That's impacted us.

But I rule areas have this variant and we've got to really concentrate there to get vaccinated as well.

Governor as always, we thank you for your time.

Thanks for coming in and come back soon.

Alright, thank you Steve.

And we'll be right back.

We're back, he's a Democrat with degrees in math and physics.

A doctorate in urban affairs, and he has more than a passing interest in the divinity.

He's a Pine Bluff native, married to a physician and he wants to be governor.

His campaign rollout included a video presentation that want attention in political circles across the country.

He's here now joining us Doctor Chris Jones.

Thanks very much, Sir, for coming in and making yourself available.

Thanks for having me.

Why do you want to be governor?

Why should you be governor?

Well, thanks for having me again.

I love my state.

My family goes back over 200 years here and I believe that all that was given me and growing up.

Is something that every child every family deserves in the state.

So I want to be governor to make a difference.

To help address some of the issues that we're facing right now.

Infrastructure, education, economic development and really to apply the gifts, skills and talents that I have and for myself.

And that I have connections to to the opportunities and challenges that we face here in first right?

Well, let's take those issues infrastructure.

Do you have a program?

Will let me let me?

Frame it like this, 'cause this is sort of week one of a 18 month job job interview.

What I know is that we're faced with challenges from rural broadband.

Two bridges to roads to Aqua force.

What I don't know is when I get out into communities like Rosebud or Pine Bluff, what really resonates?

So over the next 18 months, I'm going to listen to see how what resonates on the ground aligns with what I believe are the things that we need to focus on resonates with with Arkansans, because it's one thing for I've been out over the last few years with the Arkansas Regional Innovation Hub.

We've been in communities across the state, so I have a sense.

But one thing I know by being a physicist is that there's a whole lot more that I don't know.

Then what I do know, and so I'm starting by listening first.

So ask me again in 18 months and I can tell you education.

I ran track growing up and one of the things about running track is that.

The start is so important, so if you get out of the starting blocks, right?

Then you have a chance at winning.

In education, I think we have to set our kids up to get out of starting box right?

That's pre K it's third grade reading level and from there we have to provide options.

So clearly I love higher education.

My PhD is in urban planning 5 degrees, but also know what matters more is options.

So through the innovation hub we had the skills to launch program where we trained 18 to 24 year olds on roofing, welding, HVAC.

They will also begin to do coding and we want to give you thin Arkansas options.

Well, you say from their meeting pre K we have not met.

The state has traditionally not been especially lavish in its allocation of resources to the very youngest.

And there's been some as matter fact there has been some opposition to that, so I'm typically toward that nanny state approach your response.

Well, I don't believe in any state approach.

I mean if you if you listen to schools and teachers and families if you look at the data, what you see is that.

Kids that have had an opportunity early on.

On a trajectory for success.

So what we're finding what I'm hearing and what I believe will continue to hear, is that that's what folks at the local level 1.

I don't see it as a nanny state.

If you have value, well, let's stay with with with with, with K12 for just a second, you as a parent have chosen to.

I think one of your three children is in a charter school or private school and two others in public schools.

So you have a foot in both worlds there.

How does that affect your?

View of private public to include charter schools.

Yeah, I think it actually gives me an interesting view into what life is like on the inside of each of these types of schools.

It also gives me some humility as we seek solutions across the board.

There is no one silver bullet that fits all that that solves all.

So when I do have one child in private school, I have two children in public school.

I was raised in the public school and proud graduate of Boston Chapel Wildcats, and so I know the value of public school.

I know and I it's important for us to provide options.

So that our families will be able to again get out of the starting box right?

And run the race that they need to run to be successful our charters.

A valid option.

You know, I don't see anything as off the table.

I think part of our challenge is that we have pitted one type of school against another, I understand, so there are different types of charters and one of the things that we have to do is as we're having these conversations really level set on what are we really talking about there in district charters that are similar to public school there out of district charters and there's a rich conversation around that.

I think what we have to do is at the local level, begin to ask the question of what's going to work at the local level.

You don't see charters as inherently a threat to.

Public schools I don't see charters as inherently a threat to public schools.

No.

Talk about higher education.

You valued it.

Your product, you have a superb by any index, you have superb education.

The cost of higher education in Arkansas continues to rise.

What do you have a solution?

Do you have an antidote?

To the cost of higher tuition fees.

So again, this is the start of an interview process.

I'm not at a point where I'm rolling out specific plans, I'm just introducing myself, I do.

Agree that the cost of higher education is spiraling out of control and it has been for awhile.

It's not just in Arkansas and other places as well.

I think there are a number of ways to address it, but I can't tell you today what is going to work in Jonesboro or Southeast Arkansas or Northwest Arkansas.

Until I've had additional conversations.

Well, statewide, the problem would seem to be the just this simple affordability of it with with with static state of essentially static state appropriations.

Well again, there are a number of factors that go into this, right?

I mean, we can.

We can have a I think it's worth having a rich conversation about what are the factors that are.

Actually driving the cost up.

And how does that fit into the context of today?

So I'm not going to sit here right now and tell you we need to do ABC XYZ, But what I will say is that my approach is to fully understand the dynamics on the ground as they exist in in the time and then from there identify the solution that works.

What are the factors in your estimation?

If you identify those that are driving?

Higher education alcosta.

So there I think there are a number of factors and you know I'm not.

I have not identified all the factors.

What I do know is that you know there are some inherent things in the way we educate the cost of facilities.

The cost of.

Of those workforce goes up and higher, the administrative costs associated with it.

The cost of the need from students the student need is going up, so I think there are a number of factors that go into play.

You are would seek to succeed.

Or are you seek to succeed?

Yeah and governor who has but well isn't that in fact to a series of governors?

Have reduced the general revenue Pine Arkansas through sequential tax reductions of one form or another income sales tax.

Other levies.

Would you be in order to get your program passed?

To take the state where you want to take it, can you do that without a tax increase?

I can't say right now.

You know I'm gonna always be honest and transparent with you.

To be it to say that I will not raise taxes or will not lower taxes at this point 18 months before our Kansas have even had a chance to cast a vote.

I believe is shortsighted.

It's untruthful.

I think I am not opposed to tax cuts at all.

In fact, you know I think they're good.

I'm not what I am opposed to, is not investing in.

The things that we know work for.

Supporting Arkansans and creating opportunities for Arkansans.

Where would your what approach would you take?

We are back again.

We have.

The state has collectively sort of taken its eye off the teen pregnancy problem, which has long bedeviled Arkansas.

Do you have?

How would you approach that?

You see that as an issue.

I do see it as an issue.

I think it impacts communities.

It impacts families.

And it's an economic issue as well.

And there are a number of solutions that work in that space.

Part of it is, and again, I'm not claiming to have the silver bullet answer.

However, we do know that when you have access to greater economic opportunities, jobs and the like, then that tends to be a driver of driving teen pregnancy down.

So.

I think I would say.

That as we look at the problem.

One of the.

Challenge is actually let me let me say that differently.

While I agree that it is an enormous challenge.

It impacts things outside of the core family.

I cannot sit here today and tell you again I'm starting the interview process.

I can't tell you exactly what's going to work here in Arkansas yet.

But of the course of 18 months will.

Will seek the solutions.

This is by any index a red state pockets of blue in it, but it's a red state witness the fact that Mr. Trump carried Arkansas, he did last year by a larger margin than he did four years previously.

How?

What is the democratic message?

What is the path forward for your party?

Well, not only for you, but for your party.

Well, I would push back a little bit on this being a red state.

I mean we have our elected officials.

Are Republicans?

We're 50th in voter registration and 50th in voter turn out.

Some 10 years ago.

Our elected officials were blue.

One of our message is we want to engage those who have stepped out of the process.

Or who have never entered in the process who were not in the game at all.

Because we have to expand the electorate.

In order to make sure their voices are at the table.

And that has to happen not only at the top of the ticket, but up and down the ticket.

There are folks who are not in the process who need to be in the process, and we believe that that's going to make the difference.

Mr. Jones, thanks for coming in.

Thanks for giving us your time.

Thanks a lot.

Will continue to follow the campaign and will see here again.

We hope we hope so.

Appreciate it.

I'll be back.

Thanks for joining us.

See you next time.

Support for Arkansas Week provided by the Arkansas Democrat Gazette.

The Arkansas Times and CRF M89.