Thank you!

I want to say Thank you to everyone for your support and for overwhelming voting to re-elect me as the Republican Nominee for District 70.

Thank you to those that prayed. Thank you to the many volunteers who waved a sign, went door to door or made a phone call.  Thank you to those who donated whatever amount they could.

Winning the primary gives us the momentum we need to win in November.  The stakes are now much higher and I am committed to working hard to make sure our conservative message gets to all the voters of District 70.

I hope you will join me as we continue to fight to make Arkansas a better place to work and live.

Here to Serve,
David Meeks

What You Can Do to Help Get Out the Vote!

We are now the last 36 hours of the campaign.  We have gotten our conservative message out to the voters.

Now it is critical they get out and vote.  Here is what you can do to help us in last few hours.

1) Pray
2) Wave Signs:  Today- Stand on a busy street corner (Dave Ward, Hogan or Salem are good places)
Tomorrow- Polling Places (Peace Lutheran on Dave Ward, McGee Center on Prince, or Grace United Methodist Church on Hogan).  I will be at the McGee Center all day on election day.
3) Make Phone Calls and Email those in District 70. I have attached a map of District 70 to help you identify those voters you may know in the district.

Please join us for an election night watch party starting at 7p at Larry's Pizza in downtown Conway.

Here to Serve,
David Meeks

What My Opponent Hopes Conservatives Don't See

House District 70 Candidate Comparison

Issue	Rep David Meeks	Price Dooley
Gun Rights: NRA Grade	A (Solidly Pro-Gun)	D- (Anti-gun) (1)
Same Sex Domestic Partnerships, Civil Unions	Oppose	Undecided (2)
Blocking Obamacare	Sponsored Legislation/Voted multiple times against funding healthcare exchange	“There is nothing a state legislator can do, ultimately…” (3)
States Rights	Support: Co-sponsored resolution	Unsure.  See Above.
Military Service	Yes-Honorable Discharge	No
Endorsements	Arkansas Right to Life NRA
No Climate Tax Pledge (4)	Signed/ Record of voting against every tax and fee increase.	Not signed (As of  5/10/12)

In addition Price Dooley has voted in Democratic Primaries going back to at least 2004.  So the question he should answer is who did he vote for in 2008?  Barack Obama or Hilary Clinton?  Who did he vote for in 2010? Blanche Lincoln or Bill Halter?  Did he vote for Joyce Elliot for Congress?

If he is voting for the party will he continue to vote with the Democrats?  If he was voting values what values does he have common with all the liberals listed above?

 I have a solid conservative record in the legislature and I will continue to fight for hardworking Arkansas taxpayers.  I will remain focused on important issues like job creation, spending cuts, and working on comprehensive legislation to combat Human Trafficking.

I ask the voters of District 70 to reject the negative smear campaign being run by my opponent and vote to return a proven, solid conservative to the legislature.

As always, you may contact me at david.meeks@arkansashouse.org

References:

(1)   http://www.nrapvf.org/grades-endorsements/2012/arkansas.aspx?f=11308

(2)   http://arkansasvotersguide.com/index.asp?p=compare&Officesought=State+House&District=70

(3)   http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2012/may/06/battling-health-law-dispute-gop-2-20120506/

(4) http://noclimatetax.com

Let's Focus on the Issues

There is a proverb that I was taught growing up and  strive to live by:  "A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favor rather than silver and gold." (Proverbs 22:1)

So it’s troubling when my opponent wants to avoid his record and  instead attempt to discredit me with false accusations. 

The reality is I’ve been a strong conservative legislator.  I’ve stood against Obamacare.  I’ve fought for ethics reform.  I’ve been engaged in the concern over our shortfall in Medicaid.  I voted for millions of dollars in tax cuts and focused on job creation.  Throughout this campaign I have stayed focused on vital issues that are important to Arkansas families.

Predictably my opponent has resorted to false personal attacks because he knows I’ve kept my promises and he can’t match my credentials. Slinging the proverbial mud to distract you from the real concerns we face.

The fact he received a D minus rating from the NRA is just one example of how his stance on an issue does not match up with that of the majority of Arkansans.

He also believes Arkansans should just accept Obamacare because, in his own words, “there is nothing a state legislature can do” to protect Arkansans from overreaching government. 

I encourage my opponent to stop the negativity and start telling voters why he would be a conservative voice for Conway.  

My Reaction to the AG's Opinion on the Contraception Mandate

Late yesterday the Attorney General issued an opinion on two questions I had concerning the contraception mandate.  You can find the complete opinion here:  http://ag.arkansas.gov/opinions/docs/2012-043.html

Here is the bottom line of that opinion: "Second, the Supremacy Clause in the U.S. Constitution requires that any valid federal law will override a conflicting state law. Accordingly, if the regulation is a valid federal law, then any conflicting state laws—whether they be regulatory, statutory, or constitutional—will be preempted"

This should bring concern to all Arkansans.  If Obamacare is upheld and we go forward with implementing the healthcare exchanges we will be subject to whatever regulations HHS puts into place regardless of whether it is good for Arkansas or is in line with our values.

I believe this latest mandate is an assault on not only our states rights but also on our religious freedoms and will work diligently to fight against it.

I stand with the majority of Arkansans who oppose this encroachment on our freedoms. I stand with Cardinal Dolan, Pastor Rick Bezet and the others of faith who have said they will not comply with this mandate.  I hope you will stand with us.

Here to Serve,
David Meeks

Attorney General's Opinion on the Contraception Mandate

Recently the Obama administration mandated that all contraception, including abortion-inducing drugs be included in healthcare plans. This raised the question about whether there were any state laws that might come into conflict with the mandate.  After doing some preliminary research, I have found several state statues that may be in conflict with the new mandate.

To that end, I have sent over a request to the Attorney General to get an opinion.  The wording of the opinion and the research can be found below. Thank you to Representatives Kim Hammer and Lori Benedict for signing on to the opinion.

If you know of any other statues that may be in conflict with the new mandate, please contact me at david.meeks@arkansashouse.org

Here to Serve,

David Meeks

_____________________________________________________________

Dear General McDaniel:

I am writing to request your official opinion on the following questions.

1) Would any state statutes and/or amendments, including those I have enclosed with this request, conflict with the Contraception Mandate?

2) Based on Arkansas Constitutional Amendment 68, would the Contraception Mandate prohibit the legislature from appropriating money to entities that may dispense abortion-inducing drugs listed in the mandate?

If there is any way you might expedite your response to this question, it would be greatly appreciated 

Amendments:

---->Amendment 2 § 24. Religious liberty.

 "All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; no man can, of right, be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship; or to maintain any ministry against his consent. No human authority can, in any case or manner whatsoever, control or interfere with the right of conscience; and no preference shall ever be given, by law, to any religious establishment, denomination or mode of worship, above any other."

---->Amendment 68 I have been told that a possibility exists Amendment 68 could affect certain grants to hospitals, because we appropriate the money. On a separate note, others I have talked to said that the State Employee Health Insurance probably wouldn't be affected by the Mandate and Amendment 68 because it is considered to be self funded.

State Statues:

http://statutes.laws.com/arkansas/title-20/subtitle-2/chapter-16/subchapter-6/20-16-601

---->20-16-601  This deals with abortion and would come into play if they required a physician to administer an abortion inducing drug.

http://insurance.arkansas.gov/PandC/Insurance%20Code%20&%20related%20chapters/Chapter791.htm

---->23-79-510: (2)  EXCLUSIONS.  Subject to the contractual policy form language adopted by the board, the following services, supplies, drugs, or articles whether prescribed by a physician or not shall not be covered:

                    (R)  Any expense or charge for oral contraceptives used for birth control or any other temporary birth control measures;

Subchapter 11

— Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act

23-79-1101. Title.

This subchapter shall be known and may be cited as the “Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act”.

23-79-1102. Definitions.

As used in this subchapter:

               (1)(A)  “Health benefit policy” means an individual or group plan, policy, or contract for health care services issued, delivered, issued for delivery, or renewed in this state, including those contracts executed by the State of Arkansas on behalf of state employees, by a health care corporation, health maintenance organization, preferred provider organization, accident and sickness insurer, fraternal benefit society, hospital service corporation, medical service corporation, provider-sponsored health care corporation, or other insurer or similar entity.

                               (B)  “Health benefit policy” does not include:

                                               (i)  Accident-only, credit, specified disease, dental, hospital indemnity, Medicare supplement, long-term care, or disability income insurance policies;

                                               (ii)  Coverage issued as a supplement to liability insurance;

                                               (iii)  Workers' compensation or similar insurance; or

                                               (iv)  Automobile medical-payment insurance;

               (2)  “Insurer” means an accident and sickness insurer, fraternal benefit society, hospital service corporation, medical service corporation, health care corporation, health maintenance organization, or any similar entity authorized to issue contracts under Title 23 of this Code; and

               (3)  “Religious employer” means an entity that:

                               (A)  Is organized and operated for religious purposes and has received a section 501(c)(3) designation from the Internal Revenue Service;

                               (B)  Has as one (1) of its primary purposes the inculcation of religious values; and

                               (C)  Employs primarily persons who share its religious tenets.

23-79-1103. Parity for contraceptives.

(a)  Every health benefit policy that is delivered, issued, executed, or renewed in this state or approved for issuance or renewal in this state by the Insurance Commissioner on or after August 12, 2005, that provides coverage for prescription drugs on an outpatient basis shall provide coverage for prescribed drugs or devices approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for use as a contraceptive.

---->(b)  Nothing contained in this subchapter shall be construed to require any insurance company to provide coverage for an abortion, an abortifacient, or any United States Food and Drug Administration-approved emergency contraception.

23-79-1104. Extraordinary surcharges prohibited.

(a)  No insurer shall impose upon any person receiving prescription contraceptive benefits pursuant to this subchapter any:

               (1)  Copayment, coinsurance payment, or fee that is not equally imposed upon all individuals in the same benefit category, class, coinsurance level, or copayment level receiving benefits for prescription drugs; or

               (2)  Reduction in allowable reimbursement for prescription drug benefits.

(b)  This subchapter shall not be construed to:

               (1)  Require coverage for prescription coverage benefits in any contract, policy, or plan that does not otherwise provide coverage for prescription drugs;

               (2)(A)  Preclude the use of closed formularies.

                               (B)  However, the formularies shall include oral, implant, and injectable contraceptive drugs, intrauterine devices, and prescription barrier methods; or 

  ------->  (3)  Require any religious employer to comply with this subchapter.

Washington Politics in the Arkansas House

Today, the Senate voted against suspending the rules to consider the Trucker Tax Repeal resolution so the issue was dead right?  Wrong!

The House Democrats proposed an amendment to the DFA-Disbursing appropriation that would push back the start of the Trucker Tax Exemption to July 2013. The amendment only needed 51 votes to be attached to the appropriation (vs the 67 needed for the resolution).  It was passed via a voice vote then something very interesting happened.

Several members of the House called for a roll call vote.  A couple of seconds afterwards, a member called for a vote by division.  The Speaker of the House ignored the call for a roll call vote and proceeded with the vote by division.

The vote by division is simply members standing and being counted.  It is a way to vote and not have it recorded.

Yes, you read that right.  Democrats didn't want to go on record as to whether they voted for this amendment or not.

If you want to see if your Representative stood or not, here is a link to the video: http://arkansas-house.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=719

The actual standing vote takes place at about the 19 min mark.

What happened today set a dangerous precedent and should have been outright rejected.  The voters in Arkansas wanted the legislature to focus on the budget during the fiscal session. There was a specific way  outlined for other issues outside of the normal fiscal avenue to be addressed.  What happened today was not the way.

The next couple of days will be interesting to watch.