Louisiana Voice

Well, Trump has really done it this time and I have nothing left but to shut my big mouth and concede that the man is going to both keep me healthy and make me prosper by simply dropping by my local pharmacy and picking up my prescription drugs.

He’s bringing drug prices down. He says so himself. Not 30%, 40% or 50%, but by enormous numbers. Here, I’ll let him tell you in his own words that he spoke during a reception with members of Congress:

“We will have reduced drug prices by 1000%, but 1,100%, 1,200%, 1,300%, 1,400%, 700%, 600%. Not 30% or 40% or 50%. But numbers [the] likes of which you’ve never even dreamed of. We’re gonna get the drug prices down. Not 30% or 40%, which would be great. Not 50% or 60%. No, we’re gonna get them down 1,000%, 600%, 500%, 1,500%. Numbers that are not even though to be achievable.”

Damn! He’s a freakin’ genius!

Right now, I’m on daily does of Allopurinol, Atorvastatin, Isosorbide, Tamsulosin, Bisoprolol, Ezetimibe, Ranolazine, Farxiga, Amlodipine, Gabapentin, Baclofen, Loperamide, Calcitriol and Torsemide, along with a few non-prescription vitamins.

But for the undying dedication of Mr. Trump, I’d be paying a tidy sum. Thanks to him, however, the pharmacy’s gonna be paying me to take all that medication.

Can you imagine? Instead of cutting the cost 100%, which would place them at zero cost, he’s gonna cut the costs by as much as 1,500%.

Like I said, a freakin’ genius.

No longer shall I be referring to him as Old Yam Tits or Count Flatula. That’s just rude. No, from now on, I’m going to sit back and count all the money my pharmacy is going to be paying me and thanking Cheeto Benito, aka Don Whoreleone, profusely.

As another writer said, my flabbers are completely gasted.

Here’s the story as reported by Salon (Salon has a paywall, so I can’t provide a line; I have to show it this way):

President Donald Trump claimed to be planning a massive reduction in drug costs for Americans, but critics were quick to point out his numbers don’t add up.

In a reception with members of Congress on Tuesday, Trump spoke about lowering drug prices for Americans at a time when cuts to programs like Medicaid are on the horizon.

In doing so, Trump promised some truly staggering figures.

“We will have reduced drug prices by 1000%, by 1,100%, 1,200%, 1,300%, 1,400%, 700%, 600%.  Not 30% or 40% or 50%. But numbers likes of which you’ve never even dreamed of.”   

“We’re gonna get the drug prices down,” Trump said. “Not 30% or 40%, which would be great. Not 50% or 60%. No, we’re gonna get them down 1,000%, 600%, 500%, 1,500%. Numbers that are not even thought to be achievable.” 

Trump’s comments left social media users scratching their heads. Users asked X’s AI chatbot Grok about Trump’s claims. Grok variously called them “mathematically impossible,” “hyperbolic,” and in one case, “total bullsh**t.”

Several accounts pointed to the impossibility of “negative numbers” for drug prices, along with the idea of “getting paid to take drugs.”

One user put it more bluntly: “Cant wait fill my next zpack at cvs and leave with a stack of their money”

Trump claimed that an executive order signed in May would pave the way for reduced drug costs by invoking “most-favored nation” status on drug prices. In theory, pharmaceutical companies could not charge Americans anymore for drugs than they were charging citizens in other countries.

However, talks between the Trump administration and pharmaceutical companies have been ongoing, with one executive calling them “inconclusive” by according to Bio Pharma Dive.

In his first administration, Trump touted a war on drug prices in the wake of COVID-19, but failed to deliver on price reductions, with members of his own party referring to the idea as “socialist price controls.”

Hats off to the Art of the Deal.

You may recall the LouisianaVoice STORY OF JULY 15 about the Department of Corrections official uttering the racial slur, including the use of the N-word, when he apparently thought his microphone was muted on a zoom call hosted by the Louisiana Department of Health.

We submitted a public records request on July 14 as to the status of any investigation and/or action to be taken by DOC over the matter. Four days later, we received the following email:

Please be advised that the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections is providing notification that Blake Leblanc (director of Mental Health for DOC) resigned effective today, July 18, 2025, therefore records pertaining to an investigation that did not result in discipline are confidential due to the employee’s right to privacy guaranteed by the Article I, Section 5 of the Louisiana Constitution, and are not subject to release.

No further comments regarding this matter will be made pursuant to the above statement.

Thanks,

Tif

Tiffany Dickerson
Communications Director
Louisiana Department of Public Safety & Corrections
504 Mayflower Street | Baton Rouge, LA 70802

That’s it. No official apology on behalf of DOC for the offensive remark by one of its own, just a statement that he’d resigned. You’d think something would be forthcoming about how the agency does not condone such insensitivity and that it deeply regrets that it occurred and that it certainly does not reflect the attitude of DOC, yada, yada, yada.

But no, just that dismissive note from Tif that LeBlanc had resigned and that DOC was protecting the employee’s “right to privacy.”

In Ms. Dickerson’s defense, we’re pretty sure that’s all she was allowed to say as DOC quickly circled the wagons in hopes the controversy would go away with LeBlanc’s departure.

Of all the banalities and absurdities ever uttered, the comment that “a degree is a degree” by Livingston Parish Library Board President Jonathan Davis has to rank up there with “alternate facts” and similar asinine remarks.

That was the excuse Davis made Friday in opening the door to any applicant with a degree to apply for the recently vacated position of parish library director.

Well, Mr. Davis, I have a degree. It’s in journalism but I would never dare to venture into the area of teaching quantum physics or nuclear medicine any more than I would employ my B.A. in journalism in the practice of heart, brain or cancer research and/or surgery. Nor would I consider myself qualified to head up a complete parish library system (though I know someone who might be interested).

Of all the ridiculous things to say, Davis’s thoughtless remark sounds very much like something an idiot like Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. or Donald Trump might say.

Friday’s meeting was called after Parish President Randy Delatte, perhaps one of the least qualified persons to speak to a librarian’s qualifications, had recommended at last Tuesday’s meeting that Library Director Michelle Parrish’s contract not be renewed. All in all, it seems rather strange that the person elected to his position would crater to the wishes of someone who doesn’t even reside in the parish.

That someone would be Michael Lunsford, head of Citizens for a New Louisiana. He is a resident of St. Martin Parish and has, without a former invitation, interjected himself into the Livingston Parish Library’s operations.

Reminded of this on Friday, Davis curiously said that Lunsford has as much right to speak to local issues as those residing in Livingston Parish. Yet, those Livingston Parish residents were denied their opportunity to voice their concerns Friday.

That’s because Davis unceremoniously tabled agenda item number one, the decision to alter the qualifications for the director’s position to encompass just about anyone with a degree of any color because, in Davis’s words, he didn’t want “to punish those people, especially former principals that (sic) have managed schools and know exactly how to do a job very, very similar to this. I don’t want to punish them for getting a degree 20, 30 or 40 years ago,” he sniffed.

So, maybe I will apply for the position just for the fun of it. After all, a journalism degree implies an ability to read, does it not? And isn’t that all a librarian does (that is, if you ask Davis)? For that matter, I’d love to poll the five remaining library board members – four others resigned in protest earlier in the week when former library director Michell Parrish was abruptly fired – and Randy Delatte to learn the title of the last book each of them has read, and when that was. Maybe they should be required to give book reports.

Five remaining Livingston Parish Library Board members attended Friday’s abbreviated meeting that ended abruptly when board member Dewanna Christian (far right) suddenly claimed illness and departed the meeting, leaving it one member short of a quorum, forcing adjournment. Four other members (not pictured) resigned in protest last Tuesday when the board voted to fire the Parish library Director Michelle Parrish.

At one point, board member Trey Cowell, whose term actually expired last month, made a motion to adjourn in order to cut off public comments on board actions and when that failed, fellow board member DeWanna Christian, gathered her paperwork and stalked out of the meeting. Reached in the parking lot as she pulled away, she claimed to be physically ill and was “about to throw up.” Perhaps those with no stomach to defend their actions should resign as well.

Without her in attendance, there was an absence of a quorum and the meeting simply adjourned with several in attendance still awaiting a chance to say their piece. So, they hung around and had plenty to say to individual board members, especially to Davis, following the meeting.

Vicki Turner said a Library Science degree is a specialized area of study that requires a course in library law.

Another in attendance, Lolita Chatelain, does have a Master of Library Science and she said the library director’s job is one in which a degree indeed matters because the role is specialized and requires an understanding of several areas of knowledge. “I think it’s ridiculous that we would have someone [who is] not qualified to run our library system,” she said.

But then, why would we want to set a new precedent by insisting on qualifications – even for library board members?

Davis declined to comment on the cause for Parrish’s removal, but he did read a prepared statement – renemiscent of a third grader, his fingers mechanically tracing the words across the typewritten page as he read:

“At the most recent library board meeting, the board voted to make a leadership change and remove the director of the Livingston Parish Library System. This decision came after thoughtful discussion and careful consideration by the Board. It was not made in haste, but with a sincere desire to move the system forward and ensure long-term strength and unity within the library.

“Since being elected President, my focus has been on helping the library turn the page and begin a new chapter rooted in collaboration, transparency, and public service. Our libraries should always reflect the values, trust, and needs of the communities they serve.”

That statement stretched credulity in that observers who have been paying attention in Livingston Parish know full well that it has been Lunsford calling the shots for Davis and Delatte all along. To further promote the charade, the remaining board members sat prim and mute, like so many obedient children.

When Davis, et al, were labeled as puppets, the library system’s public information officer interrupted to suggest that decorum be practiced in the ongoing dialogue though most attending the abbreviated meeting felt that frank and open discussion was the more appropriate approach, that perhaps the time for decorum had passed.

“To help guide this next chapter,” Davis said, continuing to recite from the paper on the table in front of him, “I have appointed a review committee to assist with evaluating new director candidates and supporting strong, future-focused leadership. I have also worked with the two acting directors to ensure that daily library services continue without interruption” (though many came away feeling as if the new director might already have been chosen in some backroom deal).

Wow, just wow.