Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Layoffs’ Category

First shot fired across bow of S.S. π-yush; legislator asking colleagues for special session to challenge administration

Posted in Boards, Budget, Economy, Education, Ethics, Governor's Office, Health Care, Higher Education, House, Senate, Jobs, Layoffs, Legislature, Legislators, LSU, Politicians, Prison, Privatization, Revenue, State Agencies on September 19, 2012| 15 Comments »

The first legislative salvo has been fired but it remains to be seen whether it will become merely an isolated sniper’s round or if it will escalate into an all-out battle between state lawmakers and Gov. Piyush Jindal.

Rep. Jerome “Dee” Richard (I-Thibodaux) Wednesday morning sent an email to his fellow legislators in the Louisiana House and Senate asking for their support in calling a special session of the legislature to consider reversing what he describes as “a complete disregard of the Legislative branch’s powers by this administration.”

Richard’s email comes as a result to deep budget cuts to higher education and health care, as well as the announcement of hospital and prison closures—all announced by Jindal since the end of the regular legislative session and without prior notification to legislators in the areas affected by the cutbacks.

The Leonard J. Chabert Medical Center in Houma, part of the LSU Health System that is undergoing massive budget cuts, is in his area as is Nicholls State University in Thibodaux. “If they reduce Chabert to a clinic, it will cripple that facility,” he said.

Asked if he was concerned that Jindal might strip him of his committee assignments as he did with Rep. Harold Ritchie (D-Franklinton) and Rep. Jim Morris (R-Oil City) who voted against Jindal-backed bills in the last legislative session, Richard said, “The governor can do what he wants to do; I do what I have to do.”

Richard serves on the House committees on Education, Labor and Industrial Relations, and Transportation, Highways and Public Works.

He said he was not attempting to threaten the governor. “I just want the legislature more involved,” he said.

The procedure for legislators’ calling themselves into special session requires for one-third of each chamber’s membership (35 in the House and 13 in the Senate) to sign a petition which would then be delivered to the clerk of the House and secretary of the Senate.

They, in turn, would be required to send individual petitions within 48 hours to each member of the legislature for his or her signature. Lawmakers would then have 20 days in which to return their individual petitions and once a majority of each chamber concurs, the presiding officers (Senate President John Alario, R-Westwego, and House Speaker Chuck Kleckley, R-Lake Charles) must issue the call for the special session.

Richard, like other members of the House and Senate, is also upset at Jindal’s habit of leaving legislators out of the loop so that they often find out about administrative decisions that affect their legislative districts only after announcements are made by the governor’s office.

Two cases in point are the recently-announced closures of Southeast Louisiana Hospital in Mandeville, scheduled for next month, and last Friday’s announced closure of the C. Paul Phelps Correctional Center in DeQuincy.

Lawmakers in both areas say they were not notified in advance of Jindal’s plans to close those facilities. One of those legislators is House Speaker Kleckley.

The Phelps closure will mean that some 940 prisoners will have to be moved to the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola and the Elayn Hunt Correctional Center in St. Gabriel. But of even greater concern to lawmakers is the fate of more than 250 prison employees who will face layoffs in a rural community that is largely dependent on the facility for employment.

Likewise, the closure of the 174-bed Southeast Louisiana Hospital, slated to begin Oct. 1, will mean the loss of about 300 jobs. The closure of Southeast, along with the earlier closure of state mental health facilities in Orleans Parish, leaves the entire southeastern area of the state without access to state mental health treatment.

Following the 2009 closure of New Orleans Adolescent Hospital, Jindal said those patients would be able to receive treatment at Southeast. Now that Southeast is facing closure, one reader asked, “Where will they go now, to Mississippi?”

Rep. Dorothy Sue Hill (D-Dry Creek) said she learned of the closure of C. Paul Phelps Correctional Center about a half-hour before the announcement was made by Corrections Secretary Jimmy LeBlanc.

“I was devastated,” she said, adding that DeQuincy is in the rural northern part of Calcasieu Parish and that a large number of its residents are dependent on the facility. “I don’t understand why they (the administration) don’t realize that rural people need jobs also,” she said. “This is a good place for jobs. We can’t all move to Baton Rouge or New Orleans. They don’t want to live there.”

Rep. Brett Geymann (R-Lake Charles) called the abrupt announcement without advance notice to legislators “a lack of respect” for area legislators.

Rep. John Smith (R-Leesville) echoed the sentiments of Hill and Geymann when he said the secrecy of the move “perplexes me more than anything.”

Sticking to what has become an increasingly obvious policy of revealing as little as possible, the Department of Corrections did not respond to questions about why southwest Louisiana lawmakers were not included in the decision-making process.

“This is a good deal for Louisiana taxpayers and will result in significant savings while maintaining public safety,” was the only official response from the department. There was no further explanation as to where savings might be realized or how the closure was a good deal for the state—explanations that would seem easy enough to provide if the administration chose to do so.

Having provided the backdrop for the simmering resentment of Jindal that apparently has been building in the legislature, here is the content of Richard’s letter to his colleagues:

I respectfully ask that each of you read this email in its entirety and then ask yourself if you agree that we should immediately call ourselves in to special session. If you agree I ask that you respond to my legislative email address in order to begin the process of petitioning the body in order to reach a majority. While I acknowledge that this is not easy for each of us to decide I feel that it is time for us to get back into the process and our Constitution provides for that to happen.

Like many of you, I am passionate about the well-being of this state and its people and will continue to stand for the things that I believe in whether it be during session or while we are not in session. I believe that we are witnessing a complete disregard of the Legislative branch’s powers by this administration and must address this immediately or we shall find ourselves completely left out of the budget process. When we as a body are not convened in regular session, but have important matters to address, we do not have to wait until next year’s annual session. Our state Constitution provides a mechanism for us to meet in other times in order to enable the Legislature to continue the checks and balances of state government.

Extraordinary Sessions and the Need to Convene

As per Article III, Section 2(B) of the Constitution, the state “legislature may be convened at other times” in “Extraordinary Sessions,” (informally known as special sessions). It is during special sessions that legislators may address important items or “objects” as they are referred to in Article III.

Since our adjournment in June, there has been almost a billion dollars in reductions to the state budget without any input from the Legislature. And thanks to some media outlets we are now learning of still more cuts to healthcare without any input from the Legislature. And we know that mid-year cuts are approaching and these will be made with no input from the Legislature. We spent many hours during the past session debating the budget and trying to protect health care and higher ed and then after adjournment cuts were made with no input from legislators.

I believe it is time for us, as Legislators, to aggressively reinsert ourselves into the budget process by using the Constitutional rights given to us. We should not have to relinquish our legislative duties to the administration once we pass the budget at the end of regular session in times like this. I am tired of explaining to constituents and at civic gatherings that there is nothing we can do once the budget is passed.

There IS a PROCESS:

As stated earlier, Article III, Section (B) of the Constitution authorizes the Legislature to call itself into session for up to a maximum of 30 days. A majority of House members (53) and a majority of Senate members (20) must be in favor of convening and, if so, its members choose the time and the Call.

I would like to see the Call include the discussion of health care and higher ed and how we can determine just how reductions are made. The Constitution allows for us to set the agenda and each of you may have other interests to bring before the body.

Please understand that Louisiana Revised Statutes 24:11 sets forth the procedure for calling ourselves into special session. First, we will need a petition signed by 35 members of the House and by 13 members of the Senate, which would be delivered to the presiding officer in each. Within 48 hours of receipt of petition, the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House are then required to send individual petitions to each member for their signature. We, as Legislators, then have 20 days to return our individual petitions and once a majority of each house is reached, the presiding officers must call the Legislature into special session.

It is OUR CHOICE.

This is how I look at the situation: we can either continue to stand by and allow the administration (to) amend the budget; or we can do what we were elected to do; to represent our constituents. The Constitution gives us that right. The choice is up to each one of us.

In closing, I fully understand that convening and conducting a special session will not be easy but think about the cuts that our hospitals and universities are having to make and will continue to be forced to make while we, as local elected representatives, sit back and try to defend those cuts that we know nothing about. Please know that I respect each and every one of you, regardless of your decision to support or not to support a special session. I simply ask that you take the time to respond to this email to: richardj@legis.la.gov.
Respectfully,

Jerome “Dee” Richard
La. State House of Representatives
District 55, Lafourche Parish
Thibodaux, La. 70301

Read Full Post »

Guest columnist explains why he feels ‘sense of urgency’ in legislative defeat of the punitive π-yush privatization push

Posted in BESE, Campaign Contributions, Charters, Ethics, Governor's Office, Higher Education, House, Senate, Layoffs, Legislature, Legislators, LSU, OGB, Office of Group Benefits, ORM, Office of Risk Management, Privatization, State Agencies, Transparency on September 18, 2012| 2 Comments »

By JOHN SACHS

Periodically I am asked why I’m screaming about what is taking place in our state government. It is suggested that I speak with more deference and respect to and about elected and appointed officials. I am reminded of the adage that one catches more flies with sugar than with salt. I listen to that advice and then I counter with the following explanation for my approach and call to action:

When you as an individual or through your business or when a government entity wants to make a change in service providers such as a pest control service, a janitorial service, or a building maintenance and repair service, it does not involve the lives and livelihood of employees or the ownership of the entity’s physical assets such as buildings. One simply contacts several competing service providers and after evaluating them, makes a decision as to which vendor will provide the specific service for a specific time period.

Now take the case of lease and rentals of buildings and equipment. This is a more complex transaction and generally extends over a longer period of time than a service contract. Except in the case of a rent/lease-to-own transaction, ownership of the assets remains unchanged. Thus, at the end of the lease the parties can agree to terminate the agreement and go their separate ways or to enter into a new contract. Ownership of the asset being rented or leased, however, remains with the original owner.

Finally, there are the types of transactions that are of a permanent nature with lasting consequences, and the ones that the Jindal administration is entering into that will for all intent and purposes change our system of government, alter the delivery of essential services, and transfer ownership of state physical assets forever. What Gov. Bobby Jindal is doing now will be felt for decades to come if not forever. And forever is a mighty long time for the state to suffer after Jindal leaves office for greener pastures (which I find myself occasionally hoping will have a name such as “Serenity Gardens.”)

The first of these “Forever” changes involves privatizing essential government services. When these services are privatized, the state employees almost to a man/woman lose their jobs, their retirement and their benefits. Moreover, their years of experience and expertise are lost to the state almost always forever. The state’s records generally become those of a private company accessible only by the state agency responsible for their administration.

And even that access can become iffy. Take the Office of Risk Management, for example. In less than a year after being privatized at a cost of $75 million to the state, the contract was transferred to a second and then a third company—in open defiance of the state contract requiring written authority for the contract to be transferred. Today, two years after the privatization, nothing has been done about the contract violation.

Records that should be open and public disappear behind a cloak of protection from prying eyes not afforded public agencies. Consequently, monitoring by state and even federal investigators charged with oversight of the function becomes difficult. And to the press, the fourth estate charged with keeping everyone honest and accountable, access to once public records becomes all but impossible. When one adds in the profit motive of a private enterprise and tax liabilities that are not a cost factor to a state operating department, the cost to administer an essential and rightfully state service escalates significantly to the detriment of the state.

The second “Forever” change is the most troublesome and is the one that makes me scream the loudest. That is when physical assets owned by the state and its citizens are sold to private individuals, companies, and corporations. When assets such as hospitals, prisons, schools, etc., are sold, ownership of those assets by the state is lost FOREVER. Let me say that again. When physical assets of the state are sold, ownership of them by the state is lost FOREVER.

We will never again own them. If we need those physical assets to deliver essential state services and programs, we have to enter into negotiations with the new owners to rent or lease those same facilities that we previously owned. And since we in almost every case have no alternative site from which to provide the service, we are held captive by the private owner of the former state facility paid for with taxpayer dollars.

If the new owner knows that he has no competition, is it reasonable to expect him to give us a fair, reasonable, competitive rent/lease term? Chances of that happening are so slight as to be incalculable. The only protection is the initial agreement. After that, it’s every man for himself.

And remember, these new owners will most likely be the contributors to Jindal’s political campaigns, his political slush fund, Believe in Louisiana, or his wife’s “charitable” foundation. They will be the ALEC-supported “One-Percenters” who feel that they are, by divine right, entitled to the spoils of political patronage. It is the finality of the “FOREVER” consequences of the sale of physical assets that makes me scream the loudest and that must be stopped before it ever happens.

Jindal has three years left to do his dastardly deeds. Everyone knows he has higher political aspirations (goals that he will never attain) and that he is a pathological liar who will say anything to portray himself as a caring and responsible keeper of the sacred trust placed in him by the Louisiana electorate. And our generally brain-dead media will drink his poisoned Kool-Aid, ask no intelligent and probing questions, and print verbatim his press releases.

Meanwhile, the Super Pacs will reward him for his unconscionable acts of greed on behalf of the One-Percenters.

So how can Jindal be stopped? There is only one way. Our legislators must muster the required two-thirds (2/3) vote to take back powers to act that in the past have been ceded to the governor and his appointees. That is the only way. And that must happen within the next year and certainly before the end of his term in office. Otherwise, Jindal will have sold ALL of the most marketable physical assets that the state must have in order to deliver essential services mandated by state and federal law and the state will be forced to contract with the new owners for these assets use at exorbitant rates and for terms favorable to the new owners.

That is why I’m screaming and you’d better scream too. Legislators, you’d better muster whatever it takes to act as a body politic united to preserve our state’s assets or your term in office will be forever tainted as a do-nothing, hear, see and speak no evil hand-maiden to the most corrupt governor in our state’s history. That’s a legacy that I would not want to bear.

Read Full Post »

Attorney General opinion accuses π-yush of parliamentary chicanery in Office of Group Benefits privatization contract

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, Attorney General, Campaign Contributions, Civil Service, Contract, Contracts, Ethics, Governor's Office, Health Care, Jobs, Layoffs, Legislature, Legislators, OGB, Office of Group Benefits, ORM, Office of Risk Management, Prison, Privatization, RFP, Request for Proposals, Transparency on September 15, 2012| 5 Comments »

A Louisiana Attorney General’s opinion released Friday has accused the administration of Gov. Piyush Jindal of attempting an end run around the legislature in its efforts to privatize the Office of Group Benefits (OGB).

Meanwhile, another state prison is abruptly closed by Jindal.

The eight-page opinion, written by Assistant Attorney General Michael J. Vallan, says that the proposed privatization of the Office of Group Benefits and the ensuing contract with Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Louisiana must be approved by the House Appropriations Committee and the Senate Finance Committee, as well as the Office of Contractual Review.

But don’t expect Jindal to capitulate too easily, for while the opinion, which boiled down to a interpretation of under which state statute the privatization action was taken, is just that—an opinion. It has no force of law and the likely action to be taken by Jindal and the Division of Administration (DOA) is to simply ignore it and proceed as planned.

The only recourse in such a scenario, would be for the legislature to file suit against Jindal to get a determination of which statute should apply in the privatization process—one which effective bypasses legislative authority or one which specifically requires approval of the two committees.

The requirement for approval of the Office of Contractual Review may as well have been deleted from the opinion since the office is a part of DOA and answers directly to Commissioner of Administration Paul Rainwater, making that agency’s approval a virtual given.

The Division of Administration, through OGB issued a request for proposals (RFP) earlier this year and on April 30 issued a Notice of Intent to Contract (NIC) for Administrative Services Only (ASO), meaning for the awarding of a contract to a third party administrator (TPA) to take over the administrative duties for the state’s Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plan, the High Deductible Health Plan (HDHP) with Health Savings Account (HAS), and the LaChip Affordable Health Plan (LaCHIP).

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Louisiana (BCBS) was already serving as third party administrator for the state’s HMO coverage for state employees and their dependents through OGB and on July 20, OGB issued a report and recommendation to the Evaluation Committee in which it proposed awarding the PPO, HDHP, HAS and LaCHIP business to BCBS as well.

That recommendation was approved by the State Civil Service Commission on Aug. 1.

State Rep. Katrina Jackson (D-Monroe) two days later requested an expedited legal opinion from the attorney general’s office based on her belief that the legislature had to sign off on the awarding of such contracts.

Vallan, in his opinion, said that Louisiana Revised Statute 42:802(B)(8)(b) “clearly provides that any such contract shall be subject to review and final approval by the appropriate standing committees of the Legislature having jurisdiction over review of agency rules by OGB as designated by (statute), or the subcommittees on oversight of such standing committees, and the Office of Contractual Review of the Division of Administration.”

“It is our understanding that the House Appropriations Committee and the Senate Finance Committee are the appropriate standing committees having jurisdiction over OGB rules.

“Therefore, pursuant to the plain language of …42:802, it is the opinion of this office that any contract negotiated by OGB pursuant to the authority granted by …42:802(B)(8) shall be subject to review and final approval by the House Appropriations Committee and the Senate Finance Committee.”

The entire issue hangs on which statute was used in the issuance of the NIC and the subsequent awarding of the contract to BCBS.

“According to OGB,” Vallan said, “the contract at issue was not negotiated pursuant to the provisions of …42:802(B), but was instead negotiated pursuant to the authority provided by Louisiana Revised Statute 42:851.”

While acknowledging that 42:851 does not require legislative approval of contracts, Vallan said, “Our reading of …42:851 is that it applies to situations where a particular state governmental or administrative subdivision, department, agency, school system, etc., intends to procure private contracts of insurance for its respective subdivision, department or agency.

“We do not believe that …42:851 provides OGB with the authority to enter into the proposed contract with BCBS. We are of the opinion that such authority is clearly granted by …42:802. An interpretation of both …42:802 and 42:851 authorize OGB to execute the proposed contract with BCBS would render the provisions of (the two statutes) duplicates of each other and their provisions superfluous and/or meaningless. Such an interpretation should be avoided.”

Vallan said that by enacting 42:802, it was clear that the legislature “has expressed its desire that contracts governing the provision of basic health care services, as well as certain other related contracts be subject to review and final approval by the legislature.

“To interpret …42:851 as offering some sort of alternative route to execute such contracts, thereby escaping legislative oversight, appears to be contrary to the logic and presumed fair purpose the legislature had in enacting …42:802.

“In summary, it is the opinion of this office that the proposed contract between OGB and BCBS is a contract negotiated pursuant to the provisions of …42:802. As such, the contract is subject to review and final approval by the appropriate standing committees of the legislature having jurisdiction over review of agency rules by the Office of Group Benefits.”

Almost lost in all the legalese is the fact that if Jindal’s privatization plan is ultimately approved—by the legislature or by the courts—121 state employees who show up each day to see to it that the medical claims of more than 100,000 state employees, retirees and their dependents are paid in a timely fashion will see their jobs vanish.

Jindal sees privatization through rose-colored glasses—provided him, no doubt, by generous corporate campaign contributors—despite the obvious pitfalls.

Take the Office of Risk Management (ORM), for example. It was the first state agency to be privatized and the company that the state paid $68 million to take over the TPA functions. The takeover was to occur in phases, with the worker’s compensation section one of the first to go and the road hazard section scheduled later this year as the last section to go over.

One of the conditions of the privatization contract was that the TPA absorb displaced ORM employees for a minimum of one year.

In only about eight months after taking over ORM in September of 2010, the contractor, F.A. Richard and Associates (FARA) of Mandeville, was back, asking for an amendment of a tad over $6.8 million to its contract, bring the total to just under $75 million.

Because the request was for an additional 10 percent, legislative approval was not necessary; there is a provision that contractors may get a one-time bump of 10 percent without legislative concurrence.

Legislators were not too happy to learn of that provision but in less than a month, FARA sold out to a company in Ohio which in a matter of only a few more months, sold out to a company in New York.

But here’s the clincher: the contract with FARA contains a clause which specifically says that its contract with ORM may not be transferred or reassigned without prior written approval. When DOA was asked for a copy of the written approval to transfer the contract to each of the out-of-state companies, the response was no such document existed.

So, because of not one, but two flagrant violations of its contract for privatization, ORM is being run by an out-of-state corporation even before all the ORM sections were phased into the contract.

And where are those former ORM employees today? Well, it seems, only a handful of former ORM employees remain there.

OGB remains on the privatization chopping block despite the encouraging legal opinion of the state’s highest legal office. It remains to be seen how it all will play out.

Meanwhile, Jindal, having failed to privatize state prisons as he wished, is simply closing facilities. J. Levy Dabadie Correctional Center was closed earlier this year with nary a word to area legislators of his intent.

On Friday, September 14, Jindal dropped another bombshell.

C. Paul Phelps Correctional Center in DeQuincy is being closed with its 700 medium security prisoners to be transferred to Angola State Penitentiary.

Again, state employees, about 150 of them, have had their livelihoods jerked from under them with no prior warning. About 70 of those will be given the opportunity to transfer to Angola. As for the rest?

Apparently they’re not Jindal’s problem. After all, he likes to say do more with less.

And now, with such a stellar record to back him up, Jindal is turning his attention to the privatization of the LSU Health System and its 10 affiliated hospitals statewide that treat the state’s poor and which train medical students.

Does anyone see a trend?

Read Full Post »

Notable Quotables (in their own words)

Posted in Ethics, Governor's Office, Jobs, Layoffs, Privatization, Transparency on September 12, 2012| 9 Comments »

Funny how the same governor who fought so hard to render state employees destitute in their retirement years–and who is closing hospitals, laying off workers, privatizing state jobs and sending them out of state to contractors–never once hesitated to call on state employees to work emergency shelters and emergency food stamp application sites while he sleeps comfortably in the mansion at night.

–A reader.

Read Full Post »

Notable Quotables (in their own words)

Posted in Boards, Ethics, Governor's Office, Higher Education, Jobs, Layoffs, LSU, Privatization, RFP, Request for Proposals, State Agencies, Transparency on September 9, 2012| Leave a Comment »

“Every hospital that is within the LSU System is now on the table for privatization.”

–Observer commenting on amendment to resolution passed by the Piyush Jindal-dominated LSU Board of Supervisors authorizing the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for public-private partnerships for the operation of LSU System hospital. (The amendment was worded to include “each of the hospitals in the Health Care Services Division.”)

“That’s a decision for the board and the LSU System president.”

–Piyush Jindal mouthpiece Kyle Plotkin, trying to convince someone (perhaps himself) that the firing of Fred Cerise as head of the 10-hospital LSU Health System was not orchestrated by Jindal.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »