A E T N Logo P B S logo
Support the Programs You LoveDONATE NOW

Arkansas Week April 11, 2014

Loading the player…

(Arrears) The Arkansas judiciary and just dues, are they just dues? (Maggio) An ever murkier situation in the case of one judge, a judge with no cases. (2014) And with the prospect of another red tide, how much difference can lunchbucket issues make for state Democrats?

TRANSCRIPT

HELLO AGAIN EVERYONE. THANKS FOR JOINING US FOR "ARKANSAS WEEK".  SEARCHING FOR A WAY OUT OF A POTENTIALLY MOST EMBARRASSING SITUATION.  THE ARKANSAS JUDICIARY IS WHERE WE BEGIN TONIGHT.  ERNIE DUMAS JOINS US AN INDEPENDENT JOURNALIST BASED IN LITTLE ROCK AND STEVE BRAWNER BASED IN BRETTON AND THANKS FOR COMING IN.  ERNIE FOR THE SECOND WEEK IN A ROW WE'RE CONFRONTING A SITUATION.

OBVIOUSLY THIS IS GOING TO BE RESOLVED IN COURTS BY JUDGES THAT SOME HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM THAT BROUGHT THE PROBLEM ABOUT.

IT'S A SERIOUS THING BUT IT'S REACHED A COMICAL STAGE NOW. BACKGROUND WE SHOULD POINT OUT THAT I GUESS THREE OR FOUR WEEKS AGO SOMEBODY RAISED AN ISSUE ABOUT A CANDIDATE FOR CIRCUIT JUDGE IN PULASKI COUNTY THAT SHE HAD NOT MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONSTITUTION THAT SHE HAD BEEN A LICENSED ATTORNEY FOR SIX PRECEDING YEARS, SIX YEARS PRECEDING THE DATE SHE WOULD TAKE OFFICE IF ELECTED AND SO THE JUDGE -- A SPECIAL JUDGE RULED INDEED SHE WAS UNQUALIFIED BECAUSE OF NOT HAVING PAID HER LICENSE FEES FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS; THAT SHE WAS INELIGIBLE TO RUN AND THEN WE HAD AFTER THAT PEOPLE LOOKED AT OTHER CANDIDATES FOR JUDGES AND THEY INDEED HAD A LAPSE IN LICENSING. THERE WERE DELAY IN THE PAST AT PAYING THE ANNUAL FEE TO THE STATE TO CONTINUE TO BE LICENSED AS A LAWYER, AND THEN IT KIND OF MUSHROOMED, SO YOU'VE GOT SEVERAL SUITS ALREADY.  THEY'RE LIKELY TO BE OTHER SUITS IN THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO TO TRY TO KNOCK PEOPLE OFF OF THE BALLOT FOR THE ELECTION WHICH IS IN MAY, SO BUT THEN AFTER THAT ONE JUDGE RULED THIS WEEK -- A JUDGE IN A DIFFERENT CASE, JUDGE GRIF GRIFFIN FROM PULASKI COUNTY RULED THE OTHER WAY AND SAID "NO, YOU CANNOT REMOVE A JUDGE -- YOU CANNOT SUSPEND A LAWYER FOR FAILURE TO PAY HIS DUES WITHOUT A HEARING.  HE IS ENTITLED TO A DUE PROCESS HEARING SO THEREFORE HE INVALIDATED THAT, AND GAVE SOME OTHER REASONS AS WELL, SO NOW YOU HAVE TWO CONFLICTING REMEDIES THAT TWO DIFFERENT COURTS HAVE SPELLED OUT, SO THERE WILL BE -- OBVIOUSLY THE CASE WILL GO PRETTY QUICKLY TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT WHERE THOSE SEVEN JUSTICES WILL RULE WHO IS RIGHT, AND IF THEY RULE THAT THE FIRST JUDGE IS RIGHT, JUDGE COLE THEN THERE WILL BE QUITE A FEW JUDICIAL CANDIDATES WILL BE ON THE BALLOT BUT THE PROBLEM ARISING THAT SOMEBODY IS CHECKING AND ALL SEVEN JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT HAVE ALSO FAILED TO PAY THE FEES ON TIME AT SOME TIME IN THE PAST AND IN THREE OF THE JUSTICES THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN DISQUALIFIED FROM THE BALLOT, AND THOSE JUSTICES THAT HAVE BEEN ELECTED SINCE 2000 WHEN WE PASSED THE AMENDMENT THAT REQUIRES THIS REQUIREMENT THAT YOU HAVE TO BE A LICENSED LAWYER FOR SIX YEARS AND EIGHT YEARS FOR THE CIRCUIT JUDGE FOR A SUPREME COURT AND NOW COMES THE QUESTION CAN THE SUPREME COURT SIT ON THE CASE SINCE ALL SEVEN OF THEM -- AT LEAST THERE IS A APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST BECAUSE EACH OF THEM HAS HAD THIS HAPPEN TO THEM IN THE PAST.  SHOULD THEY RULE THIS IS OKAY AND YOU CANNOT STRIKE ME IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE TAKING CARE OF THEMSELVES SO YOU HAVE THE ISSUE WITH THE SEVEN JUSTICES CAN THEY SIT ON THIS CASE, BUT THEN IF THEY ALL RECUSE -- REMEMBER IN 1989 WHEN ALL SEVEN RECUSED BECAUSE OF THEIR APPROPRIATION WAS CHALLENGED, THE APPROPRIATION FOR THEIR COURT.  THEN YOU HAVE TO -- THE GOVERNOR WOULD HAVE TO GO INTO THE POOL OF LAWYERS FROM THE STATE AND CHOOSE SEVEN LAWYER IT'S.

CHOOSE CAREFULLY.

CHOOSES OUT 700 TO 900 LAWYERS A YEAR DO NOT PAY THE DUES ON TIME AND WOULD BE SUSPECT SO ANYWAY IT'S TO A COMICAL STAGE BUT IN THE NEXT MONTH I GUESS IT WILL BE RESOLVED ONE WAY OR OTHER.

EVEN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THEIR STAFF HAD NOT PAID THEIR DUES SO YOU WOULD HOPE THAT JUDGE GRIFFIN'S RULING WILL RESTORE SOME SANITY TO THE BECAUSE I THINK WE GREAR THEY'RE STILL LAWYERS EVEN THOUGH THEY DIDN'T PAY THE DUES BUT IT'S UP IN THE AIR BUT THERE IS THE TECHNICALITY.

ARE THEY REALLY LAWYERS?

YEAH AND IF THAT IS THE CASE THEY HAVE TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION TO TAKE THAT SILLY PROVISION OUT.

FROM AN INTENSELY PRACTICAL STANDPOINT AS NOTED ELECTIONS NEXT MONTH.  IS THERE A WAY OUT? WHERE DO WE SEE THIS THING, WHAT IS PROBABLE HERE?

  WELL I THINK JUDGE GRIFFIN GIVES THE COURT OR WHOEVER A POSSIBLE REMEDY AND THAT IS TO SAY YOU CANNOT SUSPEND A PERSON'S LIVELIHOOD, THE STATE CANNOT DO THAT WITHOUT A DUE PROCESS HEARING SO PERHAPS THAT'S A REMEDY.  THEY COULD SAY YOU HAVE TO DO IN THE FUTURE AND ALL OF THE PEOPLE I THINK THAT'S -- THE SUPREME COURT WILL FIND A WAY -- THIS SUPREME COURT OR A SPECIAL SUPREME COURT WILL FIND SOME WAY TO SATISFY THE NEEDS ALL THESE JUDICIAL CANDIDATES.

GRANDFATHER EVERYBODY IN.

SOMETHING.  THE TRUTH IS IT'S THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION HAS A LOT OF CRAZY THINGS IN AND A NUMBER OF THEM ARE UNWORKABLE AND FRANKLY WE JUST IGNORE THEM AND HAPPENS ON A REGULAR BASIS.

I SUPPOSE WE COULD HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD LUCK WITH THAT IN THE PAST.

THAT'S TO GET RID OF A OBSOLETE LAW.  THIS IS A MODERN LAW FROM 2000 AND THE BAR AND THE JUDICIARY WROTE THE AMENDMENT SO THIS IS MODERN LAWMAKING, MODERN CONSTITUTION MAKING BUT I THINK WHOEVER DRAFTED IT DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THE REPERCUSSIONS OF THAT PARTICULAR PHRASE IN THAT SECTION OF THAT AMENDMENT.

STEVE, WE GOT ANOTHER SITUATION THAT ARISES OUT OF FAULKNER COUNTY AND THAT'S THE ONE INVOLVING JUDGE MAGGIO WHO REMAINS A JUDGE BUT PRACTICALLY IN NAME ONLY SINCE THE ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT HAS STRIPPED HIM OF HIS CASES AND OF COURSE THE MATTER OF JUDGE MAGGIO OPENED UP A ENTIRE SEPARATE CONTROVERSY INVOLVING CAMPAIGN FUNDING ET CETERA AND THERE WERE NEWS ABOUT HIM THIS WEEK.

WE PUT PEOPLE IN JUDGE'S SEATS THROUGH ELECTIONS AND YOU RAISE MONEY AND CAMPAIGN AND THERE WAS A AWKWARD SITUATION WITH JUDGE MAGGIO WHERE HE MADE -- HEARD ARGUMENTS FOR NURSING HOME CASE, RECEIVED THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN DONATIONS FROM THAT NURSING HOME AT THAT SAME TIME, AND THEN REDUCED THE VERDICT OF THE NURSING HOME BY $4.2 MILLION AND THAT IS -- WE OF COURSE WITH OUR CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS THE GOAL FOR THERE NOT TO BE OUT RIGHT BRIBERY.  THE GOAL IS FOR THERE TO BE -- BUT EVERYONE KNOWS PEOPLE ARE GIVING MONEY TO CANDIDATES WHO WILL HELP THEM OUT.  THE GOAL IT IS FOR NOT TO BE A DIRECT QUID PRO QUO AND IT LOOKS BAD AND IT WAS COUPLED WITH THE IRRESPONSIBLE BLOGGING TECHNIQUES AND SOME OF THE THINGS HE SAID SO RIGHT NOW HE'S GIVEN THE MONEY BACK HE'S RAISED BUT HE'S NOT REALLY A PRACTICING JUDGE AT THE MOMENT.

JUDICIAL DISCIPLINING COUNCIL SEEMS TO BE EXPANDING THE SCOPE OF ITS INQUIRY, ITS OVERSIGHT OF JUDGE MAGGIO.

HE HAD TO DROP OUT OF THE RACE AFTER THE BLOG POSTINGS WERE KIND OF PROFANE AND ALSO BECAUSE HE HAD COMMENTED ON A CHILD ADOPTION CASE WITH ACTRESS CHARLIZE THERON AND YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO AND AT THE MOMENT I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE IS DOING WITH HIS TIME.  HE IS GETTING PAID BUT NOT HEARING CASES.

THERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE THE COMMISSION -- AND NOT INFREQUENTLY BUT RARELY AT THIS LEVEL OF INTENSITY AN INQUIRY WITH A SITTING JUDGE.

YEAH TECHNICALLY HE COULD BE REMOVED FROM THE COURT.  I THINK THAT'S A STRONG POSSIBILITY GIVEN THE SERIOUS NATURE OF ALL OF HIS INFRACTIONS THAT'S A STRONG POSSIBILITY THEY COULD SUSPEND HIM FROM THE COURT FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE YEAR.  HIS TERM ENDS IN DECEMBER SO THAT'S A POSSIBILITY.  THERE'S A RANGE OF OTHER OPTIONS THAT THE JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE COMMISSION COULD TAKE, BUT BEYOND THAT YOU HAVE I THINK THE ETHICS COMMISSION HAVING AN INVESTIGATION UNDER WAY AND ULTIMATELY THE OTHER STATE LICENSING PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE, THE LAWYERS.  HE WOULD STILL HAVE THE LICENSE TO PRACTI COULD HEAR FROM THAT GROUP AS WELL AND HAVE THE LICENSED REVOKED OR SUSPENDED SO HE HAS A LOT OF ISSUES FACING HIM.  THE OTHER ISSUE THAT THE DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE GOT INTO BELATEDLY REVEALED THIS WEEK HALF OF HIS CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS CAME FROM TWO NURSING HOME CHAINS AND THAT APPEARS TO VIOLATE THE LAW, BUT THE LAW PERMITS EACH OF THESE NURSING HOMEOWNERS OWNED A NUMBER OF HOMES SO THEY COULD ALLOW EACH ONE TO GIVE HIM MONEY AND ALTHOUGH IT'S ESSENTIALLY THE SAME OWNER PLUS THEY BUNDLE MONEY THROUGH SOME PACS SET UP FOR THIS OCCASION SO THERE ARE ALL KIND OF WAYS TO GET AROUND THE CAMPAIGN LAWS, AND ALL OF THEM I THINK WERE IN PLAY IN HIS CASE.

WELL, THE INTEREST OF THE NURSING HOME INDUSTRY IN THIS OF COURSE IS TORT REFORM WHICH HAS BEEN A PRIORITY AMONG CONSERVATIVES, MANY CONSERVATIVES FOR A LONG TIME. THE NURSING HOMES AS IN THE CASE THAT STEVE MENTIONED HAVE A BIG FINANCIAL STAKE AS DO MANY OTHER INDUSTRIES IN LIMITING DAMAGES.

RIGHT.  THE NURSING HOME OPERATOR --

OR THE POTENTIAL FOR.

AND THE BIG AMOUNTS BEFORE IT IS RUEING WAS MADE.  HE SAID "I'M JUST TRYING TO ELECT A MORE CONSERVATIVE JUDGE"  AND ALL WE CAN DO IS TAKE HIM AT HIS WORD AND RIGHT NOW THERE IS SO MUCH MONEY INTO POLITICS AND THE SUPREME COURT AND OTHER RACES HAVE BEEN LOW KEY IN ARKANSAS HISTORY, BUT THE REST OF POLITICS IS NOT GETTING MORE LOW KEY AND WE CAN ASSUME THIS IS GOING TO BE MORE INTENSE AND SEE THE SAME CAMPAIGNING FOR JUDGESHIPS LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE AND MORE AGGRESSIVE AND MORE MONEY AND ONCE ONE GROUP IS GIVING MORE MONEY THE OPPOSING GROUP WILL DO THAT AND HAVE THAT KIND OF WAR WITH THIS.

THERE HAVE BEEN VOICES IN ARKANSAS FOR HALF A DOZEN YEARS ANYWAY THAT WARNED -- STEVE, AND IN OTHER STATES SOME JUDICIAL ELECTIONS ARE NOW ABSOLUTELY CARNAL ALMOST IN THE ADVERTISING AND IN THE POLITICIZATION OF THE JUDICIARY AND THEY HAVE WARNED THAT THIS QUITE POSSIBLY COULD HAPPEN IN ARKANSAS.  NOW, WHEN WE WENT "NON PARTISAN ELECTION OF JUDGES"  REALLY WAS FOOLED BY THAT.  I MEAN THESE INDIVIDUALS RUNNING FOR JUDGE HAVE  USUALLY A HISTORY OF POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT SO THE POLITICS WERE MORE OR LESS KNOWN.

WE CAN LOOK AT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT.  BECAUSE JUDGES ARE PROHIBITED BY SAYING HOW THEY RULE ON ANY ISSUE.

RIGHT.

WE HAVE BEEN GUESSING ON OUR BALLOTS SO AS THERE IS MORE -- AT LEAST WE WILL HAVE SOME FAMILIARITY WITH THE CANDIDATES AS THERE IS MORE MONEY INVOLVED.

WELL, TEXAS AND CALIFORNIA I THINK WERE THE EXAMPLES FOR VAST SUMS OF MONEY WERE INVESTED IN JUDICIAL RACES AND ON BOTH SIDES AND ONE SIDE THE TRIAL LAWYERS AND ON THE OTHER INSURANCE COMPANIES AND NURSING HOMES AND OTHERS INTERESTED IN TORT REFORMS AND VAST AMOUNTS OF MONEY INVESTED IN THE RACES AND PARTICULARLY IN THOSE STATES AND JUSTICE BROWN WHO RETIRED FROM THE ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT A YEAR AGO HAS EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT IT.  HE'S WRITTEN ABOUT IT AND SAID IT'S COMING TO ARKANSAS AND IT'S A BAD THING BECAUSE IT LEADS TO UNDER MINDING THE CONFIDENCE AND THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY AND WE NEED TO TAKE FURTHER STEPS TO PROTECT THE COURTS FROM THE INFLUENCE OF MONEY AND POLITICS, AND IT'S A VERY CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECT. HE'S I THINK SAVAGED -- SOME NEWSPAPER COLUMNS HAVE SAID THAT POLITICS IS A NATURAL THING AND IT SHOULDN'T BE -- THE COURTS SHOULDN'T BE PROTECTED FROM IT EITHER.  PEOPLE ARE GOING TO ELECT THE JUDGES NEED TO KNOW ALL THEY CAN ABOUT AND PEOPLE ARE ENTITLED TO INVEST THE MONEY AND GET A COURT THAT'S BETTER SUITED.

YEAH, AND A JUSTICE WE WANT. ONTO OTHER THINGS AND THAT IS -- INCLUDES MINIMUM WAGE AND EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN, BOTH TO SOME EXTENT BOTH ISSUES HAVE BEEN EMBRACED IN RECENT DAYS, WEEKS BY THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE FOR THE UNITED STATES SENATE MR. PRYOR TRYING TO KEEP HIS JOB.

WELL, HE HAS TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT FROM OBAMACARE AND HE APPEARS HE'S HAVING SUCCESS AND TWO POLLS THAT CAME OUT THAT SAID HE HAD A TD LEAD OVER TOM COTTON AND OTHER HE HAS A BIGGER LEAD AND THERE IS A POLL WITH MINIMUM WAGE AND IT WOULD RAISE THE WAGE TO $8.50 OVER THREE YEARS AND IT PUTS REPUBLICANS IN A LITTLE BIT OF A QUANDARY BECAUSE THE REPUBLICANS WANT TO BE SEEN AS THE PARTY OF WORK AND NOT GOVERNMENT HAND OUTS. WELL, YOU CAN'T MAKE A LIVING ON SIX DOLLARS AND 50 CENTS AN HOUR AND IT'S A TOUGH MANDATE AND TOUGH FOR THE REPUBLICANS EITHER WAY BUT WITH ARKANSANS BEING SO FOR THE MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE AND SENATOR PRYOR BEING ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THAT ISSUE AT LEAST POLITICALLY THAT IS ONEFECTER IN HIS CAP RIGHT NOW AND MAYBE CONTRIBUTING TO THE SUPPORT IN THE POLLS.

POCKET BOOK ISSUES ERNIE.

I THINK IT'S A GOOD STRATEGY FOR THE DEMOCRATS AND LIKE SAID IT CHANGES THE FOCUS ON OBAMACARE AND THE PARTY AND HIS OPPONENT REPRESENTATIVE TOM COTTON HAS USED OBAMACARE IN HIS VOTE FOR THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT OF 2010 AND USED THAT AGAINST HIM TO DRIVE DOWN HIS NEGATIVES. FOUR YEARS AGO HIS APPROVAL RATINGS WERE SKY HIGH FOR AN ARKANSAS POLITICIAN, NOT AS HIGH AS MIKE BEEBE'S BUT PRETTY HIGH AND THAT SINGLE ISSUE HAS DRIVEN IT DOWN THAT HE VOTED FOR THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.  NOW I THINK THAT IS SOFTENING A LITTLE BIT AND PEOPLE HAVE BEGUN TO REALIZE THAT 200,000 PEOPLE IN ARKANSAS HAS GOTTEN COVERAGE BECAUSE OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AND THEY DON'T REALIZE IT'S OBAMACARE AND THEY ARE STILL VOTING FOR HIM BECAUSE OF OBAMACARE AND I THINK THAT ISSUE HAS SOFTENED A LITTLE BIT ALTHOUGH THE REPUBLICANS ARE STILL HAMMERING AT IT.  ALL OF THE NEWADS IN THE LAST WEEKS HAVE PEOPLE FOCUSING ON THE VOTE FOR OBAMACARE, TESTIMONY BY PEOPLE THAT WERE HURT BY OBAMACARE, SO ALL THEY CAN DO IS SEIZE ON THE ISSUES LIKE THIS AND ALSO THE EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN, AND THAT'S THE OTHER STRONG DEMOCRATIC STRATEGY AND WOMEN TEND TO VOTE FOR DEMOCRATS MORE IN ARKANSAS AND REPUBLICANS LESS.  MEN FOR REPUBLICANS, SO HE'S FOCUSED ON THAT ISSUE AS WELL AND THE VOTE IN THE SENATE THIS WEEK I THINK HELPS HIM ON THAT.

WELL --

SENATE OR THE HOUSE, WHICHEVER ONE IT WAS.

AND ONE COMPLAINTED LODGED AGAINST MR. COTTON WAS DISMISSED AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL ONLY TO BE SUCCEEDED IN SHORT ORDER BY ANOTHER ONE THAT WAS FILED. POLITICS AS USUAL THE NUISANCE COMPLAINTS.

THE FIRST ONE WAS BECAUSE OF THE BIPARTISAN PANEL IN THE HOUSE DISMISSED IT.  HE WAS ACCUSED OF RAISING MONEY IN THE HOUSE CLOTHES ROOM AND IN A RADIO INTERVIEW SUGGESTED PEOPLE SHOULD GO TO HIS WEBSITE AND DONATE.  AND IT'S AGAINST RULES AND HE SAYS HE WASN'T THERE AND APPARENTLY THERE IS A DIFFERENCE OF ASKING FOR MONEY IN THE OFFICE OF THE CAPITOL AND VERSUS BEING ON THE STEPS OF THE CAPITOL AND UTILITIES WAS SHOT DOWN UNANIMOUSLY BY TWO PARTIES AND THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE JACK HOLT SENT ANOTHER ETHICAL COMPLAINT SAYING THAT REPRESENTATIVE COTTON HAD NOT DISCLOSED WHO THE CLIENTS WERE WHEN HE WORKED FOR A LAW FIRM AND HE DIDN'T DO THAT AND COTTON SAID THERE WAS A CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT AND SAID I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT I AM SURPRISED AT THE RESULTS AND IN THE PRIOR CAMPAIGN THEY DID A VERY GOOD JOB OF KEEPING THE ATTACK ON REPRESENTATIVE COTTON PERSONAL.  THERE HAVE BEEN MILLIONS IN DOLLARS IN NEGATIVE ADS ON BOTH SIDES AND IT'S BEEN THE VOTES SENATOR PRYOR'S VOTE ON OBAMACARE AND WHETHER THEY'RE FAIR -- NONE OF THEM ARE ACCURATE AND FAIR BUT HIS CAMPAIGN HAS GONE OVER REPRESENTATIVE COTTON PERSONALLY AND HE'S ENENTITLED AND AMBITIOUS AND THAT'S THE BLOW AND PEOPLE USE NEGATIVE ACTS BECAUSE IT WORKS.  IT'S WORKED. IT HAS KEPT COTTON'S NUMBERS DOWN AND PUT PRYOR IN A POSITION -- I THINK HE WOULD STILL HAVE A HARD TIME WINNING BUT HE'S DOING BETTER THAN I THOUGHT HE WOULD.

IN BOTH RACES AND THE GOVERNOR'S CAMPAIGN AND THE SENATE'S RACE AND THE PRESUMPTIVE PARTY NOMINEES IN BOTH CASES THE CONSENSUS SEEMS TO INDICATE IT'S A DEAD HEAT EITHER WAY SCBLI THINK THAT'S RIGHT.  IN BOTH THE BIG RACES AND THE SEPTEMBER RACE AND THE GOVERNOR'S RACE THE POLLS HAVE BEEN CLOSE IN THE CASE OF ASA HUTCHINSON AND MIKE ROSS FOR GOVERNOR FROM THE OUT SET. BOTH CANDIDATES WERE WELL KNOWN AND ASA HUTCHINSON HAD BEEN IN THREE STATE WIDE RACES AND ROSS WAS IN RACES COVERING THE STATE AND IT'S BEEN VERY CLOSE AND I THINK IT CONTINUE TO BE AND I CAN'T PUT TOO MUCH STOCK IN THESE POLLS AT THIS POINT BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO FLUCTUATE AND THE BASIC POINT THEY'RE VERY CLOSE AND I THINK ALSO IN THREE OF THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS THEY'RE GOING TO BE FAIRLY CLOSE RACES THERE AS WELL.  I THINK THE DEMOCRATS HAVE A POSSIBILITY OF PICKING UP ONE, TWO, OR EVEN THREE OF THE SEATS.  THEY PROBABLY WON'T BUT THEY'RE WIN SHOOTING DISTANCE OF THREE CONGRESSIONAL SEATS SO I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A PRETTY COMPETITIVE ELECTION IN NOVEMBER WITH THAT AND ALSO FOR LEGISLATIVE SEATS AS WELL.

THERE ARE HEAD WINS FACING DEMOCRATS TOUGH TO OVERCOME. NUMBER ONE THE STATE'S REPUBLICAN PARTY IS PRETTY SHARP.  BEFORE THE ELECTION IN 2010 THE CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION WAS DEMOCRAT AND NOW IT'S MORE REPUBLICAN AND THIS IS A MIDTERM ELECTION AND TYPICAL THE PARTY WHO HAS THE WHITE HOUSE DOESN'T DO WELL IN A MIDTERM ELECTION OF THE PEOPLE THAT DON'T LIKE THE PRESIDENT ARE MORE MOTIVATED TO VOTE AND THAT'S RUNNING AGAINST THE DEMOCRATS AND THE NEXT THING AGAINST THEM IS WE'RE IN A MIDTERM ELECTION AND THERE'S A REAL TREND ESPECIALLY UNDER OBAMA'S PRESIDENCY THAT THE ELECTORAL ON THE PRESIDENTIAL YEARS  ARE YOUNGER AND LIKELY TO VOTE FOR DEMOCRATS BUT TWO YEARS LATER WHEN THERE IS NO PRESIDENTIAL RACE THE YOUNGER PEOPLE STAY HOME AND THE ELECTORAL IS OLDER MORE CONSERVATIVE AND THEY WILL HAVE THAT VOTER THAN LAST TIME.

MOTIVATING OFF YEAR VOTERS ESPECIALLY IN DEMOCRATIC CONSTIRCHANCIES, TOUGH TO DO.

AND THOSE PEOPLE THAT HAVE INSURANCE THROUGH THE PRIVATE OPTION AND OBAMACARE ARE NOT THE PEOPLE THAT VOTE IN LARGE NUMBERS IN A NON PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

THAT'S THE CONUNDRUM.

HE'S RIGHT AND THE DEMOGRAPHICS IN THIS YEAR ARE NOT GOOD FOR THE DEMOCRATS AND I POINTED OUT THAT THE 200,000 PEOPLE THAT GOT INSURANCE FOR THE FIRST TIME THEY ARE PEOPLE THAT TEND TO NEVER VOTE EVEN THOUGH THE VOTER REGISTRATION DRIVES REGISTERED THOSE PEOPLE THE LAST SIX, EIGHT YEARS THEY TEND NOT TO VOTE.  BIG REGISTRATION DRIVES.  THE ELECTION COMES IN THE FALL AND THEY DON'T VOTE SO I THINK IT'S RIGHT IT'S A CLOSE ELECTION BUT IT FAVORS REPUBLICANS.

I HAVE GOT TO LEAVE IT THERE BECAUSE WE'RE OUT OF TIME.  TO YOU THANKS ALWAYS FOR YOUR TIME AND WE WILL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.

AETN.org > Programs > Arkansas Week > Arkansas Week April 11, 2014