Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Campaign Contributions’ Category

Notable Quotables (in their own words)

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Ethics, Lobbyist, Notable Quotables, Transparency on July 27, 2011| Leave a Comment »

“The public has a right to know who is lobbying whom and for what. When the penalty for breaking ethics laws is a small fine or a slap on the wrist, the whole system becomes a joke. Severe offenses must be punished by expulsion and/or criminal charges.”

—Gov. Bobby Jindal, on his proposed ethics reform during his 2007 campaign for governor.

“We must demand an honest government that puts the residents of our state first and the special interests last.”

—Gov. Bobby Jindal, on his “Ethics Frform: Ending Corruption” web page.

Read Full Post »

Jindal ‘bundled’ campaign contributions linked to Abramoff, DeLay; administration seems more opaque than transparent

Posted in Bundling, Campaign Contributions, Governor's Office, Transparency on July 27, 2011| 4 Comments »

Bundling: In politics, the term refers to the convoluted practice of combining many small contributions from individuals and political action committees (PACs) into one large contribution that are then funneled to a candidate through a “conduit,” generally a corporate executive or a lobbyist who, of course, expects something in return.

In more familiar personal injury attorney parlance, that would be known as a “runner,” a practice widely frowned upon and one which has cost some attorneys their licenses to practice law. In the almost anything goes rules of politics, bundling exists on the dark fringes of ethical practices yet remains legal, legal being a relative term at best.

Many political candidates now participate in bundling but sometimes it can backfire as in the case of textile importer-fugitive Norman Hsu who bundled $800,000 in contributions for Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign.

And in the case of Gov. Bobby Jindal, who claims to have donated to a charity a $1,000 contribution from the Louisiana Chitimacha Indian Tribe that was bundled by an associate of former House Majority Leader Tom Delay (R-Texas), bundling at best, would seem to block transparency and at worst, raise serious ethics questions.

Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulations require that whenever a corporate executive or lobbyist physically touches a bundled contribution and delivers money to a campaign the bundler, as well as the original contributor, must be publicly disclosed in the campaign’s FEC reports. If the bundler does not come into physical contact with the checks, he/she is not required to be disclosed to the public as the conduit source of the contribution. It’s not clear as to how physical contact is monitored.

One way to recognize bundling is when several employees of a company or members of a PAC, in efforts to get around limitations on giving, pool their contributions which then show up more often than not as identical amounts on the same dates or on dates that are clustered together.

Plainly and simply, bundling is employed as a method to circumvent campaign finance laws and some do it better than others.

Take Tony Rudy, for example.

Rudy once headed up an influence-peddling organization called the Alexander Strategy Group and through that firm, he pulled in tens of thousands of dollars in the 2004 and 2005 election cycles on behalf of Jindal from such donors as UPS, Eli Lilly, Bellsouth, R.J. Reynolds (ever wonder why Jindal vetoed the 4-cent cigarette tax renewal?), Microsoft, Fannie Mae, Koch Industries, Dupont, AstraZeneca (a biopharmaceutical company), the National Auto Dealers Association, the Property Casualty Insurers Association, the American Bankers Association, and Amgen (biotechnology and pharmaceutical company).

Not only was bundling done on a wholesale basis on Jindal’s behalf, but identical contributions by individuals and committees, many on the same dates totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars, routinely appeared in separate reports filed by candidate Jindal, the Committee to Re-elect Bobby Jindal, and Friends of Bobby Jindal, Inc. Contributions ranged from $500 to $5,000.

That’s six separate reports on which the same contributors from Rudy’s exclusive client list appeared.

Other former clients of Alexander Strategy Group included Time Warner, Freddie Mac, Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations, AT&T, Blackwater USA, and Enron.

Alexander Strategy Group was one of Washington’s premier lobbying operations before it was shut down in January of 2006 after its ties to DeLay and another powerful lobbyist, Jack Abramoff, became known.

Rudy, a former aide to DeLay, worked for Abramoff before joining Alexander Strategy Group. Rudy’s wife also ran a political consulting firm that received $50,000 in exchange for services Rudy performed while working for DeLay. Delay was indicted in 2005 on money-laundering charges. Abramoff pleaded guilty in early January of 2006 to fraud and conspiracy charges.

One of Abramoff’s clients was the Chitimacha Indian Tribe of Louisiana that contributed at least $1,000 to Jindal who since has claimed to have given that money to charity.

He said the same thing nearly two years ago, however, about $10,000 in campaign contributions from Florida attorney Scott Rothstein, recently convicted in a $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme.

Jindal press secretary Kyle Plotkin said Rothstein’s contribution would be given to a victim’s compensation fun “once one is created.” That was in November of 2009 but a check of Jindal campaign expenditures has revealed no such donation.

Besides clients of Alexander Strategy Group, other contributors that appeared on more than one of the Jindal contributor lists included Goldman Sachs, BP Corp., ExxonMobil, CH2M Hill, Chevron, Hospital Corp. of America, Northrop Grumman, Entergy, Citigroup, BlueCross/Blue Shield, Albemarle, Wal-Mart, Lorillard Tobacco, Pfizer, and others.

Read Full Post »

Jindal can’t seem to find victim’s compensation fund to accept his tainted Florida campaign contribution money

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Ethics, Governor's Office, Transparency on July 17, 2011| Leave a Comment »

“If you lie down with dogs, you will get up with fleas.” It’s a proverb almost as old as civilization itself but it’s just as applicable today as it ever was.

Just ask Gov. Bobby Jindal.

That would be the same Bobby Jindal who routinely hops a state helicopter to some rural north Louisiana town to give adoring protestant church members a testimonial of his faith, all while adding to his growing list of potential donors.

It’s the same Bobby Jindal who promised transparency in an “open and accountable administration” and who loves to boast of his many reforms to supporters in states other than Louisiana.

It’s the same Bobby Jindal who four years ago published a campaign brochure attesting to his undying devotion to state employees but who today is doing everything possible to fire state employees, sell state offices and facilities, abolish Civil Service, and pull public education down brick by brick with his obsession over charter schools.

It would also be the same Bobby Jindal whose congressional committee the Federal Elections Commission refuses to shut down because of Jindal’s failures to respond to several Requests for Additional Information (RFAI) issued way back in 2006. His committee responded to the RFAIs regarding contributor identities, but five years later, reportedly chooses to ignore questions about illegal contributions.

It’s also the same Bobby Jindal who accepted $22,500 in five contributions from four different gambling, er gaming interests between July 2007 and January of this year. Those contributions were from Redman Gaming of Louisiana ($5,000) and Pelican Bingo Distributors ($5,000), both of the same address in Kenner, Nicky Nichols ($5,000) of Nichols Bingo Distributors, Coulon Consultants ($5,000), and Tim Coulon Campaign, Inc. ($2,500). Coulon is the former Jefferson Parish president who is registered as an officer in the now-defunct CWC Gaming.

And finally, it’s the same Bobby Jindal who two years ago promised to give $10,000 he received from a Florida attorney recently convicted in a $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme to an unnamed victim’s compensation fund.

Only hours before Tim Tebow and his Florida Gators defeated LSU, 51-21 in October of 2008, Jindal attended one of his infamous out-of-state fundraisers, co-hosted by Scott Rothstein, at the time a prominent Fort Lauderdale attorney who, in June of 2010, was sentenced to 50 years in federal prison.

First reports said Rothstein contributed $5,000 to Jindal and his law firm, Rothstein, Rosenfeldt and Adler, ponied up another $5,000. A quick check by LouisianaVoice, however, revealed that Kim Rothstein of the same address as Scott Rothstein gave another $5,000.

When news stories revealed the Rothstein contributions to Jindal, which were until now reported at only $10,000, Jindal, through mouthpiece, er press secretary Kyle Plotkin, magnanimously announced that the $10,000 from Rothstein and his law firm would be given to a victim’s compensation fund “once one is created.”

Certainly, Jindal’s campaign finance committee, which must fill out and submit reports of all contributions, must have known that the Scott and Kim Rothstein contributions came from the same address. Still, Jindal pledged to return only the $10,000 that was revealed in news reports.

So why didn’t Jindal take it upon himself, through Plotkin, of course (Jindal never seems willing to answer direct questions) to correct the figure and say he would donate the entire $15,000 to a victim’s compensation fund “once one is created.”

That was in November of 2009. A check of expenditures by Jindal’s campaign revealed 33 separate expenditures totaling $396,300 but nothing to any victim’s compensation fund.

Nada.

Zilch.

We did find that of the 33 expenditures, 26 were spent on out-of-state companies and of the seven payments to Louisiana firms, one was to the Republican Party of Louisiana ($10,934).

But nothing to any victim’s compensation fund.

Nil.

Zero.

Could it be that our transparent and accountable governor is not entirely trustworthy or that he’s not good for his word?

One would think that in nearly two years, Jindal could find a victim’s compensation fund that could use the $10,000. Or would that be $15,000?

Apparently not if the governor is placed on the honor system.

Nevertheless, here’s a victim’s compensation fund the governor might consider as a potential recipient:

Crime Victims Reparations Board
Commission on Law Enforcement
1885 Wooddale Blvd., Suite 708
Baton Rouge, LA. 70806
225-925-4437.

Here’s another worthy organization:

St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital
262 Danny Thomas Place
Memphis, TN. 38105
800-822-6344

They’re waiting to hear from you, Governor.

Read Full Post »

Can Jindal be right and all those Fortune 500 corporation CEOs somehow be wrong on the benefits of self-insurance?

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Contract, Contracts, Governor's Office, Health Care, Privatization, Transparency on July 13, 2011| 4 Comments »

Most of what has been written here in recent months about the proposed privatization of the Louisiana Office of Group Benefits (OGB) has been in the nature of political discourse laced with emotional banter.

Such is the nature of the beast when people’s lives are being toyed with by elected and appointed officials insulated in their detached bubble of infallibility—even in the face of growing evidence that their grandiose plans are skewed with false data.

This time, though, Gov. Bobby Jindal may well have overplayed his hand. It’s one thing when the rank and file employees, helpless to fight back, are opposed to his proposed sale of OGB. It’s quite another when you raise the hackles of the state district judges who voted unanimously to approve a resolution in opposition to the sale.

Perhaps it’s time for the State Inspector General, the East Baton Rouge District Attorney, and the Legislative Auditor to begin investigating the very real possibility of the existence of two separate reports by Chaffe & Associates of New Orleans.

That’s the report, in case you don’t recall, that Commissioner of Administration Paul Rainwater and Division of Administration (DOA) attorney Paul Holmes both said on separate occasions was received by DOA on May 25. When Rainwater first balked on his promise to make the report available to legislators, it was subsequently “leaked” to the Baton Rouge Advocate. The only problem with that was the “leaked” report was signed by its authors on June 3—ten days after Rainwater and Holmes said it was received by DOA.

Lending even greater credence to the theory of the existence of two reports is the fact that all documents are date stamped when they are received at DOA. The “leaked” report contained not a single date stamp on any of its 42 pages.

Did the original report, received on May 25, not say what Jindal wanted to hear?

That’s a question for investigators to ask.

In the meantime, DOA and Jindal are moving forward—but oh, so quietly. A second request for proposals (RFP) was issued when the first one fell through after LouisianaVoice broke the story about the administration’s intent to sell the agency that presently carries a $500 million surplus.

That story said that Goldman Sachs was recruited in October of 2010 to help draft the RFP and then was the only company to submit a proposal to conduct a financial analysis of OGB and then market the agency to a private sector buyer. Goldman Sachs subsequently withdrew when negotiations over legal indemnification broke down.

Rainwater and Brady were called before the Senate Retirement and Senate and Governmental Affairs committees. It was before the Retirement Committee that Rainwater said the state would maintain control over OGB because it was not selling the agency despite the first RFP that clearly said otherwise.

Rainwater said the administration was seeking a third party administrator to run the PPO, thus necessitating a second RFP seeking a firm to conduct a financial analysis and find a buyer.

A strange sense of déjà vu set in when it was learned that Goldman Sachs again submitted a proposal, one of three firms to do so. DOA, in that second RFP, said a contractor likely would be named on June 15—nearly a month ago—but as yet, no one has been awarded a contract.

Meanwhile, LouisianaVoice has been doing a little research of its own since the Division of Administration has chosen to operate secretively, in violation of the state’s public records law by ignoring numerous inquiries from us.

Even as Jindal, Rainwater, and Deputy Commissioner of Administration Mark Brady plunge ahead with their privatization plans for the OGB Preferred Provider Organization (PPO), perhaps it is time to take a look at national trends in the health insurance industry, something this administration, like a spoiled child who prefers tantrums as a means of getting its way, has refused to do.

Self-funded health insurance plans continue to grow in popularity in the U.S., according to the Society for Human Resource Management which said that 64 percent of workers in PPOs are in a self-funded plan, compared to those in conventional “fully insured” plans in 2008. That compared to only 5 percent in 1974.

With major incentives that include exemption from state taxes on insurance premiums, the ability to design their own plans, and invest money previously paid as premiums until it is needed to pay health expenses, it’s no wonder that Fortune 500 corporations have long been self-insured.

“The largest insurer in America is not Blue Cross/Blue Shield, but the nation’s employers,” said Jon R. Gabel, associate director of research and statistics at the Health Insurance Association of America. Gabel called the self-insurance trend “a quiet revolution in health care.”

Just who are some of the Fortune 500—and other companies—that have opted for self-insured health plans? Well two dozen of those have contributed $224,000 to Jindal’s political campaign and two have nine contracts with the state totaling $46.4 million.

Here is a partial list with contributions to Jindal in parenthesis:

• Johnson Controls—six contracts totaling $37.4 million;

• CH2M Hill ($8,500), plus three contracts with the state totaling $9 million;

• Pinnacle Entertainment ($8,000);

• Wal-Mart ($24,000);

• Delta Airlines ($1,000);

• Walgreen’s ($5,000);

• U.S. Marine, Inc. ($14,100);

• United Parcel Service ($15,000);

• Eli Lilly & Co. ($18,000);

• Citigroup ($15,000);

• McKesson Pharmaceuticals ($15,000);

• Georgia Pacific ($11,700);

• Hospital Corp. of America ($10,000);

• United Health Care ($10,000);

• Comcast ($3,500);

• Waste Management ($10,000);

• ExxonMobil ($6,330);

• Chevron ($5,000);

• Coca Cola ($5,000);

• Hewlett Packard ($5,000);

• Pepsico ($5,000);

• GMRI Food & Beverage ($2,500);

• Microsoft ($2,500);

• Amgen Pharmaceuticals ($2,000);

• Occidental Chemical ($2,000);

• Target;

• AT&T;

• Bank of America;

• Starbucks.

So, just what is that Jindal, Rainwater, and Brady know that the CEOs of these corporations are not smart enough to know–many of whom had sufficient wisdom to contribute to his campaign and two of whom are apparently intelligent enough to have multiple contracts with the state? That’s the question that the administration should answer, and soon.

Oh, we almost forgot. There was one more Fortune 500 corporation that has chosen to go the self-insured route as the most financially desirable method of providing health insurance for its employees.

The company?

Goldman Sachs.

Read Full Post »

Jindal, like Diogenes, needs lamp to find common sense in his absurd decision to sign bill into law at Baptist church

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Economy, Education, Governor's Office, Higher Education, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Transparency on July 11, 2011| 1 Comment »

BATON ROUGE (CNS)—A few random notes worth sharing in the wake of the most recent legislative session and Gov. Jindal’s ongoing love affair with north Louisiana:

Because Jindal and the legislature have seen fit to play fiscal shell games with education in Louisiana, considerable but unnecessary—and certainly unfair—financial strain has been placed on local school boards around the state.

Even as Jindal, when he was not drumming up campaign contributions in other states by telling Republican supporters in Wisconsin, Illinois and elsewhere what a fine job he has done in Louisiana, was telling actual constituents and state workers they would have to “do more with less.”

Except when it came to golf courses.

Ah, yes, the golf courses, that old bugaboo we talked about last year.

And let’s not forget the other sports venues and pet projects that took priority over education in Priority 1 capital outlay appropriations this year:

• City Park Golf Complex improvements in New Orleans—$6.6 million;

• Junior Golf training facilities for Jerry Tim Brooks Lakeside Golf Course in Caddo Parish—$200,000;

• Golf course development in Calcasieu Parish—$6.1 million;

• Zephyrs baseball facilities in Jefferson Parish—$1.2 million;

• Professional sports facilities and lease hold improvements in Jefferson Parish (provided that $8.5 million is used to improve the New Orleans Hornets’ training center—$17.5 million;

• Recreational complex in Iberia Parish—$1 million;

• Baseball stadium Improvements in Baton Rouge (which has no baseball team)—$1.4 million;

• Louisiana Sports Hall of Fame/Natchitoches State Museum—$7.7 million;

• Bayou Segnette sports complex improvements in Jefferson Parish—$9.2 million;

• West Ouachita Youth Sports Association site renovations—$25,000;

• Poverty Point Reservoir State Park conference center in Richland Parish—$250,000;

• Poverty Point Reservoir (real estate acquisition)—$1.7 million;

• Washington Parish reservoir feasibility study—$2.6 million.

Meanwhile, in Livingston Parish, the local school board has found it necessary to freeze all salaries and to eliminate three work days from the 2011-12 school year in an effort to cut costs.

Three days may not seem like much but why would we want to cheat our kids out of even 10 minutes?

Union Parish schools operated on a four-day week last year and at least one school district, Caldwell Parish, will follow suit this year.

But the state somehow found the money for $50 million in projects for golf courses, reservoirs and recreational facilities.

And we barely scratched the surface. Local projects were down from last year, but they still could be found crammed into this year’s budget.

Jindal, meanwhile, makes use of the tax-supported state web page to post what comes dangerously close to being a political ad for his re-election.

Go to http://www.louisiana.gov and then move your cursor to “Government,” click first on “Executive Branch,” and then on “Governor,” and voila! Up pops a series of photos of Jindal shaking hands with truck drivers, construction workers, National Guardsmen, etc. The accompanying text to the side reads:

“More than 39,500 new direct and indirect jobs will be created from the economic development wins we have announced since taking office in 2008, along with more than $8.5 billion in capital investment in our state. These figures represent thousands of opportunities for generations of Louisianians—Louisianians who will not have to leave our state to secure a great education or find a rewarding career.”

Like plucking chickens in Farmerville, perhaps?

Not that we have anything against chicken pluckers but it seems the really good jobs were handed out by Jindal to folks from out of state—including his Deputy Commissioner of Administration (New Hampshire), his press secretary (New Jersey), the Secretary of Health and Hospitals (Washington State).

Well, you get the picture.

Of course, it’s going to be rather difficult to remain in the state when programs of study at colleges and universities have been cut to the bone, college tuition increased, teacher pay cut, and state agencies privatized, forcing state workers into a virtually non-existent job market.

Our friend Don Whittinghill observed recently that Jindal convinced local school boards that the 2.75 percent growth factor of the Minimum Foundation Program (MFP—the formula used to fund public education in Louisiana)—would not be funded for the third straight year; that the state passed to the local school boards the cost of transporting private and church school students; that the state-promised $5,000 stipend for teachers who achieve the rigorous National Board Certification would have to be absorbed by the already-shrunken MFP, and that local school boards’ state retirement system contributions would jump to 22 percent.

But, hey! We got our golf courses and Baton Rouge has its baseball park improvements, just no team to play on it.

And Jindal continues to commandeer the state helicopter to fly to north Louisiana churches to give testimonials that are really little more than thinly-disguised efforts to raise still more campaign funds.

In something like five months, Whittinghill tells us, Jindal spent more than $45,000 flying to exotic places like Downsville, Dry Prong, and Shongaloo to give witness to adoring Protestant congregations.

As recently as Friday, July 8, he boarded that helicopter and flew north to the First Baptist Church of West Monroe. There, he took the occasion of signing into law HB-636 by Rep. Frank Hoffmann (R-West Monroe).

If something as blatantly political as that single action doesn’t cost the First Baptist Church of West Monroe its IRS tax-exempt status, nothing should.

How the governor could do something so ill-advised as to put the church’s tax-exempt status in jeopardy or why the church officials would allow it is a mystery.

Moreover, it’s another of those mindless laws that is almost certain to be contested in the courts at considerable cost to the taxpayers of Louisiana and it’s just as certain that the state ultimately will lose the case.

What is this bill? It’s a measure that would require women to be informed of their specific legal rights and options before they undergo an abortion procedure.

Whatever your position on this emotional issue, a church is no place to be holding a ceremony signing it—or any other bill, for that matter—into law.

Abortion providers will be required to post signs around their clinics stating that “it is illegal to coerce a woman into getting an abortion, that the child’s father must provide child support, that certain agencies can assist them during and after the pregnancy, and that adoptive parents can pay some of the medical costs.”

The law also creates a Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH) website and a mobile platform to deliver information “about public and private pregnancy resources” for avoiding abortions.

The first question that comes to mind is how are fathers going to be forced into providing child support given the current deadbeat dad caseload backlog?

Second, just who is going to be around to enforce the child support laws after Jindal gets through gutting DHH as part of his far-reaching obsession with privatization of state agencies?

The most bizarre statement yet was uttered by Jindal while signing the bill into law when he compared women who receive abortions to criminals:

“Now if we’re giving criminals their basic rights and they have to be informed of those rights, it seems to me only common sense (that) we would have to do the same thing for women before they make the choice about whether to get an abortion,” he said.

Common sense?

Indeed.

That would seem to be the rarest of commodities with this governor.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »