An effort to put Arkansas in line with 47 other states that do not link the birthdays of a civil-rights leader and a Confederate general was thwarted in a legislative committee hearing Wednesday.
After an hour of testimony, mostly against House Bill 1113 -- which would have ended the 30-year tradition of pairing Robert E. Lee's Birthday and Martin Luther King Jr.'s Birthday in a holiday on the third Monday of January -- the bill was defeated by a majority voice vote in the State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Arkansas is one of only three states that celebrate the two figures on the same day. A handful of other states celebrate Lee's and King's birthdays on different days.
After this month's holiday, Arkansas drew negative attention from traditional and Internet media for the signs posted around the state Capitol announcing the shared holiday. That attention continued Wednesday evening after the foundering of the bill earlier in the day.
The sponsor of HB1113, Rep. Nate Bell, R-Mena, said he wouldn't speculate about why the vote went the way it did but that separating the two leaders' holidays would help alleviate the attention the state receives.
"Personally, I'm doing my best to change that [negative perception]," Bell said. "I'm not going to speculate what I'll do in the future other than to say it's something I believe very strongly we need to do and I'll re-evaluate the situation and come back and take a look."
Bell filed his legislation on Jan. 21, minutes before Rep. Fred Love, D-Little Rock, filed identical legislation seeking to remove Robert E. Lee from the official state holiday. Love did not return calls Wednesday to discuss his bill, which has yet to be heard before the committee.
On Monday, Bell amended his legislation to create a separate "Southern Heritage Day" to be observed each Nov. 30 that would honor Lee as well as Patrick Cleburne, a Confederate general who lived in and is buried in Helena-West Helena.
Bell said he amended his bill after getting a lot of feedback, much of it negative.
"I've personally received some pretty strong opposition, and even some stuff that rises to the level of threats," Bell said. "So [the opposition] was not at all unexpected."
Rep. Charles Blake, D-Little Rock, presented Bell's bill to the committee, arguing that Lee and King both played vital roles in the state's history and identity and that both should be celebrated.
"It will allow [Arkansans] to celebrate the legacy and unity as well as the heritage and culture of our Southern roots," Blake said. "We will no longer have to decide which to celebrate on the third Monday of January."
Rep. Bob Ballinger, R-Hindsville, supported Bell's bill, in part because of the perception held "by some" of its being inappropriate to celebrate Civil War and civil-rights figures on the same day.
Seating was at a premium by the time Bell gaveled the committee into session at 10 a.m.
Loy Mauch, a former state legislator and former head of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, led off public comment in opposition of Bell's legislation, arguing that Lee was a patriot and that the Lee family is a pillar of the American nation.
Bell stepped in frequently to keep the conversation focused on his proposed legislation.
"Lee has been slandered by being falsely accused a traitor and rebelling against the United States government. I'm here to set the record straight," Mauch said. "First of all, one can only rebel against lawful authority ... as far as secession goes."
"Mr. Mauch we're not here to talk about secession. ... I'm giving you a lot of latitude to talk about [Lee] and his significance to the holiday, but we're not here to talk about secession," Bell said.
"I'm here to talk about the contributions he made to this country," Mauch said.
"Then let's talk about the contributions he made to this country and not the moral equivalence of secession," Bell said.
Another opponent, Kay Tatum, said she was worried that the state and country's history was being lost for younger Americans and that the legislation would only worsen the ignorance.
Mountain Home attorney and former judge John Crain said everyone in the committee room owed a bit of their heritage to Lee's legacy and that moving his holiday was an affront to that legacy.
"By taking [Lee's] birthday off the day it's set at currently would be telling me that my ancestry and my heritage is not worth honoring," Crain said. "I think Martin Luther King Jr., if he were standing beside me, would say why can't we celebrate [the birthdays] of two men, one of color and a white man? Surely we've progressed that far in our race relations."
House Minority Leader Rep. Eddie Armstrong, D-North Little Rock, questioned the efficacy of the bill and signaled his opposition to it.
"Frankly, I'm over [the] racial tension and the strife we've had over the issue," Armstrong said. "If there isn't a real robust problem, and there isn't an outcry ... why are we chasing a nonproblem to identify a solution?"
Rita Sklar, head of the Arkansas chapter of the Arkansas Civil Liberties Union, was the last to speak and voiced support of the bill.
"We feel the attempt to put the two holidays together was an effort to cancel out what Dr. King stands for," Sklar said. "[King] was an American hero who stood up for American rights when many Americans' rights were not recognized. ... He is really a hero of the Constitution, and I believe he deserves his own holiday."
Ballinger was one of the "ayes" overpowered in the voice vote.
Asked if he was surprised by the outcome, Ballinger said the issue obviously resonated with many citizens, as demonstrated by the turnout. He theorized that Sklar's testimony hurt the bill's chances.
"When the ACLU testified for it, I figured it would die. ... They tend to take bad positions on a lot of things, and people down here don't appreciate it. And typically, if the ACLU supports it, they won't vote for it," Ballinger said. "Her testimony on it killed it."
Sklar said she was "naive and idealistic enough" to be surprised by the "no" vote and added that she doubted her testimony did any real damage. She theorized, without going into detail, that the legislation was already dead on arrival.
Metro on 01/29/2015