Secure Arkansas

The Arkansas 90th General Assembly is attempting to reintroduce the legislation language of  Bruce Westerman’s bill, HB 1312, introduced in 2013 during the 89th General Assembly. The language of that bill is shown directly below between the extended dashes.

Remember, the devil is in the details. You must read the complete bill to know what effect it will have.

————————————————————————————————————

Stricken language would be deleted from and underlined language would be added to present law.

AN ACT TO PROVIDE LOCAL CONTROL OVER FLUORIDE LEVELS IN WATER SYSTEMS; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

Subtitle

AN ACT TO PROVIDE LOCAL CONTROL OVER FLUORIDE LEVELS IN WATER SYSTEMS.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS:

SECTION 1. Arkansas Code § 20-7-136(b), concerning a statewide fluoridation program, is amended to read as follows:

(b) The company, corporation, municipality, county, government agency, or other entity that owns or controls a water system shall control may determine whether the company, corporation, municipality, county, government agency, or other entity will adjust the quantity of fluoride in the water so as to maintain a fluoride content established by the Department of Health.
————————————————————————————————————

The following is from Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Addition:  “May” can be interpreted in court as “Shall..MAY”. An auxiliary verb qualifying the meaning of another verb by expressing ability, competency,

liberty, permission, possibility, probability or contingency. U. S. v. Lexington Mill & E. Co., 232

U.S. 399, 34 S.Ct. 337, 340, 58 L.Ed. 658, L.R.A. 1915B, 774; Carson v. Turrish, 140 Minn. 445, 168

N.W. 349, 352, L.R.A.1918F, 164. Regardless of the instrument, however, whether constitution,

statute, deed, contract or whatnot, courts not infrequently construe “may” as “shall” or “must”

to the end that justice may not be the slave of grammar. Minor v. Mechanics’ Bank, 1 Pet. 46,

64, 7 L.Ed. 47; Appeal of Burnap, 94 Conn. 286, 108 A. 802, 804; Stapler v. El Dora Oil Co., 27 Cal.App.

516, 150 P. 643, 645. MAYHEM.

Therefore, “may”, “shall” and “must” can be interpreted by the court as meaning the same thing!

The following is the complete Arkansas Code 207-7-136 for the statewide fluoridation program after ACT 197 was passed.  Remember that HB1312 only modified section 20-7-136 (b).  We have shown below what those changes would look like IF HB1312 had been passed in the 2013 legislative session.  We don’t want to see this bad bill introduced in this 2015 session.

20-7-136.  Statewide fluoridation program.

(a) As used in this section, “water system” means a facility including without limitation a parent system, consecutive system, or other system that holds, treats, and supplies water directly or through a consecutive system or consecutive systems to five thousand (5,000) persons or more.

This is the original code that is part of ACT197

(b) The company, corporation, municipality, county, government agency, or other entity that owns or controls a water system shall control the quantity of fluoride in the water so as to maintain a fluoride content established by the Department of Health.

This is what the Statewide fluoridation program code would look like if the proposed HB1312 was passed

(b) The company, corporation, municipality, county, government agency, or other entity that owns or controls a water system shall control may determine whether the company, corporation, municipality, county, government agency, or other entity will adjust the quantity of fluoride in the water so as to maintain a fluoride content established by the Department of Health.

(HB1312 removed the  text that is in red and added what was in yellow)  (Please note that HB1312 change did nothing)

(c) The State Board of Health shall adopt rules relating to the fluoridation of water systems that shall include without limitation:

   (1) Permissible concentrations of fluoride to be maintained by a water system; and

   (2) Requirements and procedures for maintaining permissible concentrations of fluoride including without limitation:

        (A) Necessary equipment;

        (B) Recordkeeping;

        (C) Reporting; and

        (D) Testing.

(d)  (1) A water system required to fluoridate under this section is not required to comply with the requirements of this section until funds sufficient to pay capital start-up costs for fluoridation equipment for the system have become available from any source other than tax revenue or service revenue regularly collected by the company, corporation, municipality, county, or other government agency that owns or controls the water system.

    (2) A licensed civil engineer recognized or employed by the department who is familiar with the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of fluoridation systems shall determine for the department whether the capital start-up costs claimed under subdivision (d)(1) of this section are reasonable.

(e) A water system for a city in this state that receives its water supply from a community in another state is not required to comply with this section until a substantially similar fluoridation program is enacted for the water system of the community in the other state.

HISTORY: Acts 2011, No. 197, § 1.

Attention:  legislators, don’t let this do-nothing bill replace the Arkansas Water Additive Accountability Act or interfere with repealing the Fluoride Mandate Act 197 of 2011.

This was a bad bill from the the very beginning.  The title of HB1312  is “An Act To Provide Local Control Over Fluoride  Levels”.  If you’ll notice, there’s a contradiction between the title of the bill and the language of the bill.  The bill only changes the language but not the effect.  You must read the bill to see what is in the legislation.  Don’t rely on the title of the bill to tell you what the legislation is supposed to do!

However, fluoride levels would still be controlled by the Arkansas Department of Health both before and after the passage of HB1312.

If the Arkansas Department of Health can’t make health the number one priority for Arkansas, then it is time for the legislators to cut their budget.

It appears to us that there is often a deliberate attempt made on part of the author of any piece of legislation to mislead the public.  Remember Nancy Pelosi’s statement?  “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it…”  Is this a practice of Arkansas, too?  We would hope not.

Some of the legislators may tell you they are supporting a bill to “Provide Local Control Over Fluoride Levels in Water Systems”  That is misleading. The bill only makes changes to section (b) of  Arkansas Code 20-7-136.  Secure Arkansas supports the right of local governments to make local decisions without the approval of regional government.  The bill does not provide local control.

The legislation of HB1312 really does nothing to provide for a Water Additive Accountability legislation or to repeal the Fluoridation Mandate Act.

The voice of the people is being silenced!  In cities such as Mountain View, Eureka Springs, Hot Springs, and Fort Smith, the state has overridden the popular vote of the people and imposed mandated fluoridation on the masses!

Keep calling your legislators!  Keep the pressure on them.  They need to hear from you NOW!

Be sure to forward this email to your family and friends!  Our health is important!
They may sign up to receive our Action Alerts by clicking here.