Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Transparency’ Category

Jindal reveals only polls that favor him but diregards fact that polling company OnMessage is ‘OnPayroll’ for $1.2M

Posted in Governor's Office, Politicians, Transparency on August 20, 2013| 13 Comments »

There are only two ways to describe political polls if you are a candidate who turns up in one.

If the poll favors the candidate, it’s a trend—sometimes a significant trend. If not, the numbers are meaningless.

But for pure spin, there seems to be no one who can top Gov. Bobby Jindal and his treatment of the latest numbers is merely another illustration of his ability to taint, distort, twist and skew data to his political advantage.

Harsh words? Of course, but sadly accurate. We have seen over and over his willingness to tout to the point of ad nauseam the latest survey that shows Louisiana with a favorable business climate or some such statistic that, taken as a stand-alone point, would favor his administration. Disregarded, ignored and unpublicized are other, more credible studies that show Louisiana wallowing in obesity and poverty, its citizens existing in an environmental morass and in a state with one of the highest percentages of residents without health insurance.

We have seen him pop up immediately at the site of a natural crisis of one of someone else’s making, as with the BP spill or the recent derailment in Lawtell in St. Landry Parish. Yet, it literally took months and a chorus of demands from area residents to convince him to finally visit that ever-expanding sinkhole near the Assumption Parish community of Bayou Corne, a crisis precipitated in part by permits issued by his own Department of Natural Resources.

But now we have two separate political polls—both by political conservative organizations—that show vastly different results. One shows his approval rating hovering around 50 percent while the other has him at an abysmal 35 percent—one of the lowest rankings of any governor in the history of Louisiana.

Others, it turns out, have also written about the conflicting polls. http://www.bayoubuzz.com/buzz/item/521755-jindal-poll-pipeline-is-louisiana-governor-at-50-or-35-percent

http://cenlamar.com/2013/08/20/gop-poll-if-bobby-jindal-ran-for-president-hillary-cli/

So which poll does he choose to hype? Silly question. Of course, he trots out the one reflecting a 50 percent approval rating, boasting of the impressive 12-point increase from an April poll. Surely, the rebound must reflect strong public support for his policies in education reform, budget slashing, hospital privatization, health care and massive employee layoffs. Right?

Not so fast.

Never mentioned (by the Jindal folks, anyway) is the fact that the 50 percent approval rating was the result of a poll by OnMesssage of Alexandria, VA.

OnMessage. Sound familiar? It should. It was OnMessage that hired one Timmy Teepell to head up its Southern operations in Baton Rouge—except there was never a Baton Rouge address or telephone number in Baton Rouge for the company and Teepell’s Jeep has remains parked in the back lot of the State Capitol since his hiring.

Despite recent rumors of OnMessage’s dissatisfaction with Teepell’s failure to attract clients for the political consulting firm, there is the matter of some $1.2 million that can’t be ignored when considering those rosy OnMessage poll results.

That’s the amount that Jindal’s Believe in Louisiana non-profit, tax-exempt propaganda machine paid OnMessage through last September. That figure included $456,551 paid in March of 2012, ostensibly for polling and research.

It’s enough to make one wonder how much Jindal (or Believe in Louisiana) paid OnMessage for the latest good news.

If one knew no better, it would appear a question of professional honor when OnMessage partner Curt Anderson challenged last April’s poll by Bernie Pinsonat which showed Jindal’s approval rate at 37 percent.

But Pinsonat was quick to point out the close relationship. “He (Anderson) works for Jindal. I do not. I would expect him to defend his client,” he said.

OnMessage also seemed to bolster Jindal’s rejection of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). The OnMessage poll showed that 62 percent opposed Obamacare.

The numbers should come as no surprise considering that more than 86 percent of those polled have health insurance.

Yet, at 17.8 percent, Louisiana has the second highest percentage of citizens with no health insurance. It would have been interesting to see the poll results had a greater number of non-insured residents been included in the sampling. But isn’t it interesting that even with 86 percent of those polled having health insurance, only 62 percent opposed Obamacare?

Without cozying up to any candidate, suffice it to say we all know polls can be constructed as to produce almost any desired results. A recent example is an automated, or robocall poll with questions so obviously couched to favor Congressman Bill Cassidy over incumbent U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu as to be laughable. I received one of the poll’s calls and while I usually hang up, for some reason I stayed on the line and completed the poll.

Given the manner in which the questions were phrased, it would have been difficult for the most die-hard, Yellow Dog Democrat not to have bared his fangs at Landrieu. So, it was no surprise two days later when the poll results tilted in favor of Cassidy.

Still, it is worth noting that last April Pinsonat’s poll, commissioned by conservative Baton Rouge businessman Lane Grigsby, showed Jindal trailing Obama by five points—in Louisiana.

Even more interesting is another poll last week, by Harper Polling for Conservative Intel (that’s the one that has Jindal at a 35 percent approval rating) said that Jindal, occasionally mentioned (but often by the day) as a 2016 presidential contender, “has some work to do back home first.”

That poll, in a hypothetical 2016 presidential matchup, has Hillary Clinton beating Jindal by 44 to 42 percent—again, in Louisiana.

Losing to both Obama and Clinton on his home turf should be humiliating to Jindal but because has insulated himself in some sort of impenetrable buffer that apparently shields him from bad news, he bravely soldiers on, grabbing any and every opportunity to speak to conservative groups outside (but never in) Louisiana.

Still, it is interesting to read some of the comments at the bottom of online news stories about the Boy Blunder:

  • His political star is falling…handicapped by an intellectual base little different from that of the John Birch Society of the 1950s and ‘60s.
  • It is hard to see any of the current GOP presidential contenders righting the GOP ship when none of the contenders have both oars in the water.
  • He is a member of the stupid party.
  • But he’s a legend in his own mind.
  • He’s the only one who thinks he’s all that.
  • Poor Piyush! Like most TeaPots and GOPers, the more their constituents get to know them, the more their constituents despise them.
  • Look at his state; do you want that for your state?

Read Full Post »

LSU releases LSUMC-BRF CEA: terms leave State on financial hook, claims immunity from legal challenges

Posted in Boards, Contract, Contracts, Governor's Office, Health Care, Higher Education, LSU, Privatization, Public Records, Transparency on August 16, 2013| 18 Comments »

Those blank pages in the LSU Medical Center/E.A. Conway Medical Center contract for the takeover of the two facilities by a Shreveport research foundation have finally been filled in but questions nevertheless remain as to the validity of the document.

The one thing it does do with near certainty is to guarantee lots of legal work for attorneys down the road when the disagreements begin—as they almost assuredly will because of both the wording and issues over whether there even is a contract.

It also would appear to transfer both hospitals’ accounts receivable—potentially tens of millions of dollars—to BRF, as the agreement stipulates that LSU shall transfer “all assets” to lessee.

The contract, officially entitled Cooperative Endeavor Agreement (CEA) by and among Biomedical Research Foundation of Northwest Louisiana (BRF), BRF Hospital Holdings (BRFHH), Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State university, the State of Louisiana through the Division of Administration (DOA) and the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH), was provided to LouisianaVoice by LSU on Friday (Aug. 16) pursuant to LouisianaVoice’s public records request earlier in the week.

A companion document, the Master Hospital Lease Agreement, provided along with the CEA, calls for the lessee, BRFHH, to pay the state $38,763,891.38 per year in 12 monthly payments of just more than $3.23 million.

One caveat of the contract which would appear to leave the state on the hook financially is the provision that in the event the state’s required Medicaid per diem payments should appear to be inadequately funded, DHH “shall immediately notify BRFHH” and both the Commissioner of Administration and DHH would be required to seek additional appropriations from the Legislature.

There is no such provision for increased state Medicaid payments to any other medical facility in Louisiana and in fact, many hospitals across the state are in the midst of wholesale layoffs of medical personnel because of Medicaid cutbacks by the Jindal administration. Such cutbacks are placing a heavy strain on already overworked nurses, technicians and other medical employees and many doctors are refusing to accept new Medicaid patients as a result of the state cutbacks.

But even more questionable is the legality of the CEA itself.

The LSU Board of Supervisors on May 28 approved the private takeover of four LSU hospitals—LSU Medical Center (LSUMC) in Shreveport, E.A. Conway Medical Center in Monroe, W.O. Moss Medical Center in Lake Charles and Leonard J. Chabert Medical Center in Houma.

The only problem with that approval was the board approved contracts for each of the four hospitals which contained nearly 50 blank pages, omitting financial terms, the length of the leases involved and a termination clause.

All contracts, to have any legal standing whatsoever, must plainly state an offer and an acceptance (financial terms), dates (length of leases in this case) and a termination clause. None of those were contained in the approved documents.

Even more questionable, it would seem, is a stipulation under “Representations and Warranties of the State,” which says in part:

  • This agreement and any and all agreements, documents or instruments to which the State, through DOA and DHH, is a party and which are executed and delivered by the State pursuant to this agreement constitute the legal, valid and binding obligations of the State, through DOA and DHH, enforceable against the state in accordance with its terms.
  • DOA and DHH have the absolute and unrestricted right, power and authority to execute and deliver this agreement and such other agreement, documents or instruments to which it is a party on behalf of the State and to perform obligations on behalf of the state under this agreement and such other agreements (and) documents.
  • Neither the execution and delivery of this agreement nor the consummation or performance of any of the contemplated transactions hereby will, directly or indirectly, with or without notice or lapse of time…give any governmental body or other person the right to validly challenge any of the contemplated transactions, or to exercise any remedy or obtain any relief under any legal requirement to which the State, DHH or DOA may be subject.

In other words, the contract claims that no governmental entity or individual has any legal rights insofar as mounting any challenge to the agreement by lawsuit or otherwise.

That would appear to be a particularly difficult stipulation to enforce given the fact that the contract may well not be a legal document in light of those nearly 50 blank pages.

Another curious section of the contract which addresses Medicare and Medicaid Certification, the CEA says, “With respect to the hospitals, LSU has met and does meet, without material exception, the conditions for the participation in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and LSU does not have knowledge of any pending or threatened proceeding or investigation under such programs involving the hospitals or any basis for the revocation or limitation on such participation.”

A June 26 letter from the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services, however, said the state has not submitted the required state plan amendments (SPA) proposing to fund Medicaid payments through the agreements “and CMS cannot offer former determination as to whether the arrangements would conflict with the requirements described in the Social Security Act. Once the state submits the SPAs, CMS will request necessary supporting documentation and explanations from the state to demonstrate compliance with these provisions of the statute and regulations,” the letter said.

As recently as Tuesday of this week (Aug. 13) a CMS spokesman told LouisianaVoice by email there were “no updates at this time.”

The CEA said that LSU and BRFHH would, after the Oct. 1 execution date of the agreement, jointly submit the proper forms to CMS.

But Bill Brooks, associate regional administrator for the CMS Division of Medicaid and Children’s Health Operations in Dallas, said last January that whenever documents are submitted to CMS, the process starts a “90-day clock,” during which time his office may pose additional questions. A new 90-day clock would begin when his office receives satisfactory responses to his requests.

Thusly, so long as the state fails to satisfactorily answer all questions and provide adequate documentation, the 90-day clock could conceivably run indefinitely. And that would be bad because if CMS disapproved an amendment submitted by the state, “there would be no federal dollars provided for the changes proposed” in the agreement.

Another provision in the agreement says that the Department of Corrections (DOC) is responsible for paying BRFHH for medical care provided state prisoners should DOC suspend payments for any reason, the state would have to find “alternative sources of medically necessary health care” for prisoners.

Though the agreement requires that all LSU Hospital employees shall be offered employment by BRFHH, the agreement says they “shall be employed subject to terms and conditions established by BRFHH”—meaning potentially lower wages and fewer benefits. At the same time the agreement also holds LSU liable for state employee expenses such as unemployment benefits, wages and benefits for “past, present and future employees of LSU.”

One other clause, this one contained in the lease agreement, warrants particular attention because of the failure to enforce an identical clause in another state agency privatization contract in 2010:

“Lessee (BRFHH) shall not assign this lease or any interest therein without the prior written consent of lessor” and “may not sublease all or any portion of the leased premises without the prior written consent of lessor.”

In 2010, the state contracted with F.A. Richard and Associates (FARA) to take over operations of the Louisiana Office of Risk Management (ORM) at a cost to the state of just over $68 million. Less than eight months later, ORM and DOA agreed to a 10 percent amendment to that contract, bumping the state’s cost to $75 million. Within weeks, FARA sold its interests to an Ohio company which in turn sold out to a New York firm—all within the first year of the contract.

A similar “prior written approval” clause was contained in the contract with FARA but when LouisianaVoice made a public records request for the written approval, DOA responded that no such document existed.

That, naturally, would raise the question of whether or not DOA would enforce that stipulation in this contract or not.

The lease agreement does give BRF the authority to lease to a “non-profit corporation, a limited liability company, limited liability partnership or other non-profit legal entity wholly owned or controlled by lessee or Biomedical Research Foundation of Northwest Louisiana.” That, of course, would be BRFHH, a non-profit entity “wholly owned” by BRF.

Finally, a clause in the CEA which might otherwise be overlooked, takes on significant importance in that “financial and other records created by, for or otherwise belonging to BRF or BRFHH shall remain in the possession, custody and control of BRF and BRFHH, respectively,” and such records would be considered “proprietary to BRF and BRFHH” and “such records shall be clearly marked as confidential and/or proprietary,” and thus protected from the Louisiana public records laws.

This could be crucial inasmuch as questions have arisen as to the financial viability of BRF, a non-profit organization that depends heavily on grant money, much of it from the state, for its operations. BRF has no experience in operating a facility like the two medical centers it is being contracted to run and skeptics feel it also does not have the financial resources to be successful in that endeavor.

Adding to the aura of mystique is the reported sighting of former DHH Secretary Bruce Greenstein having lunch in a Shreveport restaurant with BRF Board Chairman Stephen Skrivanos recently. BRF CEO/President Dr. John George was also reported to have been in that meeting but he has publicly denied he was present and has threatened Shreveport political consultant Elliott Stonecipher with a libel lawsuit over the reports of his attendance.

George, in addition to being the CEO and President of BRF, is also a member of the LSU Board of Supervisors which approved the agreement with BRF but Jindal has claimed there was no conflict of interests in George’s serving in the two capacities.

What makes all this so intriguing is that Greenstein resigned in the wake of an ongoing federal investigation into a $187 million DHH contract with CNSI, his former employer. Greenstein assured legislators at his confirmation hearings in 2012 that he had erected a “firewall” between him and CNSI to ensure there would be no contact with his old company during the contractor selection process. Emails and phone records subpoenaed by the committee, however, revealed Greenstein was in constant contact with CNSI officials throughout the selection process.

Even though he quickly announced his “resignation” following news of the FBI probe, he was allowed to remain on the job a month before vacating his office. He subsequently moved back to Seattle but recently showed up in Shreveport with Skrivanos.

Adding fuel to the fires of speculation was the appearance at the State Capitol a few months ago by Alan Levine, Greenstein’s predecessor at DHH.

With the blank contract, questionable financial abilities of BRF (in some minds), the mysterious appearances of Greenstein and Levine, the defensive reaction of George to the report of meeting with Greenstein even to the point of a threatened lawsuit, and potential conflict of interest of George serving as head of BRF which was approved to take over two major hospitals by an LSU board on which he sits, there is plenty of room for speculation and conspiracy theories.

Had the federal investigation into the CNSI contract not surfaced, who knows what direction this plot may have taken?

That’s especially true given the lack of transparency and openess in this administration.

Read Full Post »

Walton Foundation trumpets TFA donations; ignores $96.5 million in LA. tax breaks to sustain Bangladesh sweat shops

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, BESE, Charters, Contract, Contracts, Education, Exemptions, Incentives, Governor's Office, Grant, Grants, Jobs, Privatization, Taxes, Transparency on August 12, 2013| 17 Comments »

BATON ROUGE (CNS)—The Walton Family Foundation, already the largest single donor to Teach for America (TFA), recently committed an additional $20 million to recruit, train and place an another 4,000 unqualified teachers in America’s classrooms.

That includes $3 million to the New Orleans region, administered by one Kira Orange Jones who sits on the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) which just happens to be the agency that contracts with TFA for those novice teachers.

In case you live in a cave, the Walton Family Foundation is the benevolent offshoot of Wal-Mart, one of the most successful retail businesses in American history but which is alone responsible for the demise of more neighborhood mom and pop stores than any one factor since the Great Depression—all while enjoying the benefit of almost $100 million in various tax breaks in 19 Louisiana cities, according to incomplete figures that do not include newer state stores.

More on that later.

The Louisiana Board of Ethics, apparently kept in the dark as to Jones’ title of Executive Director of the New Orleans TFA regional office, ruled that her serving on BESE was not a conflict because her salary was not affected by the contracts with the state.

The ethics board member—its vice chairman—who lulled the board into believing she was a mere rank and file employee of TFA, has since resigned after it was revealed that he had his own conflict as a legal counsel for Tulane University which also had a contract with TFA.

LouisianaVoice recently obtained through a public records request of the Department of Education (DOE) copies of three separate contracts between DOE’s Recovery School District (RSD) and TFA. Two of those contracts, dated in September of 2009 and 2011, were signed by Kira Orange Jones, complete with the notation beneath her signature identifying her as “Executive Director.”

Exercising a bit more caution in 2012, the contract was signed by Michael Tipton, Jones’ boss.

Those contracts, by the way, called for the state to pay TFA up to $5,000 per teacher provided for RSD—up to 40 teachers—and RSD would then be required to pay their salaries.

TFA alumnus Jack Carey, vice president of the greater New Orleans program said the money would fund more than 500 positions in the 2013 to 2015 school years, though with the state paying that generous “finder’s fee,” and local school boards paying the salaries, it’s rather difficult to imagine why an additional $3 million is needed other than to surmise the whole TFA thing is one gigantic scam designed to line someone’s pockets. That “someone” would be someone other than Louisiana teachers who have invested thousands of dollars on bachelor’s, master’s, and plus-30s and even Ph.Ds., but suddenly find themselves taking a back seat to those who train for five weeks over the summer to become teachers.

But it’s not only established teachers who take a dim view of TFA. Many of TFA’s own alumni are critical of the organization to which they once pledged their loyalty.

http://truth-out.org/articles/item/17750-teach-for-america-apostates-a-primer-of-alumni-resistance

One former TFA teacher now says that the organization glosses over issues of race and inequality but “fits very nicely into an overall strategy of privatizing education and diminishing critical thinking.”

Whenever a TFA teacher begins to questions the motives and intent of the program, “The staff would get together and talk about how to handle these people,” another former TFA member says. “They’d plunk him down with groups of ‘stronger corps members’ to improve his attitude” by “trying to further indoctrinate others and myself.”

Yet another dissident said he no longer recognized TFA. “All I see is a bunch of liars who are getting themselves rich and powerful. They just can’t stop lying.” He added that TFA refuses to recognize established evidence that a child’s socioeconomic level at birth better predicts his future tax bracket and educational attainment than how well her teachers prepare him for standardized tests.

“We really get to know what schools across our community need in the way of high-quality teachers,” Carey said, “and we work with them over the course of a year to understand their needs and help make great matches.”

Wow. How noble.

But perhaps Mr. Carey has not taken a trip down to the Ninth Ward to George Washington Carver High School.

I have.

Has Kira Orange Jones toured Carver High?

I have.

Washington Carver High School is the alma mater of Marshall Faulk, Heisman Trophy runner-up at San Diego State and all-pro running back for the Indianapolis Colts and St. Louis Rams (where he won a Super Bowl).

But you’d never know it.

Eight years after Hurricane Katrina devastated the entire Ninth Ward, the school still has not been rebuilt. Today, it consists entirely of T-buildings. Superintendent of Education John White’s annual report, released last February, lists Carver as among the schools scheduled for new construction. Even though the proposed construction is to be funded by the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA), no steps have actually been taken to start construction other than the naming of two architectural firms. No contractor, though, eight years post-Katrina.

The football weight room is pathetic, consisting of three or four weight benches any other school would have thrown out years ago. There is no cover for the foam padding on the benches—padding that is crumbling. And the players’ lockers consist of plastic bins scattered across the floor—easy pickings for anyone who wanted to steal a watch or an i-Pod.

No one visiting the T-building weight room would ever believe that an NFL Super Bowl player once escaped the Desire Housing Project by playing his high school ball here.

Despite these conditions, George Washington Carver made it to the quarter-final round of the state high school football playoffs last year.

But far worse than the deplorable athletic facilities eight years post-Katrina is the fact that incredulous as it may sound, the school has no library.

Let that sink in. There is a public high school in Louisiana today that does not have a library.

Yet John White and Bobby Jindal and BESE President Chas Roemer would have us believe they’re all about education.

Gov. Jindal, Superintendent White, Chas Roemer, BESE member/TFA Director Kira Jones: what say you to the revelation that a public high school has allowed to exist under your watch that has no library? A school comprised exclusively of T-buildings? We’d love to hear your take on this. But please don’t hide behind Kyle Plotkin or your respective public relations sycophants in your response. (Surely is quiet; are those crickets we hear chirping?)

And so the Walton Family Foundation goes about with its press releases that glorify its generosity on behalf of education.

In truth, the Walton Family Foundation is all about the Waltons. TFA is simply the vehicle by which the Waltons try to put on their civic face. They are probably among the least civic minded of all.

Remember those patriotic television ads of a few years back when Wal-Mart was all about “American made” products? How long has it been since you’ve seen one of those ads? But we do hear about Bangladesh sweat shops collapsing on workers even as they turn out products for Wal-Mart.

And we hear plenty about how Wal-Mart exploits its U.S. workers with low wages and no benefits—all so it can keep corporate earnings up and competition out.

Wal-Mart is all about tax credits and making money. Here are 20 examples of economic development subsidies in 19 Louisiana cities, subsidies that total $96.5 million (the figures are probably higher because it’s virtually impossible to get updated figures from the Louisiana Department of Economic Development):

  • Abbeville: $1.665 million;
  • Alexandria: $2.5 million;
  • Bossier City: $1.7 million;
  • East Baton Rouge: $1.385 million;
  • Hammond: $1.365 million;
  • Monroe (Supercenter): $840,000;
  • Monroe (former discount store) $3.09 million;
  • Natchitoches: $1.5 million;
  • New Orleans: $7 million (estimate);
  • Opelousas (distribution center): $33 million;
  • Port Allen: $1 million;
  • Robert (distribution center): more than $21 million;
  • Ruston: more than $947,000;
  • Shreveport: $6.3 million;
  • St. Martinville: $3.725 million;
  • Sulphur: $1.8 million;
  • Vidalia: up to $1.65 million.

Wal-Mart’s expansion has been made possible to a large extent by the generous use of public money. This includes more than $1.2 billion in tax breaks, free land, infrastructure assistance, low-cost financing and outright grants from state and local governments, though the precise figures aren’t always available.

That’s because in Ruston, for example, the total subsidy was more than $947,000. That included a $647,000 enterprise zone tax break, plus $300,000 from the city in infrastructure improvements around the site through a state grant. But the city also made $12 million in road improvements throughout the area through a sales tax increment financing district. But since the district includes neighboring developments and because other area businesses benefitted from the road improvements, the benefits to Wal-Mart were impossible to quantify.

In addition, Louisiana Wal-Mart stores also receive about $5.4 million a year from a state policy that allows stories to keep a portion of the sales tax they collect from customers.

So, while the Walton Family Foundation gives itself a metaphoric pat on the back with its news release trumpeting its $20 million gift to TFA ($3 million allocated to Louisiana), it conveniently ignores how it has managed more than a billion dollars in tax dodges (nearly $100 million in Louisiana)—money that could have been used to support education.

Like perhaps permanent buildings, including a library, at George Washington Carver High School.

Read Full Post »

Difference in Jindal’s 2012 retirement ‘reform’ and these retirement gigs brings double standard into sharp focus

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, Boards, Civil Service, Congress, GOHSEP, Governor's Office, Health Care, House, Senate, Layoffs, Legislature, Legislators, Transparency on August 10, 2013| 13 Comments »

BATON ROUGE (CNS)—You may recall Gov. Bobby Jindal’s ill-fated retirement “reform” bills of 2012, all written by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and introduced individually by Jindal’s lackeys in the House and Senate.

An example of how those “reforms” would have worked if passed can be found in the case of a single state employee whom we know but who is representative of thousands of state civil service workers.

In her case, she was (and still is, given that no civil service pay raises have been approved for five years now) making $52,000 per year and had 20 years’ service in 2012 (21 now). Her plan was to put in 30 years and retire. At her current pay, with no pay raises for the remainder of her career (which appears more likely with each year of the Jindal administration), she would retire at $39,000 per year. With inflation and no raises taken into account, $39,000 a year won’t go very far.

Had Jindal’s “reforms” passed, however, her annual retirement would have been reduced to $6,000 per year—a $33,000 per-year hit. And state employees do not pay into nor do they receive Social Security benefits. Six thousand dollars per year for 30 years’ service. Period.

And she was not an anomaly; stories like this would have been the case throughout state government.

Jindal claimed his retirement package was aimed at restoring the various state retirement systems to some semblance of stability by reducing the unfunded liabilities. But rather than continue to pay the state’s share of contributions to the systems those payments were actually reduced.

The bottom line is Jindal has complete and total disdain for the plight of those in the trenches—the ones who actually make state government work by showing up for work each day (which is certainly more than he does, given his extensive travel itinerary) and listening to the complaints of hostile citizens who don’t understand why they have so much difficulty getting the services they need—from road repairs to college and university infrastructure repair to services for the developmentally disabled where the waiting list is 10,000 persons—and growing. http://theadvocate.com/news/6739937-123/la-officials-try-to-shrink

And he’s made their job much harder by laying off rank and file employees while fattening the unclassified (appointed, non-civil service) payroll.

At the same time, he has been careful to take care of favored legislators with six-figure, do-nothing jobs which serve only to beef up their retirement benefits, some by more than tenfold.

LouisianaVoice, with the information available, did a before and after calculation of retirement benefits for several of those washed up legislators and local politicians. All calculations were based on the assumption they will remain in their new lofty positions at least three years. Here is what we found:

  • Former Rep. Jane Smith, by virtue of her appointment by Jindal to Deputy Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Revenue at a yearly salary of $107,500, saw her retirement benefits climb from a modest $6,700 a year to $56,400 annually.
  • Former Rep. Kay Katz, appointed to the Louisiana Tax Commission at a $56,000 yearly salary will go from $6,700 per year to $29,400 a year in retirement benefits.
  • Troy Hebert who left the House to assume directorship of the State Alcohol and Tobacco Control Board, went from $4,500 to $37,500.
  • Lane Carson, who recently retired as Secretary of the Louisiana Office of Veterans Affairs at $130,000 after five years on the job will retire at nearly $64,000 instead of about $7,500 on the basis of his service in the legislature.
  • Former St. Tammany Parish President and now Director of the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness (GOHSEP) at $165,000 and former St. Bernard Parish President Craig Taffaro, now the $150,000 Director of Hazard Mitigation and Recovery are only guesses. Because we are unsure of their previous salaries or their tenure in office, we have arbitrarily given them 15-year tenures (including their current positions) which put their retirement at $85,000 and $75,000, respectively—estimates both.
  • Former State Sen. Robert Barham saw his modest $7,500 legislative retirement balloon to $84,500 on the basis of his $124,000-a-year position as Secretary of the Louisiana Office of Wildlife and Fisheries.
  • We already wrote about Congressman Rodney Alexander who is leaving Congress to accept Lane Carson’s former position as Secretary of the Louisiana Office of Veterans Affairs at $130,000, a comfortable position that will boost his retirement from 15 years in the Louisiana Legislature prior to his election to Congress from $7,500 to $83,500.
  • But the grand prize goes to former State Rep. Noble Ellington. His 16 years in the House earned him a pension of about $8,900 but his hiring by Commissioner of Insurance Jim Donelon (at the behest of Jindal—his fingerprints are all over this appointment) as Deputy Commissioner of Insurance brought his retirement to almost $100,000 ($99,750).

Smith, Katz, Hebert, Carson, Barham, Alexander and Ellington qualify or will qualify for a combined retirement of more than $455,000 per year—an increase of $395,700 (667 percent) over their pre-Jindal appointment collective annual legislative retirement incomes of $59,300.

Now we harken back to Jindal’s aborted retirement “reform” which would have reduced our friend’s retirement from $39,000 to $6,000. On contrasting the two scenarios, one must ask, “What’s wrong with this picture?”

What is wrong is we have a governor who is just as slick and oily with the filthy ooze of dirty politics as any governor in the history of this state—while cloaking himself in the mantel of righteousness.

What is wrong is we have a governor who knows how to enrich his friends and stick it to everyone else—while pretending to act in the best interests of the state.

What is wrong is that we have a governor who entered Congress in January of 2005 as a man of modest means but emerged three years later as governor a multi-millionaire—and no one has asked how that happened.

What is wrong is that we have a governor who has demonstrated repeatedly that he has no compassion for the sick, the elderly, the developmentally disadvantaged, the mentally ill, state workers—and certainly not Louisiana citizens in general.

And what is wrong is we have a governor who does all that while hiding behind a façade of honesty, integrity, transparency and a “gold standard” of governmental ethics.

And now that same governor is attempting to call the shots in the election to fill the unexpired term of Rodney Alexander by promoting his puppet State Sen. Neil Riser (R-Columbia) for Congress. He did this by manipulating (a) the timing of Alexander’s retirement, (b) his immediate offer of a cushy job to Alexander, (c) turning over former Chief of Staff Timmy Teepell and chief fundraiser Allie Bautsch to work on Riser’s behalf, and (d) sewing up endorsements from State Sen. Mike Walsworth (R-West Monroe) and a host of Louisiana Republic congressmen, including former Payday Loan magnate John Fleming of Minden.

We in Louisiana are used to being conned by crooked politicians but they did it with so much more class than Jindal and his gaggle of sycophants.

Read Full Post »

Jindal minions use Twitter to attack pesky bloggers who dare criticize their boss but look like playground bullies instead

Posted in Education, Governor's Office, House, Senate, Legislature, Legislators, Politicians, Retirement, Transparency on August 9, 2013| 7 Comments »

It looks as though they’re starting to get really thin-skinned on the fourth floor of the State Capitol.

First it was Timmy Teepell, the alter-ego for Gov. Bobby Jindal, who engaged Bob Mann in a Twitter war of words over the ice purchased for Hurricane Isaac. You will remember that the bottom line price for the ice was $28 per 10-pound bag after paying $7.1 million that included “loitering time” for truck drivers, ice purchases and restocking fees—and then allowing the ice to melt in an unrefrigerated storage building in St. Tammany Parish.

Now, Jindal’s assistant chief of staff Kyle Plotkin has weighed in with a few tweets of his own to Mann and his comments smack of juvenile playground retorts—not very dignified for someone who serves as Jindal’s public mouthpiece. Also not very mature for someone who has to know that any elected official, especially a governor, is going to be subjected to close scrutiny and criticism—by bloggers and voters. http://bobmannblog.com/2013/08/08/jindal-aide-to-bloggers-and-tweeters-shut-your-traps/#more-3038

“I knew that Gov. Bobby Jindal and his staff were intolerant of dissent,” Mann wrote in his introductory remarks. “Jindal has fired so many people who disagreed with him that we’ve all lost count.

“But until now, I assumed that the intolerance extended only to people who work for Jindal, not journalists and bloggers who critique Jindal’s leadership or policies. You know, citizens, who speak out in a democracy in a way that the Founders thought was essential for a strong democracy.

“But in Jindal’s world, dissent is not tolerated in any form. But at least they had the good sense to keep their intolerance of citizens’ commentary to themselves.

“Until Thursday night, that is.”

This time the exchange was over Mann’s repeated claim on his blog Something like the Truth that the administration, in its dogged pursuit of education “reform,” fails to take the state’s poverty rate into account when addressing school achievement.

“In every country, ever state, that has tried every possible reform, the achievement gap doesn’t close until poverty addressed,” Mann tweeted, followed by a quick “Oh yeah? So’s your old man” type retort by Plotkin.

“I’ve got an idea,” he fired back at Mann, “run 4 gov. Put ur ideas up 4 debate instead of just tweeting & complaining.”

Ouch. That’ll leave a mark. Did Plotkin somehow forget that Jindal’s approval ratings at the present time are in the 30-something percent range?

Mann, in an apparent effort to keep the exchange on a higher plane, responded, “You really think no one can legitimately criticize you without first running for office? Seriously?”

“If ur ideas are so great. (sic) Go try and change the world,” Plotkin sniffed back.

Referencing one of the worst episodes of any television series, Mann harkened back to the 1977 Happy Days episode in which Fonzie, in an effort to boost the show’s sinking ratings, jumped a shark while on water skis—thus giving birth to a term synonymous with acts of desperation. “You and your administration officially jumped the shark on that one,” he wrote.

At that point, education blogger Crazy Crawfish, who has gained a reputation for his research and documentation with his own blog about public education, chimed in with, “He’s got a point. Jindal and his disciples like Kyle Plotkin are changing the world. Just a shame it’s not for the better.”

Mann got in the last shots on his blog:

“Just contemplate what it means if that’s truly the opinion of (the) governor’s senior staff—that you shouldn’t speak out or criticize the governor unless you become a candidate for public office. Everyone else, keep quiet. The public sphere isn’t for mere citizens!!”

Mann said he feels his 14-year-old son’s tweets would be “more mature and more circumspect than Plotkin’s.

“And, unlike Plotkin, he also knows about the First Amendment,” he wrote.

It would be nice if these were the only examples of Jindal’s people putting their mouths in motion before putting their brains in gear. Or, in the vernacular of my late grandfather: letting one’s alligator mouth overload his jaybird backside.

Unfortunately, they appear not to be the exception, but a trend.

Back in early 2012, I had my own legitimacy called into question by the administration. When Jindal presented his Executive Budget to the legislature, Division of Administration (DOA) spokesman Michael Diresto was handing out copies of the budget to the media. When I stepped up to get one, he informed me they were only for members of the media who had offices in the press corps area of the Capitol.

I motioned to a reporter to whom he had just handed a copy and said, “He doesn’t have an office in the Capitol.”

“They’re for legitimate media only,” he said. “You’re not legitimate.”

Inasmuch as I was a “traditional” reporter for a quarter-century and I now cover state government for about a dozen newspapers statewide in addition to my blog, I was naturally curious as to what equated to legitimacy in his narrow view.

I eventually got a copy of the budget but only after appealing to then Commissioner of Administration Paul Rainwater.

And then there is retiring Congressman Rodney Alexander.

Alexander, whom Jindal offered the position of Secretary of the Louisiana Office of Veterans Affairs (he served six years in the U.S. Air Force Reserve) at $130,000 per year, apparently feels much the same way about the First Amendment.

Walter Abbott of Ruston has a blog called Lincoln Parish Online and on Thursday he alluded to an interview Alexander did with the Ouachita Citizen of West Monroe. In that interview, Alexander indicated he had a problem with social media and “non-traditional” news outlets such as blogs. http://lincolnparishnewsonline.wordpress.com/2013/08/08/alexander-unhappy-with-people-who-are-not-necessarily-in-the-news-business/

“The Facebook and all of that—people who are not necessarily in the news business—are driving what people do, and at times, that’s had a very negative impact on how the Congress operates.”

(Funny we didn’t hear him complain when Dan Rather was disgraced and forced into retirement by bloggers over that bogus Texas Air National Guard letter about George W. Bush.)

No, Congressman-cum-double dipper, bloggers aren’t the problem. Congress itself is the one dominating factor in the negative impact on how Congress operates. How dare you try to foist the inability of 535 lobbyist-purchased senators and representatives to accomplish squat onto a handful of bloggers. That’s a cop out and you know it.

Apparently, Alexander feels that the First Amendment is applicable only to those who are paid to write in traditional media, says blogger-attorney C.B. Forgotston of Hammond. “He blames the ills of our country on those of us who express our views in non-traditional ways,” C.B. wrote. “We caused Congress to be a do-nothing group. Yeah, right.

“If Alexander can’t take the heat of hearing from citizens of the United States, (it) isn’t going to be any more comfortable working on the state dole for Bobby Jindal. Yes, we have Internet in Louisiana,” Forgotston wrote.

“Rodney, if you are so concerned about the public outcry, perhaps you should refuse Jindal’s job offer and come back to Louisiana as a private citizen. You might find it educational to learn what it’s like to be a mere citizen and why we are upset with people like you who look down your nose at us.

“Meanwhile, get over yourself before you come back to our state.”

In his interview with the Ouachita Citizen, Alexander was less than candid about his future plans when asked. “Oh, I don’t know,” he said. “Something will come up.” http://www.ouachitacitizen.com/news.php?id=12879

That “something” already had come up. Jindal officially extended his offer of a job the day after his announcement that he would not seek re-election in 2014 but anyone who does not believe the fix was already in, has his head in the sand.

Here is the scenario:

Those in the employ of the state, including legislators, are eligible to retire at 2.5 percent of the average of their three highest-earning years times the number of years of service. An employee making an average of $50,000 for a minimum of three years who retires after 20 years, for example, would retire at $25,000 per year. ($50,000 X .025 X 20).

Alexander served in the legislature 15 years, from January 1988 to January 2003, at which time he entered Congress. While he took out his contributions to the state retirement system (LASERS), he would have the option of buying back his time when he begins his new job. The retirement benefits for legislators, based on salaries of less than $20,000 and his years of service would not be that much, but if he remains on the job for the duration of Jindal’s term (three-plus years) at $130,000, the numbers change rather dramatically.

Because of his age, if he chooses to buy back his time, his retirement would be at 3.5 percent of $15,000 (an arbitrary figure; it was probably less back then), times 15 years of service would come to $7,875 per year.

But take an average of $130,000 per year and add three more years to his tenure and his retirement income would take quite a jump. Suddenly, at 3.5 percent of $130,000 times 18 years, that retirement increases more than tenfold, to $81,900 per year—in addition to his federal retirement (based on his 10-year tenure and his final three-year average salary of $174,000), plus his Social Security benefits.

No wonder Alexander and the Jindal administration hold bloggers in such low esteem: we can do the math.

Perhaps those of you reading this would wish to email Plotkin at kyle.plotkin@la.gov

or call the governor’s office at 225-342-7015 to let them know that you can do the math, too—just for fun, of course.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »