Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Legislature, Legislators’ Category

The obvious similarity between a cockroach and a career politician is that you can never get rid of either one.

Take Noble Ellington, for example.

Or Jane Smith.

Or Ricky Hardy.

Or Henry “Tank” Powell.

Or M.J. “Mert” Smiley.

Or what seems like the entire Teepell family or anyone connected to Timmy Teepell.

If the supporters of Piyush Jindal don’t realize that he is every bit the political opportunist that any of his predecessors were, that his political morals are no better than any other Louisiana politician who ever got himself elected, then there is little to no hope for this state.

We’ll get back to the governor’s appointees but first let’s take a look at the $150,000 man with no qualifications and no experience.

Commissioner of Insurance Jim Donelon on Tuesday announced that Ellington, who spent 24 years in the state legislature, flip-flopping from state senator to state representative as term limits dictated, joined the department as its number-two man last week at a salary of $150,000 per year.

Ellington served on the Louisiana House Insurance Committee for the past four years, “but that is the extent of his insurance involvement to my knowledge,” said Donelon.

Let that soak in: “That is the extent of his insurance involvement.”

Let this soak in as well: $150,000 per year to serve as the second in command of the state’s sprawling Insurance Department.

For the thousands of state civil service who may find themselves having to work longer to qualify for retirement and who may have to take a five-year average earnings as the formula on which to base retirement income if Jindal’s retirement legislation package passes, let this soak in, too:

You can take comfort in the knowledge that Ellington will draw a much fatter state retirement now that he’s drawing $150 thou per year as opposed to his 24-year legislative salary because $150,000 as a base for the next four years will pretty much set him up for life.

It’s no coincidence that Ellington landed on his feet this way after opting not to seek re-election last fall. He is the national immediate past president of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and he hosted ALEC’s national convention in New Orleans last August.

ALEC, you might remember, is the national organization funded largely by the Koch brothers as well as a host of national corporation that boasts of its membership about a third of state legislators from all 50 states that sets the agenda for state legislation from prison privatization to charter schools to suspension of state employee pay raises to privatization of state employee health insurance, group benefits, risk management, Medicaid, the abolishment of state civil service and/or state employee unions and anything else that can cost state employees their jobs.

Cockroaches.

Finally, you can let these pearls of wisdom from Donelon regarding Ellington’s hiring soak in: “I’m very pleased that Noble made himself available for more public service.”

Wait. What? What self-serving politician has ever not made himself available for more public service, especially at $150,000 per year?

Donelon went on to say, “He brings a wealth of experience from his service in the legislature. I especially appreciate his expertise in issues affecting rural parts of the state.”

Really?

Okay, first of all, Donelon admitted that Ellington had little to no experience in the insurance field other than having served on the House Insurance Committee and then he turns right around to say he brings “a wealth of experience” to the table. What a crock. And exactly what expertise in issues affecting rural areas is applicable to the State Insurance Department?

Well, to be fair to Donelon’s possible motive, on Oct. 11, 2011, Ellington contributed $1,000 to Donelon’s re-election campaign.

Not that Donelon is alone is doling out political patronage.

Let’s take a look at some of the recent appointments by Piyush, the man who would counsel us to “do more with less.”

• Former State Rep. Jane Smith of Bossier City, ineligible for re-election because of term-limits and defeated in her own effort to flip-flop to the Senate, nevertheless landed a $107,500 per year position as deputy secretary of the Department of Revenue. Her qualifications for such a sensitive position were never enumerated.

• Former Reps. Ricky Hardy of Lafayette, who lost his re-election bid last fall, Henry “Tank” Powell of Ponchatoula, and M.J. “Mert” Smiley of St. Amant, were all appointed to part time positions as members of the State Pardon Board at $36,000 each.

It was Smiley who last spring, during the hearing on a $6.8 million amendment to the $68 million contract with F.A. Richard & Associates, the company that took over the privatization of the Office of Risk Management (ORM), who uttered one of the most bizarre questions to come out of any legislative hearing.

Hearing of the problem of ORM’s retaining employees who were leaving the agency for other jobs in anticipation of the phased-in privatization of the agency, Smiley asked ORM Assistant Director Patti Gonzales, “Isn’t there some way you can force them to stay?”

No, Mr. Smiley, not since the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863.

Smiley, by the way, will serve for only a year. It seems that after leaving the legislature, he ran for Ascension Parish tax assessor and somehow got himself elected but won’t take office until January of 2013. In the meantime, he needed a job and of course his impeccable qualifications made him the natural choice. For one year.

Cockroaches.

Other recent Jindal appointees:

• Former St. Tammany Parish President Kevin Davis, term-limited, bless his heart, was named director of the Governor’s Office on Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness (GOHSEP), a political patronage black hole;

• Former St. Bernard Parish President Craig Taffaro, who lost his re-election bid, had no need to worry because Jindal simply created a new position. He was appointed to lead the state’s hazard mitigation efforts in which capacity he will oversee programs that distribute money for elevating homes and making other improvements to residences and public infrastructure;

• Matt Parker, brother-in-law of Jindal’s former chief of staff and present political adviser Timmy Teepell, was hired as Jindal’s intergovernmental affairs director;

• Taylor Teepell, Timmy Teepell’s brother, was named as Jindal’s deputy legislative affairs director. Before that, he was director of the state Republican Party’s Victory Fund;

• Melissa Henderson Mann, Timmy Teepell’s former executive assistant, was named as the new legislative liaison for the Department of Transportation and Development.

Frank Collins, Jindal’s spokesman (paid in the capacity of some suitable title, we’re certain), assured all that the hiring and appointment decisions were made strictly on the basis of merit. Each and every one, he said, had the qualifications and experience needed for their new positions.

To borrow a phrase from an old friend, please Mr. Collins. Don’t urinate on our heads and try to tell us it’s raining.

Cockroaches.

Read Full Post »

Don’t say we didn’t warn you.

As recently as Jan. 31—less than a week ago—we told you that Gov. Bobby Jindal is following the playbook of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) almost to the letter.

That playbook includes a section entitled “Tools to Control Costs and Improve Government Efficiency.” Among the “tools” it recommended were:

• Adopt a state hiring freeze;

• Reform state pensions;

• Delay automatic pay increases (we wondered where legislators came up with the term “automatic” in freezing merit increases a couple of years back);

• Embrace the expanded use of privatization and competitive contracting.

Each of these has already been done or is in the process of being done.

Next Thursday, the administration will present the governor’s Executive Budget for Fiscal Year 2012-2013. Included in the budget will be the proposed sale of the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) for $189 million, to become effective Jan. 1, 2013.

The committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 9:30 a.m. in House Committee Room 5.

The $189 million apparently is the price tag derived by Morgan Keegan, the Memphis banking firm that stands to reap a $750,000 bonus over and above the $150,000 for assessing OGB’s value if it is successful in negotiating the OGB sale at the $189 million price.

Morgan Keegan was itself only recently sold after being fined $210 million nearly two years ago by the Securities and Exchange Commission for misrepresenting critical information to investors.

Whoever ultimately purchases OGB will take with them the $500 million surplus now carried on the OGB books which the new operators will use to pay claims.

LouisianaVoice has also learned that once the sale of OGB is successfully negotiated and the agency is taken over by private industry, premiums will rise by approximately 10 percent.

There are other proposed changes coming that we can tell you about next week.

We can tell you this much, though: It ain’t gonna be pretty.

Read Full Post »

Ron White of the Blue Collar Comedy Tour, arguably one of the funniest standup comics in America, once uttered the classic line, “You can’t fix stupid.”

The same might well be said of arrogance.

Case in point: Mitt Romney saying he was “not concerned about the very poor.” Even if true (which it probably is), it is arrogant to say it even privately, much less publicly.

Case in point: Gov. Bobby Jindal’s calling Louisiana Association of Educators Executive Director Michael Walker-Jones “arrogant” for Jones’s saying that some parents in poverty may not have the time or information to make a decision on their child’s education and suggesting that Walker-Jones resign.

That addressing poverty should be the key in seeking a solution to failing schools is a no-brainer to everyone except those who would gain political capital by bashing public education.

Walker-Jones made his comments in response to Jindal’s education reform plans that the governor unveiled before the annual meeting of the Jindal-friendly Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI) as opposed to the more appropriate audience of those most affected by the proposed changes: teachers.

And therein, as Willie Shakespeare said, lies the rub.

Unveiling his plan at that particular venue was a touch of arrogance in itself, a breach of protocol. But look here for the real arrogance of this governor: http://gov.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=newsroom&tmp=detail&articleID=3197.

Here are some excerpts:

“…We are going to give (local school) districts more flexibility over their federal dollars….(and) We are going to reduce federal reporting requirements….”

One has to wonder if he has run this by the feds yet. It was Earl Long who asked civil rights opponent Leander Perez in the heat of the state’s battle over desegregation more than 50 years ago, “What’re you gonna do now, Leander? The feds got the A-bomb!”

Jindal, in attempting to apply the principle of teacher tenure to a hypothetical company in the private sector, said there is no accountability for job performance and “after three years of this, if they have survived, they are given lifetime job protection. Short of selling drugs in the workplace or beating up one of the business’s clients, they can never be fired.”

Implying that teachers can only be fired for selling drugs at school is arrogance in its purest form—and stupid beyond belief. By his standards, it must be fair to say that now that he has been re-elected, he can only be removed if he sells drugs in the House or Senate chambers. Certainly, that is a far-fetched and most unreasonable analogy—but no more so than his own remarks.

Case in point: “We are going to create a system that pays teachers for doing a good job instead of for the length of time they have been breathing.”

Does anyone know of a single instance in the history of mankind where someone has been paid for the length of time he or she has been breathing? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Anyone?

We’re talking sheer arrogance here.

Perhaps Jindal should resign after making such an ass of himself.

In fairness, he did make one accurate comment to LABI: “Our system today often crushes talented teachers and it makes their jobs harder, not easier.”

At least he’s spot-on with that assessment.

Of course Jindal’s education reform proposals are drawn almost exclusively from the American Legislative Exchange Council’s sweeping agenda but it no doubt also draws heavily on a study done by Raj Chetty and John Friedman of Harvard and Jonah Rockoff of Columbia University.

Without going into too much detail, that study concludes that good teachers cause students to get higher test scores, which in turn lead to higher lifetime earnings.

Well, duh. How much was that grant? Bet we could’ve arrived at that conclusion for less.

But wait. Let’s look a bit more closely at the specifics of that study that has become the mantra of reform-minded governors like our own.

“Replacing a poor teacher with an average one would raise a single classroom’s lifetime earnings by about $266,000,” the New York Times quoted the study as saying.

Wow. $266,000? Really?

But let’s break that down a little further. Let’s say for simplicity that the average classroom has 26.6 kids and on average, those kids will become adults who will work, say, from age 25 to age 65. Forty years. So, we have $266,000 divided by 26.6, divided by 40 years. That comes to a whopping….$250 per year per student, about $20 per month or $4.81 per week.

But for all of Jindal’s disdain for teachers—Public Service Commission Chairman Foster Campbell recently opined that someone must have broken Jindal’s pencils when he was in school—and public education, nothing can quite compare to the arrogance, ignorance and convoluted logic of one Alabama state senator.

State Sen. Shadrack McGill (R-Woodville) recently spoke to a prayer breakfast in Fort Payne at which he justified a 62 percent pay raise for legislators while at the same time saying raising teacher pay could lead to less-qualified educators, according to the Fort Payne Times-Journal.

On the face of it, given his Biblical first name and the asinine statement, most readers might reasonably conclude that the story was straight out of the Onion, an on-line parody of news events. But the story is real and the speaker’s remarks were sincere if misinformed, misguided, and laced with idiocy.

The legislative increase, to be fair to McGill, was passed in 2007, before his election. It was approved by voice vote and later in an override of then-Gov. Bob Riley’s veto.

McGill said the pay raise—from $30,710 to $49,500 for legislators’ part time positions—better rewards lawmakers and makes them less susceptible to lobbyist influence.

“That (the old salary) played into the corruption, guys, big time,” he said. “You had your higher-ranking legislators that were connected with the lobbyists making up in the millions of dollars. They weren’t worried about that $30,000 salary they were getting,” he said, adding that legislators have to pay for their expenses out of pocket.

Legislators need “to make enough that (they) can say no, in regards to temptation,” he said.

Well, Mr. McGill, it may come as a surprise to you to know that members of Congress pull in about $180,000 per year and they are still very much susceptible to being swayed by lobbyists. Only a fool would argue that a salary of $49,500 would keep lobbyists at bay.

It may also come as a shock to you to know that we all pay expenses out of pocket—especially teachers, who regularly spend their own money for classroom resources.

For pure audacity, McGill, who home-schools his children, went on to say, “If you double what you’re paying (teachers), you know what’s going to happen? It’s a Biblical principle. If you double a teacher’s pay scale, you’ll attract people who aren’t called to teach.

“And these teachers that are called to teach, regardless of the pay scale, they would teach. It’s just in them to do. It’s the ability that God give ‘em. And there are also some teachers, it wouldn’t matter how much you would pay them, they would still perform to the same capacity.

“If you don’t keep that in balance, you’re going to attract people who are not called, who don’t need to be teaching our children. So, everything has a balance.”

First, of all, Mr. McGill, please direct us to the scripture in the Bible that admonishes us not to increase teacher pay. Please provide us with the specific chapter and verse.

And taking your logic to its ultimate conclusion, preachers should not be paid; it’s a calling. Instead of paying attorneys $250 per hour, they should accept $25 per hour since it’s a calling. And why pay firemen at all? Let ‘em volunteer. Same thing for police officers, judges and social workers.

Oh, and let’s not overlook legislators. It’s a calling, so let them forfeit all pay in exchange for the privilege of serving.

There you have it, folks. The contempt for teachers and public education, simply because they’re easy targets, is the most current and most popular trend in America. So, c’mon, jump on the bandwagon. The kids? They’re just an afterthought. It’s political hay and the harvest is ripe.

But one last thought: if you can read this, don’t forget to thank a teacher.

Read Full Post »

“We have significant concerns that premature disclosure of the report will prejudice the (solicitation for offers) and negotiations process. This is not a matter of secrecy, but a basic component of our ability to make decisions that are within our purview, to direct the integrity of a successful procurement.”

–Commissioner of Administration Paul Rainwater, in a letter to Senate President Joel Chaisson last June 8 in which he attempted to justify the admininstration’s refusal to provide a copy of the Chaffe & Associates report on the Office of Group Benefits to legislators. Likewise, Rainwater is now withholding the contents of the state’s contract with Morgan Keegan from the OGB Policy and Planning Board.

Read Full Post »

State employees who were blindsided by Gov. Jindal’s announcement last week of proposed sweeping changes to the state’s retirement system have only themselves to blame; they simply haven’t been paying attention.

It’s been a long time coming and while the jury is still out on what will and what won’t be approved in the upcoming legislative session or what is or is not fair to longtime state employees is irrelevant at this point. There is a much larger problem to be addressed: a problem of nearly $6.5 billion in unfunded liabilities for the state employee retirement system, to be precise.

This is an issue that has been punted repeatedly by legislators past and present who were unwilling to make a hard decision and now change is no longer on the far horizon: it is upon us and it is inevitable.

As far back as 1989 a constitutional amendment was passed by the legislature and approved by voters to amortize the state’s unfunded accrued liability (UAL) payoff over 40 years on a level payment plan (adjusted for inflation and payroll growth projections).

That amendment, however, had one fatal flaw: it allowed the legislature to change the payment schedule by statute. One may as well have turned a fox loose in the henhouse or a child in a candy store.

The latter may be more appropriate since the legislature has a greater propensity to act like the adolescent when the state coffers are rife with revenue. Lawmakers wasted no time in tinkering with the schedule in order that they might fund local projects in the annual budget. The folks back home, after all, don’t care about what’s going in Baton Rouge as long as they get their community centers and golf courses funded.

Now, as we approach the 2029 deadline imposed by that amendment, the state is staring down the barrel of huge balloon payments.

Whether one likes Jindal or not, the problem with the state’s UAL for the various pensions for employees, teachers, school employees and police is no more his doing than the state’s next governor, whoever that may be.

But neither was the problem caused by state workers who now are being called upon to change their retirement plans in mid-stream to accommodate those legislators who in past years shirked their fiscal responsibilities in order to more easily facilitate their own political careers. It is patently unfair to ask rank and file state employees to pay the penalty for past legislative moral malfeasance.

That’s not to say that Jindal has the right solutions in his proposals; we have no way of knowing that at this point. It’s just that it is now his problem to wrestle with in the upcoming legislative session.

It is not likely that Jindal or his staff conceived of these reforms independently.

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a conservative coalition of state legislatures, includes the reform of state pensions as one of its “Tools to Control Costs and Improve Government Efficiency” on its state budget reform web page: http://www.alec.org/publications/state-budget-reform-toolkit/.

Other tools specifically recommended by ALEC include the restructuring of state retiree health care plans, delaying “automatic” pay increases, adopting a state hiring freeze, embracing the expanded use of privatization and competitive contracting, establishing a state privatization and efficiency council and selling state assets.

Any of those sound vaguely familiar?

Several corporate members of ALEC have been identified as major contributors to Jindal’s political campaigns.

Of the 126 bills already pre-filed in the House and Senate as of Tuesday, 84, or fully two-thirds deal in some fashion or another with retirement. The breakdown shows that 36 retirement bills have been filed in the House and 48 in the Senate.

Some of the bills in both chambers are different versions of the same proposals, so some of the duplicate bills will be withdrawn before consideration.

Many of those deal with local clerks of court, assessors, sheriffs and municipal employees but just as many—or more—deal specifically with state employees.

Jindal said for now he is addressing only state employees and not teachers, school employees or state police.

Many of his proposals break long-standing promises made to state employees relative to retirement benefits and eligibility.

HB 53 by Rep. Kevin Pearson (R-Slidell), for example, stipulates that employees hired prior to June 30, 2006 may retire after 10 years and upon attaining age 67. Those hired after June 30, 2006 may retire after five years and attaining age 67.

The present law allows a state worker to retire after 10 years at age 60.

HB 56, also by Pearson, chairman of the House Retirement Committee, would increase employees’ retirement contributions from 7.5 percent to 10.5 percent for those employed on or before June 30, 2006 and from 8 percent to 11 percent for those employed on or after July 1, 2006.

But perhaps the bill that would sting the worst is SB 17 and SB 26, both by freshman Sen. Barrow Peacock (R-Bossier City). Each of those bills would change state pensions from a defined benefit to a defined contribution.

That means that instead of employees being guaranteed a set pension based on the current formula of three-year average salary times 2.5 percent times years of service, employees would contribute a predetermined amount to retirement with no guarantee of benefits. Such a program, which would react to market conditions, is similar to the 401K plan common in the private sector.

One bill, HB 55 by Pearson, would alter the formula for computing retirement from a three-year average salary to a five-year average, thus reducing in theory, at least, the employee’s monthly retirement check.

HB 61, also by Pearson, would require a one-time, lump-sum payment to employees with five or more years’ credit upon retirement. The employee may opt to take the lump sum or leave his account balance with the system and draw an annuity.

Because state employees do not contribute to, nor do they qualify for, social security, their retirement income would hinge solely on the uncertainty of their state retirement.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »