Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
Arkansas Advocate
Subcommittee approves rules regarding Arkansas voter registration, gender on IDs
By Mary Hennigan,
1 day ago
State Board of Election Commissioners Director Chris Madison appears before a subcommittee of the Arkansas Legislative Council on Aug. 22, 2024. (Mary Hennigan/Arkansas Advocate)
Rules regarding how Arkansans can sign their voter registration forms, gender neutrality on driver’s licenses and a coach’s ability to enter the opposite sex’s locker room at a public school were among the highlights of a legislative subcommittee meeting Thursday.
The Arkansas Legislative Council’s Administrative Rules Subcommittee heard dozens of proposed rules Thursday; three drew extra attention before being approved. Approved rules will be sent to the full council Friday for a final decision.
Approximately 200 public comments were submitted regarding a rule requiring “wet signatures” on voter registration forms except at specific state agencies. Many of the comments included concerns about voter suppression , how it is difficult for many people to physically put pen to paper when signing their forms and the overall outdated method.
Kristin Foster, deputy director of the voter advocacy group Get Loud Arkansas, spoke against the rule Thursday. Foster created the organization’s popular online voter registration tool that included an electronic signature, the same tool that caused the State Board of Election Commissioners to implement an emergency rule prohibiting the digital mark in April.
Get Loud’s form has since been amended to no longer include an electronic signature.
Rather than reiterate what Foster said were “obvious reasons a wet signature rule is unnecessary and antiquated,” she referenced a recent video of Attorney General Tim Griffin explaining the ballot initiative process, the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act (UETA) and Amendment 51 of the state constitution, all of which she said showed electronic signatures were valid under the law.
In the video, Foster said Griffin commends Secretary of State John Thurston for correcting a “‘we’ve always done it this way’ practice that did not comport with the law.”
Foster said the election board was now before lawmakers asking them to vote in favor of the same type of practice with the wet signature requirement. Additionally, the voter registration details under Amendment 51 do not contain restrictions about how a signature can be made, she argued.
“This committee was created as a safeguard against overreach in rulemaking authority by a state agency,” Foster said. “So today I’m asking you all to be that safeguard for the people of Arkansas by voting against this proposed rule.”
State Board of Election Commissioners Director Chris Madison largely disagreed with Foster’s remarks.
Madison disregarded her mention of Griffin’s video because he said it involved a different subject matter, and he explained that while electronic signatures “could be permissible” under the UETA, the election board inferred differently from Amendment 51.
“It’s a rule of exclusion,” he said. “It says, ‘If I permit it expressibly in one place, it means it’s expressly prohibited in the other place.’”
Chris Madison, director of the State Board of Election Commissioners, addresses the Rules Subcommittee of the Arkansas Legislative Council on Aug. 22, 2024 about a rule to require “wet signatures” on voter registration forms. (Mary Hennigan/Arkansas Advocate)
A third-party like Get Loud is not permitted to solicit electronic signatures, Madison said.
Rep. Joy Springer, D-Little Rock, asked if Madison had looked into the potential cost savings of permitting all electronic signatures on voter forms. Madison said he hadn’t, but said if there’s interest, the Legislature could request the election board or the Secretary of State’s office to do an interim study.
Springer indicated that she might request such a study at the election board’s meeting next week.
While the rule promulgation process for wet signatures reaches its end on the legislative front, state officials and Get Loud staff will be in the courtroom next week to address a lawsuit challenging the rule.
The State Board of Election Commissioners would typically be represented by the attorney general’s office, but a conflict from an opinion issued by the office in April led to a recusal of services. Madison asked lawmakers earlier this week to approve up to $500,000 in state funds to cover the cost of legal representation.
The request was approved, though it is pending final approval from the full Legislative Council on Friday.
Gender indication on driver’s licenses
Lawmakers also reviewed and approved a rule that requires the gender on an Arkansas driver’s license to match what is listed on the person’s birth certificate. The rule prohibits the use of an “X” to indicate someone’s gender, which has been accepted since 2010. It also restricts the use of a blank space under gender.
There was no discussion among lawmakers regarding the rule on Thursday.
The Department of Finance and Administration initially rescinded the gender-neutral driver’s license policy in March. The proposed rule is meant to prevent threats to law enforcement officers’ safety, department officials said.
When Secretary Jim Hudson rescinded the policy in March, approximately 500 identification cards, or .01% of all cards, had an “X” distinction. Those cards will remain valid though their expiration dates, at which time updates will be required.
The department submitted 70 pages of public comment in response to the proposed rule, many of which said the rule was discriminatory and an attack on the most vulnerable population in Arkansas. At least one resident said the policy change sent a message to the LGBTQ+ community that they were not welcome in Arkansas.
Nearly a dozen residents, many of whom identify as transgender or nonbinary, attended a public hearing in June and urged state officials not to reverse the policy because it was not causing any problems or harm.
Some Arkansas attorneys mentioned concerns about potential violations to the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The rule includes language that would allow a driver’s license to match a person’s passport or identification documents from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. But the federal government allows gender to be indicated with an “X” on passports, and birth certificates can be legally amended, which could create confusion.
Coaches in locker rooms
Mixed into the later part of the committee’s Thursday agenda was a rule governing public school policies related to overnight travel and the use of lavatories, such as locker rooms.
The rule aims to implement Act 317 of 2023 , which defines sex on the basis of biology , ensures public schools designate restrooms based on sex, and requires students to share sleeping quarters with students of the same sex or be provided with a single-occupancy room.
The rule will change the definition of a locker room for a set duration of time, which will allow a coach to enter a locker room of a different sex to speak with their teams during halftime under specific circumstances.
When discussed at a July meeting , Speaker of the House Matthew Shepherd, R-El Dorado, said the proposed rule conflicts with existing state law.
Lawmakers did not raise any questions about the rule Thursday before approval.
After adjournment, Shepherd said the rule is nuanced as it is heavily dependent on how the facilities are being used. He recommended school districts “pay really close attention to it.”
When asked if the rule was amended to comply with state law, Shepherd said, “It got to a point where I felt like it was — the rule … was enough to chin the bar here in front of this committee. I mean, there may need to be some clean-up work done in the next [legislative] session, just to make it more clear.”
Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
It’s essential to note our commitment to transparency:
Our Terms of Use acknowledge that our services may not always be error-free, and our Community Standards emphasize our discretion in enforcing policies. As a platform hosting over 100,000 pieces of content published daily, we cannot pre-vet content, but we strive to foster a dynamic environment for free expression and robust discourse through safety guardrails of human and AI moderation.
Comments / 0