Cameron, Vermilion, Plaquemines and Jefferson are attempting to accomplish what Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority-East could not: hold oil and gas companies responsible for the destruction of Louisiana’s coastline.
On July 28, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry expressed his “disappointment” that Vermilion Parish had the audacity to file a lawsuit over damages to the parish coastline Vermilion District Attorney Keith Stutes said was caused by drilling activities of several dozen oil and gas companies.
Gov. John Bel Edwards and Landry, in a rare display of political accord, intervened in the lawsuit with Edwards asking the oil and gas industry to settle the litigation and to assist the state in footing the cost of restoring the cost, which is expected to reach tens of millions of dollars over the next half-century. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/28/vermilion-sues-oil-and-gas-companies-over-coastal-/
Calling lawsuits filed by Cameron and Jefferson parishes as well as Vermilion “counter-intuitive,” Landry said, “We cannot allow these differing and competing interests to push claims which collectively impact the public policy for our coast and our entire state.”
Two weeks later, on Aug. 10, Landry was practically effervescent as he all but took full credit when 24th District Judge Stephen Enright dismissed a similar lawsuit by Jefferson Parish. “I intervened in this lawsuit because I was concerned that the interest of the State of Louisiana may not have been fully represented or protected.
“I accept the court’s ruling because addressing the issues associated with permit violations through the administrative process is a cost-effective, efficient way to resolve any violations,” he said. “That was clearly the purpose of the Legislature creating this regulatory scheme.”
Funny how Landry would choose to use the word scheme.
Scheme, after all, would appear to be appropriate, considering how much money the industry has invested in campaign contributions to Louisiana politicians.
Copy of Campaign Contributions
And there’s certainly no mystery why Landry is so protective of the industry. In fact, he might be described as Jindal 2.0 because of his determination to protect the industry to the detriment of the citizens od Louisiana.
After all, of the $3.3 million Landry received in campaign CONTRIBUTIONS between July 1, 2014 through Dec. 31, 2015 (during his campaign for attorney general), more than $550,000 came from companies and individuals with strong ties to the oil and gas industry.
Moreover, more than $600,000 in campaign contributions to Landry came from out-of-state donors, with many of those, such as Koch Industries ($10,000), one of America’s biggest polluters, also affiliated with the oil and gas industry.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/inside-the-koch-brothers-toxic-empire-20140924
(Koch Industries, by the way, with ties dating back to the right-wing extremist group, The John Birch Society—Fred Koch, Charles and David Koch’s father, was a charter member—has run afoul of federal law on numerous occasions, including fraud charges in connection with oil purchases from Indian reservations.) http://www.corp-research.org/koch_industries
One $5,000 donor, Cox Oil & Gas, was from St. Thomas, Virgin Islands, according to Landry’s campaign finance records. That contribution date was May 20, 2014 but Cox Oil Offshore, LLC, Cox Oil, LLC, and Cox Operating, LLC, all of Dallas, contributed $5,000 each three weeks earlier, on April 28, 2014, those same records show.
Besides the Cox companies, Landry received more than $300,000 from firms and individuals from Texas, many of those from Houston and the surrounding area.
Landry, like Jindal and the bulk of legislators, has sold his soul to an industry that has ravaged our coastline, polluted our land and waterways, and failed to restore property to its original state when operations have concluded, all while reaping record profits and enriching stockholders.
LouisianaVoice has long adhered to the idea that there is far too much money in politics and that most of it comes from special interests. The reality is that citizens have long been removed from the political process.
If you don’t believe that, drop in on a House or Senate committee hearing on some controversial issue. Invariably, the issue will have already been decided by a quiet influx of special interest money and intense lobbying. As you sit and watch and listen to testimony of citizens, pay close attention because you will be the only one besides those testifying who will be doing so.
Watch the committee members. They will be checking emails or texts on their phones, talking and joking among themselves or just milling around, exiting the rear door of the committee room to get coffee—anything but listening to citizens’ concerns. Only on the rarest of occasions could a committee member give you a summation of the testimony.
The only time many legislators really take their jobs seriously is when they are discussing a bill with a lobbyist and that is unfortunate.
Once you’ve heard committee testimony go upstairs to the House or Senate chamber and take a seat in the front row of the spectator gallery. Observe how few of the senators or representatives is actually paying attention to the proceedings. The scene below you will underscore the adage that there are three things one should never see being made: love, sausage, and laws.
And while you’re at it, watch the lobbyists working the room. As you observe the absence of interaction between legislators and average citizens, do the math and deduce the way lawmakers are influenced. You won’t get far before you encounter the old familiar $.
Like him or not (and in Louisiana, it’s fairly accurate to say most don’t though they can’t give you a really sound reason why), President Obama pretty much nailed it when he was running for re-election in 2012.
Jane Mayer, in her excellent book Dark Money, quoted Obama from his speech in Osawatomie, Kansas (the same town where Theodore Roosevelt demanded in 1910 that the government be “freed from the sinister influence or control of special interests”), about the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision of 2010 and the ensuing glut of Super PAC money into the political arena:
- “Inequality distorts our democracy. It gives an outsized voice to the few who can afford high-priced lobbyists and unlimited campaign contributions, and it runs the risk of selling out our democracy to the highest bidder.”
Meanwhile, Landry ramps up his war of words and political ideology with Gov. Edwards (perhaps in an effort to deflect attention away from his own flawed agenda). The most recent salvo was fired last week over the administration’s hiring of former Sen. Larry Bankston, a one-time convicted felon as legal counsel for the State Board of Contractors—never mind the fact that Landry also hired an employee formerly convicted of fraud for the attorney general’s fraud section. http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/article_fe56114c-6ad7-11e6-8e7e-6f06140ad60e.html
It would appear that in Louisiana, the state has long since been sold out to the highest bidder as witnessed by the combined efforts of Jindal, Landry, legislators, and the courts to protect big oil at all costs.
As further evidence of this, consider the words of Gifford Briggs, Vice-President of and lobbyist for the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association (LOGA) in the run-up to the 2015 statewide elections immediately after Landry had indicated he might oppose then incumbent Attorney General Buddy Caldwell.
Asked if LOGA would support Landry, Briggs, the son of LOGA President Donald Briggs, said, “We can’t officially endorse any candidate. Our PAC can, but not us. Having said that, Jeff Landry is looking like a very good candidate for Attorney General.”
Louisiana Voice 
Burden the taxpayers with payment. These folks disgust me.
Most people know exactly why they don’t like Obama. I could literally sit down and write 10 pages without much effort.
Perhaps, and I’m no fan of Obama, but once you get past his being black and rumors of his being Islamic (and that’s what they are—rumors), I seriously doubt you could come up with many real specifics other than his failure to pass any real programs. But one thing no one can deny is that more Americans are working today than when he took office. And, to be completely fair, he’s not the one who drug us into an unwinnable war in Iraq/Afghanistan. He’s not the one who said “Heckuva job, Brownie” or “Mission accomplished” nor was it Obama’s policies that created ISIS. Neither did he appoint Supreme Court justices who would give us Citizens United.
As for disliking Obama, my biggest complaint is simply that he has proven to be a weak president and much of that can be attributed to a Republican Congress that was/is determined to kill anything he proposes. I personally am indifferent to him. What concerns me far more than Obama is the choices we have for this election. That is something you should be able to write 20-30 pages about.
But back to my main point: it would be difficult to refute what he said about the influence of money in politics.
Ditto, Tom, though I place significantly more blame on congress than on Obama for our problems. There are very few of his positions with which I disagree, but partisan politics seem to have derailed practically every major policy he has promoted. I prefer his calmness in the storm over the bluster of either of our choices in November.
He would not have proposed the Affordable Care Act had he not seen it as the only way to get Republicans to go along with any plan that provided more health care in our country – of course, they fed it to him on a platter once it passed and have continued to do so since. The only thing that really makes sense is a single payer system, but we will all be pushing up daisies before that happens.
He proposed what, to me, could be the greatest thing possible for our economy at this time – a public works program to fix our failing infrastructure – something we are going to have to do if we don’t want to slip into 3rd world status anyhow. Think of what good infrastructure could do for industry, much less the safety of our people. Beyond that, think of the tens, if not hundreds of thousands of jobs that would be created to attack this major problem.
@fairness2014: Since it would not require much effort, could you post at least a short paragraph stating exactly why you do not like Obama? Then, you might tell us who you support for POTUS and why. I really would be interested in both.
Tom, that is ridiculous. Just because Obama is black doesn’t make anyone racist. It just makes him a terrible president. He was elected by a whole lot of white people. I sincerely think he has weakened this country more than any other president in history. Nothing in my mythical 10 page diatribe refers to his race or religion. It has everything to do with being a narcissist, harming race relations by colluding with BLM, making our military a laughing and endangering their lives by failing to take action when they are harassed by Russia, China, and Iran, dealing with terrorists and paying ransom, lying to the public to pass his agenda. Yeah, he’s awesome.
An Attorney General who comments that “I accept the courts ruling …” has a very regal attitude and is a big problem and will become a bigger one, I predict.
I agree with Fairness on our President. He LIES and LIES and there is absolutely no transparency for the citizens, one of your big concerns, Tom, at least at the State level.
You can keep your Doctor if you like him.
You can keep your medical insurance if you like it.
The Affordable Care Act with save American families $2500 a year.
I will hold those in the IRS who wronged American taxpayers “accountable.”
I will hold those responsible for Fast and Furious (the U.S. givings guns to Mexican drug dealers and smuggler, who he is trying to take ours away) “accountable.”
I am drawing a “red line” in Syria regarding chemical weapon use, and I will hold anyone who crosses it “accountable.”
I could go on and on, but “nuf said”
Like Obama???Very concerned & Fairness, you need to think seriously before you express an outright ignorant view of our Country. Republicans are so arrogant they can not comprehend anyone disagreeing with them. If you would take the “I” out of your vocabulary, and think, common good, US as in the United States of America, otherwise, in this age of instant worldwide communication, you encourage groups like ISIS and the GOP right wingers, who like your ignorance. ron thompson
Ron,
Get over yourself. I’m not a Republican. I’m a concerned US citizen. If you were objective you’d realize the President is terrible. Of course Putin is laughing at us. It’s easy to have his fighter jets buzz our aircraft carriers when our President has no spine. That red line didn’t work out so well.
As far as Landry? He isn’t perfect. Just 1000 times better than Caldwell. I believe he is still trying to pick and choose his battles. He is forced to defend the state, but the state is corrupt and wrong. I’m sure not an easy place to be, being forced to defend the indefensible.
The thing I strive for is to prompt dialog. I know I’m not always right (no one is) and I also know everyone isn’t going to agree with me on every issue. That would be an unrealistic expectation. As I said earlier, I think Obama is weak but part of his weakness is Congress-invoked. And while Caldwell was pitiful as an Elvis impersonator, he was even worse as attorney general but I don’t agree that Landry is 1000 times better. And while he is obligated to defend the state, there is no prohibition against his advising agencies on a legal course of action.
Fairness, you have made valid points and while you don’t buy into all I am saying, I appreciate and defend your right to express your opinion. Please keep ’em coming.
Hey Fairness, thanks for making my case. I also appreciate and defend your right to express your opinion. I can alleviate your concerns with some real time facts and will welcome you into my home and or tractor shed, with coffee or drinks. ron Thompson-Keep learning