State House 24
1. Abortion: Arkansas’ current law that prohibits abortion except to save the life of the mother in a medical emergency.
Charlene Fite (Republican)
Support
I was lead sponsor on several bills strengthening AR’s laws against abortion, and co-sponsor of others.
I was lead sponsor on several bills strengthening AR’s laws against abortion, and co-sponsor of others.
Melissa Koller (Republican)
Support
I support Arkansas’ current law that protects unborn life while allowing medical intervention when a mother’s life is in danger. This law reflects a clear moral and legal recognition that human life has value from conception, while also acknowledging the reality of true medical emergencies.
Protecting life does not mean abandoning mothers. In cases where a physician determines that a pregnancy poses a direct and immediate threat to a woman’s life, life-saving medical care must be available without hesitation. The law provides that allowance while preventing the intentional ending of unborn life as a matter of convenience or profit.
I also believe our focus must extend beyond the statute itself. We should continue strengthening support for prenatal care, maternal health, family resources, and accountability for pharmaceutical companies and bad actors who exploit women. A pro-life approach must be compassionate, responsible, and rooted in both moral clarity and practical care.
Arkansas’ law affirms the dignity of both mother and child, and I support maintaining that balance.
I support Arkansas’ current law that protects unborn life while allowing medical intervention when a mother’s life is in danger. This law reflects a clear moral and legal recognition that human life has value from conception, while also acknowledging the reality of true medical emergencies.
Protecting life does not mean abandoning mothers. In cases where a physician determines that a pregnancy poses a direct and immediate threat to a woman’s life, life-saving medical care must be available without hesitation. The law provides that allowance while preventing the intentional ending of unborn life as a matter of convenience or profit.
I also believe our focus must extend beyond the statute itself. We should continue strengthening support for prenatal care, maternal health, family resources, and accountability for pharmaceutical companies and bad actors who exploit women. A pro-life approach must be compassionate, responsible, and rooted in both moral clarity and practical care.
Arkansas’ law affirms the dignity of both mother and child, and I support maintaining that balance.
2. Abortion: Establishing a permanent funding stream to provide state-funded grants to charities that provide women with alternatives to abortion.
Melissa Koller (Republican)
Support
I support establishing a permanent funding stream to provide state-funded grants to charities that offer women real, life-affirming alternatives to abortion. If we are serious about protecting life, we must also be serious about supporting women who face unplanned or high-risk pregnancies.
These organizations often provide critical services such as pregnancy counseling, material assistance, parenting education, housing support, and connections to medical and social resources. A stable funding structure allows them to plan responsibly, expand services, and meet needs consistently rather than relying on uncertain, short-term funding.
This approach prioritizes care over crisis and support over pressure. It helps ensure that women are not driven toward abortion due to lack of resources, fear, or isolation. By investing in charities with a proven track record of compassionate, ethical care, the state can partner with communities to strengthen families and protect both mothers and children.
Providing alternatives is not only pro-life—it is pro-woman, pro-family, and a responsible use of public resources focused on long-term outcomes rather than short-term responses.
I support establishing a permanent funding stream to provide state-funded grants to charities that offer women real, life-affirming alternatives to abortion. If we are serious about protecting life, we must also be serious about supporting women who face unplanned or high-risk pregnancies.
These organizations often provide critical services such as pregnancy counseling, material assistance, parenting education, housing support, and connections to medical and social resources. A stable funding structure allows them to plan responsibly, expand services, and meet needs consistently rather than relying on uncertain, short-term funding.
This approach prioritizes care over crisis and support over pressure. It helps ensure that women are not driven toward abortion due to lack of resources, fear, or isolation. By investing in charities with a proven track record of compassionate, ethical care, the state can partner with communities to strengthen families and protect both mothers and children.
Providing alternatives is not only pro-life—it is pro-woman, pro-family, and a responsible use of public resources focused on long-term outcomes rather than short-term responses.
3. Education: The Arkansas LEARNS Act Educational Freedom Accounts that lets families use public dollars to pay for an education at a private school or homeschool.
Charlene Fite (Republican)
Support
I spoke for and voted for LEARNS in Education Committee. I spoke for and voted for LEARNS in the House of Representatives. I spoke for LEARNS at several informational meetings in my district.
I spoke for and voted for LEARNS in Education Committee. I spoke for and voted for LEARNS in the House of Representatives. I spoke for LEARNS at several informational meetings in my district.
Melissa Koller (Republican)
Support
I support the Arkansas LEARNS Act and its Educational Freedom Accounts because parents—not bureaucracies—are best positioned to determine what educational environment will help their children succeed. Every child learns differently, and families deserve the flexibility to choose the setting that aligns with their child’s needs, values, and learning style.
Educational Freedom Accounts empower families by allowing public education dollars to follow the student, whether that means a public school, private school, or homeschool option. This is especially important for rural families, special-needs students, and those who feel trapped in a one-size-fits-all system that may not serve their child well.
This policy does not abandon public education; it encourages accountability, innovation, and competition while expanding opportunity. When families have choices, schools are incentivized to improve, and students benefit.
Education should be about student success, not systems protection. The LEARNS Act puts students first, respects parental rights, and expands access to quality education across Arkansas.
I support the Arkansas LEARNS Act and its Educational Freedom Accounts because parents—not bureaucracies—are best positioned to determine what educational environment will help their children succeed. Every child learns differently, and families deserve the flexibility to choose the setting that aligns with their child’s needs, values, and learning style.
Educational Freedom Accounts empower families by allowing public education dollars to follow the student, whether that means a public school, private school, or homeschool option. This is especially important for rural families, special-needs students, and those who feel trapped in a one-size-fits-all system that may not serve their child well.
This policy does not abandon public education; it encourages accountability, innovation, and competition while expanding opportunity. When families have choices, schools are incentivized to improve, and students benefit.
Education should be about student success, not systems protection. The LEARNS Act puts students first, respects parental rights, and expands access to quality education across Arkansas.
4. Drugs: Legalizing recreational marijuana in Arkansas.
Melissa Koller (Republican)
Oppose
I oppose legalizing recreational marijuana in Arkansas. While some promote it as harmless or economically beneficial, evidence from other states shows increased risks to public health, public safety, and workforce readiness.
Recreational marijuana use has been linked to higher rates of impaired driving, emergency room visits, and negative mental health outcomes, particularly among young people. Legalization also normalizes drug use in ways that make prevention and enforcement more difficult, placing additional strain on families, schools, and law enforcement.
I am also concerned about the rapid expansion of large, profit-driven marijuana industries that often outpace regulation and accountability. Promised tax revenues frequently fall short of covering the long-term social and health costs associated with widespread use.
Arkansas already allows tightly regulated medical marijuana for specific conditions. Expanding beyond that crosses a line from compassionate care to commercialization of substance use. I believe the state should focus on prevention, treatment, and community health—not policies that increase access to recreational drugs.
I oppose legalizing recreational marijuana in Arkansas. While some promote it as harmless or economically beneficial, evidence from other states shows increased risks to public health, public safety, and workforce readiness.
Recreational marijuana use has been linked to higher rates of impaired driving, emergency room visits, and negative mental health outcomes, particularly among young people. Legalization also normalizes drug use in ways that make prevention and enforcement more difficult, placing additional strain on families, schools, and law enforcement.
I am also concerned about the rapid expansion of large, profit-driven marijuana industries that often outpace regulation and accountability. Promised tax revenues frequently fall short of covering the long-term social and health costs associated with widespread use.
Arkansas already allows tightly regulated medical marijuana for specific conditions. Expanding beyond that crosses a line from compassionate care to commercialization of substance use. I believe the state should focus on prevention, treatment, and community health—not policies that increase access to recreational drugs.
5. Tech: Requiring major social media websites to verify all users’ ages in order to protect children on their platforms.
Charlene Fite (Republican)
Support
Social media misuse is one of the greatest challenges facing our children.
Social media misuse is one of the greatest challenges facing our children.
Melissa Koller (Republican)
Support
I support requiring major social media websites to verify users’ ages to better protect children online. Young people are increasingly exposed to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, predatory behavior, and harmful social pressures, and platforms have a responsibility to safeguard vulnerable users.
Age verification is a practical, commonsense step to help ensure that children are not accessing material intended for adults and that adults are not exploiting minors online. It also reinforces parental efforts to monitor and guide their children’s internet use.
This measure balances technology with safety, holding social media companies accountable for creating secure environments while preserving legitimate access for adults. Protecting children online is not optional—it is a shared responsibility of families, communities, and companies, and I support policies that make it enforceable.
I support requiring major social media websites to verify users’ ages to better protect children online. Young people are increasingly exposed to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, predatory behavior, and harmful social pressures, and platforms have a responsibility to safeguard vulnerable users.
Age verification is a practical, commonsense step to help ensure that children are not accessing material intended for adults and that adults are not exploiting minors online. It also reinforces parental efforts to monitor and guide their children’s internet use.
This measure balances technology with safety, holding social media companies accountable for creating secure environments while preserving legitimate access for adults. Protecting children online is not optional—it is a shared responsibility of families, communities, and companies, and I support policies that make it enforceable.
6. Gambling: Letting casinos in Arkansas conduct gambling online.
Melissa Koller (Republican)
Oppose
I oppose allowing casinos in Arkansas to conduct online gambling. Expanding gambling beyond physical locations increases the risk of addiction, financial hardship, and exploitation, particularly among vulnerable populations. Online gambling is easier to access, harder to regulate, and can quickly lead to destructive behavior for individuals and families.
While casinos argue that online platforms generate revenue, the social costs—addiction treatment, family disruption, and economic instability—often outweigh any financial benefits. Responsible gaming should be confined to controlled, monitored environments, not open-access digital platforms that encourage impulse play.
Protecting families and communities from preventable harm must take priority over expanding gambling opportunities. I believe Arkansas should focus on policies that strengthen economic opportunity and family stability, rather than opening new avenues for financial and social risk.
I oppose allowing casinos in Arkansas to conduct online gambling. Expanding gambling beyond physical locations increases the risk of addiction, financial hardship, and exploitation, particularly among vulnerable populations. Online gambling is easier to access, harder to regulate, and can quickly lead to destructive behavior for individuals and families.
While casinos argue that online platforms generate revenue, the social costs—addiction treatment, family disruption, and economic instability—often outweigh any financial benefits. Responsible gaming should be confined to controlled, monitored environments, not open-access digital platforms that encourage impulse play.
Protecting families and communities from preventable harm must take priority over expanding gambling opportunities. I believe Arkansas should focus on policies that strengthen economic opportunity and family stability, rather than opening new avenues for financial and social risk.
7. Elections: Current ballot initiative efforts to change the Arkansas Constitution to make it easier for private individuals or entities to place measures on the ballot for a statewide vote.
Charlene Fite (Republican)
Oppose
The AR Constitution should not be for sale to entities outside our state who come in with considerable wealth and attempt to change our Constitution. I have personally heard hired signature gatherers misrepresenting ballot initiatives in attempts to gather signatures.
The AR Constitution should not be for sale to entities outside our state who come in with considerable wealth and attempt to change our Constitution. I have personally heard hired signature gatherers misrepresenting ballot initiatives in attempts to gather signatures.
Melissa Koller (Republican)
Support
I support current ballot initiative efforts to make it easier for private individuals or entities to place measures on the statewide ballot. Article 5, Section 1 of the Arkansas Constitution guarantees citizens full access to the initiative and referendum process, ensuring that the people have a direct voice in shaping our state’s laws and policies.
Expanding access to the ballot strengthens citizen engagement, accountability, and democratic participation. When Arkansans are empowered to propose and vote on measures, government is more responsive to the people it serves. This process allows everyday citizens, not just political elites or special interests, to bring ideas forward and influence policy.
Protecting and enhancing the initiative and referendum process preserves a fundamental right of Arkansans: the ability to participate directly in governance. I support efforts that make this process more accessible, transparent, and effective, giving the people greater control over the laws that affect their lives.
I support current ballot initiative efforts to make it easier for private individuals or entities to place measures on the statewide ballot. Article 5, Section 1 of the Arkansas Constitution guarantees citizens full access to the initiative and referendum process, ensuring that the people have a direct voice in shaping our state’s laws and policies.
Expanding access to the ballot strengthens citizen engagement, accountability, and democratic participation. When Arkansans are empowered to propose and vote on measures, government is more responsive to the people it serves. This process allows everyday citizens, not just political elites or special interests, to bring ideas forward and influence policy.
Protecting and enhancing the initiative and referendum process preserves a fundamental right of Arkansans: the ability to participate directly in governance. I support efforts that make this process more accessible, transparent, and effective, giving the people greater control over the laws that affect their lives.
8. Guns: Confiscation of firearms from citizens that the government deem a danger to themselves or others, otherwise known as red flag laws.
Melissa Koller (Republican)
Oppose
I oppose the confiscation of firearms through so-called “red flag” laws. While the intent is often framed as preventing harm, these laws allow the government to remove constitutional rights from citizens based on allegations rather than due process.
Every individual is entitled to notice, a fair hearing, and the opportunity to defend themselves before losing their property or Second Amendment rights. Red flag laws risk misuse, false claims, and government overreach, undermining both personal liberty and trust in public institutions.
I believe the focus should be on addressing underlying issues—mental health support, responsible ownership, and community safety—without stripping law-abiding citizens of their constitutional rights. Protecting life and safety must not come at the expense of fundamental freedoms.
I oppose the confiscation of firearms through so-called “red flag” laws. While the intent is often framed as preventing harm, these laws allow the government to remove constitutional rights from citizens based on allegations rather than due process.
Every individual is entitled to notice, a fair hearing, and the opportunity to defend themselves before losing their property or Second Amendment rights. Red flag laws risk misuse, false claims, and government overreach, undermining both personal liberty and trust in public institutions.
I believe the focus should be on addressing underlying issues—mental health support, responsible ownership, and community safety—without stripping law-abiding citizens of their constitutional rights. Protecting life and safety must not come at the expense of fundamental freedoms.
9. Marriage: The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision that legalized same-sex marriage.
Melissa Koller (Republican)
Oppose
I oppose the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges legalizing same-sex marriage, particularly on a Christian Biblical basis. Marriage, according to Scripture, is a sacred union between one man and one woman, designed to reflect God’s design for family, procreation, and community stability.
While I respect the dignity of every individual, redefining marriage through judicial action bypasses the role of families, communities, and legislatures in shaping cultural and legal norms. Protecting the traditional definition of marriage is not about discrimination; it is about preserving a longstanding institution that has served as the foundation for society and strong families.
I believe civil law should uphold the principles of natural law and biblical teaching where possible, ensuring that policy reflects moral order and supports the family structure intended by God. Changing marriage law through court fiat undermines both religious liberty and the cultural framework that sustains healthy communities.
I oppose the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges legalizing same-sex marriage, particularly on a Christian Biblical basis. Marriage, according to Scripture, is a sacred union between one man and one woman, designed to reflect God’s design for family, procreation, and community stability.
While I respect the dignity of every individual, redefining marriage through judicial action bypasses the role of families, communities, and legislatures in shaping cultural and legal norms. Protecting the traditional definition of marriage is not about discrimination; it is about preserving a longstanding institution that has served as the foundation for society and strong families.
I believe civil law should uphold the principles of natural law and biblical teaching where possible, ensuring that policy reflects moral order and supports the family structure intended by God. Changing marriage law through court fiat undermines both religious liberty and the cultural framework that sustains healthy communities.