Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Foreign Influence Lobbying topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate rejects bill to criminalize lobbying on behalf of foreign adversaries after lengthy debate
Summary
House Bill 16 62, which would bar and penalize lobbying for covered foreign entities, failed in the Arkansas Senate on April 15 after extended debate over First Amendment and enforcement concerns. Sponsors argued it protects state interests; opponents warned it could chill speech and create enforcement conflicts with federal authority.
The Arkansas Senate on April 15 voted down House Bill 16 62, a measure that would have prohibited lobbying for a "covered foreign entity." The final roll call recorded 16 in favor, 12 opposed, with others not voting or present, and the bill failed to achieve a majority.
Why it mattered: Sponsors said the bill prevents foreign adversaries from exerting influence in state policymaking. Opponents said it raises First Amendment and federal preemption questions and risks chilling lawful political speech and civic activity.
What sponsors said: Senator Blake Johnson, the bill’s floor sponsor, framed the measure as a national-security safeguard. "We have to leave this state and this nation better for my kids than it is for me," he said in closing remarks, arguing the state should not allow adversaries to "pay to play in Arkansas state government." (Transcript excerpt: floor remarks at 02:00:33–02:00:52.)
What opponents said: Senator Jonathan Rice warned that the bill could criminalize protected activity and cited a White House executive order he said reserved enforcement authority to the U.S. attorney general. "Because the national security interest at stake and because of the act best authority for investigations and enforcement... attempted enforcement by the states or private parties represents an encroachment on the powers of the executive," Rice read from the order. He urged a no vote. (Transcript excerpt: 02:04:47–02:10:10.)
Other floor debate: Supporters said foreign state actors — discussed repeatedly during the debate with reference to China — present an unacceptable risk to children and public institutions via social media and other channels. Senator Dismaine said his position had strengthened in recent months based on national reporting and expert views about foreign influence operations. Opponents emphasized constitutional protections for petitioning the government and warned the bill’s language (which includes a broad definition and phrases such as "including, without limitation") could be applied unevenly.
Final action: The bill failed on final passage. The floor tally recorded in the transcript was 16 yea, 12 nay, with additional senators not voting or present as announced by the clerk. With the failure recorded, the bill will not be enrolled for transmission to the governor unless refiled or reconsidered under applicable rules.
What to watch next: Sponsors may refile a narrower measure, or seek changes that clarify enforcement, definitions and the responsible state authority for investigations and lists of covered entities. Opponents indicated concerns about preemption and enforcement that could prompt federal review if a similar state law were enacted.
Ending: The vote showcased the chamber’s partisan and policy divisions over national-security framing for state-level restrictions and highlighted disputes about how far state law should go in policing foreign influence and lobbying activities.
