Two emails popped up on our computer on Wednesday that we simply could not ignore and while the messages concern men who have an intense dislike for each other, the emails are nevertheless related in ways that should offend every voter citizen in Louisiana.
If you were not already turned off by Bobby Jindal and David Vitter, these should do it. If not, then you are part of the problem.
The first is a response to one of our readers from U.S. Sen. David Vitter, the odds-on favorite to become Louisiana’s next governor.
Our reader had written Vitter to ask for his support for a constitutional amendment to overturn the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision that said corporations and unions may not be restricted from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections, in effect giving corporations the same rights as citizens. (The exception is that citizens may be sentenced to prison terms for white collar crimes while corporations may only be fined—usually in amounts far less than the financial gains realized from the criminal activity.)
Anyone who still does not see the manner in which money buys elections in this country—from legislators all the way up to president of the United States—either is a special interest lobbyist, a corporatist power broker, or someone who lives under a rock.
Vitter, in his response, somehow managed to morph the request for the regulation of campaign finance to the muzzling of free speech. “Thank you for contacting me in support of a constitutional amendment that would allow Congress and states to regulate campaign finance and political speech,” he said.
“As you know,” he said, “more than 40 Senate Democrats are supporting an amendment to the Constitution to allow regulations on political speech during federal elections. This proposal comes in response to multiple United States Supreme Court cases upholding the free speech protections enshrined in the First Amendment.”
Right away, he manages to turn it into a Democrat vs. Republican rather than a bipartisan issue. Somehow, when they get to Washington, they just have to make everything an us vs. them fight—like it would kill them to ever admit anyone in the other party might have a good idea. No wonder Congress has such a low approval rating, right down there with televangelists. And we just as quickly get the feeling that Vitter isn’t going to be very sympathetic to any suggestion of campaign reform. Not that’s any real surprise; a special super political action committee was set up on Vitter’s behalf earlier this year to help catapult him into the governor’s office. That PAC, The Fund for Louisiana’s Future, immediately funneled more than $3 million into his campaign.
But back to his email:
“Proponents of the amendment argue that corporations and individuals should be limited in their ability to indirectly support or oppose federal candidates, but the amendment would grant Congress power to pass new statutory limitations on political speech that could impact anyone,” he said.
Oh, please.
“I fear that its adoption would allow Congress to regulate everyone from the Sierra Club to the National Rifle Association, pro-life and pro-choice groups, and could even suppress publishers and producers from releasing new books and movies that pertain to a candidate.”
What unmitigated B.S.
“Moreover, nothing in this amendment is limited to corporations or billionaires; it could easily include limitations on the rights of every American. A free society must engage in robust discourse in search of truth,” he continued in his self-serving gooneybabble.
“Objectionable speech should be confronted in the free marketplace of ideas where the best ideas win out, not through government regulations.
“Never in the history of the Constitution have we amended the Bill of Rights. I firmly disagree that we should do so now, especially not a right so fundamental to who we are as a nation. Although we disagree, rest assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind.”
So the bottom line is Mr. Vitter, who desires to be our next governor, wants corporations, lobbyists and special interest organizations with the financial clout to continue to buy access while drowning out our voices—to club our ideas, letters, emails and small (read: meaningless) contributions into so much pulp with their millions of dollars.
Mr. Vitter’s version of free speech—speech that favors those who are connected and who have the financial resources to purchase elections and politicians—is precisely what is wrong with the political system in the United States—and Louisiana.
The plain truth is Vitter is trying to purchase the governor’s office with his PAC and well-heeled political supporters who are contributing to his campaign not in the interest of good government but in the expectation of some quid pro quo in the form of contracts or favorable legislation. In other words, the buddy system wins, the state of Louisiana loses.
That email is just the sort of thing that State Rep. John Bel Edwards (D-Amite) should plaster all over every newspaper and television station in the state to show the real manner in which David Vitter views democracy and free speech.
And those views have nothing to do with representative government. They are to be used as a vehicle to roll over honest, hard-working citizens and, in the process, to make them think he’s doing them a favor. It’s all about convincing the great unwashed to vote against their own best interests by waving the flag and finding new enemies to hate.
The other email was a report in Wednesday’s online edition of the Baton Rouge Business Report, edited by Rolfe McCollister, a Jindal appointee to the LSU Board of Supervisors and who served as campaign treasurer of Jindal’s gubernatorial campaign and who now serves a treasurer of his presidential campaign.
That story said Jindal, who announced he was a candidate for the Republican Presidential nomination just a week before the close of the second quarter fundraising period, raised $578,758 in that first week.
In all, he has raised more than $9 million, with the bulk of that (more than $8.6 million) raised through super PACs—the American Future Project, Believe Again, and the America Next non-profit—which only reinforces what we said above about the unlevel playing field created by PACs.
The report said that 87 percent of Jindal’s campaign donors contributed $100 or less.
That’s the same kind of garbage he once tried to feed us about the contributions to his governor’s campaign. Trouble is, readers should not listen to what he says but rather to what is not said.
In poring over his initial presidential campaign report (yes, we do that), we found 180 contributors gave the maximum $2,700. That included multiple members of the same household, or in the case of the Madden Construction family in Minden, eight separate Maddens contributed $2,700 each.
The 180 individual donors combined to account for $486,000 of that $578,758. Two of those donors were listed as giving additional checks of $5,400 each (which exceeds federal limits, but we’ll leave that to the Federal Elections Commission). Moreover, an organization identified as the Smoke Bend Political Action Committee ponied up another $5,000.
That runs the subtotal to $501,800.
Continuing down the list, we find that 14 individuals gave $1,000 each, 21 gave $500 each, 42 contributed $250 each, five gave $350 and two more chipped in $300 each.
Altogether, that comes to $538,800, or 93 percent of the total $578,758 and it leaves only about $40,000 for that 87 percent who gave $100 or less. Don’t listen to what they say; hear what they’re not saying.
So the point is, the big money donors simply overwhelm the small donors and to say that most of his donors were small donors is deliberately misleading and disingenuous.
But just for argument’s sake, let’s take a look at a few of major donors.
- Rolfe McCollister (LSU Board of Supervisors member) and Gene McCollister of Baton Rouge, $2700 each;
- Hank Danos (LSU Board) and Rodlyn Danos of Larose, $2700 each;
- Jack Lawton (LSU Board) and Holly Lawton of Lake Charles, $2700 each;
- Jim McCrery (LSU Board), $2700;
- Robert Yarborough (LSU Board) and Marsha Yarborough of Baton Rouge, $2700 each;
- Chester Lee Mallett (LSU Board) and son Brad Mallett of Iowa, LA., $2700 each;
- James Moore (LSU Board) and Lynn Moore of Monroe, $2700 each;
- Scott Ballard (LSU Board) and Kristi Ballard of Covington, $2700 each;
- Blake Chatelain (LSU Board) of Alexandria, $2700;
- David Madden, Connie Madden, Sharon Madden, Lydia Madden, James Madden, John Madden, Melissa Madden and Douglas Madden, all of Minden, $2700 each;
- Former Congressman Robert Livingston and Bonnie Livingston of Alexandria, VA., $2700 each;
- Former Commissioner of Administration Paul Rainwater of Baton Rouge, $2700;
- Louisiana Department of Revenue Secretary Tim Barfield and Nan Barfield of Baton Rouge, $2700 each;
- Publisher of Baton Rouge Business Report Julio Melara of Baton Rouge, appointed by Jindal to the Louisiana Stadium & Exposition District, $2700;
- Robert Bruno of Covington, appointed by Jindal to the Louisiana Stadium & Exposition District, $2700;
- J.E. Brignac of Prairieville, appointed by Jindal to the Louisiana Stadium & Exposition District, $2700;
- William Windham of Bossier City, appointed by Jindal to the Louisiana Stadium & Exposition District, and Carol Windham, $2700 each;
- Former Jindal Executive Counsel Jimmy Faircloth of Pineville, $2700.
Those are just a few, but they account for $94,500. Not too much in the way of contributions outside Louisiana. Apparently the price of being appointed to a prestigious board or commission is not only to vote the way you’re told (see LSU board’s vote on firing presidents, doctors and attorneys, and on giving away state hospitals) but to pony up campaign funds when the boss comes calling.
Conspicuously absent (with only a couple of exceptions), however, were the names of Indian-Americans who practically lined up to contribute to his gubernatorial campaigns of 2003, 2007 and 2011 before watching in dismay as he began to distance himself from his Indian heritage, claiming that he did not believe in hyphenated-Americans.
If you are a taxpayer in Louisiana, add your name to the list of donors to jindal’s campaign. Every day that he spends outside the state campaigning is a day he is stealing his salary and state-paid benefits (let’s not forget, he is enrolled in the state retirement system; it’s a good guess the jindal family’s health insurance is through OGB), not to mention free rent on the mansion for his family at home. His campaign may be paying his travel expenses, but we Taxpayers are still on the hook for travel expenses for his State Police security detail. Every day that the legislature allows jindal to rip off our state the members of that body are taxing us all.
So, yes, we are all subsidizing the jindal campaign, just as surely as if we had written a check.
And as a state employee, I’ve given a LOT MORE THAN A MEASLY $2700.00 to jindal’s ambition. My foregone merit salary increases total over $60,000 during the jindal reign of (t)error.
I agree earth mother. It sure must be nice to have a job with all the perks of free housing, security, travel expenses and you don’t even have to show up and do any work. For someone who is so opposed to “government handouts”, Jindal sure does spend at lot of time at the trough!
Don’t forget health insurance, paid by us, your faithful taxpayers.
Yes, not only he has only collected government checks throughout his adult life, but his mother owes her livelihood to the state as a high-ranking state manager.
Check the following link:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/election-2016-campaign-money-race.
Every word spoken by V & J is unmitigated BS. Jindal’s campaign promises to keep LA’s finest sons and daughters in state is his biggest lie. While bankrupting the state he has forced our finest to leave in search of decent work and wages elsewhere.
Following legislation supported by Gov. Blanco to bring LA public school teachers’ salaries up to the “Southern average” public schools and teachers are struggling. Our salaries have been frozen for 6 years while Jindal and his Republican minions diverted tax revenue to private education, against LA law.
Before Citizens United ALL contributions were transparent. Now unlimited funds are contributed anonymously to super PACs and may be sent by foreign entities, previously illegal.
And “family values” Vitter was reelected to the Senate having been proved a prostitute-frequenting John in both LA and Washington. Hard to wrap my mind around the stupidity of voters in this state.
Amen to this.
These facts do not speak well of Louisiana citizens and/or voters. I strongly feel that no Republican deserves a vote in the next election due to their support of all things Republican that have been toxic for Louisiana. None deserve re-election or election to new offices!
Vitter’s staff’s cut-and-paste response to his constituent was typical of the responses from our elected officials – or at least the ones I’ve gotten (I’m not a member of the $2700 Club). It is possible it was entirely computer generated based on keywords in her query. If so, it is encouraging, I guess, that the computer will keep her “thoughts in [its] mind.”
I, too, pored over the Jindal campaign report and commend Tom for doing a great job summarizing it. You will recognize almost all of the names he lists from his previous reports [note: my name does not have a “d” in it and I am not related to anybody named Windham].
In addition to the contributions part, it is also interesting to look at the expenditure side of the report (campaign expenditures are listed at the end) to see how the money is being spent – something that will become even more interesting with future reports.
Again, Tom has done the heavy lifting for you, but if you want to look at the full report, it is here:
So true about the cut and paste responses. I once sent a letter to Bill Cassidy expressing my disapproval with his vote on an issue and received a return form letter thanking me for my support! What a joke. It’s quite obvious that these letters never see the elected’s desk unless accompanied by a sizable check.
As for Faircloth’s contribution, it’s easy to give back $2,700 of the hundreds of thousands he earned defending Jindal’s policies in court. The majority of which he lost.
Instead of hundreds of thousands of dollars, try more than $1 million.
You are right Tom. According to today’s(7/19) Advocate, it exceeds $1.5 million.
If a corporation is a person, then it’s a monstrously evil person because it has no soul and loves money.
By the way, now that Jindal is finally leaving, are there any strong Democrats running for governor?
John Bel Edwards is the only Democrat running and is quite intelligent, honest and capable. In terms of integrity, he simply eclipses both Vitter and Jindal.
Tom, didn’t Earl Long once say “If you give folks good government they might not like it”
yes.
“Someday Louisiana is going to get “good government’…And, when they do, they ain’t going to like it.”
[supposedly the actual Earl Kemp Long quote, though variations are also attributed to him]
I guess we’re never likely to find out.
Also, by EKL:…
“Don’t write anything you can phone. Don’t phone anything you can talk. Don’t talk anything you can whisper. Don’t whisper anything you can smile. Don’t smile anything you can nod. Don’t nod anything you can wink.”
As true today as then, apparently.
.
Jindal, during his presidential run announcement, said he was “Tanned, rested, and ready.” What?! Saying he is tan is his attempt to hide his Indian ancestry so he appeals to the bigots that hate our current president only because of his race. Jingles is not tan because he has been sunbathing…he is brown because he is a member of a proud minority that should be insulted by his shameful attempt at denying his ancestry. Rested…really? How can he be proud to be “rested” when he is supposed to have the full time and challenging job of governor of Louisiana? Saying he is rested demonstrates that even he, the most delusional man in America, recognizes that he has not worked for the people of the state of Louisiana but has only done that which he believes will further his delusional self-interests. And he is ready….ready to screw the rest of the country like he has screwed the citizens of the state of Louisiana. Thankfully, the citizens in the rest of this country are not as easily fooled as the idiots in this state that voted for this lying bigot TWICE. Good-bye Booby Jingles.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Jindal is “Tanned, Rested, and Ready to Be Indicted.”
I see that Republicans in Congress are pushing a religious freedom bill that would, for example, allow employers to fire a single woman if she had sex out-of-wedlock and got pregnant. It would be nice if some reporter asked Vitter if he supports that bill.
Does a scarlet letter come with that? What about the out-of-wedlock man who impregnated the single woman – can he be fired too? If not, this is just another misogynistic conservative attack on women (which, I assume would never stand in a certain court challenge if the bill even passes).
The legislation is the First Amendment Defense Act, HR 2802, authored by Representatives Mike Lee R-UT and Raul Labrador, R-ID, introduced June 17 and supported by 129 Republican co-sponsors including Louisiana congressmen John Fleming, Steve Scalise, Ralph Lee Abraham and Charles Boustany, and one Democrat.
If we are not vigilant and vocal, the conservative agenda will take this country back to the Salem witch trial days. The American Taliban is alive and well and inhabiting the halls of Congress.
FROM HERITAGE ACTION FOR AMERICA, WHICH SUPPORTS THE BILL:
The First Amendment Defense Act (H.R. 2802), introduced by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) 100% and Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID) 92%, would prevent the federal government from discriminating against any individual or group, whether nonprofit or for-profit, based on their beliefs that marriage is the union of a man and woman or that sexual relations are reserved for marriage. That protection would extend to tax policy, employment, licensing, accreditation, contracting and grants.
From the Conference of Catholic Bishops:
The First Amendment Defense Act (H.R. 2802, S. 1598) would bar the federal government from discriminating against individuals and organizations based upon their religious beliefs or moral convictions that marriage is the union of one man and one woman or that sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage. The Act provides broad protections against adverse federal actions directed toward individuals and organizations that act on such beliefs.
On second thought – hoping that adding to my earlier comment is not a serious breach of netiquette – while the FADA is not proposing a law that criminalizes sexual behaviors, perhaps it would provide us with the right to finger-point and sneer at philandering, adulterous congressmen, fundamentalist pastors and other self-appointed arbiters of morality, who love to dictate to all until caught with their pants down, since the FADA clearly states that sexual relations are reserved for a heterosexual marriage. (Please forgive the run-on sentence.)
Hoisted by their own petards!
Folks this is a true story! You can’t make this up!!
5/7/15
I dreamed of David Vitter last night! Vitter thought he was surrounded by all Republican men and women! As he spoke about his platform to give all women in the State of Louisiana boob jobs, and I quote him, “when I’m Governor, there will be more boob jobs in the State of Louisiana than there has ever been in any other State in the Union”! To which I replied, “free boob jobs to all women is just what the State of Louisiana needs”! Vitter did learn that I was the lone Democrat in the room with a tape recorder, as he slid down in his seat and fell to the floor!!
Thanks Tom, great stuff! Fresh out of law school working at the Highway Dept, I worked with Alva Jones former Judge from Oakdale , a front man or stump man for EKL and EKL’s body guard Russell Willie. Alva taught me justice, by showing me an advance sheet (recent cases) where there were 4 pages of amicus curia about a financial ruling, and only one lawyer on a death penalty case, and Russell, about how he got promoted in an elevator in Dallas after a reporter harangued EKL about his lady friend. Lt. hit that SOB, Thank you Capt.
Vitter and Jindal are much more of a disgrace to our state than EKL. You can easily trace the religious right tea party stuff (Susan makes me use this word, rather than sh-t) to Ralph reed, and Karl Rove, and remember James David Cain wanted this in La. Law during the Terry Shiavo stuff in florida, a branding if you will, of A for adultery if you had sex while your wife was a turnip and Jeb Bush wanted an investigation as to how she got in the coma, 15 yrs after the fact. and to quote Russell Hermann,” I will believe corporations are people when Texas executes one” and finally a name for your book. Jindal and Vitter tests Democracy and they failed. love always ron