Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Politicians’ Category

A lobbyist with close ties to former Louisiana Alcohol and Tobacco Control Commissioner Troy Hebert has been indicted by a Baton Rouge federal grand jury on more than 30 counts of bestiality and distribution and possession of child pornography. http://news.co.cr/u-s-owner-costa-rica-hotel-faces-online-child-porn-charges/47325/

Christopher G. Young, 53, a prominent lobbyist for the Beer Industry League of Louisiana, is also a brother to former Jefferson Parish President and assistant prosecutor John Young who was an unsuccessful candidate for Lieutenant Governor last fall.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1697&dat=20030620&id=bCgqAAAAIBAJ&sjid=MUgEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6713,2339971&hl=en

Young is part owner of a hotel in the Central American country of Costa Rica where he was a frequent visitor on business and vacation trips, says Costa Rica Star reporter Jaime Lopez. The indictment says Young received two videos depicting prepubescent boys engaged in bestiality from an associate in that country. From from 2013 through 2015, Young then distributed the pornographic videos to 38 different individuals on 33 separate occasions via his cellphones, the indictment says.

Young is a registered lobbyists for a number of interests, most of which have strong ties to the alcohol and entertainment interests in Louisiana. Young was listed as Executive director of the Louisiana Association of Beverage Alcohol Licensees for which he also was listed as a lobbyist.

Here is a list of Young’s lobbying clients provided by the State Board of Ethics:

CHRISTOPHER GERARD YOUNG
2016: Local / Legislative / Executive
P.O. BOX 55297
METAIRIE, LOUISIANA 70055
504-915-5953
DAVID BRIGGS ENTERPRISES, INC.
Legislative / Executive
Active: 1/25/2009 – current
641 PAPWORTH AVENUE
METAIRIE, LOUISIANA 70005
BEER INDUSTRY LEAGUE OF LOUISIANA
Legislative / Executive
Active: 1/25/2009 – current
575 N. 8TH STREET
BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA 70802
LOUISIANA ASSOCIATION OF BEVERAGE ALCOHOL LICENSEES, INC.
Legislative / Executive
Active: 1/25/2009 – current
P.O. BOX 55012
METAIRIE, LOUISIANA 70055
WINE AND SPIRITS FOUNDATION OF LOUISIANA, INC.
Legislative / Executive
Active: 1/25/2009 – current
575 N. 8TH STREET
BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA 70802
TIPITINA’S FOUNDATION, INC.
Legislative / Executive
Active: 1/25/2009 – current
4040 TULANE AVENUE, SUITE 8000
NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 70119
RXPATH
Legislative / Executive
Active: 1/23/2012 – current
641 PAPWORTH
METAIRIE, LOUISIANA 70005
FRENCH QUARTER BUSINESS LEAGUE
Legislative / Local
Active: 4/1/2014 – current
119 MULBERRY DRIVE
METAIRIE, LOUISIANA 70005

I attempted to obtain a comment from one of Young’s biggest clients, the Louisiana Beer Industry League. When I called the number, we had to navigate the usual menu. We were given options to dial different extension numbers to reach Executive Director John Williams, office representatives Nicole Patel and Toni Villa (titles unknown), and finally, Chris Young.

After punching the number for Young, I got several rings and then a voicemail for his extension number (no name). I called back three more times and in succession, punched the numbers for Williams, Patel and Villa. I got only Williams’ voice mail and with Patel’s number, I was routed back to the main menu so I then punched Villa’s number and, voila! She answered. After identifying myself and telling her who I was with, the conversation unfolded this way (my questions in italics; her answers in boldface type):

“I was calling for a comment on the indictment of Chris Young.”

“We have no comment at this time.”

“Is he still employed by the Beer League?”

“He is not an employee.”

“As of when?”

“He has never been an employee.”

“He’s not?” (I’m thinking of that menu option for Young’s telephone extension.)

“He’s a contractor.”

“Is he still under contract?”

“We have no comment.”

So all I got was he (a) is not an employee, he (b) is/was a contractor, but he (c) does/did have his own telephone extension at the Louisiana Beer Industry League.

In addition to his lobbying activities, Young also serves as  legal counsel for most, if not all, bars and restaurants coming before ATC for permits to sell alcohol.

One source told LouisianaVoice that after Hebert was named to succeed Murphy Painter as ATC Commissioner, “Young never showed his face at a hearing on permit requests.”

The source, a former ATC agent, said Young was required to appear at the ATC hearings to represent his clients during Painter’s tenure but when Hebert became commissioner, “everything was done behind closed doors.”

How did Young come to represent virtually all applicants for permits to sell alcohol?

Well, it’s easy when you have a close relative in the right place to help.

Chris Young’s sister, Judy Pontin, was installed by Hebert as a $71,000-a-year “Executive Management Officer” for ATC’s New Orleans office in November of 2013. As such, she is in a perfect position to help her brother.

ATC insiders told LouisianaVoice that when an establishment wants to apply for an alcohol permit, or whenever a business experiences problems with ATC, Pontin invariably refers them to Chris Young for legal representation.

We covered that angle back in February when we learned that Hebert intervened in an investigation by ATC agents into a fatal accident in which a man with a blood alcohol content of .307 percent (more than 3½ higher than the .08 percent legal definition of intoxication in Louisiana) and driving at a high rate of speed, struck two bicyclists, killing Nathan Crowson and severely injuring his riding companion, Daniel Morris.

Branch, who had a previous DWI conviction in 2006 and was given a six-month suspended sentence on that occasion, was convicted of vehicular homicide and first degree vehicular negligent injuring and sentenced to 7½ years in prison.

http://theadvocate.com/news/11878236-123/baton-rouge-man-joseph-branch

There remained the issue of whether or not The Bulldog, a bar where Branch had been drinking with two friends just before the accident, might be legally liable for continuing to serve Branch after it was evident that he was intoxicated.

Anytime there is an alcohol-related auto accident involving a fatality, the Louisiana Office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control (ATC) investigates whether or not the driver had been served alcohol after it was obvious he was intoxicated. Such customers are supposed to be eighty-sixed, or cut off from being served more alcohol.

The investigation, which would routinely require weeks upon weeks of interviews, document and video review and which normally produce written reports 30 to 40 pages in length, was unusually short in duration and produced a report of a single page.

One page that completely exonerated the bar of any violation.

http://www.wbrc.com/story/16903763/bar-cleared-in-fatal-crash

Initially, two ATC agents, neither of whom now work for the agency, began the investigation by requesting a video of the night in question to determine if Branch displayed any obvious signs of intoxication. They also asked owners of The Bulldog, located on Perkins Road in Baton Rouge, for certain other documents and information, including copies of any and all receipts of alcoholic beverages purchased by Branch.

When the bar initially refused to cooperate, the agents who customarily investigate such cases, obtained a subpoena and served it on the bar.

Enter ATC Commissioner Troy Hebert who, as it happens, is a declared candidate to succeed David Vitter in this year’s election for U.S. Senate.

In an unprecedented move, Hebert, who had zero experience as an investigator, decided he would be the lead investigator of the Bulldog.

What possible motive would Hebert have in rushing through an investigation and issuing a press release on Feb. 9 absolving the bar of any responsibility? Why would he instruct the lead agent on the case to limit his report to one page?

Why would Hebert watch the video footage for only a few seconds before proclaiming he “saw nothing” there? Why not watch the entire video to see if Branch did, in fact, appear intoxicated?

Even more curious, why would Hebert instruct that same agent to return to The Bulldog and retrieve the subpoena the agent had served on the establishment for video and records, thus freeing the bar of any responsibility to turn over key records?

Is it possible that the answer to each of these questions can consist of two words?

Might those two words be Chris Young?

Chris Young was the legal counsel for The Bulldog prior to and throughout the ATC investigation. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/02/10/why-did-atc-commissioner-troy-hebert-intervene-as-lead-investigator-in-fatal-accident-was-it-to-protect-bar-owner/

Baton Rouge television station WAFB said in its online story about the Young pornography indictment that the case “is being investigated by the FBI.” http://www.wafb.com/story/31961141/baton-rouge-attorney-indicted-for-allegedly-distributing-bestiality-porn

LouisianaVoice said in January that the FBI was investigating Hebert for claims that he used his office to extort sex from a female restaurant manager in New Orleans in exchange for fixing her licensing problems. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/01/26/fbi-said-investigating-troy-hebert-for-using-office-to-extort-sex-from-woman-in-exchange-for-fixing-licensing-problems/

All of which leaves two unanswered questions:

  • Are we talking about two separate FBI investigations or is there only one and the Young indictment only the first of more to come?
  • Was Young indicted in order bring pressure upon him to implicate others further up the food chain?

Only time will provide the answers to those questions.

But one thing is for certain: If Hebert were a serious candidate for U.S. Senate, with even a ghost of a chance for election, you can bet his opponents in this fall’s election would be in a scramble mode today for records, reports and witnesses—anything to tie Hebert to this latest sordid affair, considering his close association with Young.

But in all likelihood, none of the candidates feel that sense of urgency.

 

Read Full Post »

Three book signings have be set for my latest book, Bobby Jindal: His Destiny and Obsession.

Our first book signing will be this Saturday at 2 p.m. at Cavalier House Books in Denham Springs’ Antique Village. It’s the same store where I held my first book signing for my first book, Louisiana Rocks: The True Genesis of Rock & Roll.

Also on hand for this Saturday’s signing will be Del Hahn, author of Smuggler’s End: The Life and Death of Barry Seal. Hahn is the retired FBI agent who successfully pursued Seal. I had a small hand in the book as editor.

Before we go any further, it might be worthwhile to point out that my book about Jindal is not a powderpuff book in the mold of the two books by Jindal which probably resulted in his dislocating his shoulder from repeatedly patting himself on the back.

Please know that this book was undertaken and written in its entirety with zero collaboration or cooperation from anyone in the Jindal camp.

It’s the kind of book that result in my being removed from Jindal’s Christmas card list—had we ever been on that list, which we certainly were not.

This 294-page book is an examination that addresses several issues:

  • How did Jindal become a multi-millionaire after only three years in Congress?
  • Jindal’s claims of a new high standard of ethics are debunked by his own actions as governor.
  • Jindal’s claim of transparency is also belied by his penchant for secrecy.
  • His vindictive nature in firing or demoting anyone and everyone who dared disagree with him.
  • His awarding of prestigious board and commission memberships to big contributors.
  • His sorry record in protecting the state’s environment and the state’s coastline.
  • His mysterious deal to sell state hospitals via a contract containing 50 blank pages.
  • His single-handed destruction of higher education and health care.
  • His near-comical, yet pathetic candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination.

There is much, much more, of course, but you will have to get the book to read it.

Here is the current schedule for upcoming book signings:

  • Cavalier House Books in Denham Springs: Saturday, May 14, at 2 p.m.
  • The Winn Parish Library in Winnfield: Thursday, May 19, at 2 p.m.
  • Barnes and Noble Bookstore in Mandeville, Saturday, June 18, from 2 to 4 p.m.

This schedule will be updated as additional signings are scheduled.

Read Full Post »

 

Some things are difficult to understand.

Like, for instance, how voters returned State Rep. Nancy Landry (R-Lafayette) to the legislature for another term. Not only was she re-elected, but it was by a landslide. The only plausible explanation was that Bobby Jindal was running against her.

She received 85 percent of the vote in her district, which includes parts of Lafayette and Vermilion Parishes.

Public school teachers and their families alone, voting as a bloc in those two parishes, should have prevented that kind of mandate.

You see, Landry is on a one-person crusade to become Public Enemy Number One among school teachers. She has repeatedly pilloried teachers from her position in the legislature and now she has been named as chairperson of the House Education Committee. (Coincidentally, Denham Springs GOP Rep. Rogers Pope, a retired school superintendent and former Superintendent of the Year for Louisiana, stepped down from the committee about the same time Landry was elevated to the chairmanship.)

Why am I so critical of Landry?

Well, first, let’s go back to March 2012 when she opened proceedings by the committee by introducing a new rule that had never existed in House committee hearings. https://louisianavoice.com/2012/03/14/how-do-you-teague-a-legislator-ask-jindal-to-teague-a-teacher-just-change-the-committee-rules-for-witnesses/

The committee was hearing testimony on HB 976 by committee Chairman Stephen Carter (R-Baton Rouge) that would impose sweeping changes, including providing student scholarships for Jindal’s Educational Excellence Program, allow for parent petitions for certain schools to be transferred to the Recovery School District (RSD) and charter school authorization criteria.

Before debate began on the bill, Landry said she had received calls from “concerned constituents” to the effect that some teachers from districts that did not close schools for the day had taken a sick day in order to attend a rally of teachers opposed to Jindal’s education reform.

She neglected to mention, of course, that teachers are given 10 sick days per year, so if they want to use a sick day to attend a committee hearing in Baton Rouge, that’s their business and no one else’s. Moreover, if a teacher exceeds her 10 days during a school year, she is docked a full day’s pay at the teachers’s salary rate while the substitute teacher is paid a substitute’s salary, which is less.

Undaunted and undeterred by those facts, Landry made a motion that in addition to the customary practice of witnesses providing their names, where they are from and whom they represent, they be required to state if they were appearing before the committee in a “professional capacity or if they were on annual or sick leave.”

Democrats on the committee were livid. Then-Rep. John Bel Edwards (D-Amite) said he had never in his tenure in the House seen such a rule imposed on witnesses.

“This house (the Capitol) belongs to the people,” said Rep. Pat Smith (D-Baton Rouge) “and now we’re going to put them in a compromising position? This is an atrocity!”

Committee member Wesley Bishop (D-New Orleans) said, “I have one question: if we approve this motion and if a witness declines to provide that information, will that witness be prohibited from testifying?”

Carter, momentarily taken aback, held a hastily whispered conference before turning back to the microphone to say, “We cannot refuse anyone the opportunity to testify.”

That appeared to make Landry’s motion a moot point but she persisted and the committee ended up approving her motion by a 10-8 vote that was reflective of the 11-6 Republican-Democrat (with one Independent) makeup of the committee.

Edwards lost no time in getting in a parting shot on the passage of the new rule.

Then-Gov. Bobby Jindal was the first to testify and upon completion of his testimony, Edwards observed that no one on the committee appeared overly concerned of whether or not the governor was on annual or sick leave.

Jindal, who had entered the committee room late and knew nothing of the debate and subsequent vote on Landry’s motion, bristled at Edwards, saying, “I’m here as governor.”

Now fast-forward to yesterday (Tuesday, May 3) and once again we have Landry going for teachers’ jugulars. http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=980632

A substitute bill for House Bill 392 by Landry cleared the committee without objection and will now move to the full House for consideration but there are a couple of points that need to be made about the provisions of the bill that committee members may have failed to consider—or simply ignored.

Landry wants to pile on the 2012 law, Act 1, under which pay for teachers and other employees may be cut. She wants to impose salary cuts when teachers’ and other employees’ working hours are reduced. She said that Lafayette Parish had cases in which educators successfully sued the school board over pay cuts when they were moved from 12-month jobs to nine-month jobs. http://theadvocate.com/news/15675829-64/new-provision-for-teacher-pay-cuts-clears-house-panel

Historically, teachers have had the option of being paid a lower monthly salary extended over 12 months or higher a monthly salary on nine months. The annual salary was the same either way.

In the Lafayette case, two teachers who were displaced by the closure of their charter school for high-risk students sued and won back pay when their schedules were reduced from 244 days to 182 days. One of the teachers saw her salary cut from $80,104 to $60,214 while the second was cut from $74,423 to $56,207. Both cuts of about 25 percent coincided with the fewer number of days. http://theadvocate.com/news/11060641-123/appeals-court-sides-with-teachers

On the surface, the bill makes perfect sense. As is the case most of the time, however, one needs to look beyond the obvious for answers.

And when you do, you will find that no teacher ever simply works 182 days. That is a myth and one that needs to be debunked once and for all.

Landry is an attorney specializing in family law. As such, she likely earns considerably more than the average teacher. But that’s okay; the teacher made a career choice, so that isn’t my sticking point. But like a teacher, she sees all manner of humanity parade through her office and while her hourly fee is the same for all, there are times I’m pretty sure that some clients should be charged significantly more per hour because of the difficulty in addressing their multitude of problems. An amicable divorce, for example, is a much easier case for Landry than one in which the parents fight over every child and every piece of property right down to the pet gerbil.

It’s the same for teachers. The child whose parents are attentive to his or her school work and who see to it that all homework assignments are completed correctly is a pleasure to teach.

The child who comes to school in clean cloths, on a full stomach, and well-rested after a good night’s sleep is not the problem.

The child whose lives in a two-parent household where the parents are not constantly fighting and screaming is generally a well-adjusted student who poses no problems in the classroom.

The child who is respectful to the teacher and who applies himself or herself in class work isn’t the one who causes disciplinary problems.

But that child whose parents are on crack or meth and who comes to school unprepared, unkempt, in filthy clothing, hungry, sleepy and angry at the world is a challenge to the teacher whose job it is to try and help that child keep up with the rest of the class—which, of course, only serves to slow the progress of the entire class.

If Rep. Landry would take the time to volunteer in an elementary or middle school classroom for one week, she would come away from the experience with an attitude adjustment. I guarantee it.

  • When she has to break up a schoolyard fight between middle school students who are just as likely to attack her physically, she will experience a world she has never known;
  • When she has to clean the behind of a first-grader in the restroom who is already wearing filthy underwear, she will get a taste of what elementary school teachers do—for 182 days a year;
  • When she has to attempt to explain the multiplication tables to a child who curses her, she will gain a new respect for teachers;
  • When she sees the hunger in the eyes of a malnourished child whose crack- and meth-addicted parents show up at parent-teacher conferences blaming the teacher for their own shortcomings, she will think about the difference—that abyss—between her fee and the salary paid a teacher;
  • When she has to stay up until midnight grading papers, she will wonder why the hell teachers aren’t paid more;
  • When she has to return to the classroom at the end of the school year to clean up her classroom, throw out old papers, prepare new lesson plans, prepare for the new school year and adjust to the constantly changing dictates of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, tasks that generally extend through most of the summer “vacation,” she will wonder why anyone would ever opt for teaching—without ever once considering that it is a calling, not a job, for those who have an unselfish desire to help children as they grow into adulthood;
  • When she must make that fateful decision, as did that teacher at Sandy Hook, to stand between an armed mentally deranged lunatic and a child so she can take the bullet that will end her life but spare the child in doing so, she will know what it’s like to enter the most honorable profession known to humanity.

When she does all that, maybe, just maybe, Rep. Nancy Landry will gain a new respect and appreciation for the sacrifice, dedication, hard work, and thankless job of educating our children.

Until then, she is just another politician with a kneejerk solution to perceived problems.

But as for me, I can honestly say that I struggled mightily in school and had it not been for at least a half-dozen of my high school teachers who took a direct interest in my well-being, nurtured my potential (what there was of it), and encouraged me to work a little harder, I truthfully do not know where I’d be today. I will carry my gratitude to those teachers to my grave.

Read Full Post »

How much does a legislator cost in Louisiana?

Certainly, that’s a loaded question, an ambush question, if you will.

Some go pretty cheap. Others not so much.

For the record, State Rep. Terry Brown (I-Colfax) says he is not for sale.

Brown, testifying before the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee last Wednesday in favor of House Bill 11, did what few legislators will ever do: he related payoff overtures he said were made by representatives of the target of the bill, Clean Harbors and its efforts to burn some two million pounds of explosives from Camp Minden in Webster Parish.

A massive explosion occurred at Camp Minden in October 2012, creating a mushroom cloud that loomed 7,000 feet over the town. That led to decision to burn 15 million pounds of explosives on open “burn trays” at the site.

That decision set off a firestorm of protests that involved citizens and officials from Baton Rouge to Washington and the plan was eventually scrapped in favor of moving the burn to the Clean Harbors location in Grant Parish where (surprise) the plan was met with an equally hostile reception.

Clean Harbors, Inc. was founded in Brockton, Massachusetts, in 1980 and has expanded to 400 locations, including more than 50 hazardous waste management facilities, in North America. Revenues for the company in 2016 totaled $3.28 billion, according to the Clean Harbors Web site. http://ir.cleanharbors.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=96527&p=irol-news&nyo=0

Clean Harbors in February withdrew its permit request to quadruple the amount it can burn at its facility located about five miles northwest of Colfax, although the company continued its open burning of explosives at the site. http://www.thetowntalk.com/story/news/local/2016/02/19/hb-11-next-battleground-colfax-open-burning/80565032/

HB 11, by Reps. Brown and Gene Reynolds (D-Minden), would prohibit open burning statewide as a method of disposal of explosive materials, such as those burned at Clean Harbors’ Colfax facility.

“…I was asked as a state representative by a person representing Clean Harbors, ‘What would it take for me to pull this bill?’” Brown testified. “They (Clean Harbors) started out by saying they would pay for our sewer system in South Grant Parish, that they would give my schools playground equipment, my Little League ball teams uniforms—and they would make me a part of it.

“Ladies and gentlemen of this panel, I am not for sale,” Brown said.

Here is the link to his testimony: http://house.louisiana.gov/H_Video/VideoArchivePlayer.aspx?v=house/2016/apr/0427_16_NR

It was a long committee meeting, lasting just more than five hours. To get to Brown’s testimony, move the cursor below the video to 3:04:30.

The bill barely made it through the committee by a 9-8 vote and will be debated on the House floor on Wednesday.

Representatives voting against the bill in its amended form were Committee Chairman Stuart Bishop (R-Lafayette), James Armes (D-Leesville), Jean-Paul Coussan (R-Lafayette), Phillip DeVillier (R-Eunice), John Guinn (R-Jennings), Christopher Leopold (R-Belle Chasse), Jack McFarland (R-Jonesboro), and Blake Miquez (R-Erath).

Amendments to the bill http://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=998279 included a self-defeating provision allowing the Secretary of the Department of Natural Resources to authorize open burning of munitions or waste explosives by the military or by state police and one that would make the effective date of the bill January 1, 2018, which would allow continued burning for an additional 18 months.

Read Full Post »

I have been accused of “intellectual laziness” by one of our readers.

That comment came after I posted my last story about Billy Nungesser’s negating 18 writs of mandamus filed over his failure to take certain actions and to produce public documents requested by the Plaquemines Parish Council in 2010 during the time he served as Parish President. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/04/26/insight-into-nungesser-disregard-for-laws-revealed-in-his-blatant-disregard-for-public-records-demands-other-actions/

“Must be a slow news week,” said the writer, who identified himself only as “Who Cares.” He went on to say, “Reporting on topics six years old is intellectual laziness.”

Well, Who Cares, or whatever your real name is (probably a political ally or even Nungesser himself), it really wasn’t intellectual laziness, but an effort to let readers know the type individual who now holds the second-highest elective office in state government.

The point of that story was to illustrate the past may well be prologue (to borrow a phrase from Shakespeare’s The Tempest…or was it that 1967 episode of Ironside?), i.e. if he was capable of such abuse of office then, who’s to say he won’t attempt the same type shenanigans as lieutenant governor?

Oops, sorry. We almost forgot: he already has. https://louisianavoice.com/2016/04/12/louisiana-has-a-new-clown-prince-but-its-egg-not-a-pie-all-over-lt-gov-nungessers-face-after-succession-of-blunders/

So, Who Cares, there was a relevance to the post and if you thought that was old news, read on.

Precisely five years ago today (April 28, 2011) Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell sent quite a testy letter to Nungesser who at the time was ramping up his first run for lieutenant governor barely six months after his October 2010 re-election as Parish President.

And lest anyone think our rehashing of Campbell’s five-year-old letter is an endorsement for his election to the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by David Vitter, it’s not. We have not and do not intend to make an endorsement in that race.

But Campbell took Nungesser to task for his political exploitation of the BP Deepwater Horizon explosion in the Gulf of Mexico and for his failure to take the lead in coastal restoration prior to that disaster.

Here is Campbell’s letter in its entirety:

            I received your letter on your thoughts of running for Lieutenant Governor. You wrote that you have been busy helping Plaquemines Parish and our state to recover from Hurricane Katrina and the BP oil spill. You described “struggles with federal bureaucrats” and your amazement that a foreign company (British Petroleum) would be put in charge of cleaning up the spill.

            You’ve concluded that you can do the most good for Louisiana by leading the effort to rebuild our image as Lieutenant Governor. You asked for my opinion, so here it is:

            I wrote to you and all Louisiana elected officials after watching you and Gov. Jindal on national television following the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil well. You and the governor were taking every media opportunity to express your anger at BP and the federal government.

            My question then, and now as well, was: Where have you been?

            You have been leader since 2007 of the parish that is Ground Zero for coastal erosion, and yet, I have heard not a word from you about the part played by other “foreign” and multinational oil companies in damaging Louisiana’s coast.

            Louisiana political leaders have known for years that oil and gas production has contributed heavily to the destruction of our marshes. It is also well-established that the force of Katrina which ravaged Plaquemines Parish and southeast Louisiana, was heightened by the loss of our barrier islands to erosion.

            The silence of you, Gov. Jindal and other elected officials from coastal Louisiana is deafening when it comes to asking major oil companies to pay for the damage they’ve caused. Your later father (William Nungesser), who (sic) I knew well, worked for the only statewide politician to make such a demand, Gov. Dave Treen. He was absolutely right.

            As destructive as it has been, the BP oil spill is minor compared to the devastation of coastal erosion which costs Louisiana a football field of land every hour. Maybe it is easier to go on CNN and rant about BP and a federal government perceived as unpopular in Louisiana than to stand up to powerful corporations doing harm to our coastline.

            I have written to you, Mr. Jindal, Mr. Vitter, Ms. (U.S. Sen. Mary) Landrieu, Mr. (U.S. Rep. Steve) Scalise, and others on this issue and I never get a reply. Maybe when you run for Lieutenant Governor, you can tell the rest of the story. I would welcome a frank discussion with you on Katrina, BP, coastal erosion and the oil industry. Let’s ask Tulane to host an event in New Orleans. Let’s determine who owes who (sic) for what. I look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

Foster Campbell

Public Service Commissioner

 C: Louisiana Elected Officials

     Prof. Oliver Houck (Tulane University Law School)

No further comment seems necessary.

 

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »