Thread by @ForARPeople1

And we're getting ready for Executive Subcommittee! This will be a shorter one; the big issue is Gov. Sanders' change to drivers licenses. Folks will be required to put their biological gender on the license instead of an "X" if they are nonbinary or transgender.

If we understand it correctly, there are exceptions if the individual has gone through gender-affirming surgery and gotten a court order.

This is another pointless punch down that affects trans, nonbinary, and intersex individuals.
arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/…

Unfortunately there's very little to be done. The committee can refuse to hear public comment and have done so; it's unlikely those opposed can outvote the majority.

There are a few procedural delay tactics opponents can try, like forcing a separate vote on the issue tomorrow in the full Arkansas Legislative Council meeting, but again, it's unlikely they have the votes.

Really disappointing stuff. There's more important work to do.

And we're off! Sen. Rice chairing.

First up is the driver's license issue from DFA. Here we go. Secretary claiming scant evidence on how policy was created in 2010, says not lawful under Admin. Procedures Act.

Emergency rule intended to match someone's gender w/ underlying identity documents.

Rep. Wardlaw: why justifiable as emergency rule, versus regular process of promulgation/public comment?

A: number of individuals who have used this policy who are about to renew licenses, so we want to have the authority to validate their gender.

A: long winded explanation of what current Ark. law requires on licenses; emergency rule needed to ensure anyone coming into the state is prohibited from using old policy. No licenses can be issued with "x" or "blank" gender information.

Also in rule: procedure for individuals who do want to change gender info on license. Requires written application and proof that their gender has been changed w/ evidence from Dept. of Health or Vital Records.

This is so much WORSE than we thought. They have to apply for this!

The state is targeting around 350 people. Can you imagine the effort and cost this is taking to hurt just 350 people?

Discussion on how this affects federal ID like passports. If passports have X designation, they will have to put either M/F on state documentation. Unbelievable.

Secretary says this has been in the works since last fall. Wants to be "respectful" and minimize the need for intrusive questions.

Well, that's news to everyone.

Rep. McCullough with "quite a few questions": points out state code says there has to be "imminent peril" for emergency rules. What is the imminent peril that we face with trying to change this rule after 14 years? She's heard 516 total individuals with X indicator.

Claim from DFA that there's likely more with "incorrect" identification. Says he's had conversations with LE; they're worried they can't have confidence that IDs contain valid info. Thinks public safety issue.

Q: then wouldn't this sow more confusion if LE gets documentation that says something different from an individual's presentation? Passports versus DL would also be confusing.

A: also confusion under existing policy. The transphobia happening right now is off the charts, frankly not even going to repeat it. Functionally creates justification for stop and frisk to check your pants.

Q: Didn't hear any specifics about "dangers" addressed. Wants to ask about intersex folks' choices. Goes back to state code: emergency rules have to based on best science available, and intersex folks have been documented.

A: intersex folks born in Ark. will regardless receive a M/F on birth certificate. Later in life they can go through DoH to get official documentation changed. Complete misunderstanding of what intersex is. Says DFA has to rely on documentation to issue license/ID card.

The hoops these folks are going to have to jump through just to have accurate IDs.

Sec. continues: "rescinded policy was no questions asked, which was an error." Wants to rely on DoH as the scientific authority on intersex/trans id-ing folks. Claims DFA just needs accurate info

Sen. Tucker (after continued disagreement from Rep. McCullough): following up on "nature of emergency." There's a cost to public for emergency implementation because no public comment. Wants to hear about examples over 14 years that created "imminent peril." Worth the cost?

A: doesn't think standard is that something bad has already happened. It's avoiding something bad happening in future. Danger to LE exists!

Complete non-answer. Can't provide a single example. "Drivers license doesn't exist for benefit of license holder; it's for 3rd party ID."

There it is: "can't provide a single example. We're not a LE agency so don't track that data."

Tucker: "really think there would be at least 1 example in 14 years."

Q: why focus just on gender? Lots of info on DL that people can misstate - weight, height, etc.

A: Eye color is objectively verifiable. Just because people provide incorrect info doesn't make it right. Gender is a fundamental characteristic that's not as easily changed as hair color.

Repeats false talking point about trans/intersex folks being a recent social phenom.

A, cont'd: of all criteria required on DL, legislature has provided a process on how to change legal names. Assembly didn't define how we satisfy requirement that gender be stated on IDs. Focused on gender because we have an obligation to comply with statute.

Very confusing.

A, cont'd: improper for state agencies to decide what they want to do.

Q from Tucker: returns to passport issue. A person could just get their passport changed, then could go to revenue office to get DL changed (you don't have to show birth cert to get a DL)

A: tried to implement policy that has a procedure attached so we can verify info. Has no real answer to Sen. Tucker's question.

Sen. Irvine: trying to claim that "imminent peril to public safety" is satisfied because there wasn't enough documentation on how 2010 policy was implemented. "If X, why not Z?"

A: Claims "x" is basically refusing to answer questions asked on forms, which is illegal.

Sen. Hammer: Returns to "why now after 14 years?"

A: Basically, "just came across it one day."

Do y'all really think nobody in Asa's admin caught this? Again, it's barely 500 people. Just leave folks alone.

Q: If this came through regular process, what would the timeline be? (emergency rules eventually DO have to go through regular process of public comment, etc).

A: Probably summer.

Q: Worried about delays with important election coming out and depriving folks of right to vote

A: in absence of this rule, there would be even more confusion (Rep. McCullough and Sen. Tucker have already noted that is incorrect).

Rep. Ladyman: returning to the LE question. "They don't know who is in the car." Soapboxing - "I'd like to see MORE info on a DL." No actual question.

Rep. McCullough again: How will people affected by emergency rule receive notice? How will public comment happen later?

A: individuals can follow process to change gender info on license laid out in emergency rule. Says 1 page app, will attach proof of gender change.

A: We will then consider app and notify them. For those that currently have X designations, they'll have to either come in or wait for their required renewal. The imminent peril is for individuals currently coming in.

Re: public comment: we'll go through ordinary process.

Says will publicize public comment hearings to make sure everyone knows.

Sen. Tucker: wants clarification on numbers. Has heard 350, 500, etc.

A: 350 DLs, 150 ID cards with X designation. The state hates 500 folks this much.

Don't know how many folks have simply changed the binary gender markers.

Rule approved, as expected. It'll go to the full Arkansas Leg. Caucus tomorrow.

That’s all we had time for. We’re planning on being back at the Capitol tomorrow for ALC. It’ll go about the same way, but we’ll at least be there to bear witness.

@threadreaderapp unroll