Bill to remove work permit requirement for children under 16 goes to Sarah Sanders

[Dill]

(04-19-2023, 04:44 PM)basballguy Wrote: Child trafficking for labor is also very much UNDER reported in Arkansas. This won't help the reporting/tracking of that crime. 

Do you have any data to back this up?  I could not find any data indicating child trafficking will increase with this modification (which is a strong position the left has taken against this)

LOL again with "the left."  This is rather like looking for data to indicate liquor sales to minors would increase if bartenders were no longer required to ask for IDs (i.e. "get permission from the government").  One can only project the future based on effectiveness of past or current law.

As far as "underreporting data," Dino's article quotes Huckabee's executive order. That is my source. 
https://governor.arkansas.gov/executive_orders/executive-order-to-prevent-human-trafficking-and-to-protect-the-children-and-youth-of-arkansas/ WHEREAS:   Although the Arkansas State Police Child Abuse Hotline has accepted 243 reports of human trafficking involving minors since August 2017, Arkansas lacks a consistent, uniform screening and identification process of human trafficking, which has resulted in underreporting of this horrendous criminal action;

(04-19-2023, 04:44 PM)basballguy Wrote: I only have anecdotal examples for this, hence why gave a personal opinion.  The feedback I saw was this rule was a "burden" on the parents....I don't recall ever needing a photo ID to register my kids for school.  Whereas it seems this eliminates the photo ID requirements for kids under whatever age it is.  

I don't recall any mention of a "photo ID" requirement regarding children's work permits. It's not in the draft bill
https://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/Bills/FTPDocument?path=%2FBills%2F2023R%2FPublic%2FHB1410.pdf

Arkansas, like most states of the Union, accept birth or baptismal certificates to get children in school. Nothing beyond that is required for the work permit, that I can see. https://a.arlawhelp.org/education/enrollment

The claim the requirement was a "burden" on parents was Huckabee's; it was part of the bill's rationale, not "feedback."  
This is a "burden" which kept parents IN THE LOOP and ON RECORD regarding the hiring of every child. 

And it was a "burden" on employers, who could not hire without parents signing off; now, apparently, they can. 

Only the legal framing is twisted to make this appear the power of decision has somehow been RETURNED to the parents, as if they didn't already have it when the decision was on record.

(04-19-2023, 04:44 PM)basballguy Wrote: You say "no labor laws are being changed," but one certainly is: the Youth Hiring Act, would delete the portion of existing law that requires an employment certificate “accessible to the Division of Labor and the Division of Elementary and Secondary Education, or local school officials” before a company can hire a child under 16 years of age.
I don't recall seeing this part when i looked at it last month.  What I was specifically referring to, as mentioned, was age laws aren't changing.  The type of work a child can do isn't changing.  The number of hours isn't changing.  The only thing changing is this perceived burden for proof of ID (on the parents). 

No one suggested age/hours/type of work laws were changing. 
They don't have to if employers no longer have to document their the age of child labor. 

At issue is the burden on employers to insure children working for them were of proper age. 
That has been removed, making it easier to hire without the parents decision at all, or for parents to lie about a child's age.

So of course where the pro-business right claims parents may now make a decision without "the government's permission, 

"the left" is going to see the real ease of burden here on business, along with greater opportunity for child exploitation