The Republican governor of Nevada has done what Bobby Jindal for eight interminable years refused to do and what Gov. John Bel Edwards should have already done.
Gov. Brian Sandoval, saying, “There’s something not right here and it needs to be fixed,” ordered Nevada’s state dental board on Nov.8 to address—and fix—problems of corruption, bullying and extortion rampant in the board’s patient-complaint/resolution process.
A STORY in the Las Vegas Review-Journal sounded eerily familiar to a number of LouisianaVoice stories dating back to March 2014 about abuses perpetrated by the Louisiana State Board of Dentistry through harassment, intimidation, and exorbitant penalties—including ruined careers—for minor infractions and sometimes none at all.
And should Edwards take it upon himself to rein in the rogue dental board, he may well also wish to take a long hard look at a few other boards that have gone off the reservation over the years.
- Here are just a few that warrant a closer look:
- The State Board of Cosmetology;
- The Auctioneers Licensing Board;
- The State Board of Medical Examiners;
- The State Board of Examiners of Psychologists
Each of these boards has been the subject of considerable controversy over the manner in which they investigate complaints and assess penalties without giving their targets the benefit of the same due process to which accused criminals are entitled under 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Several dentists and dental hygienists protested a $500,000 increase in the contract for the Nevada dental board’s outside legal counsel, John Hunt and their testimony quickly escalated to shouting a crying by those who said Hunt coerced them to acknowledge wrongdoing and to pay money to the dental board.
Several of them accused Hunt of benefitting from money collected by the board.
As we said earlier, eerily familiar.
At least in Nevada, complaints by victims of the dental board led to action.
A legislative audit of the board concluded that the board imposed excessive penalties on those it was investigating and also took issue with the board’s handling of Hunt’s contract. The board’s handling of patient complaints, it said, left targets of investigations with the belief that they either had to accept a settlement agreement or risk steeper punishment if found guilty in a final board hearing.
“That’s where the allegation of extortion comes in,” State Assemblyman Glenn Trowbridge, a member of the subcommittee that conducted the audit, said in June. “Either pay me now or we’ll look into it deeper and you’ll pay me more.”
Again…eerily familiar.
Sandoval appoints the members of the dental board. He said the time has come for the 11-member board to address the problem. Citing his experience with other state boards during his political career, he said, “I’ve never seen …people as upset as they are.”
The board, following Sandoval’s scolding, postponed action on Hunt’s contract amendment.
A 1980 U.S. Supreme Court specifically addressed the issue of excessive penalties in the case of U.S. Secretary of Labor v. Jerrico, Inc.
In that case, the Supreme Court reduced a $103,000 penalty to $18,000 in that the higher penalty constituted an unconstitutional risk of bringing “impermissible factors into the prosecutorial decision.”
In an earlier, even more pointed decision, the Supreme Court ruled in 1973 that “board members’ pecuniary interest disqualified them from passing on issues.”
In citing an Alabama case in which the Board of Optometry revoked the licenses of all optometrists employed by corporations such as Lee Optical, the court said, “Because the Board of Optometry was composed solely of optometrists in private practice for their own account, the District Court concluded that success in the board’s efforts would possibly (contribute) to the personal benefit of members of the board, sufficiently so that in the opinion of the District Court, the Board was disqualified from hearing the charges filed against the appellees.
“It is sufficiently clear from our cases,” the court continued, “that those with substantial pecuniary interest in legal proceedings should not adjudicate these disputes.”
As simple to understand as that ruling is, one must wonder why, 43 years later, the Louisiana Board of Dentistry and other licensing boards in the State of Louisiana are still allowed to operate their own respective fiefdoms with carte blanche.
Are their legal counsels not able to read and understand the law?
Is there not a single board member among them with the decency to say, “This isn’t right”?
Louisiana Voice 
State boards that regulate professions should simply be abolished as state entities. It might not necessarily help the professionals “regulated,” but it would get the state out of the middle of things. Professional boards could continue to hold members of the professions to high standards and function much as they do now in that regard, but they could not pretend they represent the “government” as their bases of authority.
The fact is, as shown here and elsewhere, the “government” doesn’t pay much attention to them except to sometimes provide state benefits (that cost the state money) to their employees. As a corollary, the boards don’t pay much attention to the state either, except to the extent they can use it. So, we could not only eliminate the state being the scapegoat, but actually save a little money to boot.
I fully realize there are arguments on the other side of this issue, but I will leave making them to somebody else.
Perfect solution to me! It’s also what Libertarian organizations such as the Institute for Justice have advocated for years!
Just a thought on why one single member isn’t willing to stand up and say: “this isn’t right”…It could be that once on the Board, if complete loyalty isn’t given, that one member that defied the Board, could stand to be professionally ruined. If this group is as corrupt and vengeful as it appears, they would not hesitate to destroy any member who did not tow the line. That being said, if this is a state Board, the state must clean house. Either disband these Boards or force them to act according to their stated purposes. Jail time might need to be applied, where possible. I think we are all tired of having corruption, such as this, brought out in the open and then to sit back and see nothing done. I will let Governor Edwards know my feelings – but, I am thinking situations like this need an avalanche of opposition before it even hits the governing radar. If I sound pessimistic, I am.
Great article. It’s time for JBE to do something. He knows about this problem and has remained silent. Times up!
Mr. Kennedy would like to quit his job as state Treasurer to go fix some nebulous swamp along the Potomac, as I understand some of his rambling on the campaign commercials. Why hasn’t he done anything to fight corruption in Louisiana? Just curious.
I take it you don’t think finding silly contracts and giving people the impression eliminating them would solve all our budget problems is fighting corruption? Neither do I.
Why are you trying to blame Kennedy for something that has fallen on the shoulders of Jindal and now JBE? Unfair much?
Possibly because of Kennedy’s shameless attempt to pander to Trump’s support base of anti-everything-gonna-solve-everything. And now he’s even taken the Grover Norquist pledge. Kennedy will win but he has prostituted himself in the process. And at the same time, he’s become just one more political opportunist, no less a hack than Jindal.
With so many now casting fond glances at Canada, that country will probably build a wall and ask Trump to pay for it.
Fairness2014: I must have missed something. “fallen on the shoulders of Jindal…” I assume we are talking about the budget woes of Louisiana. Didn’t Jindal come into office with a budget surplus? Didn’t he work very hard during his 8 years to drown us in Norquist’s bathtub? I do not recall Jindal’s shoulders being burdened with anything positive for Louisiana – he always looked very happy while he was off away from Louisiana running for President. Again, what did I miss?
Ditto to what Tom said.
The State Treasurer is the state banker.
Fighting general government corruption is not part of the treasurer’s responsibilities though ensuring the state gets the best return on its investments and spends money from the right accounts in the treasury are.
It’s hard to figure who you are addressing when you say blame is being placed on Kennedy for something that was/is Jindal’s/Edward’s responsibility because I see no such blame being placed on Mr. Kennedy anywhere on here.
What I do blame Mr. Kennedy for is giving taxpayers the incorrect view that we don’t have an income problem – something he knows to be untrue – and using a few darkly amusing examples to back the view that all we have to do is make a few cuts here and there and the problem is solved. By the way, once he gets to the U. S. Senate, he won’t have to worry about trivialities like balancing the budget because there is no such requirement at the national level.
What I blamed Jindal and now blame Edwards for is not doing enough to hold their appointees responsible for adequately managing the agencies and programs for which they are responsible, including the ridiculous “bunny rabbit” contracts Mr. Kennedy uses in his ads and any other wasteful spending..
We don’t have a revenue problem. Our budget is $25B, the same as states twice our size.
Fine, then why hasn’t somebody, including the great and magnificent Jindal. cut it down to size?
TO FAIRNESS: And yet, there’s no money for infrastructure, state employee pay raises, coastal restoration or a myriad other issues that need to be addressed. Could it be that all the corporate/industrial tax cuts and exemptions have sucked up needed revenue while placing the burden for that $25B on the backs of the middle class?
TO FAIRNESS AGAIN:
Actually, our budget is $29 billion but your claim of our budget being the same as states twice our size is not necessarily correct. Louisiana has 4.6 million population and Washington has 6.9 million, for example. Yet Washington’s budget is $93.7 million. Michigan, whose population is approximately twice ours, has a $54 billion budget. Kentucky, with 4.4 million people, has a budget of $66 billion.
I could go on, but here are two links so you can do your own comparison:
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/usa/states/population.shtml
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_budgets
Tom,
Actually the budgets for Louisiana and NC are very similar. But Louisiana has over $9.4B in corporate subsidies that no one is willing to cut. We could literally stop the corporate welfare and eliminate the state income tax. I’m sure that wouldn’t help the state boom, right?