Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Campaign Contributions’ Category

Energy-efficiency program by PSC in Dec. may be short-lived; campaign money, of course, is of no consideration

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Commissions, Exemptions, Incentives on February 26, 2013 | 3 Comments »

State officials apparently sees no problem when it comes to rushing through legislation that affects tens of thousands of Louisiana public school students or locking Louisiana into long-term tax relief for industries with little or no tangible benefits to the state but less than three months after its passage, a program approved by the Louisiana Public Service Commission (PSC) to give consumers an avenue to reduce energy costs may be scrapped.

The PSC is scheduled to vote on Wednesday to repeal the statewide energy-efficiency program to develop ways to cut down on power consumption to help save money for hundreds of thousands of homeowners and businesses.

Utilities would be required to file annual reports with the PSC that provide energy savings estimates and annual load reductions. The first phase, Quick Start, is scheduled to last a little less than four years from which point utilities will develop longer-term plans.

The problem? The program is expected to cost utilities between $25 million and $30 million. And guess who pours money into the campaigns of PSC members?

So now, while the ink is still wet on the regulation approved last Dec. 12, new PSC Chairman Eric Skrmetta (R-Metairie), himself the recipient of $45,000 in campaign contributions from energy-related firms and political action committees, has deemed that the ugly break for low- and middle-income consumers is a bad, bad thing and should be repealed henceforth.

It’s okay to hand out $5 billion a year in corporate tax breaks, exemptions, waivers and rebates but apparently taboo to take any action beneficial to consumers.

Remember what they say about money and B.S. and talking and walking.

Forty-six states currently offer Energy Efficiency programs to help consumers save energy costs (a program beneficial to everyone except the utility companies).

Heavy industrial users, which make up about half of Entergy’s Louisiana power consumption, are ineligible to participate if they use more than five megawatts of electricity, or about five times the average household consumption.

The initiative passed by 4-1 vote in December with Skrmetta voting in favor despite his stated opposition.

Contact numbers for PSC members are:

Eric Skrmetta (Metairie): 504-846-6930
Scott Angelle (Baton Rouge): 225-342-6900
Lambert Boissiere (New Orleans): 504-680-9529
Clyde Holloway (Forest Hill): 318-748-4715
Foster Campbell (Elm Grove): 318-676-7464

Read Full Post »

The Jindal paradox: he adores but would never work in the private sector (but he would make a splendid Sheldon sub)

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, Campaign Contributions, Civil Service, Contract, Contracts, Education, Ethics, Governor's Office, Health Care, Higher Education, Layoffs, Legislature, Legislators, Privatization, State Agencies, Transparency on February 24, 2013 | 12 Comments »

The burning paradox that is Gov. Bobby Jindal comes down to this: for someone who so obviously loves and embraces the private sector, it’s curious that he has never earned his livelihood in it.

Yes, we know that he “worked” for four whole months for McKinsey & Co. in 1994 but that could hardly be considered as the private sector since the firm primarily serves as a training ground for future bureaucrats and elected public servants.

To paraphrase a 1981 line from actor Burt Reynolds at his Friars Club roast, he’d probably like to thank the little people for putting him into office—but he’d never associate with them.

Of course, should he ever decide to re-enter the private sector and if Jim Parsons should decide to leave the CBS sitcom The Big Bang Theory, Jindal could step right into the role of Dr. Sheldon Cooper and never miss a beat.

Sheldon Cooper, in case you are not a regular viewer (you can catch the show on CBS at 7 p.m. Thursdays or reruns on Tuesdays at 7 p.m. on TBS), is the glue that holds the popular show together. He is academically brilliant (as most would concede Jindal to be) but completely unable to relate to mere mortals (as all would have to agree is a persona that fits Jindal like a glove).

Sheldon is a fount of book knowledge, possessed of an eidetic memory and able to spout figures, dates and statistics with the comparative ease of reciting one’s ABCs but is unable—or unwilling—to perform the simple task of driving a car.

Jindal is a fount of book knowledge, possessed of an eidetic memory and able to spout figures, dates and statistics with the comparative ease….well you get the picture.

Sheldon is completely and totally devoid of human emotion, is unfeeling and unable to communicate in a normal conversation because he has no empathy for his fellow human being. Even in casual conversation, it is impossible for him to avoid insulting the intelligence of those around him, be they peers or subordinates.

Jindal is similarly lacking in those same qualities and likewise cannot speak without offending—be it civil service employees, department heads or fellow Republicans whom he now publicly refers to as being stupid.

Sheldon, when playing board games or video games with his friends, is prone to make up his own rules as he goes along—much to the consternation of Leonard, Raj and Howard, his three friends on the show.

Jindal also is not above tweaking the rules to his advantage as in his exempting the governor’s office from the state’s public records laws—much to the consternation of the media.

But most striking of all the similarities between the two: Sheldon is stubborn and steadfastly refuses to admit to the prospect that he could ever be wrong—about anything.

Jindal, too, is mulishly stubborn and just as steadfastly refuses to entertain the thought that he might be wrong about anything—a trait that goes at least as far back as middle school, according to a former teacher who described him as unwilling to accept correction even then.

But back to Jindal’s undying devotion to the private sector:

His is a strange relationship indeed.

Visit the home a professor, and you’re likely to find shelves upon shelves of books. Visit a hunter and you will find hunting rifles and mounted deer, elk and moose heads. Same with fishermen and the mounted bass that adorn their den walls.

Visit an aficionado of the private sector like, say, the governor of Louisiana and you’re likely to find…photos of smiling campaign contributors.

But you would never find him putting in a typical 8 to 5 day in a cubicle or toiling away in the workaday world like the rest of us. That is so far beneath him as to be comical to even consider.

No, he would never stoop to such a low level. That is for people who can be manipulated, used and even fired at will—by people like him.

Instead, Jindal chooses to reciprocate the private sector’s political campaign contribution largesse by selling off the state, piece by piece, agency by agency to his corporate benefactors while at the same time, selling out hard-working, dedicated state workers without so much as a second thought or a thank you.

The private sector is Jindal’s benefactor, not his employer. Accordingly, he must pander to the corporate suits like Rupert Murdoch, K12, Dell Computers, Marathon Oil, Wireless Generation, Altria, Hospital Corp. of America, Magellan Health Services, Meridian, CNSI, Information Management Consultants, Innovative Emergency Management, Anheuser-Busch, Corrections Corp. of America, AT&T, Koch Industries, the entire membership of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), and most of his appointees to prestigious boards and commissions.

No, Bobby Jindal would never earn—has never earned—his living from the private sector.

But make no mistake about it: he owes his political existence to corporate America and the private sector.

And he believes with equal conviction that he owes nothing to state employees or the public sector.

Yes, he could step right in and fill Jim Parsons’ role as Sheldon and the difference would be negligible—except for the obvious cultural imbalance that would create.

Read Full Post »

Emerging claims, lawsuits could transform Murphy Painter from predator to all-too-familiar victim of Jindal reprisals

Posted in ATC, Campaign Contributions, Computers, Ethics, Governor's Office, Politicians, Teague, Uncategorized on February 6, 2013 | 39 Comments »

What at first appeared to be a slam-dunk sexual harassment case against former commissioner of the Louisiana Office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control (ATC) Murphy J. Painter is beginning to look more and more like reprisals on the part of Gov. Bobby Jindal because of Painter’s refusal to acquiesce to administration demands involving several major Jindal campaign contributors.

It wouldn’t be the first time Jindal has fired a subordinate or demoted a legislator because he or she had the temerity to disagree with him, of course. But it would be the first time such tactics were employed in conjunction with criminal charges.

Painter was indicted—somewhat belatedly—on 42 separate counts of computer fraud in connection with his conducting criminal records, background and driver’s license checks on 35 individuals over a three-year period but never on the sexual harassment claims. Nor was he ever indicted on charges that he stalked or conducted surveillance on individuals—even though that claim was given widespread publicity by State Inspector General Stephen Street on May 28, 2012, the day Painter was formally indicted.

That indictment, coincidentally, came down only days after the legislature voted to strip Street’s office of all appropriations for the current fiscal year. Funding for his office was restored only after Street testified before legislators and repeated details of his office’s investigation of Painter as justification of continued funding, Painter says in his motion to dismiss the charges against him.

Painter’s trial on the federal charges is scheduled to begin on April 22. Meanwhile, he has separate civil suits pending against the state and against the woman who accused him of sexual harassment—after she told an OIG investigator that Painter had never harassed her.

We’ll return to the allegations, denials and counter-accusations in due course, but the real issues swirling around Painter appear to be rooted deep in Louisiana politics and back door deals as only a saga of Louisiana political intrigue and corruption can be told.

It was in late summer of 2010 when a series of events in New Orleans and Baton Rouge—unrelated to sexual harassment, computer fraud or surveillance—would culminate in a meeting in the governor’s office which would end Painter’s 34-year career in law enforcement, 14 of which he served as chief criminal deputy under former Ascension Parish Sheriff Harold Tridico.

After losing the 1995 sheriff’s race to current Sheriff Jeff Wiley by fewer than 700 votes, Painter was appointed ATC commissioner by then-Gov. Mike Foster in February of 1996.

New Orleans Saints owner Tom Benson had purchased the 26-story building once known as Dominion Tower, or CNG Tower, a year earlier in September of 2009. The building is located across the street from the Mercedes-Benz Superdome. As part of the deal struck between Benson and the state to keep the Saints from moving to San Antonio, the Jindal administration agreed to a 20-year lease of some 325,000 square feet of office space at $24 a square foot for various state agencies, some of whom were paying as little as $12 a square foot before being forced to move to Benson Tower.

At the outset, the state’s obligation was about $7.7 million a year, $2.6 million more than the $5.1 million the state was paying before the move.

Included in the Benson Tower purchase was a 60,000-square-foot plot encompassing a one-block section of LaSalle Street and part of what once was the New Orleans Centre shopping mall.

Champions Square opened on Aug. 21, 2010, with the Saints hosting a pre-season game against the Houston Texans. The facility provided a tailgate party atmosphere and gave up to 8,000 Saints fans who did not have tickets a place to hang out and party while cheering on the Saints.

Champions Square soon became the catalyst in the struggle that would erupt between Painter’s office, the governor’s office and Mercedes-Benz Superdome management firm SMG (formerly Spectacor Management Group). On the fringes of this growing dispute were parties who had more than a passing interest: Benson, the Louisiana Stadium and Exposition District (LSED), Anheuser-Busch, brewers of Budweiser Beer, and local Anheuser-Busch distributor Southern Eagle Sales & Service.

LSED is a state political subdivision created to oversee operations of the Superdome, the John A. Alario Sr. Event Center, the New Orleans Arena, the Saints training facility, TPC Louisiana, and Zephyr Field, home of the Triple-A baseball team.

Benson, the seven LSED members (each of whom is appointed by the governor) and their families, businesses and business associates, SMG and Southern Eagle combined to contribute more than $203,000 to Jindal campaigns between 2003 and 2012.

In a lawsuit filed against Jindal, the State of Louisiana, the Department of Revenue and Taxation, its former secretary, Cynthia Bridges and Inspector General Street, Painter says that in May of 2010, some three months before Champions Square was officially opened, he met with representatives of SMG and its lobbyist about SMG’s request for a license to serve alcohol in Champions Square on Saints game days.

Budweiser and Southern Eagle stood to be the big winners if the license application was approved.

Painter says in his lawsuit that he informed SMG of several regulatory violations in its proposal and offered suggestions on bringing the proposal into compliance with state laws. SMG’s subsequent license proposal, however, failed to address a number of the problems Painter had outlined in their previous meeting.

When Painter rejected the proposal, SMG arranged a meeting between Painter and SMG attorney, Robert Walmsley, Jr., Painter says in his petition.

Walmsley is a member of the law firm Fishman, Haygood, Phelps, Walmsley, Willis & Swanson of New Orleans which also contributed $5,000 to Jindal’s campaign in October of 2008.

Walmsley, after meeting with Painter, agreed to provide “a written legal opinion to the ATC documenting how SMG’s proposal complied with, or was otherwise exempt from, Louisiana law,” the petition says.

That promised opinion was never provided to ATC, Painter or his counsel, according to the suit.

Within a matter of weeks, Painter was contacted by Jindal executive Counsel Stephen Waguespack, nephew of Ascension Parish Sheriff Wiley. Waguespack asked Painter to cooperate with SMG and to stop using ATC’s legal counsel to address concerns with the Champions Square project being pushed by SMG, Painter says in his petition.

Subsequent to that call, Walmsley sent Painter an email in which he outlined a purported rationale that would allow SMG to qualify for the sought after license but the email, Painter says, did not include Walmsley’s promised written legal opinion. The ATC legal counsel again advised that the SMG proposal did not satisfy legal requirements.

Painter advised Walmsley that the license would not be issued because SMG did not qualify for the proposed exception as had been suggested. Painter also advised SMG “that alternative legal means would be utilized to address any issues related to the forthcoming grand opening of Champions Square if a resolution was not reached,” according to the lawsuit.

Then, on Aug. 11, Waguespack again called Painter and advised that he, as executive counsel for the governor’s office, “saw no problem with issuing the requested license to SMG,” whereupon Painter said he would defer to Waguespack—if Waguespack was willing to issue a legal opinion in writing to the ATC as representing the governor’s position.

“The governor’s executive counsel refused and suggested that issuing such an opinion was not a good use of his time and/or position,” Painter says, adding that he understood from that conversation that he “was being ordered to issue the license requested by SMG in direct contravention of law.”

In more than 15 years as ATC commissioner, Painter said he had never received such a call from the governor’s office.

Painter and ATC again refused to issue the requested license and two days later, on Aug. 13, Painter was summoned to the governor’s office on the fourth floor of the State Capitol where he met with Waguespack, Louisiana State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson and another member of the governor’s legal staff.

Painter was advised that an unidentified law enforcement agency (later identified as OIG) was investigating him for alleged criminal violations, specifically sexual harassment, and that Jindal was asking for his resignation.

Painter said he asked if Jindal was asking for his resignation because it was his prerogative to do so or because of the criminal investigation and when informed it was because of the investigation, he refused to resign and was fired.

Despite, the manner in which his dismissal came about, it was subsequently reported to the media that he had resigned.

In what Painter described as another means of garnering publicity, an OIG investigator obtained a search warrant to search Painter’s office at ATC even though a previous investigation by the Department of Revenue had already cleared Painter of any wrongdoing.

The administration, through OIG, zeroed in on the sexual harassment charges for Painter’s former administrative assistant Kelli Suire. Suire did contact local news media in July of 2010 with claims of sexual harassment by Painter and on Aug. 6, an email purportedly sent from lindseyjarrrell@rocketmail.com to several media outlets outlined several complaints about Painter and ATC, including the alleged sexual harassment of Suire and that Painter stalked Suire by going to her home on several occasions. The email, Painter learned from his own investigation, originated from the Louisiana State Library near the State Capitol.

Painter also claims that Suire and ATC Deputy Commissioner Brant Thompson were cooperating with each other in efforts to undermine Painter’s authority.

Painter says he took his concerns to Thompson’s father, State Sen. Francis Thompson (D-Delhi) on Aug. 12 and the elder Thompson offered assurances that his son would cooperate with Painter in the future.

Painter then asked that Brant Thompson report to his office no later than Monday, Aug. 16, “to discuss his conduct and accept a suspension from his job duties.”

That meeting never occurred because Painter was fired the following day and Brant Thompson was appointed interim commissioner until the appointment of current commissioner Troy Hebert.

Almost a year before Painter’s dismissal, on October 16, 2009, Suire resigned her position at ATC. But three days later, on Oct. 19, Painter, on ATC business in Washington, D.C., received a call from his office informing him that Suire had been in his office for several hours that morning copying files, Painter says in a separate defamation lawsuit against Suire.

That suit was filed in 23rd Judicial District Court in Ascension Parish while his lawsuit against the state for wrongful firing was filed in 19th JDC in Baton Rouge. And while considerable coverage was given his firing and the subsequent charges of sexual harassment, minimal coverage has been given his lawsuits by Baton Rouge area media outlets.

Sometime following his Aug. 13 firing in 2010, Painter learned of a letter dated 11 days earlier, on Aug. 2, to LDR Deputy secretary Earl Millet, Jr. from Barry Kelly, assistant director of Revenue’s Criminal Investigations Division in which Kelly gave the results of his investigation of six accusations against Painter, including sexual harassment and stalking of Suire.

In that letter, Kelly said, an attorney was hired to conduct an investigation into the allegations and when questioned, “Ms. Suire admitted that there was no sexual harassment.”

Prior to that Aug. 2 letter, on March 29, the Department of revenue sent a letter to Suire reporting its findings. That letter said, in part, “The investigator met with yourself, Painter and other ATC employees. Based upon the information gathered during the investigation, LDR has determined Painter’s actions did not violate the LDR’s Anti-Harassment Policy…

“The finding is based upon information secured during your interview wherein you indicated Painter did not make unwelcome sexual advances toward you. You also indicated Painter did not request sexual favors or engage in verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature to you. Additionally, you also stated that your complaint against Painter was not one of sexual harassment.”

Despite that admission, the governor’s office, through OIG, proceeded with its investigation, accusing Painter of accessing the criminal records database 314 times in more than five years between February 25, 2005, and Aug. 13, 2010. Subsequent information obtained by Painter through legal discovery revealed that OIG received 1,063 complaints between June 20, 2009 and June 15, 2011 and determined that not all the complaints constituted a need for a law enforcement data base check.

Yet, during that same two-year period, three OIG investigators combined to access the criminal records database nearly 3,000 times—one of those more than 2,100 times.

Painter’s trial in federal district court in Baton Rouge on the computer fraud charges is scheduled for April 22.

And yet, despite the charges alluded to by Waguespack when he fired Painter, he has never been formally charged with sexual harassment, stalking or surveillance.

And charges of accessing the criminal records data bank 314 times over a period of more than five years—approximately five times per month—to most people would not appear excessive for the head of a law enforcement agency whose job it is to track criminal activity.

…Unless someone was looking for a reason to fire an uncooperative subordinate standing in the way of political expedience and opportunity—and inconveniencing campaign contributors.

Read Full Post »

Were they Teagued? 4 top-level IT employees leaving over Jindal plans to outsource Office of Information Technology

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Contract, Contracts, Privatization, Teague, Uncategorized on February 5, 2013 | 25 Comments »

LouisianaVoice has learned that Louisiana’s Chief Information Officer (CIO) Ed Driesse and three members of his staff have already or are quitting, apparently over ongoing disagreements with Gov. Bobby Jindal’s staff regarding the outsourcing of the State Office of Information Technology (OIT).

Driesse, who makes $167,000 a year, was contacted Tuesday and said his last day will be April 5.

Assistant Director Barbara Oliver and Deputy CIO Randy Walker retired on Jan. 18. The third, Assistant Director Mike Gusky, is also scheduled to leave, Driesse said.

Oliver presently earns $118,000 per year and Gusky’s salary is $117,000, according to State Civil Service records. Walker’s salary was unavailable.

As the state CIO, Driesse heads the Office of Information Technology in the Division of Administration (DOA) within the Office of the Governor.

The CIO is the state’s point person for matters related to IT and IT resources, including setting policies, standards, hardware and software deployment, strategic and tactical planning, acquisition, management, and operations in keeping with industry trends, both private and public. The CIO oversees several IT organizations within the DOA, acting as architect and primary executor of technical and business strategy for IT in Louisiana state government.

Act 772 of 2001set forth several policies of OIT, including:

• The implementation of IT standards for hardware, software and consolidation of services;

• The review and coordination of IT planning, procurement and budgeting;

• The providing of oversight for centralization/consolidation of technology initiatives and the sharing of IT resources;

• Assuring compatibility and connectivity of Louisiana’s information systems;

• The providing of oversight on IT projects and systems for compliance with statewide strategies, goals and standards.

Several additional legislative acts in 2001 provided for:

• The electronic government structure for the executive branch (governor’s office) of state government;

• The duties of the Office of Telecommunications Management (OTM);

• Electronic governmental transactions;

• Electronic transactions by certain state agencies.

Act 409 of 2009 abolished the Office of Electronic Services and transferred its duties to OIT. At the same time, it redefined the duties of the Louisiana Geographic Information Systems Council and the Louisiana Geographic Information Center.

Last February, the Civil Service Commission rejected a plan to terminate 69 IT employees in the Department of Health and Hospitals when DHH attempted to push through a privatization contract with the University of New Orleans (UNO).

Last October, eight months after that initial effort, the Civil Service Commission signed off on a revised proposal that called for revamping DHH IT services.

That plan, which involved no layoffs, called for various IT functions to be spread out among four different entities—DHH, the University of Louisiana Lafayette, UNO and a private vendor, Venyu Solutions. The move was projected to save about $1.12 million from the current $37.8 million expense, the administration said.

Venyu contributed $5,000 to Jindal’s re-election campaign in October of 2011.

In 2012, Louisiana was one of only seven states to receive an A-grade in national rankings on providing online access to government spending data. The state’s score of 92 out of 100 was tied with Massachusetts. Arkansas, by contrast, received a grade of F. The state received a score of only eight out of 100, for third worst in the nation.

The rankings were compiled by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PRIG) Education Fund, a consumer watchdog organization that promotes and evaluates transparency in government spending.

Louisiana’s OIT was also cited as having taken the lead among states in providing detailed performance evaluations of government agencies.

Driesse has 15 years’ experience as a chief information officer in both the public and private sectors, including three Fortune 500 companies.

Prior to his appointment, he served as CIO for DHH and also served as CIO for AECOM Technology Corp., a global design and management services company in Los Angeles, where he managed a budget of more than $50 million and a staff of 260.

He also served as CIO for Foster Wheeler, Ltd., a global engineering and construction company in Clinton, N.J., where he oversaw the global deployment of the JD Edwards integrated applications system.

Driesse also served as Vice President and CIO for Zimmer, Inc., of Warsaw, IN, and for HealthTrust, Inc., of Nashville, TN.

He holds a B.S. in mathematics and a M.S. in computer science, both from the University of Louisiana Lafayette.

There was no word on the planned privatization of OIT.

An email inquiry to the Jindal’s office got no response.

Read Full Post »

π-yush’s alter-ego Timmy Teepell denies knowlege of ALEC agenda while Foster Campbell rips his boss for tax proposals

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, Budget, Campaign Contributions, Congress, Economy, Governor's Office, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Lobbyist, Politicians, Revenue, Taxes, Vitter on January 23, 2013 | 3 Comments »

Last March, Piyush Jindal’s alter-ego Timmy Teepell (or would it be the other way around?) was a guest on the Jim Engster’s Show on Baton Rouge’s public radio station WRKF and in the course of that interview he denied any knowledge of the American Legislative Exchange Council’s (ALEC) agenda.

Another guest on Engster’s show, Public Service Commission Chairman Foster Campbell, this week took Jindal, the legislature and the entire Louisiana congressional delegation to task for not displaying sufficient backbone to back Jindal down on his proposals to eliminate the personal and corporate income taxes in favor of a 3 cent state sales tax increase.

Campbell instead called for the passage of a 3 percent processing tax on oil and gas which he said would generate $3 billion a year “and let the people who can afford a tax pay it.”

When one reads ALEC’s 5th anniversary edition of Rich States, Poor States http://www.alec.org/publications/rich-states-poor-states/, one has to wonder at the veracity of Teepell’s claim. The annual report devotes 15 of its 125 pages to demonstrating how bad personal income taxes for states’ economies—and that’s before it even gets to the five-page chapter entitled Policy #1: The Personal Income Tax.

Even after that chapter, state personal income taxes are mentioned at least once on 64 of the next 75 pages.

Likewise, corporate income taxes are also discussed on 10 separate pages before Policy #2: The Corporate Income Tax, another five-page chapter. Corporate income taxes are then mentioned on 56 of the remaining 80 pages.

As if that were not enough, Rich States, Poor States also zeroes in on its favorite tax, the sales tax. “We find that sales taxes have a neutral effect on state economies and therefore are a far preferable means for a state to raise needed revenue,” it said in the first paragraph of Policy #3, entitled (you guessed it) The Sales Tax.

In all, sales taxes are invoked on no fewer than 74 of the 125-page report which boasts that ALEC’s tax and fiscal policy is “to prioritize government spending, to lower the overall tax burden, to enhance transparency of government operations, and to develop sound, free-market tax and fiscal policy.”

And Teepell is unaware of this agenda. Really?

“When policymakers choose the levels and types of taxes for their state, they must confront not only the possible effects on the state economy, but the volatility of tax receipts as well,” the report says. “When tax receipts are volatile, that usually means an abnormally large shortfall of revenues when times are tough and spending needs are the greatest.”

Incredibly, the report claims that revenue generated from sales taxes “is the least affected by the boom and bust cycle—in fact, sales tax revenue changes only half as much as revenue from personal and corporate income taxes do.

“Not only does the sales tax do less to inhibit growth, it is a steady revenue source even during a recession,” says the report.

Then, ripping a page right of the Milton Friedman playbook, the report says, “Progressive corporate and personal income taxes do far more damage to the economy than do other taxes such as sales taxes, property taxes and severance taxes. In addition, they (income taxes) are substantially less reliable than those other taxes. How’s that for sound tax policy?”

Well, certainly inflicting a regressive sales tax on Louisiana’s poor is considerably more reliable than corporate income taxes when one considers all the tax breaks, exemptions and rebates this administration hands out to the tune of about $5 billion a year to corporate contributors.

But to address the sophomoric question, “How’s that for sound tax policy?” we turn to another publication entitled Selling Snake Oil to the States: The American Legislative Exchange Council’s Flawed Prescriptions for Prosperity.

A joint publication of Good Jobs First and The Iowa Policy Project, The November Snake Oil report takes ALEC to task for its Rich States, Poor States publication which, as might be expected, is heavily weighted in favor of its corporate membership.

“We conclude that the evidence cited to support Rich States, Poor States’ policy menu ranges from deeply flawed to non-existent,” Snake Oil says. “Subjected to scrutiny, these policies are revealed to explain nothing about why some states have created more jobs or enjoyed higher income growth than others over the past five years.

“In actuality, Rich States, Poor States provides a recipe for economic inequality, wage suppression and stagnant incomes and for depriving state and local governments of the revenue needed to maintain the public infrastructure and education systems that are true foundations of long term economic growth and shared prosperity,” it said.

The Snake Oil report said that results actually reflect just the opposite of the ALEC claims. “The more a state’s policies mirrored the ALEC low-tax/regressive taxation/limited government agenda, the lower the median family income; this is true for every year from 2007 through 2011.”

Jindal was elected in 2007 and took office in 2008 and his policies, Teepell’s denial notwithstanding, have certainly mirrored the ALEC low-tax/regressive taxation/limited government agenda and the state’s infrastructure and education systems just as certainly have suffered under staggering budgetary cuts.

Louisiana’s average median household income of $42,423 for 2010 was the nation’s 10th lowest and 29 percent of Louisiana’s children live in poverty, second only to Mississippi’s 32 percent.

The state’s working poor already pay little or no income tax, so elimination of the state income tax would have no effect on them. A sales tax increase, however, would hit the poor the hardest because they would be paying the same taxes on diapers, clothing, cars, gasoline, appliances and automobiles as the wealthy. Accordingly, they would be paying a much larger percentage of their income in sales taxes than higher income families.

Campbell, a former state senator and an unsuccessful candidate for governor in 2007, was elected chairman of the Public Service Commission last year.

Accustomed to being a political lightning rod for his candor, Campbell was in rare form on Engster’s show on Tuesday, saying that Jindal typically works for the benefit of big companies and corporations. “He’ll do anything he can to help those at the top end of the income bracket.”

Appearing to consciously avoid referring to Jindal as governor, he said, “Mr. Jindal knows the solution. When I ran for governor, I wanted to get rid of the income tax which I still think we ought to do. Progressive states like Florida and Tennessee don’t have state income taxes and neither does Texas. They seem to be doing better than us. But you have to replace it with something and Mr. Jindal knows what to replace it with but you couldn’t get him close to it.

“Mr. Jindal wouldn’t touch the oil companies and that’s where to get the money. We just need some politicians with some plain old-fashioned guts to ask ‘em to pay their fair share. I’ve never seen anyone stand up to the oil companies. We don’t have a congressman who’ll do it. Mary Landrieu won’t do it. David Vitter is joined at the hip with them and he absolutely won’t do it.

“Mr. Jindal would run out of the Capitol screaming if you asked him to touch Exxon with a tax,” Campbell said.

Campbell, a Democrat, then heaped praise on Louisiana’s first Republican governor since Reconstruction.

“The most honest governor by far, who tried to do the right thing, was Dave Treen. When he ran against Louis Lambert (in 1979), business and industry supported him but when he went after the oil companies, they all turned on him and put Edwards back in,” he said.

“He was absolutely right when he had the Coastal Wetlands Environmental Levy (CWEL) and he wanted some kind of fee from the oil companies for tearing up our coast.

“I like oil companies for furnishing jobs,” he said. “That’s great. But we have let the oil companies absolutely take over our state, damage our coastline and never asked them to pay for it.

The BP spill, bad as it was, was miniscule compared to the damage oil companies have done to our coastline and all our congressional delegation wants to do is go ask Obama to pay for the coastal restoration and Mr. Vitter (U.S. Sen. David Vitter is the leading cheerleader for that. The government didn’t drill the wells and Mr. Vitter knows that but he doesn’t want to ask the people he’s close to to pay for the damage. And neither does Ms. Landrieu. You see the ads on TV praising Ms. Landrieu. Do you know who’s paying for those ads? The oil companies.”

“We need to ask the oil companies who are making billions to pay something rather than asking the people of Louisiana which has (one of the) poorest populations in the nation. Rather than asking people at the bottom to pay the big end of the tax, why doesn’t Mr. Jindal ask companies like Exxon, Chevron, and Shell to pay their fair share? Fifty percent of the coastal erosion in this state is caused by offshore activity.

“In 1926, when we put it into the constitution, we could tax only domestic oil. That was fine back then when 95 percent of our oil was domestic. Today, it’s 96 percent foreign and 4 percent domestic.

“We have to tax oil and gas coming into the state of Louisiana,” he said. “I agree with Mr. Jindal that we need to eliminate the severance tax because it has been dwindling anyway since the ‘80s. Instead of the severance tax, charge a simple 3 percent processing tax which would raise $3 billion a year.

Campbell said former Gov. Buddy Roemer wants to tax oil that’s still in the ground. “That won’t generate the money. I asked Roemer, Edwards and (Mike) Foster (about the 3 percent processing fee) but they wouldn’t help.

“I guarantee you it would pass by 80 percent. Mr. Kennedy (State Treasurer John Kennedy) knows that, Mr. Roemer, Mr. Jindal and especially Mr. (Dan) Juneau, the head of LABI (Louisiana Association of Business and Industry), know it. Mr. Juneau cannot stand a processing tax because the people who pay his bills don’t want it.”

Campbell said, “It’s the LABIs of the world who represent the big companies doing business up and down the Mississippi. LABI is not worried about the Mindens, the Homers, the Farmervilles, the Ringgolds, the Mansfields or the Rustons of Louisiana. They’re worried about the Chevrons, the Dows, the Exxons. Those are the people who put up the big money.

“Legislators who consistently vote with LABI are not representing their districts because LABI could care less about them.

“That’s who Mr. Jindal is dancing to. That’s why he wants to raise the sales tax on the people. Don’t put it on the oil companies that make billions,” he said in mocking the administration line. “They can’t afford it. They might leave the state.

“How are they going leave the state when they have 50,000 miles of pipeline that deliver oil and gas all across America? And they have the Mississippi River! They can’t leave the state. We need politicians with backbone who’ll say, ‘Now listen, you’ve had a great day in Louisiana, but it’s over. We have crumbling roads, poor education, pollution, a torn-up coast and now you’re gonna pay your fair share. Now get out there and start crying that you’re gonna leave the state and we’ll see what the people believe.’”

At that point, Engster finally got to ask, “Are you a member of LABI?”

“Absolutely not. They don’t represent small business. They say they do but they represent the big boys. Never forget that. Mr. Juneau takes his orders from the boys that put up the most money. They don’t worry about the hardware store in Mansfield. They say they do, but they’re fooling those people. They represent the biggest of the big, nothing more, nothing less.

“That’s who Mr. Jindal represents. Look what he’s doing: raising the sales tax on the poorest people living in America—and make sure, by the way, to get rid of corporate taxes.

“You haven’t heard Mr. Jindal say one word about Exxon paying its fair share and you won’t because he’s in their back pocket.

“Mr. Vitter won’t say anything about fixing our coast because he’s in their back pocket.

“Ms. Landrieu won’t say that because she’s in their back pocket.”

LouisianaVoice did a quick check of campaign contributions and found that Campbell may have been onto something when he talked about a lack of courage by the legislature and the congressional delegation and Jindal’s being beholden to the oil and gas industry.

Oil and gas interests contributed more than $1.5 million to 143 state candidates, including legislators and statewide elected officials since 2003, including Jindal, Kennedy, Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne, former Lt. Gov. and current New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu, Commissioner of Agriculture Mike Strain and former Secretary of Natural Resources and current Public Service Commissioner Scott Angelle.

Moreover, oil and gas contributed more than $1.75 million to six of Louisiana’s seven congressmen since 2002 and $1.99 million to the state’s two U.S. senators since 1996.

The breakdown for the congressional delegation, with the dates each was first elected in parentheses is as follows:

Senate:

• Mary Landrieu (1996)—$940,174;

• David Vitter (2004)—$1.05 million’

House:

• Steve Scalise (2008)—$257,785;

• Charles Boustany (2004)—$641,605;

• John Fleming (2008)—$405,450;

• Rodney Alexander (2002)—$254,559;

• Bill Cassidy (2008)—$194,300;

• Cedric Richmond (2010)—$0

Read Full Post »

With π-yush, the word ‘friends’ has become synonymous with the word ‘cash’ when it comes to state board appointments

Posted in Boards, Campaign Contributions, Commissions, Governor's Office, Louisiana Purchase on January 6, 2013 | 3 Comments »

Never let it be said that Piyush Jindal doesn’t remember his friends. As long as the word “friends” is synonymous with the word “cash.”

Of the seven new appointments and one re-appointment to the University of Louisiana System board, six of those combined to contribute nearly $147,000 to Jindal political campaigns from 2003 through 2011, according to state campaign finance records.

The terms of seven of the 16 member board expired on Dec. 31. The eighth position was vacated when attorney Jimmy Faircloth, Jindal’s former executive counsel, resigned after two years on the board and was replaced by his wife, Kelly Faircloth, a chiropractor.

Faircloth, while serving on the board, recently was contracted by Jindal to represent the State Department of Education in a pair of lawsuits challenging the state voucher system and the teacher tenure revisions, both enacted last year by the state legislature as part of Jindal’s education reform package.

Faircloth contributed $14,000 and his former Alexandria law firm contributed an additional $9,000 to Jindal campaigns in 2003, 2006 and 2010. Of that total, Faircloth and his firm each contributed $5,000 to Jindal on the same date in December of 2006.

Only one of three re-appointees, Jimmie “Beau” Martin, Jr. of Cut Off, contributed to Jindal. Martin, family members and three family-owned businesses combined to contribute $34,278.30, records show.

Jimmy Long, Sr. of Natchitoches and Winfred Sibille of Sunset were also re-appointed to new six-year terms but neither was found to have contributed to Jindal.

The other four new appointees and their contributions include:

• Gary Solomon of New Orleans, chairman of Crescent Bank and Trust (replacing Renee Lapeyrolerie): $35,000 from Solomon and family members in 2003, 2007 and 2008 and another $7,199 from Crescent Bank in 2007 and 2009;

• Mark Romero of New Iberia, executive vice president of Brown & Brown Insurance (replacing Paul Aucoin of Morgan City): $1,000 from Romero in 2008 and $9,000 by his insurance firm in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011;

• Robert Shreve of Baton Rouge, CEO of Gulf South Business Systems and Consultants (replacing Russell Mosely of Baton Rouge): $11,000 in 2007 and 2009 and $1,000 by his firm in 2011;

• John Condos of Lake Charles (replacing Louis Lambert): $20,500 by Condos and his wife.

No one expects any governor to appoint political opponents to state boards and commissions but some elected officials might choose to appoint small-time contributors; appointment considerations with this governor, however, just don’t work that way.

Instead, Piyush has displayed a disturbing propensity to favor the big-dollar contributors in making his appointments and the same old names keep popping up, indicating that his solid core support base may be a smaller fraternity than one might assume.

It’s either that or he simply chooses to bestow appointments on only his biggest contributors and ignore the rest.

Read Full Post »

π-yush insists on giving away the store in the form of corporate tax incentives–many to campaign contributors

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Contract, Contracts, Economy, Exemptions, Incentives, Governor's Office, Jobs, Taxes on December 19, 2012 | 3 Comments »

Unless the Revenue Study Commission’s report on the state’s tax structure is destined to become just another government study that gathers dust, it must address one significant fact: that for every dollar in the state’s budget, 21 additional cents is given away in tax incentives, exemptions and credits.

The report is scheduled to be released sometime shortly after the first of the year.

The state, as has been the case the past several years, is facing a budgetary shortfall of about $1 billion for Fiscal Year 2013-14 and the Jindal administration on Friday, Dec. 14., announced another budget cut, this one $166 million—all in health care for the poor.

For the current budget of $25 billion, the state each year gives away almost $5 billion in various tax breaks which range from enterprise zone credits to 10-year property tax exemptions to sales and use tax rebates.

Louisiana corporate and industrial tax incentives were only $59 million as recently as 2001. The surge, of course, translates to less revenue in the state budget but Gov. Piyush Jindal has refused to offset the revenue losses with increased taxes elsewhere, choosing instead to cut services. As a consequence, higher education and health care have incurred devastating cuts.

Put another way, the Jindal administration continues to insist on transferring money from education and health care to businesses.

Louisiana commits $394 for every man, woman and child each year in tax breaks to manufacturers, retail outlets and movie production companies through the Louisiana Office of Economic Development (LED).

Those include:

• LED FastStart, which creates customized employee recruiting, screening and training solutions for eligible companies;

• Angel Investor Tax Credit of up to 35 percent for start-up and expansion investors;

• Digital Interactive Media and Software Development Incentive;

• Enterprise Zone tax credits of $2,500 for each new job created;

• Industrial tax exemption of 100 percent for up to 10 years on new manufacturing investment;

• Motion Picture Investor transferrable tax credit of up to 30 percent;

• Musical and Theatrical Production tax credit of 25 percent to 35 percent;

• Ports of Louisiana investor tax credit program to promote Louisiana ports;

• Quality Jobs program that offers up to 6 percent in rebates on annual payroll expenses for up to 10 years;

• Research and Development tax credits of up to 40 percent to existing businesses;

• Restoration Tax Abatement of 100 percent for five years for rehabilitation of existing structures;

• Sound Recording Investor Tax Credit of 25 percent;

• Technology Commercialization Credit and Jobs Program offering a 40 percent refundable tax credit and a 6 percent payroll rebate for firms that invest in the commercialization of Louisiana technology.

The New York Times recently conducted an extensive investigation into state tax incentives that revealed that Louisiana’s $1.79 billion in business tax breaks ranks 11th in the nation.

Local governments give up $9.1 million per hour ($80 billion per year) in tax incentives to business and industry, according to the Times story.

Movie maker Oliver Stone criticizes subsidies to industries but defends similar subsidies for movie production, the story noted.

Moreover, the $394 per capita cost is eighth highest in the U.S. and the 21-cent cost per state budget dollar is seventh highest in the country.

That $1.79 billion includes $1.61 billion in corporate income tax credits, rebates and reductions and $75 million in property tax abatement.

But one thing the Times story neglected to point out in its report is that the $1.79 billion in corporate tax breaks represents only about 40 percent of the total tax breaks given by Louisiana through other exemptions, including those for hazardous waste disposal, gift taxes, inheritance taxes, sales taxes on alcoholic beverages, tobacco, food and prescription drugs.

Only six other states had a higher ratio of tax incentives to state budget. Texas granted 51 cents per state budget dollar in corporate tax incentives. Following, in order were Nebraska (39 cents), Oklahoma and West Virginia (37 cents), Vermont (31 cents) and Michigan (30 cents).

Not surprisingly, Texas has the most corporate tax exemptions with $19.1 billion.

But Louisiana, like so many other states has plunged headlong into the ever-escalating race for industry and jobs and again, like other states, has placed a tremendous strain on state finances.

The current obsession with tax breaks began with the repeal of the Stelly Plan in Gov. Piyush Jindal’s first few months in office in 2008, a move that has cost the state approximately $300 million per year.

The repeal of the Stelly Plan, according to Jindal, was supposed to save individual taxpayers between $500 and $1,000 per year. But to save $500, a single filer would have to earn as much as $90,000 and joint filers would have to make more than $150,000 a year to save $1,000.

But the revenue losses caused by the ill-advised repeal of the Stelly Plan are dwarfed by the losses to the state treasury that have resulted in corporate tax incentives granted for projects that have produced few or no jobs.

In 2011, for example, the Board of Commerce and Industry approved exemptions totaling more than $2 billion in enterprise zone and property tax exemptions for new and expanded businesses that produced a mere 7,300 jobs, many of those low-salaried jobs.

But not even those comparatively few jobs turn out to be permanent.

• The Ormet Corporation kicked about 200 of its employees in Ascension Parish to the curb in November, only about a year after receiving tax credits worth about $1 million and a performance-based loan of $1.5 million from the state.

• International Paper Co. received more than $55 million in tax breaks while creating only 107 new jobs over the four-year period from 2008-2011. But that did not prevent IP from shutting down its plant in Bastrop in 2008 and another in Minden last May, putting 610 employees out of work.

• The $26.3 million in tax incentives received from the state by General Motors in 2008 and 2009 produced no new jobs and worse, failed to prevent closure of its Shreveport plant which sent 950 workers to the unemployment lines.

• Dow Chemical continued taking tax incentives from the state, even after announcing in 2009 that 2,500 workers would lose their jobs when three Louisiana plants that make ethylene and derivatives would close. Over the four years from 2008 through 2011, Dow accepted $70.3 million in tax incentives that resulted in not a single new job.

That could be because many established plants submit applications for renewals of existing 10-year exemptions, citing plant modernizations or improvements as justification for the continued tax break when in reality, many of the so-called modernization projects involve little more than landscaping, changing a few light bulbs or similar routine maintenance projects.

But even worse is the gnawing appearance of quid pro quo. Many recipients of the state’s generous tax incentives also made generous campaign contributions to Gov. Piyush Jindal.

In all, 29 separate entities received 32 tax exemptions totaling $774 million over the four-year period. Those same 29 have made $135,700 in campaign contributions to Jindal.

Some of the recipients, followed by total tax breaks and campaign contributions to Jindal, include:

• CLECO ($169 million, $14,000);

• Calumet Lubricants ($105 million, $1,000);

• Dow Chemical ($70.3 million, $13,000);

• Exxon/Mobil ($13.3 million, $11,000);

• Century Tel ($24.6 million, $5,000);

• The Coca Cola Co. ($23.9 million, $2,500);

• PPG Industries ($23.2 million, $1,000);

• Marathon Oil ($27.7 million, $11,000);

• Monsanto Co. ($38.7 million, $5,000);

• Conoco Phillips ($37.2 million, $5,000);

• General Motors ($26.7 million, $2,500);

• Stupp Corp. ($25.9 million, $6,000);

• DuPont ($21.3 million, $1,000);

• Select Energy ($14.3 million, $5,000);

• Dynamic Industries ($13.6 million, $5,000);

• General Electric ($11.2 million, $5,000);

• Syngenta Crop Protection ($11 million, $1,000);

• Georgia Pacific ($10.7 million, $4,200);

• Targa Midstream Services ($7.88 million, $5,000);

• Weyerhaeuser ($3.98 million, $5,000);

• Bollinger Shipyards and affiliated companies ($9.36 million, $63,850);

• Chevron ($3.7 million, $1,000);

• Rouse’s Enterprises ($3.48 million, $5,000);

• The GEO Group ($3 million), $5,000);

• Wal-Mart ($2.59 million, $5,000);

• Walgreens ($2.59 million, $5,000);

• Bruce Foods ($2.5 million, $4,500);

• Turner Industries ($2.42 million, $5,000);

• Boh Brothers ($1.76 million, $1,000);

In addition to campaign contributions, which are limited to $5,000 per individual per election cycle, several of the recipients of tax incentives have contributed even more generously to the Supriya Jindal Foundation, established by Jindal’s wife six months after Jindal took office.

Among the contributors are charter members (who give a minimum of $250,000) Marathon Oil, Dow Chemical and Wal-Mart.

Chevron is among the foundation’s Platinum members who pledge a minimum of $50,000.

Read Full Post »

π-yush has more Christmas cheer: Revenue plans shutdown of all state satellite offices except Benson…er, New Orleans

Posted in Budget, Campaign Contributions, Economy, Governor's Office, Jobs, Layoffs, Revenue, State Agencies on December 19, 2012 | 6 Comments »

Get ready, Louisiana taxpayers. If you encounter a need for a one-on-one meeting with a Louisiana Department of Revenue spokesperson to discuss your state taxes in the near future, you soon will be out of luck. You’ll need to juke on down to Baton Rouge or New Orleans to get face time.

Though no announcement has yet been made of a target date, LouisianaVoice has learned that all other state revenue satellite offices are being shuttered.

The closures, of course, will not affect New Orleans where the state is locked into that overpriced lease agreement with Tom Benson as part of the notorious state giveaway to keep the Saints in Louisiana. That’s the deal whereby Benson purchased the old Dominion Tower across from the Superdome with the understanding that the state would move all its New Orleans offices there and pay about twice was it was paying for its former office space.

It was not immediately known how many state employees would be affected, but suffice it to say the timing of the decision, coming as it does a week before Christmas, couldn’t be worse for Revenue staffers in Shreveport, Monroe, Alexandria, Lake Charles and Lafayette.

Having already gone for more than three years without a raise, they now face the prospects of unemployment.

Of course, certain employees have nothing to worry about. The cutbacks will only apply to the grunts, the ones who actually do the day-to-day work, the ones who have to suffer indignities from supervisors and flak from unhappy taxpayers.

This is the same agency, by the way, that hired former State Rep. Jane Smith first as Assistant Secretary at $124,446 despite her professed lack of knowledge about revenue. Upon the firing of Secretary Cynthia Bridges over that alternative fuel tax (a bill authored by smith, no less, and signed into law by Jindal), Smith was briefly promoted to secretary by Piyush.

Jindal later hired former executive counsel Tim Barfield as secretary but circumvented the state law which limited the secretary’s salary to $124,000 by also giving him the title of Executive Counsel of Revenue and bumping his salary up to a cool $250,000.

Of course, it didn’t hurt that Barfield and his wife contributed $15,000 to Jindal’s campaigns in 2006 and 2010 and that one of his former employers, Amedisys, chipped in another $11,000 to the Piyush cause.

And apparently oblivious to the current state hiring freeze, the new secretary promptly went out and bought himself a chief staff in the person of Jarrod Coniglio, who “will take the lead for all of our day-to-day work and be a great help to us as we work to coordinate and execute with the highest efficiency, accuracy and customer service,” according to Barfield.

The price for his new aide that Bridges apparently never saw the need for? $115,003.

While on his shopping spree, Barfield also picked up a new press secretary: Douglas Baker at an annual salary of $105,997.

True to form in the Piyush administration, efforts to contact the newly-appointed Revenue press secretary for more detailed information about the office shut-downs and accompanying layoffs were unsuccessful.

Read Full Post »

π-yush Gump pens WSJ op-ed contraceptive piece advising National Republican Party that ‘Stupid is as stupid does’

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, BESE, Campaign Contributions, Courts, Education, Governor's Office, Health Care, Higher Education, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, OGB, Office of Group Benefits, Recovery School District on December 14, 2012 | 9 Comments »

It’s certainly refreshing and reassuring to know that the woes of running a state government laden with the ever-increasing burden of budgetary shortfalls has not distracted Gov. Piyush Jindal from his primary objective of tending to the more pressing needs of advising the national Republican Party on how not to be stupid.

Jindal, in his latest appearance on the national stage, has authored an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal in which he calls for over-the-counter sales of oral contraceptives.

This, by the way, is yet another in a series of instances in which Jindal makes himself available to the national media while ignoring requests for interviews from new media in Louisiana—a somewhat curious pattern of behavior for a man who insists he has the job he wants.

But back to that WSJ piece. Whether or not you agree with him—and on this issue, a case could certainly be made for such a policy—it is puzzling, to say the least, how a devout Catholic such as Jindal can endorse birth control in any form.

The Catholic Church, last time we checked, was unconditionally opposed to birth control and Piyush is such a good Catholic that he once claimed to have performed an exorcism during his student days at Brown University.

“As a conservative Republican,” he says in the piece, “I believe that we have been stupid to let the Democrats demagogue the contraceptive issue and pretend, during debates about health-care insurance, that Republicans are somehow against birth control.”

Well, that’s certainly seizing the high ground. Jindal arbitrarily hijacks the Rodney Dangerfield claim of “no respect” for the national Republican Party. Good move, there Swifty. My grandfather always told me that when I find myself in a hole, quit digging.

Piyush is looking more and more like a politician who was created by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) but who now wants to put distance between himself and the right wing Tea Partiers who owe their very existence to ALEC. And he’s still digging.

Yep. Piyush is claiming the middle ground, apparently so as not to appear stupid.

The Boy Blunder has, in the wake of the Mitt Romney loss to President Obama, morphed into the Forrest Gump of political science. Maybe we should henceforth simply refer to him as Piyush Gump: stupid is as stupid does.

He implied that Romney ran a “stupid” campaign—but only after the election. Prior to Nov. 6, Piyush campaigned tirelessly for the Republican nominee with nary a hint of discomfort or embarrassment over any supposed GOP stupidity.

Neither Piyush nor any of his appointees, of course, could ever be accused of doing anything stupid.

After all, it would be stupid to repeatedly hide behind something called the “deliberative process” in an effort to avoid revealing information to the public.

It would be stupid to suggest to subordinates that they use private email accounts for communicating about Medicaid budget cuts.

It would be stupid for Jindal’s education superintendent to approve 315 vouchers for the New Living Word School in Ruston without first learning that the school had no instructors, no desks and no classrooms.

It would be stupid for the education superintendent to send an email to the governor’s office outlining his plans to lie to a legislative committee about New Living Word to “take some air out of the room.”

It would be stupid to attempt implementation of a funding method for school vouchers that is clearly unconstitutional.

It would be stupid to describe the judge who ruled that funding method as unconstitutional as “wrong-headed.”

It would be stupid to ignore a growing hole in Assumption that has swallowed up some eight acres of land while belching toxic gases because campaigning against a judge in Iowa is considered more important.

It would be stupid to close a state prison without at least extending the courtesy of a heads-up to legislators in the area.

It would be stupid to close a state hospital without at least extending the courtesy of a heads-up to legislators in that area.

It would be stupid not to fire—or at least punish—a Recovery School District Superintendent who wrecked a state vehicle on one of his three dozen trips to Chicago on private business, including appearing on a Chicago television station to announce his intention to run for mayor.

It would be stupid to attempt a total takeover of the state’s flagship university by loading up its governing board with campaign contributors—and to coerce that board into firing the president, the university’s legal counsel, and the head of the university’s health care system.

It would be stupid to fire or demote scores of other state employees and elected members of the state legislature whose only sin was to disagree with Pontiff Piyush.

It would be stupid for his commissioner of administration to refuse to release a copy of a consultant’s report on the privatization of the Office of Group Benefits.

It would be stupid for his secretary of the Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH) to refuse to divulge to the senate committee considering his confirmation the identity of the winner of a 10-year, $300 million contract—when it was later learned that the winner was a company for whom the secretary had once worked.

It would be stupid for that same DHH secretary to swear under oath to that same committee that he had established a fire wall between him and his former company and that he had had no communication with the company during the selection process—when in fact, as was subsequently learned, he had been in constant communication with the company during the entire selection process.

It would be stupid for a governor to refuse to return $55,000 in campaign contributions after learning it had been laundered through a bank into his campaign.

And it would be oh, so very stupid to insist on no new taxes or tax increases in the wake of a budget deficit hole rivaling the one in Assumption Parish.

Piyush is not stupid. That’s why he is offering advice to his fellow Republicans.

That’s why he is writing op-ed pieces for the WSJ about the need to sell contraceptives over the counter.

And if that doesn’t work, he can always reprise his Brown experience and perform an exorcism on Republican stupidity in much the same manner he performed his exorcism on the collective courage of certain legislators.

Read Full Post »

Jeff Hughes borrows from Woody’s failed congressional bid: pseudo-newspaper claims entire Supreme Court is at stake

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Courts, Governor's Office, Judges on December 7, 2012 | 2 Comments »

Is it just us or has Jeff Hughes ripped a page from the Woody Jenkins playbook in his campaign for the State Supreme Court with that tacky “newspaper?”

For that matter, how is it that Jeff Hughes runs on a campaign of rock-solid conservatism, garnering endorsements from Piyush Jindal, the Louisiana Republican Party and the Tea Party while at the same time reaping boat loads of campaign contributions from the plaintiff bar?

And how is it that Jeff Hughes on the one hand touts his support for right to life, firearms, “traditional” marriage and capital punishment while citing the new chief justice as a New Orleans liberal and says that his election would give conservative Republicans a majority on the Supreme Court and at the same time insisting that he would never in a million years allow his personal views supplant a strict application of the law.

That, folks, in hockey parlance is known as the hat trick.

For that matter, how does his high school basketball prowess qualify him for anything but a college scouting report?

And what makes the fact that he wrote the opinion on the First Circuit Court of Appeal denying the appeal of convicted serial killer Derrick Todd Lee significant? Given the evidence in that case, a first-year law student could have written it and in all likelihood, it wasn’t Hughes at all, but a law clerk who did the actual writing that Hughes signed.

In this, the last week leading up to Saturday’s runoff between Hughes and Judge John Michael Guidry, we received two mail-outs from Hughes. One, a slick, 9 by 6-inch card contained the headline: “Bummed About Obama?” and text that proclaimed that “19 states how have legalized marijuana and 9 states and the District of Columbia now allow gay marriage.”

Beneath that shocking news bulletin was the message, “Protect your rights here in Louisiana—vote Judge Jeff Hughes.”

Now, whether you like or despise Obama, whether you endorse the legalization of marijuana or gay marriage should never be an issue in an election for the Louisiana Supreme Court. Minnesota notwithstanding, a candidate for a judgeship has absolutely no business espousing his political viewpoint on political issues, hot-button or otherwise. That is simply improper and inappropriate.

And yet, Jeff Hughes maintains in that pseudo-newspaper, “I am a strict constructionist. It is the duty of the legislature, not judges, to make the law. I consider the Constitution to be an inspired document.”

During his unsuccessful 2008 campaign for Congress against Donald Cazayoux, Jenkins published several issues of what appeared to be a tabloid newspaper which, as it turned out, was nothing more than an oversized campaign brochure that praised Woody Jenkins.

Now Jeff Hughes has cloned that idea, mailing out the Louisiana Judicial Report.

At first glance, it looks like a real, bona fide, sure-fire tabloid newspaper, complete with the official Seal of Louisiana in the upper left hand corner, next to the masthead. “Supreme Court at Stake,” the headline screamed at the reader just before the paper disappeared into the recycle bin. Not an individual Supreme Court seat at stake, mind you, but the entire cotton-pickin’ court apparently is at risk in this one election.

The “newspaper” contains an assortment of hot “news stories” about liberal Democrats, conservative Republicans, student-athlete Jeff Hughes, the lack of experience of John Michael Guidry, the boyhood of Jeff Hughes, ads saying Hughes is a “pro-life champion,” his two-time All-District basketball career at Denham Springs High School and Livingston Parish MVP, the obligatory family photo, a list of “key” endorsements and a half-page ad denying that he is aligned with the plaintiff bar in the so-called “legacy lawsuits,” litigation by landowners against oil companies for not cleaning up their property once exploration was completed.

The ad says that after the legislature passed legislation prohibiting the legacy lawsuits, the oil companies (he refers to them as “billionaires”) are supporting Guidry and the landowners (“millionaires”) support Hughes, all of which somehow makes no sense whatsoever.

“As a judge, my job is not to favor or reward any group but to apply the Constitutions and laws to the facts of each case,” Hughes said in the ad. “That’s what I will always try to do in every controversy.

“Here’s some advice: ignore the big money being spent on TV (ironically, that would be Hughes money to a large extent) and think about the issues that actually affect you and your family.

“If you’re pro-life, pro-gun, and pro-traditional marriage, then vote Jeff Hughes.”

Wait. What?

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,814 other followers