Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Legislature, Legislators’ Category

Notable Quotables (In their own words)

Posted in House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Notable Quotables, Transparency on May 10, 2012| 4 Comments »

“Don’t worry, I’ll recall the bill.”

–Sen. Mike Walsworth (R-West Monroe), to Kristy Nichols, Gov. Piyush Jindal’s Deputy chief of Staff, after Senate Bill 47, which would change the computation of retirement benefits from three to five years, failed by one vote to get the necessary 20 votes.

“Wahh, wahh, my machine malfunction! Wahh, wahh, I was pounding on my computer during the vote. Can I have a do-over?”

–Sen. Mike Walsworth (R-West Monroe) to the Senate President following the failure of SB 47. The bill passed on the second vote.

Read Full Post »

Sen. Walsworth not above a little deceit to pull Piyush’s bill out of the fire; such is the Jindal brand of ‘good government’

Posted in Governor's Office, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Retirement on May 10, 2012| 5 Comments »

It seems that Sen. Mike Walsworth (R-West Monroe) is not above a little chicanery and outright misrepresentation when it comes to salvaging a losing vote on behalf of Piyush Jindal.

When the Senate voted Wednesday on SB 47, which would change the computation of pension system benefits from an average of three years of compensation to a five-year average, the tally was 19-16, or one vote shy of the 20 votes needed.

Walsworth whined that he had been “pounding” on his computer during the vote and would like to have a re-vote. The Baton Rouge Advocate said he claimed that his voting machine malfunctioned. Either way, the Senate agreed, and approved the amended bill by a 23-13 vote.

But spectators in the Senate gallery clearly heard Walsworth tell Kristy Nichols, Gov. Piyush Jindal’s Deputy Chief of Staff, not to worry, that he would recall the bill.

Bottom line: there was no “pounding on the computer” and no “machine malfunction.”

But there was deception and outright lying on the part of Walsworth.

That’s the Piyush Jindal version of accountability, ethics and good government.

Read Full Post »

Could loss of that $80.6 million broadband internet federal grant last fall have been deliberately orchestrated by ALEC?

Posted in Broadband, Internet, Governor's Office, Grant, Grants, Higher Education, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Regents, Revenue on May 9, 2012| 6 Comments »

That $80.6 million Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) grant to provide high speed broadband internet to rural areas of Louisiana keeps rearing its ugly head.

That’s the grant—the second grant—that Gov. Bobby Jindal eschewed and eventually lost when the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a three-page letter of revocation last October. Jindal had earlier declined to apply for a $60 million grant for early childhood education.

LouisianaVoice has obtained information that indicates the forfeiting of the broadband grant now appears to have been the brainchild of none other than the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which last August bestowed its highest honor, the Thomas Jefferson Freedom Award, on Jindal at ALEC’s national conference in New Orleans.

The project would have created 900 miles of cable over 21 rural parishes in Louisiana and would have supported several Louisiana universities with expanded optical fiber networking capacity that could have complimented the Board of Regents’ $20 million Louisiana Optical Network Initiative (LONI) project, designed to extend high-speed networking capabilities in the state.

But Jindal, whose wife’s charitable foundation received funding from AT&T, preferred that the project be carried out by private companies—such as AT&T. He refused to re-apply for the grant because of what he called a “heavy-handed approach from the federal government that would have undermined and taken over private business.”

U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu called Jindal’s reasoning “hogwash.” She said the grant would not have interfered with private enterprise and in fact, just the opposite was true. “We weren’t trying to create a government broadband system; it’s granting money for private companies to lay the cable,” she said.

Even more ominous, that revocation letter from Arlene Simpson Porter, director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Division (NOAA), informed the Jindal administration, “Consideration of this adverse action may be used in future funding decisions for your organization.”

That could mean that Jindal’s decision could be used against the state in any future grant applications.

The problems started March 17, 2011, when BTOP staff informed the Board of Regents that the project was nine months behind schedule. A formal response was requested by May 13, 2011, but on May 17, there still was no formal response and a corrective action plan (CAP) letter was sent to the Board of Regents.

That was followed on May 26 by a conference call between BTOP staff, the Board of Regents and the Division of Administration (DOA) to discuss the CAP response. On June 14, the Board of Regents and DOA issued a response letter in which it was noted that the DOA Office of Information Technology (OIT) would provide project oversight to ensure that implementation of the BTOP grant would not be in direct competition with private providers.

The state was notified on July 6 that it was even further behind on the project and additional problems were encountered on July 12. On July 27, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) requested that NOAA suspend Louisiana’s U.S. Treasury Automated System Application for Payment (ASAP) account pending corrective actions, including delivery of project benefits and compliance with award terms and conditions.

The Board of Regents on Aug. 8 provided BTOP staff with a chart outlining the planning process and goals. A month later, the Regents proposed an alternative design that included a new plan, new project schedule with new structure and milestones and a survey of service providers that would provide unspecified indefeasible right of use (IRU). An IRU is a contractual agreement between operators of communications systems, including fiber optics.

The Regents’ proposal was rejected by NOAA, which on Sept. 20 issued a 30-day notice of termination of award. That was followed by Simpson-Porter’s Oct. 26 termination letter.

Could the loss of the grant have been orchestrated by ALEC? Could the administration have deliberately stalled until the grant was pulled in order to comply with ALEC’s national agenda?

Perhaps we will never know the answer to that, but consider this:

As far back as August of 2010, at ALEC’s annual meeting in San Diego, its Telecommunications & Information Technology Task Force passed the following resolution:

• Whereas, it is the mission of the American Legislative Exchange Council to advance the Jeffersonian principles of the free markets, limited government, federalism and individual liberty, and

• Whereas, broadband information services sector is critical to growing the nation’s economy, enhancing quality of life through new and innovative applications, and enabling greater job creation, and

• Whereas, the rise of private investment in broadband technologies has dramatically transformed the way consumers work, live, learn, and conduct their daily lives, and

• Whereas, ALEC believes that innovation, private investment, and market competition, not additional regulations, should drive the continued deployment and adoption of broadband information services, and

• Whereas, the FCC has moved forward with a plan that would impose its authority on the internet and regulate the provision of broadband information services, and

• Therefore, be it resolved that ALEC voices its support of lawmakers and regulators avoiding the unnecessary, burdensome and economically harmful regulation of broadband internet service companies, including the providers of the infrastructure that supports and enables internet services, and further

• Be it resolved that ALEC urges that the FCC, Congress, and state regulatory and legislative bodies refocus their efforts on specific and limited initiatives targeted at ensuring that broadband service is made universally available and affordable to consumers, rejecting overly prescriptive regulation that would harm innovation, investment, and job growth, and further

• Be it resolved that ALEC’s opposition to the sweeping redefinition of broadband services be communicated to all ALEC members, and further

• Be it resolved that ALEC shall convey its support to the members of the United States Congress and Executive Branch.

The resolution was offered by Intuit, Inc., following a presentation by Eagle Communications on “concerns over federal grants being used to fund businesses to compete head-to-head with broadband service providers in areas that are already being served.” Intuit was one of the corporate members that recently pulled out from ALEC after the controversy over Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, a law strongly supported by ALEC, and the subsequent shooting death of a black youth by a neighborhood watch volunteer.

AT&T and Cox Communications, both major investors in cable TV and internet services, are also members of ALEC. AT&T even serves on ALEC’s corporate board.

Louisiana legislators attending that San Diego conference – at state expense – included:

• Former Rep. John LaBruzzo (R-Metairie);

• Rep. Robert Johnson (D-Marksville);

• Rep. Thomas Carmody (R-Shreveport);

• Rep. Tim Burns (R-Mandeville);

• Rep. Joe Harrison (R-Gray);

• Rep. Bernard LeBas (D-Ville Platte);

• Sen. Yvonne Dorsey (D-Baton Rouge).

Read Full Post »

Eavesdropping on lobbyists at Senate Labor & Industrial Relations Committee during recess in SB 560 hearing

Posted in Legislature, Legislators, Lobbyist on May 7, 2012| 3 Comments »

The Senate Labor and Industrial Relations Committee hearing last Thursday, May 3, gave us some interesting audio while the committee was in recess.

The committee spent more than an hour on SB 560 by Sen. Jack Donahue (R-Mandeville) that would make sweeping changes to the state’s workers’ compensation statutes.

Basically, the bill, a product of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), would limit which doctors could treat workers who are injured on the job by setting up a medical provider network that injured workers must utilize.

The bill also would limit legal fees for attorneys representing injured workers.

But it was when the committee recessed 53 minutes into hearings that things got really interesting.

That’s because a few pro-business lobbyists were still sitting at or near the witness table and someone left the camera and microphones on.

Be patient. It takes a few minutes for this video to load.

http://senate.la.gov/Labor&Industrial/archives/2012/video.htm

At 53:07, Jim Patterson, lobbyist for the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI), sitting at the witness table to the viewer’s left, begins discussions with Clark Cosse, seated in the first row behind and to Patterson’s left:

• Cosse: “Kostelka’s (Sen. Bob Kostelka, R-Monroe) a wild card.”

• Patterson: “You never know what’s gonna set him off.”

At 55:09, Alton Ashy, lobbyist for Worley Claims, a score of gaming interests and several medical providers–and a political ally of Gov. Bobby Jindal–approaches Patterson to briefly discuss one witness’s opposition to the bill and cracks a joke before moving on.

Patterson then turns to Dennis Juge, a Metairie attorney who, along with Patterson and Cosse, was re-appointed by Gov. Jindal last November to the Workers’ Compensation Advisory Board, to repeat the joke told him by Ashy.

• Patterson: “He said maybe they should rope off a corner and give each of you knives and tie your wrists together and (inaudible).”

• Juge: “It would be easier….and cleaner.”

It was at this point, at 56:45, that Cosse re-entered the conversation and things got a little more graphic.

• Cosse: “In lobbyist school they have a desk and they put a little butt on it and you…” (He bobs back and forth, making kissing motions.) “It doesn’t matter who they are, when they (presumably legislators) get elected, you gotta get along with ‘em. If you lose ‘em one day, you gotta go back and get ‘em the next day.”

• Patterson: “And they put a little hair on that hiney to make it all the more challenging.”

(Laughter.)

• Cosse: “That’s right, like hair on soap, man.”

• Patterson: “That’s too funny.”

And that, folks, is today’s civics lesson. You must (or should) be 18 years of age to attend a legislative session or committee meeting unless accompanied by an adult.

Read Full Post »

It’s just an innocent little ol’ bill that would abolish payroll deductions for Children’s Museum & LaCAP, among others

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, Attorney General, Education, Governor's Office, Health Care, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Retirement, tagged , , , , , , , , , on May 5, 2012| 9 Comments »

Freedom of expression for state employees, even when they pay for it, is squarely in the crosshairs of the Jindal administration.

State lawmakers in Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona, Indiana, Ohio, Idaho, Washington, Michigan, Wyoming, North Carolina and Florida have all passed or attempted to pass anti-public employee union legislation sponsored by the American Legislative Exchange Council.

More recently, the ALEC-sponsored movement has moved to Louisiana in the form of two House bills, one of which (HB 1023) is authored by ALEC member Rep. Alan Seabaugh (R-Shreveport). The second, HB 88, is the handiwork of Rep. Bob Hensgens (R-Abbeville).

Seabaugh’s bill would prohibit mandatory payroll deductions from the paychecks of public employees for membership dues for “any entity which engages in political activity” while HB 88 by Hensgens is more narrowly worded in that it would apply only to public school officials who belong to organizations that are politically active.

Jindal would probably claim that he had nothing to do with the bills, that they were the product of free and independent-minded Seabaugh and Hensgens. But let us not overlook the fact that Jindal contributed $2,500 to each of their legislative campaigns last August.

That is enough for Louisiana’s teachers’ unions to feel that the bills are nothing more than reprisals for their opposition to Gov. Bobby Jindal’s sweeping education reform bills.

The bills could also apply to payroll deductions for membership in the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). For doctors and nurses who work in state facilities, it also could conceivably apply to membership dues for the American Medical Association and the Louisiana State Nurses’ Association.

What about all the attorneys for the Louisiana Attorney General’s office and executive legal counsels for all the state agencies, including the governor’s office? Most of those are members of the State Bar Association and most of those pay dues through payroll deductions.

The Louisiana Retired Teachers’ Association, Louisiana State Troopers Association, Professional Fire Fighters Association and even the alumni foundations of state colleges and universities are political active to some extent.

Each of those either employs full time lobbyists to represent their interests before the legislature or do so themselves. That’s pretty far-reaching, but within the definition of either of the two bills.

The Louisiana Department of Education has an undetermined number of Teach for America members and they, too, may pay dues through payroll deduction. Teach for America is about as politically active as any other organization already mentioned.

There are others. Acadian Ambulance has an entire team of lobbyists who stand ready to twist legislative arms on behalf of their client. So what about state employees who have purchased membership with Acadian and set up payroll deductions?

Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Co., the parent company of Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Louisiana, made $17,500 in political contributions in 2003, including $10,000 to Jindal. That would constitute political activity by any definition.

Blue Cross/Blue Shield provides health insurance for tens of thousands of Louisiana active and retired employees—through payroll deductions.
The same would apply to UnitedHealthcare which also provides health care coverage and which employs lobbyists and actively provides financial support to various political campaigns.

The same goes for scores of life insurance companies which provide coverage to state employees—again, through payroll deductions. Ditto for such organizations as Humana, the Boys and Girls Clubs, the Girls Scouts of Louisiana-Pines to the Gulf, Louisiana Citizens for the Arts, Louisiana Children’s Museum, LaCAP Federal Credit Union, the four state retirement programs (LASERS, LSERS, LSPRS AND LTRS).

One would assume that the Sierra Club, Ducks Unlimited, the Coastal Conservation Association and the NRA are politically active and would thus, be forbidden to extract dues via payroll deductions.

Steve Monaghan, president of the Louisiana Federation of Teachers, said he is convinced that Seabaugh’s bill was filed as a form of reprisals against teachers for their part in trying to sink Jindal’s education reforms.

“This is an effort to silence the voice of opposition,” Monaghan said. “Because we defend public education and stand up to the politicians who seek to bully, some want to strike us down.”

Dr. Michael Walker-Jones said the bills were “an attempt to shut down the voice of public employees totally.”

Bridget Nieland, vice president of Communications and director of Education and Workforce for the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI), however, said the idea that non-profit groups would be affected by the legislation were nothing more than a “scare tactic” being used by union leaders in an effort to garner opposition.

One opponent of the proposed legislation said the bills were based on two false assumptions—that taxpayer dollars are being used for political purposes and that payroll deductions of union dues is tantamount to compulsory unionism.

“Union members’ dues are not taxpayer dollars,” said Les Landon, writing on Facebook. “They (dues) come from the salaries earned by employees who have a right to spend those dollars as they wish, including for political purposes.”

Seabaugh, a member of ALEC, was reimbursed $2,060.52 in taxpayer dollars for his attendance of the ALEC National Conference last August—in New Orleans.

Seabaugh apparently saw no problem in spending public dollars to attend the conference by an organization which drafts hundreds of laws favorable to business and industry and adverse to the interests of public employees.

Those drafts are provided—some say spoon-fed—to state lawmakers — to take back to their home states for passage. Among bills written by ALEC and promoted in Republican-controlled state legislatures are privatization of state agencies, the sale of state prisons, school vouchers and charter schools, and major public employee retirement reform.

Nick Dranias, director of Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute, speaking on behalf of a similar bill to abolish payroll deduction in Arizona, said, “No special interest is supposed to have a law that forces government to negotiate in a secret backroom for advantages that benefit only their private interests.”

All sample legislation adopted by ALEC, including last August’s national conference in New Orleans, is done so behind closed doors. The media and general public were barred from the New Orleans conference as they are at all such conferences.

It would be interesting to hear Dranias offer his take on that “special interest” negotiating “in a secret backroom” on behalf of its “private interests.”

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »