The Power and Politics of the Legislative Branch
These observations...provide the basis for concluding that the Arkansas General Assembly does display adequate conditions for legislative accountability. In light of Arkansas' recent past this is certainly a source of satisfaction to those of us committed to democratic practices.
Donald E. Whistler and Charles DeWitt Dunn, "Institutional Accountability in the Arkansas General Assembly", 1983
It is hard for a legislator to look past his or her constituency. It takes a very special legislator to do anything but worry about himself and there aren't very many who do.
Dennis Robertson, Arkansas Farm Bureau Association, 1983
State historians have not attempted to rank Arkansas legislatures as they have governors, but it seems fair to say that if few governors achieved very impressive records of achievement, their efforts still shine in contrast to those of the legislatures with which they dealt. Indeed, the institutional ineffectiveness of the legislative branch is a constant thread in Arkansas political history from the 1830s through the 1960s.1
Unlike the governorship, which began the twentieth century in the straitjacket imposed by the 1874 constitution, the legislature brought at least some of its institutional disabilities upon itself. The constitution did establish a biennial session not to exceed sixty days but permitted the legislature to extend the session by a two-thirds vote in both chambers and to set their
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Book title: Arkansas Politics & Government:Do the People Rule?. Contributors: Diane D. Blair - Author. Publisher: University of Nebraska Press. Place of publication: Lincoln, NE. Publication year: 1988. Page number: 160.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.