Support for Arkansas Week provided

by the Arkansas Democrat Gazette,

The Arkansas Times and

KUARFM 89.

Hello again everyone,

and thanks very much for being with us.

Her administration is 2 weeks old now,

and the major pieces of Governor Sarah

Huckabee Sanders legislative program,

reshaping education,

reworking the criminal justice system,

revising the tax code,

they're still essentially conceptual.

That doesn't mean Miss Sanders can't

continue to campaign for them,

education in particular.

At one point this week,

she appeared before a sort of pep rally of

students from non traditional classrooms.

Alright, so here we go.

We're gonna do 123.

We're going to give a big

woo and wave your scarf.

Here we go, 123.

We're focusing on the

Arkansas learns initiative.

We will be rolling out legislation on

that initiative here in the coming weeks,

but it's something I talked a

lot about during the campaign.

The Arkansas learns initiative focuses

on a handful of key areas literacy.

We have to make sure that we

are putting a better foundation

underneath our students so that

they have a pathway to success.

Right now, our system is failing

too many of our students and

it's simply unacceptable.

At the end of the day,

we have to make sure that we are

never trapping students in a

lifetime of poverty and that we are

not sentencing them to a lifetime.

Of poverty because of where they live.

Or how much money their parents make,

what zip code they're in.

We will not trap students in failing

schools in this state any longer.

We will give parents the right to

choose the best path for their child.

Yeah,

in a few moments more on the new

administration and these first

days of the legislative session

from 3 reporters on the Capitol B.

First, though,

a couple of lawmakers with close ties

to the Sanders administration and

who are helping shape its program,

representative Jimmy Gazaway of Paragould.

And Senator Ben Gilmore of Cross

and gentlemen,

thanks very much for coming in.

You are deeply involved in another issue,

but we use that sound bite up top.

There was a bit of method to our madness.

There is going to be a great deal

of competition for dollars in

all this is in this session,

but that budget surplus is sitting

there like a Thanksgiving Turkey.

And a lot of people are going

to want a piece of it,

and Miss Sanders has some plans for it, too.

When are we going to see a program?

An education program.

When are we gonna get to take a look at that?

Do you have some insights that you share, Mr.

Gassaway?

So my understanding is that the

education bill is in the works.

My understanding is that they're

meeting with all the stakeholders.

And trying to come to some consensus there,

I I think it's being drafted at the Bureau.

And so once the language is prepared,

hopefully within the next couple

of weeks we'll see something.

But as you know,

Senator Gilmore and I have been more

focused on the criminal justice legislation.

And so,

you know,

there are other folks who probably

have greater insight to that

than than I do with Mr.

Gilmore before we go to criminal justice,

even the parameters of it.

Could you give us a clue?

Well,

look,

I I think the governor's made very clear,

Steve,

where where her focus is with education

and to representative gasaway's point

that's still being worked through.

I'd be hesitant to to speculate

on what all's going to be in that

package because I haven't seen

the the education package yet.

I know they're working through

it with stakeholders.

I trust they're being

very thorough with that.

So look forward to seeing

it in the coming weeks.

One more question on that,

both of you represent districts

that are parts of this.

State that has substantial numbers

of of rural districts or you're

close to rural districts anyway.

What is do you are you picking up

some suspicion or some apprehension

among your Superintendent,

school boards, teachers,

faculty about about what

the governor intends to do?

Certainly they're they're following

very closely and I actually was talking

to a Superintendent this morning.

I was talking to one last night even.

And they certainly have their

priorities they're focused on there's

things they want to see in this bill.

They don't want to get hurt.

They well of of course they always

want to try to make sure that that

whatever comes this doesn't have

any sort of unintended consequences.

And I think again from what I'm hearing

I'm not on the education committee,

so I would I would defer to those who are.

But what I'm hearing is they're being

very intentional and very thorough in

trying to vet out a lot of those policy.

Mr.

Caswell,

I'll give you the final word on that

before we go to something else.

So obviously I mean I think

superintendents of any public school.

District have a important role

to play in this discussion.

My understanding is that the

administration has been very intentional

about keeping them informed and

involved in that discussion in my

district at Greene County Tech

and Paragould School District 2,

fairly large public school districts.

And so my understanding is that

they're attuned to what's going on

and involved in those discussions.

So on the criminal justice,

your specialties if you will,

one thing that seems obvious about the

governor's program or any other program.

It's pending before the General Assembly

that is going to get serious consideration,

and that is that the state is getting

ready to have to spend a great deal

more money than it is now on the

criminal justice and the correctional system.

Mr.

Gazaway, how much more?

Well,

I think that remains to be seen.

I mean if it's like with any

other piece of legislation what

can you build consensus around?

I think that's, you know,

kind of where we are,

we have to weigh,

you know,

what we need in terms of criminal

justice reform in light of the money

that may be spent on education,

the money that may be spent on

other priorities that exist.

And so, you know,

I don't know exactly what

we're willing to devote.

Those are the ongoing discussions

that we're having that's,

you know, people ask sometimes why,

why haven't we seen a bill yet,

you know, what are we waiting on?

Well?

Part of it is,

you know,

we have to determine among our

priorities how much can we devote

to criminal justice in light of what

we're devoting to other priorities.

So I can't give you a number right now.

I mean, I I expect that it

will be several $100 million.

But you know, again, ultimately that'll

be what we can build consensus on.

Well, building consensus is

inevitably going to come down

to building space for more beds.

We've got 500 coming at Calico Rock.

ADC is looking for a place

to build another thousand.

How many more beyond that would do you

gentlemen have a a figure in mind?

What's likely to emerge?

Yeah, there's a there's a lot of

figures that have been thrown out.

We we do know that there's

a capacity issue right.

And we understand that there is an

issue with the backup in our county

facilities that needs to be addressed.

I would like to touch real quick

on the question that you asked

Representative Gazaway and that

is the cost and and I would.

I would argue back what's the cost if

we don't spend the money that's needed

to address the acute crisis violent

crime that's sweeping our state.

And so I think we have to be very

intentional when we're looking at that

that we that we consider the the,

the negative externalities of

not addressing our,

our county backup issue of not locking

away violent offenders where they need to be.

And that's in prison away from from

our communities and our families

that that we want to keep safe.

So I think.

All of that has to be factored into

the equation of what is the cost Mr.

Gasway well so realistically and to

follow on Senator Gilmore's point,

look,

we have about 2000 people who are in

county jails who are awaiting a bed

in the ADC that we simply don't have.

So if you look at eliminating

that backlog alone,

you're talking about 2000 folks,

then you're going to have natural

growth that's going to occur.

Of course,

we have a consultant who you know has

projects kind of what the natural

growth will be among the prison population.

So you have that to account

for and then we're looking at.

You know,

reforming our broken parole

system because we have a broken

parole system in this state.

We're not keeping the people,

the violent offenders who we

need to be keeping in prison.

People are only serving

a fraction of their time.

And so if we reform our broken

parole system then that also adds,

you know, to the capacity issue.

So, you know,

realistically I would say a minimum

of 3000 beds could be as many as five.

I think you heard Lieutenant,

sorry Attorney General Griffin say

that the other day an interview,

possibly even up to 5000 beds

is the need we are spending.

If I have the numbers of the

last time I checked anyway,

I think for the current FY

we're doing a between.

More than $600 million, I think,

for correct community corrections and

for the Department of Correction.

We're edging toward a billion dollars.

Are we now?

Well look again, not edging.

We're taking big steps toward it.

Well look again, it,

it is expensive, right,

but it's very expensive to

keep our community safe,

which I think is should be

our number one priority.

I think also we have to look at the fact

that it's a little bit inconsiderate

and and disrespectful to law enforcement

if we don't address these problems and

make them go back and catch the same

people over and over and over again.

So there's there's those things

that have to weigh into that.

Equation of the cost but to representative

gasaway's point we have things that

we have to fix within the system.

The parole system is broken.

We have a revolving door.

Anybody within the corrections system

can tell you that and and so if we if

we don't fix that the costs are going

to continue to edge up and so we and

when I say edge up vastly more so than

what we're dealing with now we had we

seem always gentlemen to have a backlog.

With the county and well at the

county level of anywhere from

1000 to to 2000 as you mentioned,

are we doing something wrong and yet

we keep building this or have over the

years are we doing something wrong?

Well, I think the issue is,

is that it really has been ignored

for for several decades.

Yes, we've built beds in terms

of community corrections,

which are for nonviolent offenders.

But if you listen to the folks

at the Department of Corrections,

Solomon Graves,

for instance,

testified in a in a recent hearing

last year that the what's driving

the prison population or seriousness

level 8-9 and 10 offenses,

these are violent offenses.

These are the sexual offenses and

the type of beds that we need.

And this is again Secretary Graves last year.

Our maximum security beds,

the types of prison facilities that we have,

the communal housing and that sort of

thing doesn't address the need that

we have in our state for more maximum

security beds for the violent offenders.

And so I think that's what we're looking at,

why we need to build more beds is to

address those particular types of offenders.

Could this be addressed at to what

extent could this be the situation be

addressed by changes to the sentencing grid?

Is that under consideration?

To what extent is that under consideration?

Well?

Look, the what I think we have to address,

first of all,

we have to address the capacity issue.

And with that we have to find a way to

keep the repeat violent offender locked away.

And I don't think there has to be a ton of

changes to the sentencing grid to do that.

I think that what we need

to do is we need to,

we need to see some truth and sentencing.

We need people to understand that when

they commit a violent crime in the

state of Arkansas that it's going,

they're going to be in prison for

serious time and they're going

to do almost all of that.

Time.

I don't think that's too much to ask for.

When someone is committing a serious,

heinous crime,

they need to do serious time with that.

Mr. Gatsby, you're a former prosecutor.

Go ahead, I'll give you.

We've got a little bit less

than a minute remaining.

You've got it. Well, you know,

want to make something very clear.

I think the purpose of our legislation is,

look, no one wants to imprison nonviolent

offenders or drug addicts like that is

not the purpose of this legislation.

What we have to do is make sure that

we keep our communities safe by having

sufficient capacity to incapacitate

or lock up those violent offenders

who are praying on our communities and

that sexual predators child sexual.

Offenders, we have to have sufficient

capacity to address those issues.

But in terms of the nonviolent offenders,

look, I don't think that it serves

communities, that it serves families,

that it serves the taxpayer to keep

people locked up who are nonviolent,

who may just be drug addicts.

You know,

the the purpose there would be

to divert them from ever entering

the prison population.

And the focus there should

be on rehabilitation.

And so that's what we're seeking to do

with this legislation. Got into there.

Gentlemen, thanks very much.

Representative gasaway.

Senator Gilmore,

thank you very much for coming in.

Please come back.

We'll do it hopefully as soon as

the legislation is cooked. Sure.

Sounds good. We'll be right back.

Back now with more on the session from 3

pairs of eyes watching it fairly closely.

Andrew de Millo, Capital Bureau chief

of The Associated Press, Steve Bronner,

independent journalist and Josie Lenora,

politics and government reporter from

KUAR Public Radio in Central Arkansas.

Thanks to everybody for coming in.

Andrew, we'll bring you in from afar.

We're two weeks into the administration now,

two weeks into the session,

and everything is still pretty thematic.

We don't know what we don't know really

about the administration's program.

Yeah, that's that's correct. Yeah.

We're kind of in a holding pattern.

Everyone heading into the session

had said the three big issues

were going to be education,

criminal justice and tax cuts.

And we have yet to see pieces of

legislation on any of those 3 topics.

Obviously,

tax cuts is something we're expecting

to come at the tail end of the session.

But, you know, education reform,

which is the issue that Governor

Sanders has said is her priority,

you know, we're still, you know,

possibly a couple weeks away

from seeing legislation.

On that,

we know she's talked in kind of broad

strokes about what she wants to do.

There's going to be some element

of school choice in there.

There's going to be some some kind of

teacher raised in there as stuff dealing

with literacy literacy programs as well, too.

But a lot of the specifics and a lot of

the numbers we still don't know about,

and that's kind of keeping legislators in a

holding pattern on a lot of the other issues.

Right now.

Well, we may not have the

specifics on criminal justice,

but we do know some of the

numbers that at at a bare minimum,

we know.

Guys,

we're getting ready to spend a lot more

money on the Department of Correction.

Josie.

Yeah the Lieutenant governor Tim

Griffin has talked about how he wants

to increase sentences for those who

have been convicted of violent crime so

that people wouldn't would spend more

time in prison for their sentencing.

But again that's kind of all

we know right now.

It's going to cost money though in

addition to capital expenditures

which we're getting seem imminent.

Steve M&O on those prisons is going

to go up and you know once you have

a prison you kind of got to fill it,

but that's not going to be a

problem right now.

There's,

there's attorney General Griffin has said,

yeah,

basically our prisons are full and they're

running over into the county jails,

which are also full.

So we're kind of in a crisis situation.

So even if legislators might have different

ideas about how you need to address crime,

reduce the population,

at this point,

you've got to do something.

You've got it.

And so there we have a surplus,

we have a need.

So we're going to build some

prisons and you build a prison

and you pay for it over and over

and over again because you use

it. You know, we have a surplus right now.

Right now we have a surplus in the future.

But again, you know,

as as General Griffin has pointed out.

You know, the bad guys are getting

let out really early and the

ones in misdemeanor offenses,

offenders aren't even going to jail at

all because they're just is no space.

So we are building a prison.

Yeah. Andrew Demello on back to

education for just a second.

It's, it's always been implied

I think in earlier discussion

during the campaign anyway,

that parochial schools might well in

Arkansas pick up some public dollars.

The administration,

the governor is now using the word openly.

Which?

Surprised there's a little people

are surprised at people a little.

Not a whole lot, maybe, but a little anyway.

Yeah and and that's still that's

one of the areas that we're still

you know waiting details on.

She's talked you know just

generally about school choice.

You know I think the term that she's used

is a parental empowerment but we don't

really know what exactly does that mean.

You know is that going to be

a straight up voucher program?

Are we talking scholarships,

are we talking some kind of savings accounts?

You know there's different forms that

this that this could take and that's

going to be you know the details we're

we're waiting to see and one of the

issues that's going to come up on that is.

How do they deal with potential

potentially some opposition from some

rural Republicans to to a school,

a school choice element of this legislation?

Obviously you're not going to get

support from Democrats who have

actually presented their own education

legislation this week,

kind of,

you know,

taking advantage of the fact that

there's this vacuum right now on

details on the education legislation.

But, you know,

is this something where they can still get?

Through some some resistance that they

may face within their own party on it.

Yeah.

Josie,

do we know,

do we have a sense yet of

how much resistance the.

I was at her school choice rally

this week where she had all the

children chant students, not systems.

And she sort of regurgitated these lines.

She likes like no child should be caught

in a failing education system because

of the size of their bank account.

A lot of Democrats don't love,

you know,

things like a school voucher program

because it takes money from public schools

and funnels it into private schools.

And there's also a lot of backlash

about those schools don't

necessarily have to be accredited.

So this week.

Senator Wooster from BBC representative

Wooster from B put forth two bills.

One that would make it so that your has

to be public transportation to private

schools that receive public dollars,

and another one that would make

it so these schools have to face

certain accreditation requirements,

some monitoring anyway,

state monitoring of private school.

Steve, yeah, I think well,

the the fact that we haven't seen

the bill yet is pretty good evidence

that there's a lot of pushback.

If there was unanimous agreement,

then we would have already seen it

at this point, even though this is

going to be a pretty massive change.

So I think that we can gather that.

As you said, Representative Wooten,

he's a Republican and yet he is,

you know, he's basically by

following those two bills was making

the argument against vouchers,

which is that private schools

have not had to do the same things

that that public schools do,

which is educate everybody,

transport them, educate the hard students,

not be exclusive.

All those what that's what he was doing.

That's that argument.

That's what we'll see and and

that's why that's why we haven't

seen the bill yet and this is.

Not a new position from these for Mr.

Wooten.

He has argued in Sessions previous

that any encroachment on the public

school fund is is inevitable.

Any expansion anyway of vouchers

is inevitably, in his estimation,

going to damage the public school fund.

And there are Republicans across the

state who are going to agree with that.

So we'll we'll see.

This is going to be the big issue.

Look,

we had a governor elected with

63% of the vote.

As she is is our first term,

it is unthinkable that that she's going

to lose completely on this issue.

She will get a big part of what she wants.

It just as depends on on on what

is proposed and what is what what

the what the debate boils down to.

But we're going to have something

pretty significant because it's

her signature issue and she cannot

fail and they won't let her fail.

Well, chemically speaking,

ideologically speaking, Josie,

it would seem to be a General Assembly

that is rather in tune with the governor.

She hasn't done any.

I can't recall her saying

anything in the two.

We are related for that matter during

the campaign that would put her

substantially at odds with with the

Republican majority in either chamber.

I haven't seen a lot of pushback

to any of her policies.

And within that education bill,

she's talked a lot about raising

teacher salaries and then having

a more of a phonics curriculum as

opposed to whole reading curriculum.

And I haven't seen any pushback or any

disagree with some of those policies.

Andrew, as Steve mentioned,

just second ago there was a

Democrat or one of our panelists

mentioned there was a democratic

alternative or a democratic bill

for for teacher pay introduced.

This week,

I would I would put my money on

whatever the administration proposes.

Yeah, I I think so.

You know,

this is something though signed on by all

the Democrats in the House and Senate.

But you know, this is a predominantly

Republican legislature.

And yeah,

I don't,

I don't really know that this

is going to get get that far.

But they're at least, you know,

taking advantage of the fact that

there there's an opportunity to at

least put attention on their proposal

and on their issues right now.

But I think the focus is going to be on

whatever the teacher raise element is in

her legislation and also the other big.

Question is, is there going to be

some kind of merit pay or performance

incentives type plan in this legislation?

Yeah. One of the things that strike

just two weeks into the session and

that is the sharp and predictable at it.

At one level Josie, that Steve,

that's the sharp ideological divide

now between the parties.

You have a super majority Republican

super majorities in both Chambers but

there seems to be a great cohesion

on on the part of both.

Democrats just don't have muscle to do much.

Steve. Josie. Well, you know you there's.

Basically 80% of the of the

legislature is Republican.

All the constitutional

officers are Republican.

This is a Republican state.

So you know we're Democrats have some

leverage as it's if if they're they

can you know form coalitions with

enough Republicans who will be opposed

to certain elements of of what the

governor is trying to do and then

they can sneak some things through.

You know that representative flowers

has an interesting bill that would

allow felons to to regain their

ability to have a have a have a,

have a gun.

And that's a kind of a interesting

pro gun legislation by a Democrat

and it's and it's probably it's

got a good chance to going through.

So that's how a a Democrat can get

something through if they play

their cards right pick the right

issue get the right allies and and

and do what they need to do that.

It can it can happen and in that

case it probably will.

My conversations with the Democrats and

all the interviews I've seen with them,

they do kind of fall back on this rhetoric.

We're going to focus on what

unites us and what not divides us.

We're gonna focus on issues that

we can all agree on.

Which is why I think even in this,

within this education debate,

they keep talking about teacher

pay and phonics and things that

you have wide support.

Keep in mind also that while Republicans

might appear to be unified at,

you know,

on the surface at times there is

going to be some pretty major

differences issue by issue and overall.

And so in some ways it would be

easier for them if there were 67

instead of over 80 in the house.

And you know that that major

majority almost makes things more

complicated for them at times.

There does seem to the the executive

and the legislative is certainly the

legislative majority seem to be in

lockstep on this Andrew de Millo and that's.

A at times not so gentle

repudiation of of Miss

Sanders Republican predecessor.

Yeah, that's that, that's true.

Yeah. I think we're seeing,

you know, some of the pushback

that you saw in the front.

You know, the final years of

Governor Hutchinson's administration

from fellow Republicans,

I think has boiled over

even to this session now,

which we've seen with us some of his,

some of his appointments

being that being rejected.

And, you know,

we're also seeing that with the

Governor Sanders rolling back some

of his positions and some of his

initiatives she had dissolved,

some of his panels that he had

formed addressed, addressing COVID.

She's reversed.

This position opposing a,

you know,

opposing a judge's ruling that

struck down the ban on mask

mandates by government entities.

So yeah, I think this is kind of,

you know, an indication that she's

going in another direction and also,

you know,

the legislature kind of indicating,

you know,

still indicating some of their

displeasure with some of his stances.

Yeah,

it's a General Assembly that's

moving and an administration

that's moving to the right.

Well,

I mean the Republican Party has

moved to the right that the

cultures become more split.

And then also keep in mind too,

I mean Governor Hudson was

there for eight years.

You had the whole COVID thing which was

which was divisive for a lot of people.

Not necessarily what he did.

I'm just saying that that

was a divisive time.

He was part of it.

And then he was there for

eight years probably.

And governor Sanders is 8 years incumbent,

15 year.

There will be issues with her from

some people if she stays that long.

Josie, what are we looking for in the next?

Five days?

What are we looking for the next 5 days?

I'm interested to see make it 6 do

get the education ability time soon,

but I haven't seen any indicators.

Do we have any kind of timeline at all,

any signals at all?

Steve,

from the administration to Speaker

Shepherd and Governor Sanders were

talking about a couple of weeks,

representative Brian Evans,

who's the chair of the House Education

Committee, told me Wednesday,

maybe by the end of this week,

but that was a in terms of possibility.

So it's going to happen in

the next couple of weeks.

But we'll see, Steve,

you get our Andrew,

you get the last word,

what you're projections for the coming week.

Yeah,

I think the thing to watch is

going to be a social issues.

We're going to see a dominating

the session right now like we

saw at the beginning of the

session a couple of years ago.

We're going to see likely final

action next week on a bill that

puts restrictions on drag shows,

which could put Arkansas as the first

state to make such restrictions.

We have a bathroom bill that's

going before committee and I would

not be surprised to see movement

on other kind of cultural wars

types issues that coming up in

the next week and a lot of them.

All right, that does it for us.

Gents and lady,

thanks for coming in.

As always, as always,

thank you for watching.

See you next week.

Support for Arkansas Week provided

by the Arkansas Democrat Gazette,

The Arkansas Times and

KUARFM 89.