If there’s going to be change to
Louisiana’s laws regarding the use of campaign funds, it won’t come this year,
and it won’t come from legislators. But it can, and must, come.
The New Orleans Times-Picayune and WVUE-TV in New Orleans continue
their series on campaign finance matters, now focusing on spending
habits of elected state officials. As opposed to thier efforts
reviewing donations, which was plagued with sketchiness that provided poor
context for understanding the nature and scope of the significance and impact
of donations, especially relative to the First Amendment, this investigation is
much more solid in its analysis. It underscores that the general wording of
statutes regarding how campaign donations may be spent leads to much leeway that
threatens to pervert the intended and essential nature of these offices.
For example, if you spot state
Rep. Steve Pugh
dining out, go by and have a chat with him. By doing so, he can follow his past
practice of ringing up his entire meal from his campaign account, an apparently
legal practice such are the open-endedness of the laws (although don’t do it
too often: at the end of 2012
he was down to less than $5,000 in that account so he might have to cut back
unless he had a good 2013 fundraising year, details on that coming within 10
days).
Another
calendar year, another attempt to reform Louisiana’s Taylor Opportunity
Program for Students comes to the Legislature. It’s actually a retread of failed
previous legislation by state Sen. Blade
Morrish, and it continues to make incomplete progress towards the real
solution needed to both contains costs and to make the free tuition program
work more efficiently so that the state’s higher education system works more
effectively.
Morrish’s SB
34, similar to last year’s SB
83, which would cap tuition paid by TOPS by an inflation index for higher
education. Currently, it pays the tuition charged at a state school if attending
that, and for any other school pays a weighted average of all state school
rates, adjusted every two years. This is in response to escalating program costs,
thought to total $235 million for this fiscal year, in large part driven by
tuition increases now allowed without legislative oversight if schools hit performance
benchmarks that mostly have replaced the taxpayer dollars that previously
funded higher education.
While it’s a start, the bill does
not address the real issues behind the program that now costs nearly a penny on
every dollar spent by the state, because it adopts the confused
idea behind the program. What started as a need-based enterprise in name was
made into a scholarship program, but never has operated as a scholarship program
because its standards – basically the same as admissions criteria to get into
most baccalaureate-and-above public universities in the state – are relatively so
low. It’s more like a promise that if one can get into directly from high
school that kind of college, tuition is free, making it really an entitlement
more than anything else as its merit standards are undemanding. For that
reason, about 70
percent of first-time, full-time freshmen entering in a fall semester end
up qualifying.
You know, maybe all of those
counterfactual assertions that Rep. Bill
Cassidy is a stark, raving, closeted liberal are true. That’s the only
explanation as to why Pres. Barack Obama
is doing everything possible to see that Sen. Mary Landrieu loses her reelection bid
to him.
Poor Mary keeps getting the
beatdown from her fellow Democrat and Dear Leader, even though she was the
crucial vote that foisted the more expensive, worse performing, wealth
redistributive overhaul of America’s health care system onto her suffering
constituents, among the many other vigorous tail-wags she has surrendered to
her master. Worse, the manner in which she continues to get whipped by him
negates what she perceives is her major selling point to a Louisiana electorate
increasing skeptical of what she professes to be.
Landrieu knows she votes as a
liberal, as any
voting scorecard will tell you, but a large portion of the voting public
doesn’t know about those even as majority of them would reject her if they did.
So her gambit has been to try to create the impression that she’s a political
moderate, deviating from her party’s unrepentant liberalism on the issues that
matter most to Louisianans. Further, she hopes to leverage that figment by
claiming her seniority and experience gives her an advantage to any rank
newcomer to the Senate (even though Cassidy will have spent six years in
Congress by election day 2014), much like an aging prostitute tries to make up
for the bloom being off the rose by enticing customers through tantalizing them
that she knows a few tricks that the less seasoned girls don’t.
A growing dispute over sales taxation never may have happened had the
Legislature addressed the matter more decisively and rationally – not because clarity
could have been provided, but because it hasn’t fixed the controversy it
created in the first place.
Act
298 in 2007 created “cultural districts,” which afford sales tax breaks to “original
art” sold in them. Earlier this month the state sanctioned four more of them to
create 67 total that includes a pair in Shreveport and one in each of Monroe
and West Monroe.
The problem comes from enforcement. The statute creates an exacting
set of standards for what qualifies for exemption from state and local tax.
For example, if one makes by hand beads and then strings these together, that’s
undeniably considered art. But take prefabricated beads and do the same, and it’s
not. Sometimes furniture, photographs, rugs, and even clothes are; most of the
time, they would not be. Generally, this is left up to self-enforcement by
sellers, but government has an interest in some oversight.