To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

1992 United States Senate special election in North Dakota

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1992 United States Senate special election in North Dakota

← 1988 December 4, 1992 1994 →
 
Kent Conrad official portrait.jpg
North Dakota Lieutenant Governor Jack Dalrymple (cropped).jpg
Nominee Kent Conrad Jack Dalrymple
Party Democratic-NPL Republican
Popular vote 103,246 55,194
Percentage 63.2% 33.8%

North Dakota D Special1992.svg
County results
Conrad:      50–60%      60–70%      70–80%
Dalrymple:      40–50%      50–60%

U.S. Senator before election

Jocelyn Burdick
Democratic-NPL

Elected U.S. Senator

Kent Conrad
Democratic-NPL

The 1992 United States Senate special election in North Dakota was held on December 4, 1992 to fill the United States Senate seat vacated by the late Quentin Burdick. Burdick's widow, Jocelyn Burdick, was appointed as a temporary replacement until the election was held. Democratic-NPL nominee Kent Conrad, who held North Dakota's other senate seat since 1986, had not run for re-election to his own seat, holding himself to a campaign promise pledging to reduce the federal deficit. Conrad won the election.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/1
    Views:
    610
  • ✪ Election 2014: Ballot Initiatives

Transcription

>> MAJOR FUNDING FOR ELECTION 2014 BALLOT INITIATIVE IS PROVIDED BY AARP ARKANSAS. >> HELLO AGAIN EVERYONE. . THANKS FOR JOINING US AND WELCOME TO OUR EVERY OTHER YEAR COMPLETE AND THOROUGH AND TOTALLY NON BIAS EXAMINATION OF THE ISSUES THAT WILL APPEAR ON THE ARKANSAS BALLOT. YES, THERE WILL BE A NUMBER OF POLITICAL CANDIDATES, CANDIDATES FOR PUBLIC OFFICE BUT THERE ARE ALSO FIVE -- AT LEAST TIME OF THIS TAPING FIVE ISSUES TO CONFRONT ARKANSAS VOTERS ON THE SAME BALLOT AND THE WAY TO CUT TO THE BOTTOM LINE AS IT WERE DR. STACEY MCCULLOUGH WHO IS THE DIRECTOR OF THE POLICY CENTER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE AND OUR FRIEND DR. WAYNE MILLER PROFESSOR AT THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE AND THE STORY WE HEARD BEFORE AND FOR ABSOLUTE NEUTRALITY OF ANALYSIS THEY PROVIDE AND AMENDMENTS AND PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS AND THE LIKE AND WE WILL START WAYNE, DOCTOR, THERE ARE STILL A COUPLE OF DEADLINES THAT ARE PERTINENT AND JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF OUR AUDIENCE WE ARE TAPING ON SEPTEMBER 23. THAT COULD BE IMPORTANT AS WILL BE REVEALED LATER IN THE PROGRAM BUT WE HAVE A COUPLE OF DEADLINES TO CONSIDER. >> SURE. OCTOBER 20 IS WHEN EARLY VOTING IS GOING TO START SO PEOPLE THAT DON'T LIKE TO BE IN THE LINE THAT BIG DAY CAN GO AHEAD AND START VOTING AT THEIR PRECINCTS. NOW KEEP IN MIND THEY MAY HAVE LIMITED VOTING SO IT'S NOT LIKE WHERE YOU CAN GO ON ELECTION DAY SO YOU NEED TO CHECK WITH THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE WHAT IS OPEN. >> THAT'S TRUE. >> AND NOVEMBER 4 IS THE BIG DAY, THE OFFICIAL ELECTION DAY. THAT'S WHEN EVERYTHING WILL BE CALCULATED AND FIGURED OUT. >> WE HAVE THE WHOLE MATTER OF BALLOT POSITION THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER FIRST HOW WE GET THINGS ON THERE OR HOW THEY CAME BEFORE WAYNE. >> SURE, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF WAYS. CITIZENS IN ARKANSAS HAVE THE RIGHT TO PUT INITIATIVES ON THE BALLOT. THEY CAN INITIATE AN ACT OR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. IT REQUIRES A DIFFERENT NUMBER OF SIGNATURES DEPENDING WHETHER IT'S A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT OR INITIATED ACT BUT CITIZENS CAN PUT ISSUES ON THE BALLOT AS WELL AS THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, AND THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY CAN PUT UP TO THREE ISSUES ON THE BALLOT AND THIS YEAR THEY HAVE PUT THREE ISSUES ON THE BALLOT SO THERE ARE A COUPLE OF WAYS ISSUES CAN GET ON THE BALLOT. >> LET'S GET STARTED ON ISSUE ONE TO CONFRONT VOTERS. >> YEAH, I MIGHT REITERATE TOO THAT WE ARE AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION SO WHAT WE PRESENT TODAY IS TAKE TAKEN IN AN EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT TO BE BETTER INFORMED WHEN WE VOTE AND WE'RE NOT SUGGESTING THAT YOU VOTE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. >> JUST FOR THE RECORD FOLKS. >> ISSUE ONE IS A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PUT ON BY THE ARKANSAS GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND TO PRIMARILY ALLOW THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO APPROVE OR DISPROVE ANY ADMINISTRATIVE RULES PROPAGATED BY THE STATE AGENCIES. NOW, THE STATE AGENCIES DEVELOP RULES TO INTERPRET AND IMPLEMENT LEGISLATIVE LAWS PUT ON THE BOOKS BY THE LEGISLATORS AND THE PROCESS THEY HAVE USED IN THE PAST THEY HAVE TO DEVELOP A RULE, ALLOW 30 DAY COMMENT PERIOD. THEY TAKE THESE COMMENTS SOMETIMES AND SOMETIMES REVISE THE RULES, AND SUBMIT THOSE TO THE BUREAU OF LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH, AND THE STAFF MEMBERS THERE ARE BASICALLY STAFF FOR THE LEGISLATORS IN THE STATE, AND THEY PRESENT THESE RULE CHANGES TO THE ARKANSAS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL OFTEN REFERS THESE TO THEIR SUBCOMMITTEE ON RULES AND REGULATIONS, REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE WHO REVIEWS THE RULES WITH STATE AGENCY LEADERS AND HISTORICALLY THEY WORKED TOGETHER IN DEVELOPING THESE RULES, BUT THE COMMITTEE AND THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL CANNOT APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THESE RULES AND I THINK THAT IS THE ISSUE BEING ADDRESSED HERE -- >> THEY CAN EXPRESS APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL. >> RIGHT. BUT THEY CAN'T ENFORCE IT AND THAT'S BEEN BACKED UP BY THE STATE SUPREME COURT IN ARKANSAS WHO SAYS THERE IS A SEPARATION OF POWERS DEFINED BY THE ARKANSAS CONSTITUTION WHICH SAYS THAT THE STATE AGENCIES OR THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH HAS THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP AND ENFORCE THE RULES AND THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH CANNOT APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OF THOSE FOR THE SEPARATION OF POWERS. I THINK AT LEAST THERE ARE ENOUGH MEMBERS IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY THAT WANT THIS PUT ON THE BALLOT BECAUSE THEY THINK THE INTENT OF THE CONSTITUTION WASN'T INTERPRETED CORRECTLY SO THEY'RE PUTTING IT ON THE BALLOT TO LET THE VOTERS DECIDE ON THIS ISSUE. >> THERE IS OPPOSITION TO THE AMENDMENT WITHIN GOVERNMENT. I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY IT IS VIEWED IN SOME QUARTERS ANYWAY AS AN ENCROACHMENT ON THE POWERS OF THE EXECUTIVE. >> EXACTLY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE STATE STATE SUPREME COURT HAS SAID IN THE PAST THAT IT INFRINGES ON THE EXECUTIVE POWERS. LET'S GO TO WHAT THE OPPONENTS -- THESE ARE NOT OUR STATEMENTS BUT WE PRESENT WHAT THEY SAY ABOUT THE ISSUES AND I WILL REFER TO MY CHEAT SHEET HERE. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> OKAY. >> FULL DISCLOSURE. >> YEAH. THEY WOULD SAY DISRUPT -- WELL, THE SUPPORTERS -- OPPONENTS. OKAY. THE OPPONENTS SAY IT WOULD DISRUPT THE POWERS BETWEEN THE LEGISLATURE AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND BASICALLY WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE. THEY ALSO SAY IT WOULD MAKE THE PROCESS TO ESTABLISH RULES MORE COMPLEX AND TIME CONSUMING WHILE A LEGISLATOR LEARNS ABOUT AN ISSUE IN ORDER TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE RULES. THEY ALSO SAY A FEW LEGISLATORS COULD BLOCK THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RULES AND OF THE LAW PASSED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY BY REFUSING TO ACCEPT THE RULES. >> BUT IT HAS ITS ADVOCATES. >> IT DOES. >> OBVIOUSLY. >> THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S WHY IT'S ON THE BALLOT, BUT THEY SAY LEGISLATORS WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT STATE RULES FOLLOW THE INTEND OF THE LAW PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE. THEY SAY THAT THE LEGISLATURE WOULD HAVE THE FINAL SAY OVER NEW RULES AND REGULATIONS BEFORE THEY GO INTO EFFECT BEFORE THEY'RE ALLOWED TO CAUSE ANY DIFFICULTY AND THESE ADMINISTRATORS ARE NOT ELECTED OFFICIALS, AND THAT THE POWER SHOULD RESIDE IN THE ELECTED OFFICIALS SO I THINK THAT'S BASICALLY -- BUT AGAIN I MEAN THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE STATEMENTS THAT WE COLLECTED FROM THE SUPPORTERS AND OPPONENTS OF THE LEGISLATION. MORE DETAILED INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE OF COURSE FROM THOSE GROUPS THAT SUPPORT OR OPPOSE TO IT AND YOU CAN GO TO OUR WEBSITE AND CLICK ON THE NEWSLETTER AND SEE LINKS TO THESE GROUPS. >> THERE WE GO. ALSO THE VERY MANNER IN WHICH WE APPROACH FROM A -- EITHER A STATUTORY BASIS OR A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THERE IS A QUESTION INVOLVING THAT ON THE BALLOT FOR FUTURE -- >> FOR FUTURE INITIATIVES. >> FOR FUTURE PURPOSES. >> RIGHT. THIS IS ALSO A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROPOSED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND THE SECOND OF THE THIRD ISSUES THEY'RE PUTTING ON THE BALLOT AND WHAT THEY'RE SAYING -- THEY'RE NOT CHANGING THE NUMBER OF BALLOT SIGNATURES REQUIRED TO GET A PETITION ON THE BALLOT. WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS FOR THE INITIAL SUBMISSION WHAT THE CURRENT PROCESS IS RIGHT NOW THERE IS A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SIGNATURES REQUIRED FOR A PETITION TO BE PUT ON THE BALLOT. ORGANIZATIONS MUST SUBMIT THESE TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE FOUR MONTHS IN ADVANCE OF THE ELECTION, AND AS LONG AS THEY HAVE THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED SIGNATURES ON THAT PETITION THEN THE SECRETARY OF STATE WILL LOOK AT IT AND DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF VALID SIGNATURES ON THE BALLOT. IF THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH BALLOT SIGNATURES ON THE BALLOT RIGHT NOW WHAT HAPPENS THEY CAN HAVE ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS TO COLLECT MORE BALLOT SIGNATURES TO TRY TO REACH THE MINIMUM NUMBER REQUIRED FOR THEM AND WHAT THIS PROPOSAL SAYS IF THEY DON'T HAVE 75% OF THE BALLOT SIGNATURES REQUIRED TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT THEY CANNOT GO BACK AND GET ADDITIONAL SIGNATURES. >> AND A VALID SIGNATURE IS BASICALLY A SIGNATURE OF A REGISTERED VOTER. THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR. >> BUT IT'S DIFFERENT -- DEPENDING ACT OR INITIATED ACT OR CONSTITUTIONAL PROPOSED -- >> YEAH, THE NUMBER OF VALID SIGNATURES REQUIRED I THINK FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT IT REQUIRES 10% OF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO VOTED IN THE LAST GOVERNOR'S ELECTION, AND FOR INITIATED ACT REQUIRES I THINK 8% AND FOR A REFERENDUM I THINK IT'S 6%, AND ALSO YOU NEED TO GET A CERTAIN NUMBER OF THOSE SIGNATURES FROM 15 COUNTIES. >> YEAH. THERE HAS BEEN -- ALWAYS IS EVERY TWO YEARS THERE IS SOME CONFUSION AND USUALLY SOME LITIGATION OR OFTEN LITIGATION INVOLVING THE SIGNATURES THEMSELVES. THIS WOULD AT A MINIMUM PERHAPS ELIMINATE SOME OF THE CONFUSION AS TO EXACTLY HOW MANY WERE NEEDED TO AT LEAST MEET THAT THRESHOLD FOR A GRACE PERIOD AS IT'S SOMETIMES CALLED. >> EXACTLY. I MEAN IF THEY DON'T HAVE 75% OF THE BALLOT SIGNATURES REQUIRED TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER THEN THEY'RE WANT ELIGIBLE TO GO BACK COLLECT MORE SIGNATURES. >> THREE MORE ISSUES ON THE BALLOT. ALL THREE -- NOW AS OF THIS MORNING ANYWAY INVOLVE A LITTLE LITIGATION WHICH IS STILL PENDING. DOCTOR CAN YOU TAKE THE THREE? >> ISSUE NUMBER THREE IS REFERRED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, THE THIRD FINAL ONE THEY COULD PUT ON THERE. IT'S GOT FIVE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS TO IT AND IF YOU LOOK THROUGH THE LEGISLATIVE RECORD YOU CAN SEE WHERE EACH PART WAS MAYBE PART OF A SEPARATE INITIATIVE AND AS THEY FINE TUNED AND GOT TO A COMPROMISE OF WHAT TO PUT ON THE BALLOT SEVERAL THINGS GOT FOLDED IN TOGETHER SO ISSUE THREE HAS FIVE COMPONENTS. THE FIRST IS GIFTS THAT CAN BE RECEIVED BY LOBBYIST. THE SECOND IS HAVING AN INDEPENDENT CITIZENS COMMISSION AND SET SALARIES FOR CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS FOR THE STATE OF ARKANSAS, MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AS WELL AS JUSTICES AND JUDGES ACROSS THE STATE. THE THIRD ISSUE DEALS WITH CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS IN TERMS OF PEOPLE RUNNING FOR OFFICE, WHAT THEY CAN ACCEPT AND FROM WHOM. THE FOURTH COMPONENT DEALS WITH LOBBYING BY FORMER LEGISLATORS. IT SETS A MINIMUM OF TWO YEARS BEFORE THEY CAN REGISTER AS A LOBBYIST AND THE LAST ONE DEALS WITH TERM LIMITS AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT ON THE BOOK AND IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES YOU CAN SERVE UP TO TWO THREE YEAR TERMS AND IN THE SENATE -- AND TOTAL OF 16 YEARS YOU CAN SERVE IN ANY COMBINATION OF WAYS THERE MIGHT BE. >> SO THAT WOULD EXPAND -- ACTUALLY LENGTHENS BY A SERVE. >> 14 TO 16, SO IF YOU ADD THE EIGHT AND THE SIX THAT IS THE 14 AND THIS WOULD EXTEND BY TWO YEARS AND AGAIN IT COULD BE IN EITHER CHAMBER. >> NOW, THERE IS SOME LITIGATION. >> SO THIS IS ONE -- ACTUALLY THREE OF THE ISSUES ON THE BALLOT CURRENTLY HAVE COURT CASES PENDING. THIS ONE IS ONE OF THEM. IT'S BEING CHALLENGED IN TERMS -- ON A COUPLE OF POINTS. ONE IS THE BALLOT TITLE BY PUTTING TERM LIMITS IN THERE THERE IS SOME CONCERN THAT PEOPLE WILL ASSUME THEY'RE AREN'T TERM LIMITS ALREADY THERE, AND THEN ALSO JUST THE NATURE OF THE TITLE AND ALL THE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS IN THERE. THERE IS CONCERN WHETHER OR NOT IT'S CLEAR TO VOTERS AS WELL. >> LET'S TAKE THE FIVE COMPONENTS AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN. >> SURE. GIFTS FROM LOBBYIST. BASICALLY PROHIBIT CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS SO PEOPLE LIKE THE GOVERNOR, THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, SECRETARY OF STATE, COMMISSIONER OF LANDS, ALL THE THINGS THAT WE ELECT AT THE STATE LEVEL AS WELL AS MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND THIS NEW CITIZENS COMMITTEE WHICH WE WILL TALK ABOUT IN A MOMENT. IT WOULD PROHIBIT ANY OF THEM ACCEPTING A GIFT FROM A LOBBYIST OR SOMEONE ACTING ON BEHALF OF A LOBBYIST AND THEY DEFINE GIFTS AND ANYTHING OF VALUE THAT SOMETHING OF EQUAL VALUE HASN'T BEEN GIVEN. THERE EXEMPTIONS TO THAT AND TRAVEL TO CONFERENCES AND FAMILY MEMBERS AND A NUMBER OF THINGS AREN'T CONSIDERED GIFT. THE ACTUAL PROPOSAL DEFINES WHAT GIFTS ARE AND WHAT THEY'RE NOT. >> AND PART TWO. >> PART TWO IS THE CITIZEN -- THE INDEPENDENT CITIZENS COMMISSION AND SO RIGHT NOW UNDER CURRENT LAW THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ESTABLISHES SALARIES FOR THEMSELVES AS WELL AS THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS AND SO THIS WOULD CREATE AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION. IT WOULD HAVE APPOINTEES THAT ARE SUBMITTED FROM THE GOVERNOR, FROM THE LEADERS OF THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE, FROM THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, AND APPOINT MEMBERS TO THE COMMISSION AND THIS COMMISSION WOULD BASICALLY DO A REVIEW OF ALL OF THE SALARIES OF ALL OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS ACROSS THE STATE. THEY COULD ADJUST WHAT SALARIES ARE FOR THOSE ENTITIES OR THOSE INDIVIDUALS AND THEY WILL REVISIT IT AND SET THE SALARIES. THE COMMISSION WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY OF MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS OR PER DIEM THAT THE LEGISLATORS OR OTHER OFFICIALS RECEIVE SO THEY DON'T NECESSARILY SET THOSE. THEY PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION. >> STILL HAS TO BE FUNDED. >> YEAH. SO THAT'S THE CITIZENS COMMISSION AND THERE ARE -- THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE -- THERE ARE RULES ABOUT WHO CAN SERVE ON THAT. BASICALLY IT'S ALMOST ANYBODY WHO IS A REGISTERED VOTER AND A CITIZEN AND 24 OR 25 YEARS OF AGE, SO THERE ARE THINGS THAT DEFINE WHO IS ELIGIBLE. YOU CAN'T DO IT IF YOU HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, SO IF YOU'RE RELATED TO A SENATOR YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO SERVE ON THAT COMMISSION. THE COMMISSION CAN RECEIVE A STIPEND FOR THEIR EFFORTS AND THERE IS A WAY TO CAP THAT AMOUNT AND IT WOULD BE A NEW BODY IN ARKANSAS. >> NUMBER THREE. >> CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND THIS WOULD PLACE LANGUAGE IN OUR CONSTITUTION THAT DEALS WITH CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS. RIGHT NOW ALL OF THE LANGUAGE IS STATUTORY AND IT WOULD BASICALLY PROHIBIT ANYONE RUNNING FOR ANY OFFICE IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS, WHETHER THAT'S A LOCAL OR STATE OFFICE FROM ACCEPTING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM ANYONE EXCEPT FOR FIVE GROUPS SO INDIVIDUALS CAN STILL MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS. POLITICAL PARTIES CAN. COUNTY POLITICAL PARTY COMMITTEES CAN. LEGISLATIVE CAUCUS COMMITTEES CAN STILL PROVIDE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND APPROVED POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES CAN DO IT BUT LOBBYISTS OR OTHERS OUTSIDE OF THOSE THINGS CAN'T PROVIDE THE CONTRIBUTIONS. >> AND THERE'S MORE. FOUR. >> FOUR, LOBBYING FROM FORMER LEGISLATORS. I THINK I ALREADY -- >> THERE'S A LOT HERE. >> THERE IS AND RIGHT NOW IN ARKANSAS CODE THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAVE TO WAIT ONE YEAR BEFORE GETTING OUT OF OFFICE BEFORE THEY REGISTER TO BE A LOBBYIST AND SET IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION AND COULDN'T BE CHANGED UNLESS VOTERS CHANGED IT AND A TWO YEAR COOLING OFF PERIOD IF YOU WILL AND ONCE YOU'RE OUT YOU HAVE TO WAIT TWO YEARS UNTIL YOU BECOME A LOBBYIST SO STRAIGHTFORWARD WITH THAT. >> AND FIVE. >> AND THE LAST ONE DEALS WITH TERM LIMITS AND WE ADDRESSED THIS. BASICALLY IT'S EXTENDING FROM THE CURRENT LEVEL OF 14 YEARS TO 16 YEARS AND THERE IS NO STIPULATION. IT CAN BE ALL IN THE SENATE OR ALL IN THE HOUSE OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF. >> OKAY. THIS ONE IS SO HAS BECOME -- I THINK EVERYBODY -- KIND OF HYPER CHARGED IN TERMS WHICH WE WON'T GET INTO THE MOTIVATIONS OF BOTH SIDES BUT THERE ARE ARGUMENTS BEING MADE. >> SURE. >> ON BOTH SIDES. >> I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE MORE OF THOSE IN THE COURT CASES, ESPECIALLY THOSE WITH COURT CASES. WE HAVE TO PREPARE OUR INFORMATION TO VOTERS FAIRLY EARLY IN THE PROCESS AND A LOT OF STUFF COMES OUT IN THE MONTH BEFORE THE ELECTION AND TOO LATE FOR US TO GET THAT ADDRESSED SO I ENCOURAGE VOTERS TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE NEWS, SEEK OUT INFORMATION ABOUT THESE ISSUES AND FIND OUT WHAT'S THE MOST CURRENT THINGS COMING UP RELATED TO SUPPORTING THE ARGUMENTS. >> ANOTHER ISSUE ON THE BALLOT AND COME TO A SURPRISE OF MANY ARKANSANS AND ANY PART OF ARKANSAS THAT IS STILL DRY GIVEN THE ABUNDANCE OF PRIVATE CLUBS, BUT IN ANY RATE IN TERMS OF PACKAGED SALES THERE ARE PARTS AND ISSUE FOR -- I WOULD SAY FAIR TO SAY PRETTY SWEEPING AND USUALLY ON A COUNTY BY COUNTY BASIS AND UNDER FOUR IT WOULD NOT. >> RIGHT. THIS WOULD BASICALLY OVER TURN ANY COUNTY OR LOCALITY SPECIFIC LAWS ON THE BOOKS -- >> [INAUDIBLE] >> THAT MAKES PART OF THE COUNTY DRY SO RIGHT NOW IN ARKANSAS THERE ARE 37 DRY COUNTY S. THE REST ARE WET BUT AMONG THOSE THERE ARE 26 OF THE 38 HAVE PORTIONS OF THE COUNTY WHERE THE LOCAL ELECTORATE VOTED TO MAKE THOSE PARTS DRY. >> TOWNSHIPS. >> EXACTLY. THERE ARE SEVERAL COUNTIES YOU COULD GO -- LOGAN COUNTY AND GO TO PARIS AND BUY SOMETHING AND GO TO BOONEVILLE AND YOU CAN'T AND THIS WOULD ELIMINATE ALL OF THE INCONSISTENCY ACROSS THE STATE. THE ENTIRE STATE WOULD BE WET AND YOU COULD BUY ANYWHERE. IT'S NOT SAYING IT WON'T BE REGULATED. THE ARKANSAS ALCOHOL BEVERAGE COMMISSION -- SOMETHING LIKE THAT -- ABC, YEAH, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO REGULATE LIKE THEY DO NOW AND ZONING THINGS PASSED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL PROHIBITING WHERE THINGS COULD BE LOCATED OR HOURS OF OPERATIONS. LOCALLY YOU COULD PASS THINGS AS LONG AS THEY DON'T CONTRADICT ANYTHING THAT IN IS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. >> AND ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS ARE WITH THE ABC. >> CORRECT. >> AND WAYNE WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE AND MINIMUM WAGE. >> AND THAT'S AN ISSUE BY THE PEOPLE OF ARKANSAS AND INCREASE THE MINIMUM WAGE TO $6.25 TO $8.50 OVER TWO YEARS STARTING JANUARY 1, 2015 IT WOULD RAISE TO $7.50 AND THEN TO $8 IN 2016 AND $8.50 IN 2017 SO I THINK THE RATIONAL FOR THIS THAT THE SPONSORS SAY ANYBODY THAT WORKS HARD AND FOLLOWS THE RULES DESERVES A FAIR WAGE AND BRIEFLY I CAN GIVE YOU A QUICK REVIEW OF THE MINIMUM WAGE IN ARKANSAS. IT STARTED IN 1969 AT 1 DOLLAR PER HOUR. >> THAT WAS THE FIRST MINIMUM WAGE STATUTE. >> IN ARKANSAS. ARKANSAS THAT WAS THE FIRST THEN. IT'S BEEN INCREASED 22 TIMES SINCE THEN AND THE LAST TIME WAS 2006 AT $6.25 AN HOUR AND IF YOU COMPARE WHAT THAT $6.25 BUYS TODAY VERSUS 2006 IT WOULD TAKE ABOUT $7.28 TO BUY THE SAME GOODS AND SERVICES FROM THEN AND 1978 IT WOULD TAKE $9.48 TODAY TO BUY THE SAME GOODS AND SERVICES WITH THE MINIMUM WAGE AT THAT TIME SO IT'S CHANGED OVER TIME A LITTLE BIT AND BRIEFLY WHO WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS? THERE ARE BUSINESSES, WORKERS AND WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE GENERAL ECONOMY, EMPLOYMENT AND THE GENERAL ECONOMY AND ALL EMPLOYEES WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS AND BUSINESSES AND THIS WOULD RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE ABOVE THE FEDERAL LEVEL SO ALL BUSINESSES THAT HAVE FOUR OR MORE EMPLOYEES WOULD BE AFFECTED. THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR SAYS ABOUT 44,000 WORKERS IN ARKANSAS ARE AT OR UNDER THE FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE RIGHT NOW SO THE FIRST YEAR MORE THAN 44,000 WORKERS WOULD BE AFFECTED. IF IT'S RAISED TO $8.50 THE ARKANSAS SERVICE FOR FAMILIES AND SAYS IT WOULD AFFECT 10% OF THE WORK FORCE AND THOSE INDIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THIS AND THE INCREASING PRESSURE OF RAISING THE WAGE. A BIG QUESTION ON THIS ISSUE WHAT HAPPENS TO THE ECONOMY? WHAT HAPPENS TO THE EMPLOYMENT AND THE ECONOMY IF YOU RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE? AND I THINK THERE'S -- YOU KNOW, SUPPORTERS OF THIS IS A THAT IT WILL ACTUALLY INCREASE EMPLOYMENT AND OPPONENTS SAY IT WILL DECREASE EMPLOYMENT SO THERE'S A GROWING CONSENSUS NOW AMONG ECONOMISTS INCLUDING FIVE NOBLE PRIZE WINNERS WHO REVIEWED ALL PAST ACADEMIC LITERATURE ON THIS TOPIC AND THEIR BASIC CONSENSUS IT HAS LITTLE OR NO EFFECT ON EMPLOYMENT AND COULD STIMULATE THE ECONOMY AND PUT HANDS INTO THE PEOPLE THAT SPEND IT AND CREATING MORE DEMANDS AND JOB GROWTH. >> CORPORATE ARKANSAS TYPICALLY OPPOSES -- AS IT IS IN THIS CASE IT'S FAIR TO SAY -- AS INFLATIONARY AND AS COUNTER TO FULL EMPLOYMENT, BUT TO THE MATTER OF LITIGATION THIS ONE'S UNDER STUDY AS WELL IN THE SUPREME COURT NOW. >> YES. I THINK I HEARD LAST NIGHT ON THE NEWS WHERE THE CASE IS BEING BROUGHT AGAINST THIS. AGAIN IT'S THE TIMING WHEN THE SIGNATURES WERE PRESENTED TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE. >> JULY 4, JULY 7. >> EXACTLY. I GUESS THE STATE SUPREME COURT WILL ADDRESS THAT ISSUE. >> AND A SECOND ISSUE DR. MCCULLOUGH SUFFICIENCY OF THE SIGNATURES COLLECTED. >> YES. ONE IS THE DEADLINE AND THE SECOND ONE IS THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SIGNATURES THAT THE COMPLAINANT FEELS IS SUSCONSPIRACY AND NOT VALID SO THERE IS SOME QUESTION AND THEY'RE CHALLENGING WHETHER THEY HAVE THE CORRECT NUMBER OF SIGNATURES. >> AND OF COURSE IT'S BEYOND OUR KNOWING WHEN THE SUPREME COURT WILL RULE ON ANY OF THE THREE ISSUES THAT ARE NOW -- >> WHICH IS A GOOD POINT. MOST LIKELY ALL FIVE OF THESE WILL APPEAR ON THE BALLOT THAT PEOPLE VOTE ON. >> THE BALLOTS ARE DONE. >> THEY HAVE TO BE PROGRAMMED. YOU JUST CAN'T CHANGE IT OVER NIGHT SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN EVEN IF YOU VOTE FOR SOME IF THEY HAVE BEEN DISMISSED BY THE COURTS THEY WON'TING TALLIED AT ALL AND LIKE THEY DIDN'T EXIST EVEN THOUGH PEOPLE VOTED FOR THEM. >> DR. MCCULLOUGH AND DR. MILLER THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. VOTE. SEE YOU IN TWO YEARS. >> MAJOR FUNDING FOR ELECTION

Contents

Major candidates

Democratic-NPL

Republican

Campaign

Burdick's death provided an opportunity for Conrad to return to the Senate in a fight for an open seat. However, some, particularly his political opponents, saw this as a breach of his promise in spirit if not letter, Conrad's high approval ratings as Senator carried through to a victory against Republican state legislator Jack Dalrymple.[1]

Results

General election results
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Democratic-NPL Kent Conrad 103,246 63.22 73.57
Republican Jack Dalrymple 55,194 33.80
Independent Darold Larson 4,871 2.98
Majority
Turnout 163,311

See also

References

External links

This page was last edited on 21 January 2020, at 01:49
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.