Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October, 2013

2011 DOC memo asks probation officers to refer non-violent offenders to facility run by LSU Board member, Jindal donor

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Courts, Ethics, Governor's Office, Judges, LSU, Prison on October 11, 2013| 20 Comments »

The Jindal administration two years ago attempted to influence parole officers and district judges throughout the state to refer violators to a private facility operated by a major Republican campaign contributor whom Gov. Bobby Jindal subsequently appointed to the LSU Board of Supervisors.

LouisianaVoice obtained a four-page memorandum through a public records request of the Louisiana Department of Corrections (DOC) which indicates that state probation and parole officers were directed to funnel offenders into the Academy of Training Skills (ATS) in Lacassine.

ATS, owned and operated by Chester Lee Mallett of Iowa, LA. in Calcasieu Parish, is a 200-bed transitional work program ostensibly set up to provide employment and training in various industrial trades in order to return offenders to the work force. http://www.aattss.com/

On July 13, 2012, Jindal appointed Mallett to the LSU Board of Supervisors. He was previously appointed by Jindal to the State Licensing Board for Contractors in June of 2010. Mallett and companies controlled by him have contributed more than $30,000 to Jindal personally, $242,000 to the Louisiana Republican Party and $75,000 to the Republican Governors Association, of which Jindal is currently president.

The memorandum, from Barry Matheny, Assistant Director of Probation and Parole, to his boss, Probation and Parole Director Gerald Starks, was dated Oct. 3, 2011, and noted that DOC had amended its policy to include probation violators as eligible for the program. Forwarded to parole and probation officers throughout the state, it directed them to “get with your respective judges at your earliest convenience to make them aware of this alternative program.”

Matheny further said, “I would ask that you look at all technical violators…and see if (you) can get some offenders into this program.”

What followed was an outline of the ATS program which essentially was an endorsement of Mallett’s facility which does not accept state or federal funding but rather charges a housing fee to the residents, many of whom are said to work for Mallett’s construction companies.

ATS’s website says that salaries residents receive from job placements by ATS are kept in special accounts in residents’ names. Several former residents, however, have told LouisianaVoice that upon their release from the program, they actually owe ATS money. They said ATS “forgives” any outstanding rent balances owed. But when those who work for Mallett’s companies have to use their salaries to pay Mallett for lodging at ATS, Mallett is basically getting free labor in exchange for the lodging.

Moreover, the ATS website, which apparently has not been updated for some time, says it is certified by the Department of Public Safety and Corrections and the American Correctional Association (ACA).

The value of the ACA accreditation, however, is somewhat suspect in that the association has come under criticism that it routinely accredited facilities which experienced charges of abuse or poor conditions, according to a 2001 Boston Globe report. http://www.prisonpolicy.org/aca.html

One of ACA’s past presidents, Richard Stalder, while serving as Louisiana State Corrections Secretary in 1993, canceled spending on psychiatric counseling for troubled teens so that he could give out $2.7 million in raises to his staff.

By 1995, ACA had accredited all 12 prisons in Louisiana, passing the last two with 100 percent scores, all while the head of Louisiana’s prison system was serving as ACA’s national president—an arrangement some might consider a conflict of interests. That same year, however, more than 125 prisoners sued Stalder for mistreatment within the prisons and a month after it accredited the state prison at Angola, it was reported that about $32 million in repairs were needed for it to meet safety requirements. Prisoners with fractures were splinted and then not seen for months.

Stalder rejected all the claims, saying that he and his staff deserved “a pat on the back” but in June of 1995, Federal Judge Frank Polozola criticized Stalder for the way in which he ran the state prison system.

In 1998, the new Jena Juvenile Center came under fire for widespread problems, including a near-riot, poor teaching and security and physical abuse and in 1999 the juvenile facility in Tallulah was taken under state control after five years of repeated problems with private ownership despite its having received accreditation and a positive report only six months earlier from ACA and Stalder.

http://www.prisonsucks.com/ACA/ACAofficers.html

In 2010, Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) trumpeted the re-accreditation of five of its private prisons by ACA. But what CCA did not reveal was that it had paid ACA more than $22,000 for those five accreditations, that CCA employees serve as ACA auditors, that CCA is a major sponsor of ACA events or worse, and that accredited CCA facilities had experienced major security problems. http://www.privateci.org/private_pics/PCIACApr.htm

(CCA, it should be noted, is one of several private prison companies that have made major contributions to the campaigns of Gov. Jindal.)

Despite the memorandum from DOC, most judges and district attorneys have shied away from ACS. One judge said he threw the letter in the trash can “as soon as I received it,” and a district attorney told LouisianaVoice he wanted nothing to do with the facility.

Both Mallett and his son are major players in politics, having contributed $670,000 to assorted state and national candidates—mostly Republicans—and Jindal’s Believe in Louisiana “527” tax exempt political organization which is little more than a political slush fund used to push Jindal’s agenda such as his failed state income tax repeal last legislative session.

Lee Mallett contributed the yearly maximum of $30,800 to the Republican National Committee on three separate occasions between the summer of 2011 and the spring of 2012 and son Brad Mallett also contributed another $30,800, records show.

Following is a partial list of contributions by Lee Mallett and nine of his corporate entities:

Academy of Training Schools

• Billy Nungesser (lieutenant governor bid), $5,000, July and August of 2011;

• State Sen. John Alario Jr., $1,000, September of 2011;

• Republican Party of La., $12,000, September and November of 2011;

• Jane Smith (who lost her State Senate race but was subsequently appointed Assistant Secretary of Revenue by Jindal), $1,000, October of 2011;

Air Vac Inc.

• Bobby Jindal, $5,000, September of 2010;

• State Sen. Dan Morrish, $1,000, November 2010;

• Chuck Kleckley (La. House Dist. 36), $2,500, Feb. 8, 2011;

• State Sen. Jonathan Perry, $2,500, February 2011;

• State Sen. Ronnie Johns, $2,500, May 2011;

• Billy Nungesser, $2,500, August 2011;

• Republican Party of La., $27,000, September and November 2011;

Best Buy Industries

• Billy Nungesser, $2,500, August of 2011;

• Republican Party of La., $27,000, September and November 2011;

Caddy Shack Enterprises

• Bobby Jindal, $5,000, May 2007;

• Agriculture Commissioner Mike Strain, $2,500, August 2007;

• Republican Party of La., $15,000, May and September 2008;

Mallett Inc.

• Attorney General Buddy Caldwell, $2,500, November 2007;

Mallett Buildings

• Republican Party of La., $25,000, April 2011;

Nature’s Best Inc.

• Dan Morrish, $500, November 2010;

• Bobby Jindal, $1,500, March 2011;

• Republican Party of La., $12,000, September and November 2011;

Progressive Buildings

• Dan Morrish, $1,000, November 2010;

• Bobby Jindal, $3,500, March 2011;

• Bobby Jindal, $1,500, April 18, 2011;

• Sen. Ronnie Johns, $2,500, May 2011;

Progressive Merchants

• Republican Party of La., $107,000, May, October, February, 2007, December, 2009, September and November 2011, and April 2012;

• Mike Strain, $2,500, August 2007;

• Bobby Jindal, $5,000, December 2009;

• Louisiana Committee for a Republican Majority, $25,000, June 2011;

• Billy Nungesser, $2,500, August 2011;

Lee Mallett

• State Treasurer John Kennedy $2,500, February 2007;

• Republican Party of Louisiana, $1,000, April 2007;

• Dan Morrish, $2,500, November 2010;

• S.C. Gov. Nikki Haley, $3,500, April 2012;

Federal contributions

• Republican Party of Louisiana, $16,000, April 2007, June 2008, September and December 2010, and June 2011;

• Cong. Charles Boustany, $7,200, September 2007 and October 2011;

• U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, $4,600, September 2007;

• State Treasurer John Kennedy (U.S. Senate bid), $2,300, December 2007;

• Donald Cazayoux (La. 6th Congressional Dist.), $16,100, February and April 2008;

• Kennedy Majority Committee, $28,500, April 2008;

• National Republican Senatorial Committee, $28,500, April 2008;

• U.S. Sen. David Vitter, $1,200, June 2008;

• Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachman, $2,500, July 2011;

• Republican National Committee, $61,600, August 2011and March 2011;

• Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry, $2,500, October 2011;

• Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, $2,000, November 2011;

• Republican National Committee Recount Fund, $30,800, December 2011;

• Cong. Bill Cassidy, $2,500, April 2012;

• Romney Victory Inc., $14,200, June 2012;

527 contributions

Lee Mallett

• American Solutions Winning the Future, $1,100, January and December 2009;

• Republican Governors Association, $50,000, October 2010 and February 2012;

Mallett Inc.

• Republican Governors Association, $25,000, June 2009;

Air Vac Inc.

• Believe in Louisiana, $1,000, March 2012;

Academy of Training Schools

• Believe in Louisiana, $6,000, March 2012;

Nature’s Best Inc.

• Believe in Louisiana, $1,000, March 2012;

Progressive Merchants

• Believe in Louisiana, $1,000, March 2012;

Progressive Buildings

• Believe in Louisiana, $1,000, March 2012;

Brad Mallett

• David Vitter, $3,100, June 2008;

• Republican National Committee, $30,800, August 2011.

Read Full Post »

Psychopaths and sociopaths share many characteristics: seem to coincide eerily with Louisiana official’s persona

Posted in Governor's Office, Politicians on October 10, 2013| 19 Comments »

We at LouisianaVoice are not into pop psychology, but in reading interviews with three authors of two separate books, one about sociopaths and the other about psychopaths, we could not help noticing first, the character traits the two have in common and second, how those descriptions seem to fit a certain Louisiana elected official like a Brioni suit.

All three authors are respected practicing psychologists.

Martha Stout, Ph.D., is a clinical psychologist and former Harvard Medical school instructor. Author of The Sociopath Next Door, she has spent much of her professional life trying to decipher the psyche of the sociopath and has determined that the central trait of a sociopath is the total lack of conscience.

http://www.interviewmagazine.com/culture/conscience-lack-of#_

http://www.bookbrowse.com/author_interviews/full/index.cfm/author_number/1097/martha-stout

She estimates that one in 25 people, 4 percent of the population, are sociopathic. That translates to roughly 12 million Americans. The percentage, she said, most likely increases as one climbs the ladder of success.

Dr. Stout describes sociopaths as those who, through grand schemes of contrivance, manipulation and deceit, seek to undermine and manipulate simply because they can.

She is also quick to point out that sociopaths generally are not violent and don’t necessarily look like Charles Manson. Instead, she says, they are like most other people in that some of them are brilliant, some stupid and others somewhere in between.

In fact, they are often charming and charismatic and the skilled ones will study the way we emote and use that to his or her advantage. Beneath that façade, however, Dr. Stout says they live “only to dominate others and win.”

While loath to practice amateur psychology, we have to ask: does this sounds like anyone we know?

“In a perfect world, human respect would be an automatic reaction only to those who are strong, kind and morally courageous,” Dr. Stout says. The person who profits from manipulation and fear is not likely to be any of these, she added.

One lie, one broken promise or a single neglected responsibility might well be a simple misunderstanding, she said. “Two may involve a serious mistake. But three lies says you’re dealing with a liar and deceit is the linchpin of conscienceless behavior.”

Most disturbing of all, Stout says at least six out of 10 people “will blindly obey an official-looking authority to the bitter end.”

Two other experts, Robert Hare, Ph.D. and Paul Babiak, Ph.D. have conducted extensive research into psychopathy and have come up with several similarities between Dr. Stout’s description of sociopaths and their own characterization of psychopaths.

http://www.fraud-magazine.com/article.aspx?id=404

In their book Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work, they note that psychopaths “have an inordinate need for power, prestige, wealth, etc. They operate according to their own self-serving principle: look out for number one, no matter what the cost to others and (do so) without guilt or remorse.”

Again, sound like anyone we know?

The emotional life of psychopaths lacks the range and depth found in most individuals, Dr. Hare says. “…No amount of training and practice will allow…the psychopath to really understand the emotional life of others, except in a vague intellectual, inferential sense. To put it simply, they don’t know how you feel, nor do they much care.

“They are described as without conscience and incapable of empathy, guilt or loyalty to anyone but themselves,” he added.

Dr. Babiak added that psychopaths make great first impressions and “talk a good game on a surface level, and will use technical jargon and glib, superficial charm” to convince others of their experience and expertise.

He said the psychopath “operates on the surface level,” presenting a mask or persona that is in keeping with the expectations of the audience and that they are “more observant of others and are motivated to take advantage of the traits, characteristics and personal situations of those around them.”

“Other people only exist to fulfill the supporting roles required of them—the pawns and patrons,” he added.

He said most psychopaths they have known were “loners” in the sense of only thinking of themselves, but that “they do surround themselves with supporters and followers to facilitate their activities.”

Babiak then dropped a bombshell during the interview about their book:

“While economic slowdowns can lead to layoffs and plant closings,” he said, “there is still the need for seasoned, experienced leaders who have the wherewithal to meet the challenge of recovery and turnaround. These individuals are rare. What a perfect scenario for the psychopath to enter as the ‘solution,’ replete with the skills (faked), abilities (faked), and background (faked) necessary to take over and make things right.”

Babiak said the change of organizational structures from large and bureaucratic to lean, mean and flat (read: consolidation and privatization) has inadvertently made organizations more attractive to psychopaths because of fewer rules and at the same time, easier to negotiate (faster progression—as in education reform legislation).

“The mantra became ‘do more, better, faster with less,’” Babiak said.

He said psychopaths are intolerant of creativity and innovation and that in an atmosphere of constant policy changes and restructuring, new structures “are always in a state of flux and never reach the ‘ideal’ state. This frustrates and confuses those who have grown accustomed to the stability that large organizations used to provide.

“Being a thrill seeker by nature, the psychopath relishes the chaos,” Babiak said. “On a practical level, a constantly changing work environment provides the psychopath and endless source of new co-workers to target and many opportunities to move from project to project when boredom sets in.”

“Sadly, even after being victimized, many members of a group will refuse to face the truth, continuing to believe that the scamster is basically good at heart or that there must be a reason why he or she took advantage of the group,” Dr. Hare said.

“There is little evidence that psychopaths can be or even believe they should be, rehabilitated. Their behavior reflects a well-established, stable personality structure,” he said.

“They have solid positions from which they continue to use their organization (read: office) for personal gain,” Babiak added.

One more time: sound like anyone we know?

We’re just sayin’…

Read Full Post »

The solution to the federal government shutdown is really quite simple: we should fire all 535 members of Congress

Posted in Congress, Economy, Governor's Office, House, Senate, Supriya Jinda Foundation on October 5, 2013| 32 Comments »

While we normally do not delve into national politics (we have quite enough to do to keep up with the jesters on the fourth floor of the State Capitol), we have decided to offer up our solution to the impasse in Washington, aka the federal government shutdown.

If the board of a larger corporation like, say, Wal-Mart disagrees with the company’s CEO or president, there are no closures of Wal-Mart stores. That would be self-defeating in every respect. Corporate profits would plummet, consumers would buy elsewhere and the stockholders would elect new board members and new officers.

So how is it that Congress—America’s corporate board—can shut down company operations because of disagreements among themselves and with the President—the country’s CEO? Is our national company that near bankruptcy, financial collapse, that hysteria is now the order of the day when it comes to running the store?

To borrow a line from the television sitcom Two and a Half Men, our elected representatives appear to have the emotional stability of a sack of rats in a burning meth lab. Come to think of it, the analogy might not be that far off.

When either side of the aisle in Congress, whether Republicans or Democrats, takes it upon itself to hold the entire country hostage over its inability or unwillingness to compromise, drastic measures are in order.

When 535 men and women can cancel services to more than 300 million Americans on a whim, the system is broken and is in immediate need of repair.

When either side of the issue comments that it is “winning” and that it “doesn’t matter” to them how long the shutdown lasts—and please remember that there are cancer patients and wounded veterans who run the risk of not receiving needed medical treatments—then arrogance has supplanted diplomacy and common sense in our nation’s capital and something must be done.

When Rep. Randy Neugegauer (R-TX) can publicly insult a park ranger for doing her job in closing access to the temporarily closed World War II Memorial in Washington because of the government shutdown—a shutdown brought about by congressional stupidity and not by any action of the park ranger—then he, not she, should be ashamed.

And then we have Rep. Lee Terry (R-NEB) who said he cannot afford to give up his salary during the shutdown. He was dismissive of those who are declining their pay, saying, “Whatever gets them good press.” Good press seems the do-all, end-all for elected officials these days but they often miss the mark by a wide margin. “I’ve got a nice house and a kid in college,” Terry sniffed in refusing for relinquish his salary. “Giving our paycheck away when you still worked and earned it? That’s just not going to fly.”

Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) expressed similar sentiments, saying he’s keeping his money because he’s “working to earn it.”

Certainly not like those federal employees who also have houses and kids in college and credit card debt and utility and grocery bills but who aren’t working because they were furloughed as a result of increasingly recurring—and tiresome—congressional gridlock and 535 megalomaniacs jockeying for “good press.”

Unfortunately, the solution to this idiocy cannot be implemented overnight; it will take several years.

Nevertheless, here is our solution:

Fire every damned one of them.

That’s right. Put them on the street for a change. Let them struggle to make ends meet each month. In short, put them back in touch with their constituents by making them one of us. We at LouisianaVoice have long felt that if we sent the politicians into battle before sacrificing our young men and women, there well might be fewer unnecessary, foolish, and costly wars like Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and possibly Syria that benefit only the defense contractors.

So why not take that idea further and whenever federal employees are placed on furlough because of a federal shutdown resulting from sheer pigheadedness and some philosophical point, stop the pay for members of Congress and put them on furlough—permanently.

Constitutionally, it cannot be done in one fell swoop. Senators are elected on a rotating basis—one-third every two years. But in 2014, we could fire 468 of ‘em—all 435 members of the House and one-third, or 33 senators. Two years later, in 2016, send another one-third of the senators home and the final one-third in 2018. (Somewhere along the way, of course, there would be 34 senators up for re-election to account for all 100, but it should be just as easy to fire 34 as 33.)

None are righteous, no not one. All 535 have lost touch with the American people. Witness the shabby way in which 5th District Congressman Rodney Alexander “retired” with little advance notice, all so that (a) Gov. Bobby Jindal could install his choice, State Sen. Neil Riser, into Alexander’s seat and (b) Alexander could be rewarded for opening the door to Jindal’s boy via his appointment as head of the State Department of Veterans Affairs, a position which, incidentally, will bump his state retirement from his tenure in the state legislature before his election to Congress from approximately $7500 to about $82,000 per year.

He’s not alone, of course. Far too many members of Congress have parlayed their time in Washington into small—and not-so-small—fortunes.

Jindal, for example, spent a tad more than three years in Congress and emerged a multi-millionaire, a status he was far from enjoying when he entered.

And at least four of our own former congressmen—Sen. John Breaux and congressmen Bob Livingston, Richard Baker and Billy Tauzin—simply retired and moved over to K Street as highly paid lobbyists. There are others, but those come to mind quickly. Tauzin, it should be noted, used his position in Congress to set up his future employer—and himself—in a way we can only dream of. He rammed through a Medicare bill that prohibited the federal government from negotiating the cost of prescription drugs with pharmaceutical companies, meaning that the pharmaceutical companies set the prices—and that was that. And then he resigned and went to work as a lobbyist for (you guessed it) the pharmaceutical industry.

Other members of Congress (and some governors) establish non-profit, tax-exempt foundations that allow well-heeled donors to circumvent laws that limit campaign contributions to $5,000 per election cycle. Donations to foundations such as the Supriya Jindal Foundation for Louisiana’s Children and Jindal’s Believe in Louisiana, however, have no such restrictions placed on them.

As might be expected, contributions to these foundations from individuals seeking lucrative appointments and corporations seeking favorable legislation tend to spiral out of control.

And there are members of Congress, Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid among them, who use their positions to garner inside information that allows them to anticipate and profit from stock market fluctuations or to make property investments that enrich them personally.

There is less controversy in Congress over the issue of the NSA’s spying on American citizens—an issue that should prompt outrage on the part of the American people.

And now these self-righteous hypocrites beat their breasts as each side waits for the other to blink—all over the issue of ObamaCare which, good or bad, passed Congress and was ratified by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The American people should be asked to tolerate only so much from these miscreants. Our patience should be wearing a bit then with these spoiled brats.

The only reasonable solution, therefore, is to fire them all.

No exceptions.

Read Full Post »

Correction (BIG correction)

Posted in Uncategorized on October 1, 2013| 22 Comments »

In the fourth paragraph of the story below about Bill Cassidy, I inadvertently said that Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe, “like Jindal, a Democrat…”

It is times like these that I maintain that the Golden Years are highly overrated.

But to make a mistake like—and on my 70th birthday at that—is inexcusable and requires that I post the correction.

Obviously Jindal is not a Democrat.

I have since made the correction, so if you did not see the original error, forget this contrite admission.

—Tom Aswell

Read Full Post »

Notable Quotables (in their own words)

Posted in Congress, Health Care, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Notable Quotables on October 1, 2013| Leave a Comment »

“Proposed law creates the Louisiana Health Insurance Exchange in the Department of Insurance. Provides for the powers, duties, functions, responsibilities and obligations of the Exchange.”

—The Digest of Senate Bill 307 of the 2007 Louisiana Legislature by then-State Sen. Bill Cassidy. The bill, had it passed, would have created a Louisiana version of ObamaCare while Barrack Obama was still a U.S. Senator from Illinois and more than a year before he was elected President.

“The House has repeatedly passed legislation to fund the government and protect millions of American families from the devastating effects of Obamacare.”

—Sixth District Congressman Bill Cassidy, in a prepared statement on Tuesday, Oct. 1 about the government shutdown.

Could there be a reason that public opinion of Congress is at an all-time low?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »