|
|
| |
| Fri, Dec. 5, 2008 |  |
 |
|
||
| |
Senators to decide whether colleague keeps his seat Thursday, Jun 12, 2008 By Rob Moritz Arkansas News Bureau LITTLE ROCK - His disputed loss in a 2006 Democratic primary runoff for an eastern Arkansas Senate seat still an open wound, a bitter Arnell Willis said Wednesday he would not attend today's Senate meeting to decide whether the victor will be vanquished from the chamber. Willis, a former state representative, said his presence at the state Capitol probably would not make any difference anyway. "For two years we haven't been able to correct the injustice," the Helena-West Helena businessman said. "I'm doubtful they are going to correct it at this time." The full 35-member Senate was scheduled to gather to review evidence and possibly ask questions of members of a Senate committee who heard testimony in an unprecedented trial-like setting this spring before deciding whether Sen. Jack Crumbly, D-Widener, who defeated Willis in the disputed 2006 election, can keep its seat. Today's proceeding will mark only the second time in 34 years the full Senate has assembled to decide the political fate of a fellow member. In 1974, senators voted to expel Democrat Guy H. "Mutt" Jones Sr. of Conway following a tax-evasion conviction. In April, after three days of hearings and 15 hours of closed-door deliberations, the seven-member Senate Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs voted 4-3 to recommend Crumbly be allowed to remain in the Senate. That despite the panel's finding of "flagrant voter fraud and irregularities" in the District 16 Democratic runoff. "Over a two-year period I stood up for what I believed in, for what was right," said Willis, who challenged the election results, first in court, then before the Senate committee. "I feel I never got justice. I was wronged. I beat (Crumbly). He ought to be holding his head in shame." But Crumbly said Wednesday he planned to be in his seat on the Senate floor during today's extraordinary meeting, though he said he would neither speak nor vote. "I hope that with the evidence that the committee has presented that each senator will vote his or her conscience, and certainly I'd like to remain in the Senate," said Crumbly, the Earle school superintendent. "I've maintained throughout the entire election challenge, and it's been supported in court and by the committee, that I personally haven't done anything wrong." Sen. Steve Faris, D-Malvern, chairman of committee that heard testimony, said he would present the panel's report to the Senate and said he and other committee members would answer questions. "We'll do our best, but there aren't really a lot of questions to ask any more," Faris said, adding his colleagues have had more than a month to read the transcripts of the three-day hearing and review copies of all evidence. "It's time to give the committee report, for the Senate to vote and for us to move on." Faris said he expects the Senate to endorse the committee's recommendation, which included a request for state and federal officials to investigate the election process in St. Francis County. Willis, then a three-term House member, appeared to have won the 2006 Democratic runoff against Crumbly after the initial vote count showed Willis ahead by 28 votes. However, a recount put Crumbly ahead by 68 votes, and a second recount confirmed Crumbly as the winner. No Republican sought the office, and Crumbly was seated in January 2007. Willis filed a lawsuit in St. Francis County Circuit Court challenging the election results. A special circuit judge ruled in February that the Legislature, not the courts, should decide who should occupy the Senate seat. For three days in late March the Senate committee heard testimony, charged with deciding whether there was voter fraud and, if so, whether the fraud was enough to expel Crumbly. Willis' attorney, Mike Easley of Forrest City, argued the evidence brought into question about 800 votes while Crumbly's attorney, Robin Carroll of El Dorado, said fewer than 30 votes were clouded. Willis said Wednesday, "If I were in the Senate I could not vote in good conscience to allow something like this to happen." "Whatever (today's) vote," Faris said, "my hope is that the proper and appropriate federal and state officials will pick up on this and diligently try to stop this election mess that has been going over there for years." In April, after the committee made its recommendation, the state Board of Election Commissioners ordered a staff member and board-certified election monitors to be in St. Francis County for the May 20 primary and to file a report. Susie Stormes, the board's director, said Wednesday an initial review showed "things went fairly well" in primary voting. She said a detailed report would be presented to the election board, possibly at its July meeting. |
