Feeds:
Posts
Comments

State’s three major enforcement agencies exhibiting common swaggering attitude of smugness; accountability non-existent

September 24, 2014 by tomaswell

  • The Louisiana Office of Alcohol and Tobacco Control (ATC).
  • The Louisiana Department of Public Safety (DPS).
  • The Louisiana Fire Marshal’s Office.

From liquor permit rejections, wholesale firings of agents that may have been racially motivated and amateurish investigative tactics at ATC to a multitude of questionable activities at the State Fire Marshal’s Office to attempts to sneak a hefty retirement benefit through the legislature for the state’s top cop, Louisiana’s three major enforcement agencies appear to be riddled with procedural matters bordering on federal EEO violations, investigative cover-ups and back door politics which sometimes blur ethical and legal lines and which reach all the way into the governor’s office.

The latest incident involves an ATC agent who apparently sent a teenage undercover operative into Hook’d Up Bar and Grill in Hammond in an attempt to purchase alcohol. The girl, age 17, was accompanied by a 21-year-old female. The older woman purchased a drink but waitress Ashleigh Burdett refused to comply with the 17-year-old’s repeated requests for another cup so the drink could be divided.

Burdette said she refused the requests, telling the girl, “I can’t do that because you’re a minor.”

Fortunately for Burdette and the establishment’s owners, a video camera captured the entire sequence of events, including the older customer leaving the table to go the restroom just after 10 p.m., whereupon the 17-year-old picked up the older woman’s drink and walked outside with it.

ATC agent Jeff Barthelemy then entered the establishment and wrote a warning to the business and a $500 citation to Burdette, both for serving a minor.

“The fact of watching my staff carding her, telling her no, going as far as to give two checks to each individual showing that the underage person was not served, it’s kind of disheartening,” said Jennifer Mier who co-owns the business with husband Mark Mier.

Mark Mier, interviewed by LouisianaVoice, said he was scheduled to meet with ATC Commissioner Troy Hebert on Wednesday in an attempt to get the matter ironed out but Mier was still upset at the idea of sending a 17-year-old undercover operative in an attempt to purchase alcohol.

“The legal age for purchasing alcohol is 21 so why couldn’t they have sent a 19- or 20-year-old in instead of a 17-year-old. That was a very ill-advised thing to do with someone that young. I would never have done that.”

Hebert, who has been the subject of several stories by LouisianaVoice for the manner in which he arbitrarily fires employees, particularly African-American agents and for his insistence that all employees rise from their desk and offer a cheer “Good morning” when he enters a room, defended the practice of using operatives that young. “We use 16- and 17-year-old operatives to make sure that we’re only catching the worst violators out there.”

Huh? Did he really say that?

“I appreciate people that are there to keep us safe,” Jennifer Mier said, “but when the line gets crossed, when someone with authority chooses to use it just because they decide they’re going to, that’s not acceptable.

As strange as Hebert’s comment about “catching the worst offenders” was, the most curious comment by him was when he said, “ATC goes above and beyond to make sure we don’t use trickery. At ATC, we’d actually like to not write any violations across the state.”

That is odd indeed, given the fact that Hebert keeps a log of how many citations and how much in fines each agent issues and writes up agents who do not produce the number and amounts expected.

By established procedure, two agents are supposed to be involved in each case when underage operatives are used to attempt to purchase alcohol and at least one agent has to witness the sale.

But Hebert has fired so many agents that there are not enough to go around for each bust so ATC contracts with civilians such as the 21-year-old woman who accompanied the teenager into Hook’d Up. The contractors are paid an hourly rate but they are expected to produce an illegal sale or ATC will cease using them for undercover operations. Accordingly, the contractor is under pressure and has the incentive to ensure that an illegal sale will be made in order to continue collecting the hourly fee.

But what Hebert did to the owners and waitress at Hook’d Up pales in comparison to what he has done to a decorated retired Army Reserve major who has been attempting to open a restaurant and bar in the New Orleans French Quarter.

Tracy Riley, you see, is black and as LouisianaVoice has previously reported, Hebert has lost racial discrimination lawsuits and currently has others pending after vowing and then making good on that promise to rid his department of blacks.

So intent on carrying out his denial of her license was he that he even went so far as to file an official complaint with her commander when prior to her retirement that she had the audacity to show up at ATC headquarters to check on her permit—in uniform. In a Sept. 30, 2013, letter to Maj. Gen. Peter Lennon in Belle Chasse, Hebert cited what he called “unbecoming conduct” demonstrated by Riley for appearing at Hebert’s offices in full military uniform.

In a meeting at ATC headquarters, Barthelemy told Riley that being granted a permit was a privilege, not a right. He then admonished Riley and her son, saying that when they were in the ATC building, they were to conduct themselves “respectfully.”

As Riley and her son were leaving, Barthelemy asked Riley if she was on active duty and the name of her commanding officer.

This from an enforcement agent whose agency which works closely with State Fire Marshal Butch Browning who drew criticism and even resigned temporarily only to be cleared of wrongdoing over reports that he was wearing military ribbons and medals from World War II and the Korean Conflict on his dress uniform—and Browning never even served in the military.

Something’s a little out of kilter here, folks, and LouisianaVoice will be delving into the Browning Ribbongate issue in the coming days.

“I trust that the unbecoming conduct demonstrated by this military member will be handled accordingly and respectfully request to be notified of any corrective action taken,” Hebert wrote.

Riley was subsequently reprimanded for wearing her uniform while on personal business but the violation certainly didn’t equate to the war crimes offense Hebert made it out to be—especially given the timing of his Sept. 30 letter to Gen. Lennon.

Less than three weeks earlier, on Sept. 12, 2013, the French Quarter Business Association (FQBA) sent its own letter to Hebert complaining about Riley’s establishment, the Rouge House Supper Club, located at 300 Decatur Street.

Jeremy DeBlieux, president of FQBA, said in his letter to Hebert that he understood that a special event permit was granted to Riley to operate during the annual Essence Festival in July of 2013 but that the Rouge House “did not adhere” to provisos set forth in the temporary permit.

“We believe the owner’s blatant disregard to the city’s special event provisos and the unpermitted operations to date has indicated their intent,” DeBlieux said. “The business has clearly operated as a nightclub, rather than a supper club. Nightclub is not a permitted use at this specified location. We believe, with good reason, as a business association in the French Quarter, we should formally oppose the granting of alcoholic beverage permit to The Rouge House.”

So there you have it. Alcohol is strictly taboo in the New Orleans French Quarter.

On Dec. 5, Hebert denied Riley’s permit in a letter that gave as the reasons for denial as:

  • Operating without a valid state alcoholic beverage permit;
  • Misstatement or suppression of fact in application by failing to report managers and provide verification of suitability, failure to report owner Dale Riley (Riley’s husband) and provide affidavit showing that he meets the qualifications and conditions as set out in statute and failure to provide information on landlord as required.
  • Failure to submit fingerprints of members (of) the company.

“If the aforementioned reasons(s) for denial is corrected within 60 days, you may request rescission of this decision,” Hebert wrote.

Riley said she has repeatedly requested meetings with Hebert to discuss her plight and to request a probationary permit but he has refused to meet with her. Moreover, she says she overheard an employee tell an agent that Hebert did not want to talk to her.

She did meet with Barthelemy who told her his only reason for meeting with her was to inform her that when she was in the ATC building she was to be respectful, Riley said. “He would not even discuss my application.”

ATC did conduct surprise inspections of The Rouge House but found the establishment either closed with no activity. In one undated report, agents noted they had conducted “surveillance” for 36 minutes and found the business closed. It is somehow difficult to imagine it taking 36 minutes to determine an establishment is closed. The report said the ATC agent “spoke with owner of Star Steak and Lobster in reference to the target location. Pictures attached.” A sticky note was attached to the report which said, “Pictures show no activity.” The sticky note contained the initials “TAR.”

On another occasion, a “full walk-through” was conducted by the agent from 12:45 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Again, the report, like all the others, was not dated. “Upon arriving at the location I found it open for business,” the agent’s report said. “I completed a full walk-thru of the location and found no alcohol on the premises. There were no customers in the location either. The kitchen was open and food was available to be purchased.”

Despite receiving only two complaints (actually four separate statements from individuals relative to the two complaints) that The Rouge House was operating, ATC spent considerable man-hours and expense in conducting at least 21 separate surveillance and investigative assignments only to find the business closed on each occasion.

One of the complaints was from an individual claiming to be a graduate of Xavier University who also appeared to be not only an authority on permits and licenses but clairvoyant as well in saying the club “will be serving alcohol on Friday, Aug. 16 (2013) with NO alcohol permit or license.”

Riley, unaware of the close association between Gov. Jindal and Hebert (Hebert’s wife is the Jindal children’s pediatrician) and of the fact that Jindal appointed Hebert after his ill-fated attempt to frame former Commissioner Murphy Painter, attempted to obtain help from the governor’s office but we all know how that went.

Now she is seeking justice through the courts. She filed a formal appeal in June in Civil District Court in New Orleans.

And if history is any indication, the administration is well on the way toward yet another in a long line of legal defeats.

LouisianaVoice, in the coming days and weeks, will be taking closer looks at the state’s three major enforcement agencies.

Posted in ATC, Lawsuits, State Fire Marshal, State Police | 12 Comments »

Former DHH Secretary Greenstein indicted on nine counts of perjury over $183M CNSI contract; can prosecutors flip him?

September 23, 2014 by tomaswell

Former Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH) Secretary Bruce Greenstein has been indicted by the Louisiana Attorney General’s Office on nine counts of perjury stemming from a lengthy investigation of his involvement in the awarding of a $183 million contract to a company for which he once worked.

Greenstein is accused in four counts of lying under oath to the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee during his confirmation hearings of June 8 and June 17, 2011 and five counts of lying to an East Baton Rouge Parish Grand Jury on June 3 of this year.

Greenstein was appointed head of DHH in September of 2010 and was terminated by the governor’s office on May 1, 2013 when it was learned that the FBI had begun an investigation of the state’s contract with Client Network Services, Inc. (CNSI) as far back as January, 2013 when records of the state’s contract with the company were subpoenaed.

When the FBI probe became known in late March, Jindal immediately cancelled the CNSI contract and Greenstein announced his “resignation” a short time later, though he was allowed to remain on the job until May 1.

The indictment that came down on Tuesday (Sept. 23) is the first time that it was revealed that Greenstein did not resign, but was terminated and apparently allowed to announced that he had resigned.

There was no immediate word of the status of the federal investigation of CNSI and Greenstein but legal observers said Tuesday that pressure will most likely be applied to Greenstein to cooperate with the investigation.

Assistant Attorney General David Caldwell said that while the indictment is for perjury, “it really stems from the entirety of the activity in the awarding of this contract” and the grand jury will remain empaneled to do additional work on the case.

At his confirmation hearings, Greenstein first refused to tell legislators who had won the contract to provide Medicaid billing services for the state but under unrelenting pressure and scolding from legislators, as well as threats of his not being confirmed, he finally admitted that CNSI, his old employer from Washington State, was awarded the contract.

Greenstein, however, insisted that he had built a “firewall” between himself and the selection process and had not intervened in the deliberations, nor had he had any contact with CNSI officials.

It was subsequently learned from emails and text messages subpoenaed by the committee that he had had thousands of text messages and hundreds of phone calls from CNSI officials during the bidding and selection processes.

It was also learned that Greenstein had learned that CNSI was initially not qualified to bid on the contract and that he had added addendums to the bid requirements that made the company eligible.

Counts 1and 2 of the indictment cited his testimony under oath in a response to a question from Sen. Rob Marionneaux that he did not know if CNSI was unqualified under the original request for proposals and became eligible only after the addendum was added to the bid specifications.

Counts 3 and 4 involved his responses to Sen. Karen Carter Peterson about his emails to and from CNSI founder Adnan Ahmed relative to the addendum that made CNSI bid eligible.

The remaining five counts, all for lying to the grand jury, involved charges that he lied about email communications with CNSI, about a directive to DHH personnel forbidding contact with bidders and whether or not the directive applied to Greenstein himself, about his false testimony regarding legal advice he said he received from DHH staff attorney Stephen Russo, and his false testimony regarding his confrontation with DHH and administration officials prior to his June 17 Senate testimony and their efforts to learn the truth about his contacts with CNSI.

Interestingly, none of the counts was for bid-rigging or public corruption, leaving observers to speculate while waiting to see what other charges might be forthcoming as the grand jury continues its investigation.

For the full text of the indictment, go here: INDICTMENT

Of course, he has not been convicted of any of the charges as yet but if prosecutors are able to flip Greenstein, things are going to get pretty interesting around the State Capitol and in Washington State in the coming weeks and months.

And it’s not very likely that he will take the full brunt of the charges if he has committed any wrongdoing. That is, if he can implicate others further up the line.

Posted in Contract, Contracts, Corruption, Courts, DHH, DOA, Governor's Office, Legislature, Legislators, RFP, Request for Proposals, Senate, State Agencies | 16 Comments »

Smackdown! Attorney General opinion on OGB proposals hands Jindal administration another stinging legal setback

September 23, 2014 by tomaswell

As legal setbacks begin to mount for Gov. Bobby Jindal with the indictment of a former Jindal cabinet member coupled with an attorney general’s opinion that recently announced changes to state employee group health plans are most probably illegal, one political observer intimated to LouisianaVoice that Jindal’s political career “may be coming unraveled” even as he remains fixated on the White House.

The attorney general’s office on Tuesday (Sept. 23) released a legal opinion that could signal a devastating blow to the administration’s plans to overhaul health benefit plans offered through the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) to some 230,000 state employees, retirees and dependents.

The opinion was requested on Sept. 9 by State Rep. John Bel Edwards (D-Amite), who wrote, “…The Office of Group Benefits proposes to make major plan changes, effective Jan. 1, 2015, which changes conflict with existing provisions contained in the Louisiana Administrative Code.”

LouisianaVoice has learned that word of the request was leaked to the administration after seeking and receiving a copy of the request through a public records request and Jindal dispatched Executive Counsel Thomas Enright to Attorney General Buddy Caldwell’s office to lobby the state’s chief legal officer to issue an opinion favorable to the administration.

When it became evident that Caldwell’s opinion would not be favorable to the administration, Commissioner of Administration Kristy Kreme Nichols capitulated in advance when she said last Friday that the state would go through the rule-making process spelled out in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

“But they’ve already put the changes out there,” Edwards said. “They implemented changes in the prescription drug co-pay in August without observing the proper legal procedure and would be deemed null and void if challenged in court. It will be impossible to do this (the remaining proposed OGB changes) by Jan. 1. The process would have had to have been started as early as June and as late as July of this year in order to become effective by the time the new plans will go into place.

Edwards was not the only legislator to voice criticism of the administration just two days before the House Appropriations Committee is scheduled to meet on Thursday to hear comments on the proposed health care coverage changes.

State Rep. J. Rogers Pope (R-Denham Springs), a member of both the Appropriations Committee and the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget, said he has consistently opposed the governor’s intervention into the operations of OGB both in committee and on the House floor.

“The heavy hand and somewhat sleight of hand of the Jindal administration to make such a drastic change to the health care benefit program that will impact some 230,000 people in Louisiana is a disgrace and a slap in the face for the many who have contributed to this health care program and expected it to provide basic healthcare coverage,” he said.

Pope urged those affected by the proposed changes to attend Thursday’s 10 a.m. meeting in the State Capitol to provide comments and to ask questions.

Former State Sen. Butch Gautreaux (D-Morgan City) also weighed in on the latest development. Gautreaux, who served on the OGB board of directors during his final term in the Senate, said he felt as though Jindal privatized the agency because he “couldn’t be embarrassed by the best managed and most cost effective health insurance department in all 50 states.”

Gautreaux said the OGB board began asking for answers as soon as Jindal indicated his desire to privatize the agency. “When the board couldn’t get the administration to a board meeting, I called a special meeting of the Senate Retirement Committee, again asking the governor to inform us of his intentions,” he said. “Paul Rainwater (then Commissioner of Administration) attended reluctantly but could only tell us that government had no business in running a health insurance agency. He couldn’t tell us why because the logical answer would be cost savings but the opposite was the truth. Our complaints fell on deaf ears because the business was already promised.”

Gautreaux said the “corruption began when Timmy Teepell (Jindal’s original Chief of Staff) instructed Tommy Teague (the OGB Executive Director until teagued by Jindal when he balked at the privatization of OGB) to write a tightly written RFP (request for proposal)…for northeast Louisiana so that only one company could meet the (bid) criteria.”

“Jindal’s OGB mess goes much deeper than we thought,” Edwards said. “The mismanagement of the $500 million OGB fund balance is just the beginning. Jindal’s mean-spirited solution to this self-created is being forced down the throats of state workers illegally.

“I believe this failure to comply with the APA speaks volumes about the quality of the plans. This administration knows that they are unfairly shifting the costs to state workers and teachers. Why else would they go to such great lengths, even breaking the law, to avoid public input and legislative oversight?”

Of the belated decision by the administration to comply with the law, Edwards said, “It’s too little, too late, from an administration that has consistently disregarded its legal obligations and fiscal duties to the people of our state.”

Under the APA, the procedure for the adoption of rules requires a minimum of 100 days which puts the administration under the gun to meet a tight deadline. Other requirements include:

  • Notice of the intended action and a copy of the proposed rules at least 90 days prior to taking action on the rule;
  • A statement, approved by the Legislative Fiscal Office, of the fiscal impact and the economic impact of the intended action;
  • The name of the person within the agency who has responsibility for responding to inquiries (in this case, Ansafone temporary phone bank workers in California and Florida);
  • The time when, the place where, and the manner in which interested persons may present their views;
  • A statement that the intended action complies with statutory law, including a citation of the enabling legislation;
  • A statement concerning the impact on family stability, on child, individual or family poverty;
  • Publication of a notice at least once in the Louisiana Register containing the full text of the proposed rule at least 100 days prior to the date the agency will take action on the rule;
  • Upon publication of the notice, copies of the full text of the proposed rule shall be made available upon written request within two working days;
  • Notice of the intent to adopt, amend or repeal any rule and the approved fiscal and economic impact statements shall be mailed to all persons who make timely requests of the agency no later than 10 days after the date the proposed rule change is submitted to the Louisiana Register;
  • All interested persons must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to submit data, views, comments or arguments—orally or in writing.

For a complete list of requirements of the APA, go here: apa

The attorney general opinion said the significant changes proposed by the administration “constitute a modification of the health care plans set forth in Title 32 and also has the effect of repealing and/or rendering many of the rules contained in Title 32 obsolete without following the required procedures established by the Louisiana Administrative Procedure Act.”

The APA “requires that agencies comply with the rulemaking procedures set forth in the act when adopting rules,” it said, adding if OGB failed to follow APA procedures which specify that no rules adopted on or after Jan. 1, 1975, is valid unless adopted on substantial compliance with APA, “then the validity of the plans becomes questionable.”

Additionally, the opinion said, “Louisiana jurisprudence has found that rules unlawfully adopted are invalid and unenforceable.”

The opinion noted that the Legislative Fiscal Office found that significant changes to the health plans include:

  • Increasing out-of-pocket maximum for health plan options;
  • Increasing deductibles for all health plan options;
  • Increasing co-pays 100 percent for proposed health plans with co-pays;
  • Increasing the out-of-pocket maximum for the prescription drug benefit by $300—from $1,200 to $1,500 (a 20 percent increase);
  • Subjecting the prescription drug benefit to categories that will result in an increased cost for preferred and brand name drugs and a decreased cost for generic drugs;
  • Implementing other various prescription drug benefit changes including high compound management, over utilization management and the exclusion of medical foods;
  • Requiring prior authorizations for certain medical procedures;
  • Eliminating the out-of-network benefit for some health plan options;
  • Application of standard benefit limits for skilled nursing facilities, home health care services and hospice care services;
  • Removing all vision coverage;

For a copy of the complete attorney general opinion, go here: ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION

While we have not been in discussion with Gov. Jindal or Kristy Kreme regarding the latest legal setback, we feel we can safely predict that Jindal will call the opinion “Wrong-headed,” while Kristy Kreme will put on a happy face and assure us that everything is just fine and there’s nothing to worry about.

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, Attorney General, DOA, Ethics, Governor's Office, Office of Group Benefits | 47 Comments »

If Jindal can distort simple language of Common Core audit, how would he do as POTUS? LouisianaVoice gives a preview

September 22, 2014 by tomaswell

Regardless of how you might feel about Common Core, Gov. Bobby Jindal has shown in no uncertain terms that he is either a liar willing to twist facts to his own political advantage or that he is just too dense to comprehend the English language.

As our friend Stephen Sabludowsky over at Bayou Buzz noted in his blog post today (Monday, Sept. 22), Jindal, having crashed and burned in state court (for what seems like the umpteenth time) has now filed a “frivolous” lawsuit in federal court challenging Common Core and by some extension as yet undefined, President Barak Obama. http://www.bayoubuzz.com/buzz/item/748889-jindal-misleads-in-his-legislative-auditor-common-core-spin

Jindal, Sabludowsky noted, said in a press release following the release of an issue brief by Legislative Auditor Daryl Purpera’s office that the report “declared that Common Core Standards are driving curriculum in the classroom.” http://gov.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=newsroom&tmp=detail&articleID=4678

Jindal added that while the report says that standards are not synonymous with curricula, “the report clearly declares that standards drive curriculum.”

The report, however, says nothing of the sort.

That sent Sabludowsky into orbit. “The word ‘drive’ does not even appear in the report, nor does the word ‘drives’ or even ‘driving.’”

Jindal filed his lawsuit against the Obama administration, saying the federal government (read: Obama) “has hijacked and destroyed the Common Core initiative.”

That, of course is the only tact he could have taken, given the fact that he once was an ardent proponent of Common Core

Yet, blaming Obama for the Common Core standards is more than a little misleading. Our friend Gregory DuCote correctly pointed out that the standards were adopted by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. “I do not see Barak Obama’s name” in the report. “I do not see him credited with the standards.”

All of which got us to wondering what would happen should Jindal somehow, against all odds, be elected POTUS and attempt (either by misinterpreting or by manipulating) to skew the meeting of an international communique or a clause in a peace treaty or trade agreement?

With that in mind, we take you to the White House Oval Office sometime in say, 2018 or 2019:

President Jindal: I’ve just read the report on the Chinese economy and I don’t like what I see.

Press Secretary Mike Reed: Why is that, Mr. President?

Jindal: Well, it says here in black and white they want to initiate an “aggressive tirade mission aimed at exploding western markets. It’s obvious they’re planning to bomb Wall Street.”

Reed: No sir, it says “aggressive trade mission aimed at exploiting western markets.”

Jindal: Don’t correct me. I’m POTUS. Get me the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the NSC, Homeland Security and CIA Director Edmonson. Where’s my Budget Office director?

Kristy Kreme Nichols: I’m right here, Mr. President. I’ve been practicing my half-truths, distortions and denials.

Jindal: Kristy Kreme, where do we stand on Social Security and Medicare?

Kristy Kreme: It’s just Kristy, Sir. Some jerk in Louisiana hung that stupid name on me. Our program to cut Social Security and to offer less coverage under Medicare at higher premiums has resulted in 93 percent of senior citizens having to go back to work to supplement their retirement income. And eliminating the funding for unemployment certainly was effective. We have handicapped military veterans and homeless people cutting lawns and doing landscaping now. By the way, Susan West is doing a great job running Medicare under DHH Secretary Greenstein.

Jindal: Excellent. More people working. That’s what we wanted. Mike, put out a press release about our full employment program. How does Attorney General Faircloth feel about the legal issues involved?

Executive Counsel Thomas Enright: I spoke with him on this and he thinks it’s a slam dunk.

Jindal: Good. I knew I could rely on Jimmy. Always there when I need him. Oh, I need to talk to Secretary of State Teepell about that Russian threat to deploy its nuclear missiles.

Teepell: I’m here, Mr. President. That communique from Putin said he was offering to destroy his nuclear weapons, not deploy them.

Jindal: Destroy, deploy. Whatever happens, we know it’ll be Obama’s fault. Is the Secretary of the Interior here to give his report?”

Scott Angelle: Yes sir, Mr. President, I’m here. I’m happy to report that we have finalized contracts with Exxon/Mobil to open up oil and gas drilling in all the National Forests. Of course, we may have to cut down a few redwood and sequoia trees. Fracking in Yellowstone, however, could pose a problem with the geysers. Especially Old Faithful.

Jindal: Frack it. Those tree huggers probably believe in global warming, too. Do we have a report from Treasury?

Secretary of Treasury Tim Barfield: Everyone on Wall Street sends their best, Mr. President. The Dow set an all time record yesterday, thanks to our sweeping deregulation programs.

Jindal: You’re doing a heckuva job, Barfee. How’re we doing on our legislation to create a new cabinet position?

Chief of Staff Kyle Plotkin: It looks good, Mr. President. I believe we have the votes for the Secretary of Morality position.

Jindal: How does Gene Mills feel about his nomination to the post?

Plotkin: He’s warming up to it, sir. He’s taking a page from the Koran and informing senators and congressmen that if they adhere to a strict monogamous marriage, they will go to heaven where they will be rewarded with 70 virgins.

Jindal: How’s that working out?

Plotkin: We have complete bipartisanship in the House and Senate on this. And ALEC is seriously considering it for their model legislative package for state legislatures next year. We’ve never seen such enthusiasm. It’s a breakthrough of historic proportions.

Jindal: Well, I fail to see the hysterics in that but I’m glad they’re receptive.

Reed: Sir, it seems to me that you spent eight years as governor beating up on the federal government for trying to run our lives and now you’re trying to get it to monitor America’s bedrooms.

Jindal: But don’t you see, now I am the federal government. And you’re fired. This is great! I really do have the job I want.

Posted in ALEC, Congress, Education, Governor's Office, Health Care, House, Senate | 11 Comments »

Notable Quotables (in their own words)

September 20, 2014 by tomaswell

“It is to the credit of Col. Mike Edmondson (sic) and Master Sgt. Louis Boquet, of Houma, that they declined to accept the raise because of irregularities in its passage.”

—From a Baton Rouge Advocate editorial on Friday, Sept. 19, in an effort to paint Edmonson as a dedicated and noble public servant for “refusing” a $55,000 yearly increase in his pension resulting from a Senate bill amendment that he and his staff helped orchestrate—with assistance from State Sen. Neil Riser (R-Columbia), Gov. Bobby Jindal and Jindal’s executive counsel.

Posted in Corruption, Ethics, Finances, Legislature, Legislators, Media, Retirement, State Police, Transparency | 3 Comments »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »