Spoilers: They all definitely suck. One maybe sucks slightly less than the others.
Arkansans will be voting for more than their elected representatives this fall! Four ballot measures will appear on your 2026 ballot: three constitutional amendments and one bond issue. You may note that all three amendments are legislatively referred, and none were proposed by the people. This is because the legislature sucks and doesn’t hold itself to the exactingly high standards that the people of Arkansas must meet to amend their own constitution.
Alas.
Nevertheless, we must play the hand we’ve been dealt. Here’s our staff takes.
Gennie Diaz
- Issue 1, Citizens Only Voting Amendment: Nope. Um, Arkansas already requires citizenship to vote. Why are we wasting time and paper with Issue 1? It’s dumb. Seems like the legislature wants voters concentrating on culture war issues. Bad news, we’re worried about grocery and gas prices.
- Issue 2, Right to Keep and Bear Arms: Nope. Like Issue 1, Issue 2 is something that already exists. Maybe they are unfamiliar with the Second Amendment? Someone should let them know about it. Also, sirs and ma’ams, no one is trying to take away your guns. Let’s focus for a hot second and try, just a tiny bit, to have some imagination and refer a constitutional amendment that may solve a real-life problem for the people of this state.
- Issue 3, Economic Development Districts: Nope. Guys, look, this is very much a sweetheart deal for the people that give big bucks to certain legislators. Do I know exactly who these sweetheart deals are for? I have a decent guess. Is the legislature going to admit this amendment is about making it even easier for the Googles of the word to build data centers? Definitely not. There are so many things to dislike about Issue 3, but the legislature does win the name game, because “economic development district” sounds very enticing. Why would you be against economic development! We need jobs! We need the economy! Development sounds cool! But yikes, Issue 3 would give the legislature a silly amount of control over who gets tax breaks at the local level and who doesn’t. Big businesses that would get these tax breaks would not be contributing to things like schools, roads, water, etc. Not to mention that our cities and counties will be throwing more money than ever before at their local public school districts since the state’s been bleeding them dry with those pesky private school vouchers. But back to the main point: an amendment like Issue 3 *could* potentially benefit Arkansans but we’d need a future legislature that has enough integrity to write sensible regulations for this amendment. In reality, our legislature sucks, and Issue 3 is just pure, unfettered access to tax-free business development for whatever industry the supermajority likes best.
- Issue 4, Water Bonds: Undecided. This bond authorization is the only ballot issue that has real, substantive benefit to Arkansans. Counties and cities need to tap into infrastructure bonds to fund their water systems. This authorization gives them access to that money. And without it, who the hell knows how local governments will pay for their water systems and upgrades (remember that insane water debacle in Helena-West Helena? No bueno). Here’s the rub for me – the sponsor tacked on a companion bill to this bond issue, which passed both chambers easily. The implementation of this companion bill is entirely contingent on whether or not Issue 4 passes. That’s because Act 736 let’s *private entities* access tax-payer funded loans to finance their own water-related projects… say, water infrastructure needed for a private prison build. I’m quite irritated with this d-bag move from Bart Hester, because voting for this bond means allowing private business to compete with our local governments for critical water financing. I very much do not like that. But I also know that not passing this bond means putting our local governments in a pickle. People need water! But Bart Hester needs to be less of a turd. Your girl is conflicted.
Sam Watson
- Issue 1, Citizens Only Voting Amendment: No. This is literally already in the Constitution and will do nothing new. Non-citizens, and I cannot emphasize this enough, already can’t vote; a state investigation turned up thirty-four people voting illegally, and all were caught. More seriously, this opens a door for the legislature to pass stringent proof of citizenship laws that otherwise legal and qualified citizens may not be able to meet, further reducing our already-pitiful voting numbers.
- Issue 2, Right to Keep and Bear Arms: No. Much like Issue 1, this right already exists in the state and federal constitutions. Adding language relating to “firearm components” and “accessories” creates a vagueness that people might exploit for court challenges against reasonable gun safety laws. I don’t think anyone wants domestic abusers or violent felons to have access to firearms that have been heavily modified by previously illegal “accessories” or “components” and this amendment would put more guns into the hands of people like former Republican Representative Austin McCollum who like to beat the crap out of their families. No thank you, next.
- Issue 3, Economic Development Districts: No. I’m all for economic development, but I don’t think it should be in the hands of legislators and I’m uncomfortable with how vague the language is as currently written. Supporters of the amendment argue that it would help Arkansas catch up to speedy development in Oklahoma and Texas, but there’s better ways to do that than a constitutional amendment. That hands the legislature way too much power. Theoretically, they could use this to supersede local moratoriums and regulations against data centers and force new data center development into localities. It’s funny to see “conservatives” who rail and rant against big government put forward things like this that massively expand the size and scope of state government! Who knew the progressive would be more pro-small government and local control than these extremist jokers. Also, as a former legislative editor, this is the stuff of nightmares. It’s vague as hell, unfocused, expansive, you name it. Were I a Supreme Court justice – god forbid – I would strike it down out of spite for crappy writing.
- Issue 4, Water Bonds: Undecided, but leaning yes. I really don’t love the idea of borrowing money against the future, but poor and rural districts rely on bonds like this, and many of them desperately need to update their water systems. Like my colleagues, I trust Bart Hester not at all; he’s proven over and over again he doesn’t have Arkansans’ best interests at heart. But people have to drink, and despite the possible poison pills Bart Bootlicker Hester slipped in here, at the end of the day, it could genuinely help Arkansans.
Aliah Rowe
- Issue 1, Citizens Only Voting Amendment:
- No, Non-citizens can already not vote in elections. The Arkansas constitution already limits the ability to vote to only U.S. citizens. It is completely unnecessary. But if we’re worried about voter fraud, maybe make it an explicit requirement that you must be registered to vote at the address you currently reside. *cough* Stephen Bright *cough* Tom Cotton *cough*
- Issue 2, Right to Keep and Bear Arms:
- No, creating a right to firearms and accessories without limitation is extremely dangerous. Arkansas has the 10th highest rate of gun deaths in the country. 40.8% of women and 34.8% of men experience intimate partner physical violence, sexual violence, and/or stalking in their lifetimes. And lastly, Arkansas ranks 4th in the nation for violent crime. It is for these reasons, that there should be some limitations on guns in order to ensure safety of our citizens while also maintaining the fundamentals of the right that is embedded in our constitution.
- Issue 3, Economic Development Districts:
- No, to put it quite frankly, I do not trust the proponents of this amendment. Additionally, I am hesitant to give this Arkansas Legislature this overbroad authority.
- Issue 4, Water Bonds:
- No, similarly, I do not trust the proponents of Issue 4 and I don’t think the Arkansas Legislature has proven the necessary financial responsibility to trust them with this kind of endeavor. Additionally, I believe that if this a problem the Arkansas Legislature should address it and divert reserve funds instead of those going to private schools.
Abby Oliver
- Issue 1, Citizens Only Voting Amendment: NO, It is already illegal for non-citizens to vote in the United States. I see no compelling reason to amend the wording of our state’s most foundational document to solve a problem that, as far as I can tell, nobody in Arkansas is trying to create. Most importantly, this amendment strips decision-making from local communities. In the future, should a community want to let certain noncitizens — think visa holders and other legal residents— vote in a strictly local election, like the school board, they wouldn’t be able to. I also have a hard time believing this amendment isn’t part of the broader political effort to make people hear “noncitizen” and immediately think “illegal immigrant.” Immigrants are our neighbors, coworkers, students, business owners, and friends. They are not political props for a problem that does not exist. For people who supposedly hate government overreach, constitutionally prohibiting local communities from ever making this decision themselves feels awfully… big government.
- Issue 2, Right to Keep and Bear Arms: NO, Arkansas has protected the right to keep and bear arms in its Constitution since the founding of our state. Nothing about that has changed and I’m not in favor of changing it— especially when those changes include adding sweeping language like “without limitation” and “shall not be infringed”. This is extraordinarily broad language, making it virtually impossible to implement any type of reasonable gun regulation. Regulation that would protect Arkansans from irresponsible gun owners and gun violence. I support the second amendment and respect an individual’s right to own and use a gun. I also believe the government should retain the ability to enact reasonable gun laws if they need to. Those positions are not mutually exclusive. Unlimited access to guns, ammunition, accessories and components is not a God-given right. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of excessive gun ownership” was not the phrase.
- Issue 3, Economic Development Districts: NO, This is probably the vaguest thing I’ve ever read. I read the entire amendment and other people’s interpretations of the amendment, and I still came out just as unclear as I went into it. That alone is a problem. If you want voters to amend the Arkansas Constitution, the burden should be on you to explain exactly what we’re authorizing, how it will work, who benefits, who pays, and what protections are built into it. I’m particularly uncomfortable with the potential property-tax implications and with granting broad economic-development authority without knowing what the important details look like. I prefer guardrails to pinky promises. When legislators answer “What would the money be used for?” with “Developing and diversifying Arkansas economy” all I hear is “developing data centers without local interference”. While other states have implemented successful versions of EDDs, and maybe we should too, we definitely shouldn’t have to change our constitution or accept no guardrails to do so.
- Issue 4, Water Bonds: No, After first reading this, I felt like I was going to vote yes on this measure. I think all Arkansans can appreciate financing projects that improve water, wastewater, and irrigation infrastructure across the state. However, this measure is asking us to finance these projects by letting the state borrow $500 million, the principal and interest of which could be paid from Arkansas’s general revenue. Which sounds a whole lot like the state is asking to borrow my money to fund these projects. Which, ya know, I could be convinced! Infrastructure is expensive, it lasts for decades, and borrowing money for long-term capital projects is not inherently irresponsible. But then I remembered Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders flexing Arkansas’s massive budget surplus and billions in state reserves as proof that “conservative leadership works.” Which is a flex — until you ask taxpayers in one of the hungriest states in the country to take on hundreds of millions of dollars in debt to pay for infrastructure. If billions in reserves are proof that “conservative leadership works,” then make it work. Clean water, functioning wastewater systems, flood mitigation, and other basic infrastructure seems like a good place to start, no? I need a much better explanation for why taxpayers should authorize hundreds of millions of dollars in additional debt before we talk about using more of the money the state already has. And then came my bigger problem: the amendment is broad enough to finance infrastructure serving commercial and industrial development. If we’re going to use the state’s borrowing power to build infrastructure that directly benefits major private industrial developments, I want strong protections ensuring those corporations — not Arkansans — pay the additional infrastructure costs their projects create. Corporations HAVE money. They do not need to ride the coattails of Arkansas taxpayers.
