A divided legislative committee on Monday endorsed a bill that would ax the state law under which judges and justices lose their retirement benefits if they don't retire by age 70.
Under existing state law, a judge or justice who turns 70 during a term of office to which he has been elected may complete the term without forfeiting his retirement benefits.
But if he chooses to serve beyond the end of that term, he forfeits his retirement benefits, said Jody Carreiro, an actuary for the Joint Committee on Public Retirement and Social Security Programs.
Rep. Reginald Murdoch, D-Marianna, said his House Bill 1352 "takes away the age requirement on a retirement for the judges -- something that was much older and antiquated and was for a different reason and a different time."
"Because of the advent of various commissions and oversight that we currently have on our judges in our system, now there is no need that we remove them from the bench at a certain age," he said.
"As we know, many times as they get older, they get wiser, they become better judges, so there is no reason to make them do that," and voters should be allowed to determine whether the judges continue to serve, Murdoch said.
Rep. Grant Hodges, R-Rogers, said, "I feel like this is a very significant change and I just don't feel like I have enough information at this point to make a decision."
[RELATED: Complete Democrat-Gazette coverage of the Arkansas Legislature]
But Murdoch said, "It is as simple as it sounds. It is that simple."
Sen. Joyce Elliott, D-Little Rock, said voters should oust elected officials who aren't performing, whether at age 45 or age 75, and "that's the way the system works for anybody except judges.
"There is nothing magical about this, folks, because ... at age 70 that we can elect them or we can unelect them. It seems to me [judges should be treated like lawmakers] because you can run for the Legislature no matter what age you are, and I think that's fair," she said.
Rep. Doug House, R-North Little Rock, said the state's constitutional officers and lawmakers are subject to term limits, and asked, "Doesn't this serve as a term limit for judges?
"There are thousands of other lawyers who would love to serve on the bench. There are thousands of other citizens ... who would like to serve in the Legislature, but we have term limits," he said.
House said the turnover rate in the House is about 25 percent every two years, and the turnover rate for judges hasn't reached that rate.
The state Supreme Court has upheld the state law on several questions, House said in signaling his opposition to the bill.
Murdoch said, "This is not for term limits of judges.
"This is a retirement piece of legislation. Term limits is a different conversation that should be approached differently at a different time," he said.
Murdoch said 18 members of the 135-member Legislature are above age 70, and "we appreciate it."
In related action, the committee recommended approval of House Bill 1219 by Rep. David Hillman, R-Almyra.
It would extend the period during which a judge or justice could turn 70 without forfeiting retirement benefits, allowing someone to turn 70 after his election but before his term in office begins.
"The only ones that I know of that might be opposed to it are those that have a judge that might be in the 5 percent of the judges that might fall into this category and that they want an easy way to get rid of them. We kind of like to keep ours," Hillman said.
A Section on 03/19/2019