Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Campaign Contributions’ Category

Nero Jindal fiddles at San Antonio fundraiser even as Legislature crashes and burns, state employees smolder

Posted in BESE, Campaign Contributions, Governor's Office, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, OGB, Office of Group Benefits, Prison, Privatization, Transparency on April 8, 2011| 4 Comments »

Events in Baton Rouge appear to be spinning out of control these days with legislative efforts at mandated reapportionment appearing to crater coupled with growing discontent among state employees over the proposed privatization of the Office of Group Benefits and three state prisons.

Probably the most appropriate metaphor would be that Emperor Nero (Gov. Bobby Jindal) fiddled (attended yet another out-of-state fundraiser) while Rome (the Legislature) burned.

On Thursday, both houses of the Louisiana Legislature abruptly and simultaneously said to heck with it and adjourned until Monday as the deadline loomed for reapportioning the House, Senate, the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, the Public Service Commission, and redrawing the state’s congressional districts from seven to six to accommodate the state’s loss of population from 2000 to 2010.

When they return, they will have only three days to agree on all of those issues, a virtual impossibility in the eyes of some observers. They’ve been in special session, after all, since March 20 and now must try to accomplish in three days what they haven’t been able to do in the past three weeks.

In all probability a second special session will have to be wedged in between Wednesday’s adjournment and the April 25 start of the 2011 regular session. If that occurs, the first order of business should be that the 39 Senators and the 105 House members pass by unanimous vote a resolution that will not accept one penny of per diem. Legislators currently are paid $159 per day for each day they are in Baton Rouge. That’s over and above their regular salary, so a second special session of, say 10 days would cost the state almost $230,000 for doing what it should accomplish in the current special session.

So at a time when a steady hand was desperately needed to steer the ship, when some semblance of leadership and guidance was sorely needed, where was Gov. Bobby Jindal?

Why in San Antonio trying to raise still more funds to get him re-elected to the job he wants, of course.

Jindal, who already has upwards of $12 million in his campaign coffers and no opposition in sight, appears focused on just two things (we know, the governor usually begins his responses to questions with, “Three things….): his re-election and his obsession with privatizing everything he possibly can in state government.

Edwin Edwards, his legal shenanigans notwithstanding, and despite his weakness for women and gambling, would never have let what happened on Thursday occur on his watch. You can take that to the bank.

Smooth Eddie would have taken Jim Tucker (R-Terrytown) and Joel Chaisson (D-Destrehan) to the woodshed that is the fourth floor of the Capitol and given them an attitude adjustment. He would have said something like, “If you want to remain Speaker of the House and President of the Senate, you better get back down to chambers and get this thing resolved.”

And Tucker and Chaisson would have left the governor’s office with their tails between their legs and would have proceeded to follow the governor’s directions to the letter. That’s real leadership.

And therein lies the rub, as ol’ Billy Wayne Shakespeare once said. There was, is no governor around who commanded that kind of respect. Heck, the governor wasn’t even around, respect or no respect. And the legislature wasn’t about to take its marching orders from Timmy Teepell.

The only thing one can find in abundance on the fourth floor is the abyss that is a gaping leadership void. The current situation makes the title of Jindal’s book, Leadership and Crisis, nothing more than a cruel, very unfunny joke.

On another front, Jindal appears oblivious to growing discontent among employees of three prisons, the Office of Group Benefits (OGB), and state retirees who have brought about a resurgence of the Gray Panthers of a few decades ago.

Reports surfaced Friday that at least two and perhaps three separate groups are considering class action lawsuits against Jindal, OGB, and the Legislature to halt the proposed sale of OGB. One of those groups is the Retired State Employees Association of Louisiana.

Meanwhile, Jindal is plunging ahead with his plans to privatize the two agencies despite the appearance at the House Appropriations Committee Thursday of more than 100 corrections employees from Avoyelles Parish, a former congressman, and a former commissioner of administration during the Edwards administration, all of whom were vehemently opposed to the sale of state prisons in Allen, Winn, and Avoyelles parishes.

As regards OGB, a letter has started making its rounds among state employees and retirees.

It is not known who authored the letter but whoever wrote it urges others to send copies to legislators to remind them that R.S. 42:854.5(A) says quite clearly that revenue under control of OGB “shall not be used, loaned, or borrowed by the state for cash flow purposes,” precisely the intent of Gov. Jindal.

Under his plan, if OGB is sold, the state would get $150 million to $200 million of OGB’s $500 million surplus with the purchaser getting the balance.

The trick for Jindal would be to remove the $500 million surplus from OGB’s control. That would require cunning and guile, diabolical characteristics that should never be confused with leadership.

Here is the full text of that letter:

As a state retiree I would like to make it known in the strongest possible language my dissatisfaction with Governor Jindal’s plan to privatize the Office of Group Benefits. This includes any plan he has to “outsource” the PPO. Either of those actions will cost the state much more money than it now pays, not to mention the horrible financial hit it would mean for state retirees.

It is an open secret that he hopes to simply GIVE most of OGB’s $500 million surplus to whichever of his rich cronies end up buying OGB. Not all of it, of course. He hopes to confiscate a portion of the $500 million for budgetary reasons. This money is, by law*, for OGB’s use in properly administering the plan. GIVING away money obtained from the state’s employees and taxpayers is reprehensible and is entirely politically motivated. It is only in a love-the-rich and hate-the-poor universe that such a thing could be considered moral.

The sale of OGB, resulting in a one-time monetary benefit, or the outsourcing of the PPO, will not save the state one penny. Either action would, in fact, end up costing the state more money. The reason for this lies in the fact that OGB’s administrative costs (which includes all aspects of running the agency, including premium increases) is an incredibly low 4% (compare this to the for-profit industry average). If another company, of necessity a for-profit company, takes over the operation of the PPO, this cost will rise by a minimum of 10%. This translates into higher premiums for both the state (since it is the state’s responsibility to contribute up to 75% of the cost of the premiums for state retirees) and the state’s retirees. Would someone please tell me HOW increasing premiums will save either the state or its retirees any money? Whatever money is made (the figure bandied about is $125 million) by a one-time sale of OGB will quickly be lost in increased state expenditures. If the PPO is outsourced, the increase in premiums for the replacement plan will land the state in even more dire financial straits.

*Louisiana State Law La. R.S. 42:854.5(A)
C. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, any money received by or under the control of the Office of Group Benefits shall not be used, loaned, or borrowed by the state for cash flow purposes or any other purpose inconsistent with the purposes of or the proper administration of the Office of Group Benefits. – Acts 2001, No. 1178,§ 5, eff. June 29, 2001.

Read Full Post »

Foundation a novel twist on fundraising methods

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Governor's Office, Supriya Jinda Foundation, Uncategorized on April 7, 2011| 3 Comments »

Federal income tax returns show that the Supriya Jindal Foundation for Louisiana’s Children had receipts of more than $278,000 in 2009 but spent less than $67,000 on 60 interactive whiteboards donated to public school classrooms across Louisiana.

Returns for two other years, 2008 and 2010 were not immediately available but apparently reflect much larger donations to the foundation, according to other sources.

The foundation, headed by Gov. Bobby Jindal’s wife generated considerable controversy last month when it was learned that several corporate contributors had profited either through lucrative state contracts, favorable legislation, or lax enforcement of penalties against polluters.

The foundation was founded in mid-2008, six months after Jindal took office. Capitol News Service requested complete tax returns from the foundation but received only the return for 2009. No returns for 2008 or 2010 were provided.

Charter members pledged $250,000, according to the foundation’s web page which contains a photo of Gov. Jindal and his wife. Platinum members pledge $100,000, Gold members $50,000, Silver members $25,000, and bronze members $10,000. Circle of Friends members give a one-time gift of up to $10,000, the web page says.

Individuals and corporate donors are limited to maximum political contributions of $5,000 during each election cycle, but there is no limit on the amount that can be given a foundation run by either a candidate or a spouse.

Depending on the news source quoted, Mrs. Jindal’s foundation has received $1 million overall and has spent that same amount on the installation of about 170 interactive whiteboards that enable teachers to download multimedia lesson plans to aid them in teaching math or science.

A report by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) said nine companies that collectively contributed $100,000 to Jindal’s campaign over several election cycles donated at least $790,000 to the foundation.

The foundation received $250,000 from Marathon Oil. Marathon subsidiaries have received $5.2 million in state funds, according to a report by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).

BlueCross/BlueShield contributed $100,000 and won a questionable $400 million contract to provide health insurance for state employees and retirees and their dependants. A state court judge later ordered the state to re-bid the contract after Humana challenged the contract in a lawsuit that said the plan bid on by BlueCross/BlueShield was not what the state request for proposals (RFP) specified.

Northrop Grumman contributed $10,000 and was awarded a consulting contract of $11.4 million.

Dow Chemical pledged $100,000 and efforts by the administration to fine Dow’s Union Carbide subsidiary for allowing the release of a toxic pollutant and failing to notify state authorities of the leak in a timely manner were apparently dropped.

AT&T may have been the big winner, though.

The corporation contributed $10,000 to Jindal’s campaign since 2007 but gave $250,000 to the Jindal Foundation after Gov. Jindal signed SB- 807 into law (Act 433) in 2008 over the objections of the Louisiana Municipal and the State Police Jury associations. The bill, the Consumer Choice for Television Act removed from local and parish governments their authority and responsibility to negotiate cable franchise agreements with companies that relied largely on locally-owned public infrastructure such as utility poles. The bill also allows AT&T to sell cable television service without the necessity of obtaining local franchises.

In addition to benefitting from the newly enacted cable television law, Capitol News Service found that AT&T also had a minimum of 17 separate contracts with the state totaling $32.2 million.

In addition to contracts, lax enforcement, and favorable legislation, the foundation’s tax return shows that the foundation’s treasurer is Alexandra Bautsch who also is Gov. Jindal’s chief fundraiser, an association that is a little too close for CREW Director Melanie Sloan, who called it “an awfully close relationship between the charity and the governor.”

Sloan, a former prosecutor, said, “Donations that come in to charities like this are almost always from folks who want something from a politician. The donations are made not because of the great work of the charity, but because of connections.

“Foundations tied to politicians see their donations dry up when the politician is no longer in power,” she said. “That demonstrates the real reason the charities get the donations is their political position, not because of the good works they do.”

“If it is not an actual conflict, it is an appearance of conflict,” she said.

Claude “Buddy” Leach, Jr., chairman of the Louisiana Democratic Party, said it was “the perception that you can have influence with the governor’s office through this foundation.”

Jindal press secretary Kyle Plotkin said Jindal has never solicited donations for his wife’s foundation. But Jindal does appear with his wife in a photograph pasted on the foundation’s web page which could be interpreted by some as a subtle come-on by the governor aimed at potential donors.

Another spokesperson for Gov. Jindal said anything other than the reality that the charity is a “completely nonpolitical, nonpartisan organization created by the first lady….has plainly been dreamed up by partisan hacks living in a fantasy land.”

Pot, kettle.

Gov. Jindal simply said allegations of influence peddling through his wife’s foundation were “silly.”

Kettle, pot.

Read Full Post »

State employees get another slap in the face from administration in the form of Personnel Policy #95

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Civil Service, Ethics, Governor's Office, Legislature, Legislators, Lobbyist, Transparency on April 5, 2011| 5 Comments »

There exists something of a double standard in Louisiana state government between elected officials and civil service employees, or as some would describe it, between the haves and the have nots.

Members of the Louisiana Legislature may reinstate their currently suspended annual, automatic pay raises at their pleasure. Likewise, unclassified employees (appointees) may be given annual pay raises at the pleasure of the administration but for the second straight year state classified (civil service) employees have their pay frozen—at the behest of the legislature and Gov. Jindal.

Legislators may accept meals from lobbyists but classified employees are strictly prohibited from accepting so much as a cupcake from a vendor for fear that the low-level bureaucrat can do favors for the vendor that a legislative committee chairman obviously is unable to do. One civil service employee was fined $250 by the State Ethics Board a few years ago because a vendor sent her a Christmas ham.

The governor of the State of Louisiana is free to write a book about his career and to hawk it on national television but if an employee of the Division of Administration (DOA) wishes to write a book, he must obtain prior approval from his section head. Those who embrace the First Amendment might suggest that this is a form of prior censorship.

Legislators who happen to be attorneys can—and do—sue the state and no one in any official capacity sees it as a conflict of interest.

The playing field, which has never been level, is poised to become even more tilted in favor of those in power and to the detriment of those who work in the trenches on a day to day basis to keep the state running efficiently.

State classified employees—the same employees whose pay has been frozen for two years—cannot engage in outside employment activities to earn extra income unless the work is approved in advance by that same section head for fear that an employee may be engaging in a conflict of interest.

DOA employees either have already received or will be receiving a copy of DOA Policy No. 95 (not to be confused with Area 51 in Nevada, though the policy may appear to some to have been inspired by alien mind control). The new policy details limitations to any outside work employees may perform outside state business hours.

State civil service employees have for decades been asked to sign affidavits that neither they nor immediate family members worked for any contractors or vendors who did business with their agency but this regulation is far more restrictive.

The five-page memo being sent out via email to DOA employees said the purpose of the policy “is to prevent employees from participating in outside employment that may be detrimental to the DOA’s mission and public image.”

The governor only last week attended a campaign fundraiser hosted by a state vendor who has a $380,000 state contract but it’s not considered a conflict because, the vendor said, it was held “after hours.”

Corporations with lucrative multi-million-dollar contracts with the state are allowed—encouraged, even—to contribute to the governor’s wife’s foundation with no apparent concern about conflicts of interest. The governor, in fact, even posed with his wife for a photo that is featured on the foundation’s home page.

Could that be construed as a subtle solicitation of contributions on the part of the governor, and thus a conflict of interest? Apparently not.

So much for public image.

Outside employment is defined by Policy 95 as “any non-DOA activity for which economic benefit is received,” including but not limited to:

• Employment with any non-DOA employer;

• contracts to provide consulting, personal, or professional services to non-DOA individuals or entities, or

• Self-employment (an individual who operates a business or profession as a sole proprietor, partner in a partnership, or any other type of legal business entity).

Policy 95 defines economic benefit in the context of the policy as “any compensation or benefit an employee receives for his outside employment that has a monetary value, e.g. payroll check, cash payments, share of profits, share of stocks, equity participation, etc.”

Any current DOA employee planning to engage or already engaged in outside employment will be required to complete an Outside Employment Disclosure Statement form and forward it to his supervisor for review and consideration.

The supervisor will review the statement and make a recommendation to either approve or deny the request and the supervisor would forward the form, along with his recommendations, to the section head, who then would make the final decision to approve or deny the request. If the section head is unsure, he will be required to consult with the DOA Office of Human Resources (OHR) and if necessary, OHR would contact the Board of Ethics for further guidance.

On closer examination of the entire five-page document, it appears to be sorely lacking in firm, definitive policy and heavy on vague but subjective policy enforcement by too many section heads on individual whims. In more common venacular, enforcement is strictly fly by the seat of the pants with ever-shifting interpretations that could all too easily hinge on the personalities involved.

“Original disclosure statements for outside employment must be forwarded by the section to OHR for filing and copies should be kept by the supervisor in a confidential file,” the memo says.

The policy and accompanying memo are already causing an undercurrent of discontent among many state employees.

One DOA employee said he has no outside income but nonetheless feels it is no business of the state what he does after 5 p.m. “This just smacks of …. the old ‘1984 Big Brother is watching thing,’” he said in an email to OHR.

“I object strongly, on principle alone. I don’t care if I am a male stripper on Friday nights or if I repair cars in my back yard on Sunday mornings—it is none of your or anyone’s business.”

“At this moment in time, I am so angry that I have no intention of signing this thing…and I am sure that I am not alone,” he said. “What happens if I don’t sign? Would you really fire me—after 36 years?”

There was no indication as to whether or not Policy 95 would also apply to non-classified employees in the governor’s office.

Read Full Post »

WikiLeaks reveals Jindal’s ambitious plans for second term

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Charters, Contract, Contracts, Economy, Exemptions, Incentives, Governor's Office, Higher Education, House, Senate, Layoffs, Legislature, Legislators, Privatization, Supriya Jinda Foundation, Taxes on April 1, 2011| 10 Comments »

Gov. Bobby Jindal has outlined an ambitious program for his second term of office, including the privatization of the Louisiana Legislature, state colleges and universities, the sale of all state roads and highways and bridges to private concerns, and rapid expansion of the state’s charter school system, all to be controlled by private entities.

His plans for the state, which he calls the “Piyush Push,” were revealed by WikiLeaks which published a series of emails between Jindal and corporate campaign supporters who have contributed millions of dollars to Jindal’s wife’s charity, the Supriya Jindal Foundation for Louisiana’s Children. Upon learning of the WikiLeaks report, the governor called a press conference to explain his programs.

The privatization plan calls for the takeover of the Louisiana Legislature by a corporate board made up of the CEOs of Louisiana’s larger corporations and Wall Street bankers, including AT&T and Goldman Sachs.

The operating boards of state colleges and universities would be merged into a single governing board with board members serving at Jindal’s pleasure. An obscure clause in his plan would allow him to retain control of appointments even after he leaves office. The so-called super board would be comprised of major contributors who would purchase stock shares in the universities. Board members would be allowed to send their elementary- and high school-age children and grandchildren to state charter schools.

“We are not going to raise taxes on the people of Louisiana,” Jindal said at the hastily called press conference attended only by reporters from the Baton Rouge Business Report. “We are going to run these universities like a business. Tuition will be adjusted to a level comparable to that of our nation’s finest institutions, the Ivy League schools, of which I am an alumnus. The board members will not draw per diem or salaries for their services but we anticipate they will profit from their sacrifice and hard work through stock ownership and lucrative stock options in the universities,” the governor said.

“Again, I want to reiterate that we are not going to increase taxes but the new owners of state roads, highways, and bridges will certainly be free to charge a modest usage fee for travel on their byways and bridges,” Jindal said. “People who drive cars should understand that use of roads and bridges is a privilege, not a right and that a usage fee is not the same as a tax; it’s a fee. We believe that these usage fees will offset the need for any increase in gasoline taxes.”

As for the future of the legislature, Jindal said it will be downsized from the current membership of 144 to 12 white males who will inherit all current campaign contributions remaining and accruing to the 144 outgoing legislators. The only way an African-American would be appointed would be in the event of a class action lawsuit by representatives of minority groups. “It almost worked with the Board of Regents,” the governor said in defending his legislative plan.

A few legislators voiced reservations with the manner in which Jindal is moving to privatize their institution, but after having gone along with the governor in other privatization endeavors, most indicated they would not resist the new austerity moves by the governor. Nor was there any immediate indication that legislators would attempt to invoke the separation of powers doctrine under which the legislature has heretofore been largely independent of the governor’s office.

Sen. Carl Spackler of Bushwood, however, was one who vowed he will not vote in favor of privatization of the legislature. “I believe the legislative branch of government is protected in the Constitution somewhere and I’m going to read up on that,” Spackler said. “If I’m correct, I’m not going to sit still for him putting me out of a job. Who does Jindal think we are, state employees? I worked hard for my GED.”

But Jindal was emphatic about pushing for complete passage of his austerity package, saying there would be no compromise. “I want to emphasize that these moves are in keeping with my ‘more is less’ philosophy for all government,” he said. “For those who may question these actions, I would say to them, ‘Quit whining and work smarter.”

Neither is Jindal considering an increase in tobacco taxes. “Smoking is a private decision, an individual right, and smokers should not be penalized for exercising that right,” he said. “We are, however, imposing a significant surcharge for abortions to encourage the notion that life is sacred and women should not make such decisions too lightly. Again, I want to emphasize this is not a tax.”

He said he is also planning to sharply reduce the number of state employees. One example of his layoff plan would require every Louisiana citizen who is unwilling or unable to complete the process on-line to appear at a central location in Baton Rouge, Shreveport, Monroe, New Orleans, Alexandria, Lafayette, or Lake Charles for driver’s license applications and license renewals. “I don’t see why we can’t get by in each office with one or two persons,” he said. “How difficult can it be to issue a driver’s license?”

He also announced plans to double the size and the salaries of the state’s Homeland Security Office while at the same time saying he would cut staff at state hospitals to a single physician and nurse per specialty at each facility. “I believe with fewer doctors, people will find a way to stay healthier,” Jindal said.

“Again, I want to say we are not going to raise taxes,” he said. “That is not an option. We are, however, going to raise the annual deductible on medical care to $12,500 per year, increase co-payments to $50, and at the same time, we’re asking state workers to kick in another 75 percent on employee premiums on health care coverage and retirement benefits.”

Jindal used the press conference to take yet another swipe at big government in general and President Obama in particular. “The bloated federal government should take a look at Louisiana and say, “That’s how things should be done,” he said. “We’re proving in our open and transparent administration that our ethics are above reproach and we’re wiping out our deficit with good, open and honest government,” he said as the CEOs of AT&T, Northrop Grumman, Worley Catastrophe Response, and Blue Cross/Blue Shield stood behind him.

“I would once again call upon the Obama administration to repeal its drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico so that our oil companies can make a decent living,” Jindal said.

Jindal said he would sell all public schools to private entities so that they could be converted to charter schools. He said the move would be a model of efficiency for the rest of the nation. “I believe the 25 percent loss in Detroit’s population over the past decade, for example, could be reversed simply by converting to my proposed system for Louisiana schools,” he said.

“I fully anticipate there will be a bidding war for acquisition of schools as public finance will guarantee a solid return for investors,” Jindal said. “Of course my administration will invest the funds derived from the sale so that cash flow will support scholarships to the schools or such other General Fund needs as might arise in the budget balancing process.”

He said those children unable to take advantage of the improved educational opportunities will be housed in dormitories near the Nucor Steel Mill in St. James Parish, the Tournament Players Club golf course in Jefferson Parish, and the Foster Farms chicken processing plant in Union Parish. “There, they will be given hands-on training to meet the plants’ needs,” he said. “If all else fails, they would certainly be qualified to become slag haulers, caddies at state-run golf clubs, or chicken pluckers.”

To insure that the schools will succeed and will demonstrate high test scores, students will be carefully pre-screened before being accepted for enrollment, Jindal said. The schools will be run by boards comprised of members selected by the owners. Owners and board members, along with the college and university Super Board members, will be given first choice of the available seats in the school for their children, as will those of select employees.

“I am fully aware that all this will require Constitutional amendments but I fully expect the voters of Louisiana to continue to support our programs. But just in case, beginning here and now, I am stepping up my schedule of visiting churches to garner popular support for my proposals. Beginning Sunday and continuing through Election Day, I will be visiting churches all over north Louisiana. My agenda will consist of three things: Sunday morning and Sunday evening services as well as Wednesday night prayer meetings.”

And that’s the way it is on Friday, April 1, 2011.

Read Full Post »

Conflict? What conflict? Just give me the money

Posted in Campaign Contributions, Contract, Contracts, Ethics, Governor's Office, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Transparency on March 30, 2011| 2 Comments »

The nation’s “most transparent” and “most ethical” administration is becoming more transparent with each passing day but the ethical part is looking a little shaky.

A Hammond firm that has one $380,000 contract with the state and another to oversee a $20 billion claims fund resulting from the BP Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico that killed 11 men last April and spewed nearly 5 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico hosted a $1,000-a-plate fundraiser for Gov. Bobby Jindal on Tuesday of this week.

The $1,000 is just to attend the event. If one wanted to be listed as a “host,” the ante was $5,000.

Worley Catastrophe Response, which also has had contracts with the Louisiana Office of Risk Management, was the primary host, and even made its Hammond training facility available for the event.

The Louisiana Code of Ethics, which apparently does not apply to elected officials, forbids state employees from accepting gifts from vendors.

But not to worry. Worley CEO Mike Worley was careful not to push the envelope insofar as the state ethics laws are concerned. He contended the event was on the up-and-up and that no ethics protocol had been breached because the function was held after business hours.

Apparently Worley’s contracts are rendered null and void after 5 p.m.—or at least placed in a state of suspended animation.

And, of course, Jindal ceases being governor “after business hours.”

Horsefeathers.

This is simply another case of Jindal’s twisting the rules to suit his needs and apparently those needs are all monetary. His campaign already has $12 million in the bank with no opponent in sight. The only candidate even mentioned thus far, Caroline Fayard, attempted to self-destruct in Bogalusa earlier this week with some off-the-cuff venom directed at Republicans in general. To say anyone, even Republicans, “eat their young” is a bit over the top and likely not to play well in north Louisiana.

But back to Piyush and his new take on the code of ethics. Remember: he was fined $2,500 back in 2008 for his failure to disclose $118,000 in expenditures by the state Republican Party on his behalf.

And now he allows a fund raiser in his behalf to be hosted by a firm holding fat state contracts. And he sees no conflict of interest.

Beautiful. Just beautiful. Sometimes even smart people learn slowly.

“People who support us are supporting our agenda and not the other way around,” the governor said. Now, if someone could just tell us what he meant by that ….

“I’m a resident of the state of Louisiana, and I support the governor,” Worley said. Apparently that overrides any silly old ethics laws. Erlichman and Haldeman supported Nixon, too, not that we’re drawing any comparisons.

Jindal’s press lackey Kyle Plotkin said the governor saw nothing inappropriate about the fund raiser. “Obviously, the governor is running for re-election, and he wants the support of all people in Louisiana,” he said.

Jindal and Attorney General Buddy Caldwell in February filed papers in U.S. District Court in New Orleans asking a federal judge to oversee the oil leak claims process.

Louisiana Democratic Party spokesman Kevin Franck called the fundraiser a conflict of interest for the governor who he said “is essentially taking money from somebody who works for BP at the same time he’s supposed to be holding BP accountable.”

State Rep. John Bel Edwards (D-Amite) was at a loss in trying to understand how Jindal did not see what Edwards said was a clear conflict in complaining about the claims process while attending a fundraiser at the headquarters of one of the claims adjusters.

He said Jindal should avoid any appearance of a conflict, regardless of whether or not he has an opponent. He added that because he has no opponent, however, “It may mean that he’s able to get away with it.”

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »