everything you want to know (and don't) about arkansas politics

Republican Sponsorship
Healthcare

SB468

To Amend The Law Concerning Fluoridation Of A Public Water System; And To Allows Voters To Elect "for" Or "against" Water Fluoridation In The County.

Failed

Last Action (May 5, 2025): Died on Senate Calendar at Sine Die adjournment.

Sponsors

AI-Generated Summary

Senate Bill 468 establishes a process for voters in Arkansas to decide whether their public water systems should add fluoride to their water supply. The bill permits a public water system—defined as one serving 5,000 or more people—to hold an election on the issue if initiated by a petition signed by at least 5% of the total votes cast for circuit clerk in the previous election, or by a majority vote of the county's quorum court. Elections would be held during general election cycles, with a restriction preventing subsequent elections on the same issue for at least four years. The bill mandates that if a majority of voters in the counties served by a system choose to prohibit fluoridation, the water system must discontinue it within 30 days. Additionally, the bill amends existing law to ensure that the results of such a public election supersede any prior or current decisions made by a water system's board regarding fluoridation. This legislation effectively decentralizes the decision-making process for water fluoridation from administrative or board-level control to the public voting process.

Potential Impact Analysis

Who Might Benefit?

The primary beneficiaries include residents who prefer direct democratic control over public health policies and those who advocate against mandatory water fluoridation for personal, health, or philosophical reasons. Additionally, anti-fluoridation interest groups and citizens who believe that fluoride levels should be subject to local referendum rather than state or agency mandates gain greater influence over their municipal water quality.

Who Might Suffer?

The primary entities negatively impacted would be public health organizations, such as dental and medical associations, which advocate for water fluoridation as a primary tool for preventing tooth decay. Citizens, particularly those in lower socioeconomic brackets who rely on public water for dental health and may have limited access to professional dental care, could be negatively impacted if the discontinuation of fluoridation leads to an increase in dental health issues in their communities. Additionally, public water system management may face increased administrative and logistical costs associated with conducting elections and modifying treatment processes.

Vote Records

Third Reading

April 8, 2025
Yea: 9 Nay: 17 NV: 9 Absent: 0 Failed
View individual votes (35)
Legislator Party Chamber Vote
Jane English Republican Senate NV
Jonathan Dismang Republican Senate Nay
Greg Leding Democrat Senate Nay
Missy Irvin Republican Senate Nay
Bryan King Republican Senate Yea
Kim Hammer Republican Senate NV
Stephanie Flowers Democrat Senate Nay
Frederick Love Democrat Senate Nay
Terry Rice Republican Senate NV
Reginald Murdock Democrat Senate Nay
Gary Stubblefield Republican Senate Yea
Jim Dotson Republican Senate Yea
John Payton Republican Senate NV
Alan Clark Republican Senate Yea
Ronald Caldwell Republican Senate NV
Bart Hester Republican Senate Nay
Jimmy Hickey Republican Senate Nay
Dan Sullivan Republican Senate Yea
David Wallace Republican Senate Nay
Blake Johnson Republican Senate NV
Justin Boyd Republican Senate Nay
Clarke Tucker Democrat Senate Nay
Scott Flippo Republican Senate NV
Clint Penzo Republican Senate Yea
Mark Johnson Republican Senate Nay
Ricky Hill Republican Senate Nay
Jamie Scott Democrat Senate Nay
Breanne Davis Republican Senate Nay
Ben Gilmore Republican Senate Nay
Joshua Bryant Republican Senate Yea
Matt McKee Republican Senate NV
Jim Petty Republican Senate Yea
Steve Crowell Republican Senate NV
Tyler Dees Republican Senate Yea
Matt Stone Republican Senate Nay
Read Full Bill on arkleg.state.ar.us