Requesting That Senator Dismang Be Authorized To Pursue The Consideration Of Sjr 15 As A Third Proposed Constitutional Amendment.
If adopted, SR71 will facilitate the progression of SJR 15 to the point where it can be presented to the electorate for a formal vote, thereby shaping the framework under which the state’s constitutional amendments are processed. This process signifies the importance of obtaining consensus among legislators to ensure that proposed amendments reflect a broad agreement before reaching the voting public. The resolution underscores the significance of thorough legislative scrutiny in constitutional matters and aims to protect the integrity of the amendment process.
Senate Resolution 71 (SR71), sponsored by Senator Dismang, seeks authorization for the consideration of Senate Joint Resolution 15 (SJR 15) as a proposed third constitutional amendment in the State of Arkansas. This resolution highlights the procedural requirement under Section 19(C) of the Joint Rules of the Ninety-Fifth General Assembly, which mandates the approval of two-thirds of the members elected to both houses of the General Assembly prior to considering a third proposed constitutional amendment. This means that before SJR 15 can be debated or voted upon, a sufficient level of legislative support must be garnered first.
In conclusion, SR71 is a fundamental procedural resolution that reflects the legislative protocol for considering constitutional amendments in Arkansas. The engagement of Senator Dismang in pursuing this measure conveys a commitment to uphold democratic legislative practices and to ensure that proposed changes to the state constitution undergo appropriate vetting. The outcome of this resolution will ultimately determine the trajectory of SJR 15 and its impact on Arkansas law.
The resolution primarily focuses on the procedural aspects of the legislative process; however, potential points of contention could arise regarding the content of SJR 15 itself, which has not been detailed in the current discussion. Democratic and Republican factions may have differing views on the implications of the proposed amendment, its necessity, and its alignment with current state governance needs. Additionally, discussions surrounding amendments can sometimes ignite broader debates on state authority and individual rights, depending on the nature of the amendments proposed.