Latest news with #JonEubanks
Yahoo
08-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Proposed SNAP asset limit increase heads to Arkansas House after committee approval
Holly Skipper (right) speaks in support of House Bill 1915, sponsored by Rep. Jon Eubanks (left), R-Paris, before the House Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee on Tuesday, April 8, 2025. (Tess Vrbin/Arkansas Advocate) An Arkansas House committee approved a bill Tuesday that would allow households receiving food stamps to save more of their income or own more assets. Arkansas is one of 13 states with an asset limit for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients, and the state aligns with the federal limit of $3,000. House Bill 1915 would double the limit to $6,000 and require it to be adjusted for inflation every two years. The House Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee passed the bill on a split voice vote. On Thursday, committee members said they were hesitant to vote without knowing how much the policy would cost the state. The administrative cost to the Department of Human Services would be $87,500, according to the requested fiscal impact statement from the agency. DHS Secretary Kristi Putnam told the committee she still opposed the bill, repeating her statement from Thursday that the state should let Act 675 of 2023 take effect first. Act 675 kept the federal asset limit but authorized a USDA waiver request to allow exemptions for individual families with more assets. Those families would have a new asset limit of $5,500 and remain enrolled in SNAP as long as they receive an exemption within a year of exceeding the current limit, and they would only be allowed one exemption every five years. Advocates for child well-being call for removal of barriers to Arkansas SNAP participation Assets include cash on hand and in the bank, savings certificates and stocks and bonds, among other things. HB 1915 would repeal Act 675 and replace it with the $6,000 asset limit. Sen. Jonathan Dismang, R-Searcy, sponsored Act 675 and is sponsoring HB 1915. He expressed frustration in January and again last week that DHS has not yet implemented Act 675. The Arkansas Legislative Council's Executive Subcommittee approved an emergency rule Thursday to enact the policy. Earlier versions of Act 675 would have raised the asset limit to $12,500 and then to $6,000. Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders said at the time that she opposed making people more dependent on government benefits, a sentiment echoed Thursday by Opportunity Arkansas CEO Nicholas Horton and Tuesday by Nick Stehle, a visiting fellow at FGA Action. Rep. Jon Eubanks, R-Paris, is HB 1915's House sponsor and told the Public Health committee that the bill will give SNAP recipients a path to no longer needing food stamps. Rep. Aaron Pilkington, R-Knoxville, said he supported providing 'off-ramps' for Arkansans on government assistance, based on his past work with Section 8 housing assistance recipients. 'They would get a job, they're working, they're doing everything we want them to do, but then unfortunately they would get a promotion and potentially would lose their housing, so they wouldn't take the promotion,' Pilkington said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Three members of the public spoke in favor of HB 1915, with two saying they personally benefited from SNAP and saw the asset limit as a barrier to developing financial stability and food security. Brittany Stockton told the committee she enrolled herself and her three daughters in public assistance a few years ago after leaving a dangerous situation. 'Had we had savings, we would have been better off, but I wouldn't have been eligible for the benefits that I had,' said Stockton, who added that she has worked two jobs for two years and no longer qualifies for benefits. Holly Skipper said she also works two jobs and had to reduce her hours at one of them in order to receive SNAP benefits, which she received on Saturday, four months after applying. She is both a full-time student and a full-time caregiver for her husband and adult son, the latter of whom receives disability benefits, she said. 'Not only did I have to account for every dime that I was making in the two part-time jobs I had, plus school, plus my son's money, but I spent days and days crying, wondering which job I was going to have to quit so that I could afford to be able to feed my son and feed my partner,' Skipper said. Because of the SNAP asset limit, DHS required Skipper to explain why she owns a vehicle before approving her application; she explained she needs it to get her husband to his medical appointments, she said. 'People aren't just out there trying to stay down,' Skipper said. 'We're trying to get some help, and we're trying to get a leg up so we can help other people.' New report ranks Arkansas' food insecurity rate worst in the U.S. The federal asset limit of $3,000 isn't even one month's worth of savings in case of an emergency, said Christin Harper, policy director for Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, the third person to speak for the bill. AACF called for the removal of the asset limit in a January report. Harper reminded the committee that Arkansas has the nation's highest rate of food insecurity, at nearly 19% in 2023, according to a U.S. Department of Agriculture report released in September. The report defines food insecurity as being unable, at some time during the year, to provide adequate food for one or more household members because of a lack of resources. Food insecurity for Arkansas children is higher at 24.2%, which accounts for more than 168,000 children, according to Feeding America. Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance Advocacy Director Lance Whitney expressed support for HB 1915 last week. The full House is expected to vote on HB 1915 Wednesday. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Proposed SNAP asset limit increase hits roadblock as DHS takes action on 2023 law
Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance Advocacy Director Lance Whitney (right) speaks in favor of House Bill 1915, sponsored by Rep. Jon Eubanks (left), R-Paris, before the House Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee on April 3, 2025. (Tess Vrbin/Arkansas Advocate) Two Arkansas lawmakers expressed frustration Thursday that their efforts to allow food stamp recipients to save more of their income were delayed. Arkansas is one of 13 states with an asset limit for SNAP recipients. Assets include cash on hand and in the bank, savings certificates and stocks and bonds, among other things. Sen. Jonathan Dismang, R-Searcy, attempted in 2023 to raise the asset limit from $2,250 to $6,000 for Arkansans to qualify for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. He and Rep. Jon Eubanks, R-Paris, are cosponsoring a bill this year with the same provision, and House Bill 1915 would also require the asset limit to be adjusted for inflation every two years. HB 1915 did not receive a vote Thursday after members of the House Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee said they wanted clarity about how much the change would cost the state. SNAP is entirely federally-funded with the exception of administrative costs, Department of Human Services Secretary Kristi Putnam said. Even so, Putnam said she opposed new changes to the SNAP asset limit while the state has not yet seen the impact of Act 675, the final version of Dismang's 2023 bill. Act 675 kept the $2,250 asset limit — which the federal government increased to $3,000 last year — but authorized a USDA waiver request to allow exemptions for individual families with more assets. Those families would have a new asset limit of $5,500 and remain enrolled in SNAP as long as they receive an exemption within a year of exceeding the current limit, and they would only be allowed one exemption every five years. HB 1915 would repeal this provision and replace it with the $6,000 asset limit. Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed Act 675 after it had been amended twice. The original version would have raised the SNAP asset limit to $12,500, but Sanders said she opposed 'expanding welfare,' even after Dismang reduced the proposed limit to $6,000. Advocates for child well-being call for removal of barriers to Arkansas SNAP participation Earlier on Thursday, the Arkansas Legislative Council's Executive Subcommittee approved an emergency rule to amend DHS' SNAP Certification Manual with the requirements put forth in Act 675. When asked why the policy took two years to enact, Putnam told the subcommittee that DHS 'made it more complicated than it needed to be.' Act 675 and the new emergency rule allow families who qualify for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program to also qualify for SNAP. Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families expressed support for this policy change in a January report that called for the state to remove barriers to SNAP qualification and enrollment. DHS Division of County Operations Director Mary Franklin told lawmakers in January that enacting Act 675 did not require a USDA waiver as stated in the law, but the department needed to ensure it had the funding to enact the policy. Dismang said at the time that he was 'disappointed' that Act 675 had not been implemented at all in two years. He repeated this statement in an interview Thursday. Eubanks similarly expressed disappointment with the lack of action on HB 1915. He told the Public Health committee that he had been under the impression DHS was neutral on the bill. 'How long are we supposed to wait?' Eubanks said. 'I believe we need to move forward on this.' Republican Reps. Jeremy Wooldridge of Marmaduke and Cameron Cooper of Romance said they were sympathetic to the intent of HB 1915 but wanted to know the fiscal impact of the bill before voting on it. Putnam said DHS will examine income trends and try to project how many people will remain on SNAP longer under a $6,000 asset limit. She said DHS will have the fiscal impact report ready by Monday, and committee vice chair Wooldridge said members will vote on the bill Tuesday. The bill would have to advance with no roadblocks or amendments in order to reach Sanders' desk by the end of the legislative session on April 16, Dismang said. He also said potential fiscal impact should not be an issue, not only because SNAP is federally funded but also because allowing SNAP recipients to collect more assets while enrolled in the program 'should eliminate some of the turnover that may be occurring right now, so there may actually be a decrease in the demand that's getting placed on DHS.' 'I sure wish they were as diligent running impact [statements] on this as they are with some other bills that have run through the session,' Dismang said. If HB 1915 does not clear the Legislature by April 16, Dismang said he is willing to try again in 2027, but there might be some ways to address the asset limit 'that do not require legislation' in the meantime. In addition to Putnam, Opportunity Arkansas CEO Nicholas Horton spoke against HB 1915, saying it would keep low-income people reliant on government aid. Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance Advocacy Director Lance Whitney disputed Horton's statements while speaking in favor of HB 1915. He said most SNAP beneficiaries are only enrolled in the program for 18 to 22 months on average. 'We are currently looking at seniors, veterans and households who are looking for the ladder to get out of the hole… to get out of these safety net programs, but they need to have the rungs on the ladder to reach that,' Whitney said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
House passes bill clarifying Arkansas public meetings law
Rep. Jon Eubanks, R-Paris, attends a House Judiciary Committee meeting on Jan. 28, 2025. (Mary Hennigan/Arkansas Advocate) The Arkansas House of Representatives passed a bill Monday that would clarify state public meetings law by specifying what members of city councils, quorum courts or school boards can discuss outside of a public meeting. Senate Bill 227, sponsored by Sen. Clarke Tucker, D-Little Rock, and Rep. Jon Eubanks, R-Paris, would also allow a court to nullify any decisions made by a public body if it was in violation of open meetings laws, would add a cybersecurity breach as a reason to meet in executive session, and would regulate remote meeting attendance. Under current state law, the number of people needed for a meeting to qualify as public is not defined, but has generally been interpreted to mean a meeting where at least two members of a governing body meet. Tucker's bill would make that more explicit. The legislation passed with 87 out of the 99 members present voting for the bill; five voted against it and five voted present. Two lawmakers abstained and Rep. Stephen Magie, D-Conway, was absent. The bill, which already passed the Senate once, was amended to add co-sponsors after it was sent to the House, so it will be returned to the Senate for another vote. While the measure passed with broad margins in the House, Rep. Jim Wooten, R-Beebe, stood to urge colleagues to vote it down. 'We're starting down a slippery slope when we start fooling around with the Freedom of Information Act as it relates to the public knowledge and transparency in government,' Wooten warned. Wooten expressed concerns that the language of the bill would allow board members to discuss their positions on public business, and then pressure other members behind the scenes. A separate bill, SB 376, would define a public meeting as one where more than two members of a government entity met. That bill is awaiting a hearing in the House State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee, and has been opposed by government transparency advocates. Eubanks said that provisions included in the bill would prohibit that kind of behavior while providing needed clarity to local officials alongside transparency. 'I spent 10 years on a school board, and I can assure you I did not know what the rules were, and I don't think anybody else did either,' Eubanks said. 'I think this is important, and it's going to allow school board associations, counties, Municipal League to have clear understanding of what is allowed so that they can give the proper training to the members of those boards.' The Arkansas Freedom of Information Act of 1967 gives Arkansans the right to obtain government records, such as emails. However, vague definitions of what exactly constituted a public meeting has led to litigation as local government bodies ran afoul of sunshine provisions. Tucker's bill has garnered support from state FOIA advocates, including the Arkansas Press Association. The association's president, Andrew Bagley, called Tucker's bill 'a very good piece of legislation' during a committee meeting March 12. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
29-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Arkansas lawmakers file bill to restrict phone access at school
Rep. Jon Eubanks (left) and Sen. Tyler Dees, both Republicans, discuss a bill to restrict cell phone use in schools at the Arkansas Capitol on Jan. 29, 2025. (Mary Hennigan/Arkansas Advocate) State lawmakers filed legislation Wednesday that would ban smartphones and other personal electronic devices from all Arkansas public schools beginning with the 2025-2026 school year. Senate Bill 142, also called the Bell to Bell, No Cell Act, follows through on the promise to ban cellphones in schools made by Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders during her State of the State address this month. Speaking during a mental health event at the Capitol rotunda in Little Rock Wednesday morning, Sanders said the bill will curtail 'unrestricted access to smartphones and social media,' which she said has caused a decline in children's mental health over the last decade. 'Arkansas has the opportunity to lead on this issue globally and pass one of the most comprehensive phone-free school bills in the world, and that's a good thing,' Sanders said. 'And when we do that, I truly believe we won't just improve test scores and school discipline, we'll also get to one of the root causes of so many of the mental health issues facing our state today.' Co-sponsored by Sen. Tyler Dees, R-Siloam Springs, and Rep. Jon Eubanks, R-Paris, SB142 requires cellphone policies — which school districts must publish on their websites — to include exemptions for health reasons, Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), extracurricular activities and emergencies. Policies must be submitted to the Division of Elementary and Secondary Education for approval, and a district that fails to adopt or enforce a policy will be cited for a violation of state accreditation standards. Under the proposed law, districts would not be liable if a personal electronic device is lost, stolen or damaged. Eubanks told the Advocate he has first-hand knowledge of health issues and learning problems for students because his daughter is a counselor at an elementary school. SB142 is a way for the Legislature 'to help our young kids have a bright future,' he said. 'We want to be able to limit the distraction that students have in school,' Eubanks said. 'They're there to learn, and we want to make sure that that happens.' Arkansas governor, education secretary call on schools to join mental health pilot project Proposals to reduce smartphone usage have gained traction in recent years in states like California and Florida. Arkansas joined the conversation last summer when the governor and education secretary invited schools to participate in a pilot program focused on restricting cellphone access during the school day. In August, state lawmakers permitted the Arkansas Department of Education to distribute $7 million to districts to cover the cost of pouches or lockers where students could store their phones during class time. Sanders said Wednesday the administration 'received an overwhelmingly positive response from school leaders.' Stakeholders, who used data from the pilot program to inform SB142, have been working on the legislation for over a year, Dees said in an interview. The bill aims to respond to parents' concerns, he said. 'Our response today with this bill is that we're no longer going to allow our children to be guinea pigs of Big Tech and social media and the ramifications that have affected our kids,' he said. Dees anticipates the bill will be presented in committee next week and said it will have bipartisan support. As of Wednesday afternoon, Sen. Reginald Murdock of Marianna was the sole Democratic co-sponsor of the bill. This is not the first time state lawmakers have tried to limit Arkansas children's access to social media. Dees and Eubanks sponsored the Social Media Safety Act of 2023 to prohibit minors from creating a social media account without parental consent. It would have been the first such law in the nation, but a federal judge blocked the law in August 2023 before it was set to take effect. Echoing statements made in her State of the State address, Sanders in a press release Wednesday said she plans to update the law so it's no longer held up in court, and to give parents the right to sue tech companies under state law 'so they can hold bad actors accountable.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
28-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Proposed tort reform advances out of Arkansas legislative committee
Rep. Jon Eubanks, R-Paris, presents a tort reform bill to the House Judiciary Committee on Jan. 28, 2025 in the Arkansas Capitol. (Mary Hennigan/Arkansas Advocate) A bill that would decrease the amount plaintiffs could recover in personal injury cases passed in an Arkansas legislative committee Tuesday despite legislators' concerns and public comments against it. House Bill 1204, sponsored by Rep. Jon Eubanks, R-Paris, would add five lines to existing Arkansas code concerning the recovery of damages. 'Recovery of damages under subsection (a) of this section for past necessary medical care, past necessary medical treatment, or past necessary medical services received includes only those costs actually paid by or on behalf of the plaintiff or that remain unpaid and for which the plaintiff or any third party is legally responsible,' the proposed addition reads in its entirety. Members of the House Judiciary Committee passed the bill on a voice vote, though multiple members could be heard in dissent. Eubanks filed the bill last week, and during his introduction Tuesday he said it had quickly garnered a lot of attention and controversy. Eubanks said his bill was similar to one that failed in the 94th General Assembly sponsored by Rep. Marcus Richmond, R-Harvey. The only difference between the two proposals is that Eubanks' includes the word 'past' in three instances. Richmond's bill in 2023 died in the House Judiciary Committee at sine die adjournment. 'I certainly don't want to deprive an injured party of any just recovery of damages, I really don't,' Eubanks said. 'But for this particular issue on the recovery of the medical bills, it just seems that what is accepted as full and final payment should be the amount that they receive. Currently, Arkansas courts allow the plaintiff to recover the billed amount, even though something less was accepted. That honestly doesn't make any sense to me.' Republican Reps. Matthew Shepherd of El Dorado and Jimmy Gazaway of Paragould led much of the committee's questioning on Tuesday, though Reps. Ashley Hudson and Andrew Collins, both Little Rock Democrats, shared concerns as well. At the core of their concerns, lawmakers wanted Eubanks to explain how the bill would improve the lives of the average Arkansan who pays their monthly health insurance premiums. Citing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Eubanks said Arkansas' average tort burden cost per household is $2,942. This figure, Eubanks said, is a 'substantial amount' that the proposed policy would help alleviate. But Gazaway was unsatisfied with Eubanks' macro-level assessment, and when he asked again, Eubanks said the proposal would 'bring reality to what damages are, and it will impact the economy … the average Arkansans' employer, their small business, their insurance premiums.' Eubanks presented his bill alongside Justin Allen, an attorney with Wright Lindsey Jennings in Little Rock. Allen answered the bulk of lawmakers' questions, and ultimately agreed plaintiffs would receive less in cases where medical bills are discounted or negotiated. 'The argument here is that the plaintiff should be recovering less because those amounts don't even exist as damages, but I would acknowledge it would decrease that recovery,' Allen said. Allen partially agreed with Hudson that the legislation would create a class system of different plaintiffs based on their insurance status, and disagreed with Gazaway that the bill would only benefit defendants. Allen said the bill would affect both parties, though the defendant would only have to pay what was paid and accepted, 'which is less than what is being paid under current law.' HB1204 was heard under a special order of business, which means committee members did not discuss any other bills. The Capitol committee room was standing room only. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX No one from the public spoke in favor of HB1204, but three people came to speak against it. Two attorneys and one disabled veteran said the bill would have an overwhelmingly negative effect on Arkansans. Justin Minton, a Saline County attorney and former insurance adjuster, said defendants are already not required to pay for unnecessary treatment. 'In reality, the bill does two things,' Minton said. 'It without a doubt, 100% of the time, penalizes responsible, socially productive people by anchoring the amount of their non-economic damages to a lesser number. And two — and probably even worse — is it rewards bad behavior by allowing bad actors, for example a drunk driver, to take credit for our veteran service or our single moms' health insurance premiums.' Minton said if passed, the bill would also benefit insurance companies by lowering their payouts at the expense of those who pay their premiums. Stephen Finnegan, a disabled veteran who is a client of Minton's, said he has first-hand experience with the issue at hand after a recent car accident on Interstate 430. He told the committee that the existing system works well, and the proposed bill will 'detrimentally affect the veteran community of Arkansas.' Fayetteville attorney Alan Lane was the last to speak against the bill Tuesday, and he said there's nothing to suggest that Arkansans will benefit from the proposed policy. Lane said that while the conversation Tuesday centered around people injured in car accidents, plantiffs in every civil claim, including those in child sexual abuse and sex trafficking cases, would also be affected. 'There's not one person in your district that would benefit if you change this policy,' Lane said. 'We know this is not an issue that's brought forward to any of you by your individual constituents in your district. This is a special interest bill.' In closing for his bill, Eubanks pushed back on Lane's comments and said he filed the bill independent of any outside influence. He also said he's spoken with constituents of his who are interested in tort reform. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
