Feeds:
Posts
Comments

The Advocate-Times Picayune on Sunday trumpeted the results of a poll the publication said reflected strong backing for Jeff Landry’s political agenda.

The story said Landry received a 56 percent overall favorable rating in the poll, conducted by New Orleans pollster Ron Faucheux on behalf of the newspaper but in reality, there was little chance for it to show a different result; it may as well have been commissioned by Landry or the Louisiana Republican Party.

I happened to have been one of the 800 Louisiana voters who received a call and participated in the poll and from the way the questions were structured, only an anarchist could possibly have taken issue with Landry’s agenda.

It was a classic “push-poll,” where the questions are couched in such a way as to elicit the desired response and for The Advocate-Times Picayune to promote the results as news is, simply put, lazy reporting.

Ron Faucheux is, by all accounts, a reputable, non-partisan political consultant but this poll was less than credible – not because I happen to disagree with many of Landry’s positions (I do) but because the questions afforded me no opportunity to say how I really felt about certain issues.

For example: yes, education in Louisiana is a problem but allowing parental participation is playing with fire. A single complaint from a parent can wreak havoc on what books a child may read or what history he or she may be taught. That’s not improving education; it’s instilling mass confusion for teachers and principals.

Crime, too, is a huge problem but gutting the budgets of public defenders is certainly not the solution. Nor does it address the problem by making it more difficult for the wrongfully convicted to have their cases re-heard. And there have already been some 100 individuals who have been exonerated after serving decades at Angola for crimes they never committed, thanks to over-zealous prosecutors willing to sell their souls for a quick conviction.

There were others, but every single question (except for my religion, which I refused to reveal), was a multiple-choice question that made me to be either a full-throated dedicated Landry supporter or a bomb-thrower. I’m neither.

But I don’t think the pollster recorded any of my responses after I insisted on expounding on my answers.

Well, I’m back. Yes, I know I’ve retired – twice. First because of failing eyesight and most recently because at 80, I’m just tired of chasing leads, some of which turn out, most of which ultimately don’t

There can be any number of reasons that might explain my decision to return to the keyboard.

There’s the analogy of the old fire station horse who still tries to answer the call or the over-the-hill boxer who responds to the bell. Or maybe it’s just the senility that allows me to forget that I’m supposed to be sitting in the sun room drooling with a lap blanket and shoulder shawl draped over my frail body.

There are those (maybe most) who would choose the latter. But the truth is, the level of corruption in Louisiana is such that it’s virtually impossible to walk away if you have a scintilla of love for this state. And if the first months are any indication, the next few years under Jeff Landry will be a challenge that will make the Jindal years pale by comparison.

So it is that I have opted to keep pounding away at those who would put personal gain before the interests of the state and her citizens.

Which brings me to the unpleasant task of renewing our twice-a-year fund raisers in order to keep the lights on.

Heretofore, we held fundraisers in April and October but since April is gone, we are coming to you with hat in hand during the month of May. I humbly ask that you support our efforts in any amount you’re comfortable with – $5, $10, or whatever. I’ll be traveling the state (believe it or not, south Louisiana doesn’t hold franchise rights to corruption; there’re stories that need exposure way up in north Louisiana. I also anticipate a few roadblocks to future requests for public records which will necessitate legal action, all of which take money.

Anyone contributing $50 or more will receive his choice of one of my (signed) books. Here are your choices of non-fiction:

Louisiana’s Rogue Sheriffs: A Culture of Corruption

America’s Rogue Sheriffs: A Culture of Corruption (each state is profiled)

Murder on the Teche: A True Story of Money and a Flawed Investigation

For fiction, there are these:

It’s All Theirs (a story about one man’s fight against the IRS)

Bordello on the Bayou (a high-end prostitute is murdered in Baton Rouge)

Vieux Carré Vengeance (a ghost story set in New Orleans)

If you order a book, be sure to provide a mailing address.

So, please, as the preacher said in the movie Oh, God, please “dig DEEP into your pockets to support this min’-istry.” Seriously, click on the yellow DONATE button to the upper right to contribute by credit card or you may send a check to me, Tom Aswell, at 107 North College West, Denham Springs, LA. 70726.

As usual, I deeply appreciate all the support I’ve received in the past.

Just a thought…

Maybe Dick Cheney would like to invite Kristi Noem to go bird hunting.

Pundits are calling it the “con-con,” which I suppose is short for “constitutional convention.”

I would suggest, however, that it be called the “con-con-con,” for “constitutional convention con,” because what Jeff Landry is selling doesn’t look like a good buy from just about any vantage point.

There can be no disputing that the current Louisiana State Constitution, like its predecessor, is far too long, crammed as it is with more than 200 amendments (and those are just the ones voters passed) over the past 50 years. And at more than 77,000 words it is more than 17 times the length of the U.S. Constitution. The Public Affairs Research Council tells us it is the fourth-longest state constitution in the U.S.

There also is little argument that a new constitution might not be such a bad idea – so long as the process is carried out carefully and fairly – and not turned into a partisan rush job with little or no public scrutiny.

Unfortunately, Jeff Landry is trying to do just that: a two-to-four-week work session in which a new document will be drafted. There will be no traveling road show to give voters an opportunity for public input. Landry doesn’t like an informed public, remember?

That’s a fool’s errand. The last constitutional convention, back in 1973, took more than a year to write and it was written by delegates chosen by the people. Some of those delegates were also state legislators, but many were not. Then-Gov. Edwards had campaigned vigorously for a constitutional convention in the quest for his first term as governor. Landry uttered not a peep about rewriting the constitution during his campaign and sprang it on the state only after he took office.

Still, done right it could be a constructive endeavor. But one has to wonder why the urgency? Why fast track it this way? Or, a more sinister question: What is it that Landry wants to do that he doesn’t want us to know about? What are his true motives?

Rather than elect delegates, Landry wants delegates to consist of sitting House members. In a sense, I suppose, it could be said they were elected; but they were elected as legislators, not delegates to rewrite the constitution. A fine sticking point, to be sure, but a sticking point nonetheless. Edwards appointed 27 delegates and Landry wants to do the same.

And while I don’t profess to know a lot about many of his proposed appointees, I do know a little about one of them and have written about some of his actions in the past.

Eric Skrmetta has been involved in past activities that should have raised a few red flags with voters in his district. His latest was a proposal to withdraw Louisiana’s membership from the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), a nonprofit association that manages the power grid for 15 states and Manitoba Province in Canada. It oversees the uninterrupted provision of electric power to 42 million people and Louisiana has been a member since 2013.

Texas is not a member of any cooperative grid, relying instead on the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT). And you may remember what happened in that state a couple of winters ago. If you don’t, just ask Cancun Ted Cruz.

To read more about that effort by Skrmetta, go HERE.

If you’re not convinced, you can read other stories I’ve written about Mr. Skrmetta by going HERE, HERE and HERE.

Skrmetta is also one of the three Republican Public Service Commissioners who earlier this month APPROVED a quickie proposal by Entergy to slap you with another hike in your electric bill to help the company finance a $1.9 billion project to improve its grid. These people are not your friends.

Both Democrats voted no, by the way, so just who is it that’s trying to protect consumers here? The plan was introduced by Entergy on a Monday and approved later that same week. Kind of a rush job, don’tcha think?

Well, this cockeyed proposal to rewrite a state constitution in a couple of weeks is kind of a rush job, too.

Unless, of course, certain people, Landry included, convened surreptitiously sometime in the past, along with a few hand-picked lawyers, and have already written the document that will be passed under the noses of delegates/legislators for their rubber stamp approval in a few weeks.

And with Landry proposing to shield the “deliberative process” from public disclosure, we will probably never know if that is the case.

But let us assume that the House and Senate pass muster on the new constitution and it is ultimately approved by voters.

It’s a done deal. Now consider this: How long do you think it will take for the amendment proposals to start flowing out of the legislature? If it’s a slapped-together document, as it will have to be if truly done over a couple of weeks, you can anticipate the first amendment proposals to show up next year and every single year after that.

The more things change, the more they stay the same…especially in Louisiana.

Completely unrelated to the con-con-con, I came across this little meme which you might find amusing if it were not so close to the truth relative to Entergy’s proposed rate hike of up to $8 per month:

Electricity Bill:

Usage                                                                   $40.21

 Distribution Fee                                                  $152.35

Processing Fee                                                     $76.83

Accessing Fee                                                       $45.34

Transmission Fee                                                 $38.75

Fee Fee                                                                $16.90

Fee Fi Fo Fum Fee                                               $17.75

Might as Well Fee                                                  $5.00

What You Gonna Do Fee                                       $3.75

What the Hell, Another Dollar Won’t Hurt Fee    $2.00

Here is the original public records request I submitted to Gov. Jeff Landry on Thursday:

From: Tom Aswell
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2024 2:15 PM
To: GovPublicRecords@la.gov
Subject: PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST

“Pursuant to LA. R.S. 44.1 (et seq.), I hereby submit my formal request for the opportunity to examine, inspect, and otherwise review all correspondence (including all emails and texts between Gov. Jeff Landry or any and all of his designees and State Sen. Heather Cloud relative to public records and Senate Bill 482. According to state law, I have the option of reviewing records before committing to any purchase of documents.

Thank you.

Here is the response from the governor’s office that I received on Friday (after I found it necessary to follow up with a gentle reminder):

From: Gov Public Records <GovPublicRecords@la.gov>
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2024 4:45 PM
To: Tom Aswell <louisianavoice@outlook.com>
Subject: RE: RESPONSE REQUESTED FOR PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST

Mr. Aswell,

Our office received your public records request below, dated April 25, 2024, generally concerning “public records and SB 482”. 

After reviewing your request, we find your request as it relates to “any and all of his designees” vague, overly broad, and unduly burdensome, and we ask that you please specify or narrow your request.  Can you please specify or narrow your request to any particular employee or employees whose records you would like to request? 

Additionally, can you please provide a date range for the records you would like to request?  Please note the custodian for any records of the Office of the Governor prior to January 8, 2024 is the Louisiana State Archives, 3851 Essen Lane, Baton Rouge, LA 70809, pursuant to La. R.S. 44:5.  You may make a public records request for the office of State Archives here:  https://coraweb.sos.la.gov/Contact/ContactForm.aspx?recipient=Public%20Records%20Request&subject=Public%20Records%20Request%20Inquiry&returnto=/pages/default.aspx.

With regard to the remainder of your request, our office will begin determining what, if any, records are subject to your request, as well as any whether any exceptions or exemptions apply.  Please note that pursuant to La. R.S. 44.1 et seq., and particularly La. R.S. 44:5, certain records may not be disclosed.  You will be notified within 30 days of this email whether we have located any records responsive to your request, and what, if any, privileges may apply.

Thank you.

Jeffrey Wale   
Deputy Executive Counsel Office of Governor Jeff Landry
Phone: (225) 342-7015 www.Louisiana.gov

And, to bring you up to date, here is my response to Wale’s response (sent on Saturday):

Jeffrey Wale   
Deputy Executive Counsel

Office of Governor Jeff Landry

Mr. Wale:

First of all, it is not “vague” or “overly broad.” My request is very specific in that I am asking for all communications between Gov. Landry and/or any of his designees and Sen. Heather Cloud relative to any proposed changes to the Louisiana Public Records statute, (LA. R.S. 44.1 [et seq.]). As you well know, Gov. Landry did not take office until Jan. 8, so I would think the date range is obvious. His “designee” would include anyone communicating with Sen. Cloud on Gov. Landry’s behalf about proposed changes in the public records law, but certainly I particularly want to examine all communications (emails, faxes, texts, etc.) between Gov. Landry and Sen. Cloud (limited specifically to public records) during the time period dating from Jan. 8, 2024, forward to the current date.

As for as my request being burdensome, that is a smokescreen argument. All you have to do is to type in key words, “Cloud” and “public records” on Gov. Landry’s email server and hit ENTER and presto, all relative emails on this subject will appear on your computer screen in a nano-second. And you do not have 30 days in which to comply. The law is quite clear on that. You may be familiar with this from Jeff Landry when he was the Louisiana Attorney General:

https://www.brla.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7145/LADOJ-Public-Records-Presentation-Outline

Here is a paragraph from the above document:

X. Timeline to Respond A. La. R.S. 44:33(B)(1) provides that if the public record applied for is immediately available, the public record shall be immediately presented to the authorized persona applying for it. B. La. R.S. 44:33(B)(1) provides that if the public record is not immediately available because it is in active use at the time of application, this shall be certified in writing and a time shall be set within three days for reviewing the record. C. La. R.S. 44:35(A) allows the custodian to send an estimate of the time reasonably necessary for collection, segregation, redaction, examination, or review of a records request. D. La. R.S. 44:32(D) states an exception shall be asserted within three days, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and legal public holidays, of the receipt of the request. An exception must be asserted in writing and refer to the provision of law that excepts such record. E. La. R.S. 44:33(A)(2) directs that, “if… segregating the record would be unreasonably burdensome or expensive… the official shall so state in writing and shall state the location of the requested record

Please comply in full with this request by close of business Wednesday, May 1, 2024.

And now we wait.