One presumed motive of Democrat Lt. Gov. Mitch Landrieu’s decision not to run for mayor of New Orleans is that he could succeed to the governorship of the state sooner rather than later. However, this is not a realistic scenario.
If Landrieu’s ambitions include being governor, Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal’s exit by 2015 leaves him a decent opportunity to try for it, yet also risking the rise of other younger Democrats not seen as ossified into a do-nothing job as is Landrieu now. But if Landrieu can ascend to the office by Jindal’s early departure, this definitely keeps him at the forefront of Democrat possibilities for the governorship.
The problem with this strategy, however, is that Jindal, especially if he seeks executive branch national office, is unlikely to leave earlier than the end of his second term. There’s no way Jindal would challenge sitting Republican Sen. David Vitter next year; indeed, he has pledged campaign support. More likely would be taking a shot at Mitch’s older sister Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu in 2014, but only if it seems a 2016 bid for vice president or president would seem unreasonable.
While Jindal may run for president in 2012, for a number of reasons this is quite unlikely primarily the timing of a reelection run for governor in 2011, so the most likely situation of early exit would be accepting a vice presidential nomination in 2012. Even here, this is a longshot unless the right circumstances manifest.
Since he is thought of as potential presidential timber and because of his relatively young age, no younger presidential candidate for the GOP would want Jindal on the ticket, not only to tamp down any potential rivalry, but also because younger nominees tend to pick those who are older and more experienced in national government, especially as almost every serious GOP believed candidate have backgrounds mostly in state government.
And as of now, the national party has a vacuum of nationally-experienced candidates considered in the running for the top job, due to a leadership that turned away from conservatism and thereby brought voter approbation and thus their rejection. About the only candidate now being discussed that would seem to be senior enough in terms of national stature, age, and ideology (the wavering from conservatism that brought defeat in 2008 probably will not make economic liberal former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee a likely nominee) might be former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Otherwise, Jindal’s characteristics pair poorly with other potential nominees, and keep in mind any GOP team with Jindal on it would have to win for Mitch Landrieu to get a payoff.
So if Landrieu is calculating he may benefit from a premature Jindal departure, he shouldn’t place much weighing on it, which is why the element of risk in his waiting to aspire out of his current office, which increases the chances he will become overshadowed by others, is higher than perhaps he and many others understand.
15.7.09
Lower standards may play to overbuilt technical schools
One wonders whether the driving force behind relaxed standards in Louisiana secondary education does not have something to do with trying to justify the surplus of community colleges and technical schools in the state.
Last week, Gov. Bobby Jindal signed into law a measure that would allow a third option for those wishing to graduate with high school diplomas in Louisiana. Created as a response to a stubbornly-high dropout rate from high school, the guiding philosophy was this “career” track would pump up these rates by changing the rules thereby making it easier to graduate. Rather than elevate students and changing structures to help accomplish this, such as merit pay for teachers and regular subject area testing of teachers for competence, the move makes it easier for politicians to declare victory while less becomes demanded of students in an evolving economy that relentlessly demands more conceptual skills. Even if children were, no politician was left behind on the notions behind this backwards attempt.
But it’s possible that another motive played a part in the disturbingly-easy acquiescence policy-makers had to lowering standards. The budget crunch evident in this year’s state budget highlighted spending on higher education as the constitutional and legal structure of state fiscal procedures forced it to bear disproportionately cuts made to the budget. Along with that came questions about whether the structuring of higher education in the state, from doctoral programs all the way to vocational training, could be made more efficient.
There are some disturbing questions about the conduct of higher education in Louisiana, especially in the area of community and technical colleges, where there seem to be too many of them. The state has more of these than all but five others of which all have significantly higher populations. It’s likely the greatest efficiency savings would come from closing a number of technical schools and realigning their programs. However, perhaps not coincidentally, the new diploma track would prepare students in it only to attend community colleges and technical schools.
The hopeful way to look at this would be the new law’s political backers recognize the necessity of these changes to the two-year and technical schools and in a sense are transferring their function to a lower but more efficient level. If almost every parish no longer will have a technical school, then the training task in those that will lose one can be devolved to beefed-up programs in the high schools. Then there’s the cynical, and perhaps more realistic way of viewing the alteration, that perhaps the creation of this track would act as a diversionary element to those who in the regular track would do poorly enough in high school that they otherwise could not go on to higher education now to get a form of it, artificially creating more demand – and the necessity of state dollars – for attendance in the overbuilt two-year and technical system.
Problematic here is that it is an even less efficient way of using resources. Why not simply transfer efforts from higher to secondary education through the new track and realize economies of scale instead of creating more duplication? Vocational kinds of education for first-time workers need to have just one home, higher or secondary, and if 13-year-olds are going to be rigidly segmented into different tracks that will make it difficult for the rest of their lives for the ones choosing (at an age where many have little idea of real understanding or the implications of their decision) the vocational track ever to move beyond that, there’s no reason to have such a vast network of technical schools to serve them (a smaller one can serve adults who want to change vocational careers).
Let’s hope the latter in fact was not a motive for this change which threatens to prepare a larger proportion of the student population for an economy that demands greater critical thinking abilities that the current curriculum emphasizes more. If so, it makes a bad public policy decision even worse.
Last week, Gov. Bobby Jindal signed into law a measure that would allow a third option for those wishing to graduate with high school diplomas in Louisiana. Created as a response to a stubbornly-high dropout rate from high school, the guiding philosophy was this “career” track would pump up these rates by changing the rules thereby making it easier to graduate. Rather than elevate students and changing structures to help accomplish this, such as merit pay for teachers and regular subject area testing of teachers for competence, the move makes it easier for politicians to declare victory while less becomes demanded of students in an evolving economy that relentlessly demands more conceptual skills. Even if children were, no politician was left behind on the notions behind this backwards attempt.
But it’s possible that another motive played a part in the disturbingly-easy acquiescence policy-makers had to lowering standards. The budget crunch evident in this year’s state budget highlighted spending on higher education as the constitutional and legal structure of state fiscal procedures forced it to bear disproportionately cuts made to the budget. Along with that came questions about whether the structuring of higher education in the state, from doctoral programs all the way to vocational training, could be made more efficient.
There are some disturbing questions about the conduct of higher education in Louisiana, especially in the area of community and technical colleges, where there seem to be too many of them. The state has more of these than all but five others of which all have significantly higher populations. It’s likely the greatest efficiency savings would come from closing a number of technical schools and realigning their programs. However, perhaps not coincidentally, the new diploma track would prepare students in it only to attend community colleges and technical schools.
The hopeful way to look at this would be the new law’s political backers recognize the necessity of these changes to the two-year and technical schools and in a sense are transferring their function to a lower but more efficient level. If almost every parish no longer will have a technical school, then the training task in those that will lose one can be devolved to beefed-up programs in the high schools. Then there’s the cynical, and perhaps more realistic way of viewing the alteration, that perhaps the creation of this track would act as a diversionary element to those who in the regular track would do poorly enough in high school that they otherwise could not go on to higher education now to get a form of it, artificially creating more demand – and the necessity of state dollars – for attendance in the overbuilt two-year and technical system.
Problematic here is that it is an even less efficient way of using resources. Why not simply transfer efforts from higher to secondary education through the new track and realize economies of scale instead of creating more duplication? Vocational kinds of education for first-time workers need to have just one home, higher or secondary, and if 13-year-olds are going to be rigidly segmented into different tracks that will make it difficult for the rest of their lives for the ones choosing (at an age where many have little idea of real understanding or the implications of their decision) the vocational track ever to move beyond that, there’s no reason to have such a vast network of technical schools to serve them (a smaller one can serve adults who want to change vocational careers).
Let’s hope the latter in fact was not a motive for this change which threatens to prepare a larger proportion of the student population for an economy that demands greater critical thinking abilities that the current curriculum emphasizes more. If so, it makes a bad public policy decision even worse.
14.7.09
Corps decision should discourage unneeded reservoir
The Army Corps of Engineers, reviled by some in New Orleans, may have many in Washington Parish feeling quite the opposite about it with its recent decision to deny a permit for the commencement of the building of a manmade reservoir there.
As noted previously, this project emulates others around the state that not only serve as glorious wastes of taxpayer dollars but also enable the shuttling of these to special interests. The worst example, at it got completed, is Poverty Point near Monroe where tens of millions of dollars were spent to create a lake that supposedly would bring a big touristic economic boom to the area. Instead, all it did was flood a bunch of land and make some political insiders wealthy – and apparently not totally legally.
Led by state Sen. Ben Nevers, a similar stunt is being attempted in Washington Parish, but area residents are resisting. A pliant Washington Parish Reservoir Commission, of whom all but one of its members were appointed by former Gov. Kathleen Blanco in 2003 for 10-year terms, tried to push through the necessary permits with the ACE. But in part because of resident objections, the federal agency turned down the request. Unfortunately, the Commission plans on trying again by addressing one ACE complaint that the request did not fit the intent of the project.
As noted previously, this project emulates others around the state that not only serve as glorious wastes of taxpayer dollars but also enable the shuttling of these to special interests. The worst example, at it got completed, is Poverty Point near Monroe where tens of millions of dollars were spent to create a lake that supposedly would bring a big touristic economic boom to the area. Instead, all it did was flood a bunch of land and make some political insiders wealthy – and apparently not totally legally.
Led by state Sen. Ben Nevers, a similar stunt is being attempted in Washington Parish, but area residents are resisting. A pliant Washington Parish Reservoir Commission, of whom all but one of its members were appointed by former Gov. Kathleen Blanco in 2003 for 10-year terms, tried to push through the necessary permits with the ACE. But in part because of resident objections, the federal agency turned down the request. Unfortunately, the Commission plans on trying again by addressing one ACE complaint that the request did not fit the intent of the project.
13.7.09
On Medicaid, LA may end up casualty of ideological war
Pres. Barack Obama cut his political eyeteeth in the shadowy world of community organizing where many are influenced by New Left radicalism of the 1960s. Louisiana may soon run afoul of Obama’s grand strategy to acquire and consolidate power and privilege.
Last week, the state’s Secretary of Health and Hospitals Alan Levine went to Washington to plead for some reasonable adjustment to the formula that calculates the state’s match for Medicaid payments. It is computed on levels of income over a three-year period and thus rises as does that indicator. Presumably, a wealthier population has a greater ability to pay for its services. After three straight years of massive federal spending in the $150 billion range for recovery-related efforts in the state, Levine argued that this artificially inflated the numbers for Louisiana which means it would disproportionately pay more in the immediate future.
No doubt the federal aid provided a boost to Louisiana’s tax coffers of which some could have been saved to counteract a higher rate. But in all fairness, the state overall still would be negatively affected fiscally by this induced condition if the matching percentage rises as scheduled. And Congress, controlled by Democrats, did provide relief in other areas in the past in terms of waiving matching requirements for recovery dollars beginning with Democrat former Gov. Kathleen Blanco and, to a lesser extent as the dollars figure grew smaller, to current Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal.
However, the present situation may turn out differently. Democrat Obama now controls the federal bureaucracy that would waive the requirement, and his party still reigns over Congress. And with Jindal at the helm of Louisiana, he is viewed by them not only as an irritant for reasons such as this spring he successfully defied their plan to transform unemployment benefits from insurance to an entitlement, but also because he could be an electoral threat to Obama in 2012 and/or a long-term threat to the party’s ability to stay in power.
If Obama follows the playbook he has referenced throughout his short presidency, expect the federal government to deny a waiver, and for him to instruct Congress not to intervene. He would be following one of the rules for radicals postulated by New Left icon Saul Alinsky, as elucidated in a strategy known as “orchestrate a crisis.”
In a nutshell, the idea is to take a presumed tenet or ideology of a governing system and associate policy failure with it to discredit the ideas behind that system. An example at the federal level has been Obama economic policy that features massive increases in government spending and borrowing to cover it with the stated goal of improving economic performance. The learned and informed know well that a transfer of assets from more- productive private sector uses by expanding the money supply and disproportionately moving those funds into the less-productive government sector will serve to weaken, not strengthen the economy in the immediate future, and produce a double whammy with a higher debt burden in the more distant future. Yet Obama pursues this on the double hope that somehow, despite decades of refutation, that Keynesian economics actually is reflected in the real world or the crisis will deepen making radical calls for redistribution of power and wealth more palatable to voters.
The same tactic can be applied to Louisiana. By refusing the waiver, within Louisiana a crisis can be created as the state would be obligated to spend hundreds of millions more of its own money, replicating the tough budget decisions experienced this past budget cycle. These conditions Democrats hope will cause blame to be attached to Jindal and his ideas and thereby erode his chances for future national success, and perhaps even cost him reelection as governor. At the very least, they may wish that Jindal backs off from health care reform plans that, contrary to what Obama is trying to pull on the national level, place less emphasis on government. A decision on whether to grant a waiver may come down to an insistence that Jindal abandon such plans.
Either or both scenarios of Jindal giving up trying to pursue polices that ultimately would demonstrate the bankruptcy of the ideas underpinning Obama and his supporters or his political demise so that he cannot pursue them any longer, by threatening or bringing about the creation of a crisis, would satisfy the left. Surely Jindal realizes what’s on the way and must do his best to make it politically difficult for the left to achieve this outcome. He can try by having his administration talk up the matter, particularly noting that other states are in such a position so it is not an isolated problem, and to bring up the disaster relief repayment waivers of the past. If he can adequately show, in terms based on the principle of fairness, the punitive and partisan nature that a refusal of a waiver or of a change in the law implicates, Obama and the leftists that run Congress may see the political price as too high to block any change.
This decision will have major implications for the state for years to come. Let us hope Louisiana can avoid being trampled by the left’s unquenchable thirst for power and privilege.
Last week, the state’s Secretary of Health and Hospitals Alan Levine went to Washington to plead for some reasonable adjustment to the formula that calculates the state’s match for Medicaid payments. It is computed on levels of income over a three-year period and thus rises as does that indicator. Presumably, a wealthier population has a greater ability to pay for its services. After three straight years of massive federal spending in the $150 billion range for recovery-related efforts in the state, Levine argued that this artificially inflated the numbers for Louisiana which means it would disproportionately pay more in the immediate future.
No doubt the federal aid provided a boost to Louisiana’s tax coffers of which some could have been saved to counteract a higher rate. But in all fairness, the state overall still would be negatively affected fiscally by this induced condition if the matching percentage rises as scheduled. And Congress, controlled by Democrats, did provide relief in other areas in the past in terms of waiving matching requirements for recovery dollars beginning with Democrat former Gov. Kathleen Blanco and, to a lesser extent as the dollars figure grew smaller, to current Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal.
However, the present situation may turn out differently. Democrat Obama now controls the federal bureaucracy that would waive the requirement, and his party still reigns over Congress. And with Jindal at the helm of Louisiana, he is viewed by them not only as an irritant for reasons such as this spring he successfully defied their plan to transform unemployment benefits from insurance to an entitlement, but also because he could be an electoral threat to Obama in 2012 and/or a long-term threat to the party’s ability to stay in power.
If Obama follows the playbook he has referenced throughout his short presidency, expect the federal government to deny a waiver, and for him to instruct Congress not to intervene. He would be following one of the rules for radicals postulated by New Left icon Saul Alinsky, as elucidated in a strategy known as “orchestrate a crisis.”
In a nutshell, the idea is to take a presumed tenet or ideology of a governing system and associate policy failure with it to discredit the ideas behind that system. An example at the federal level has been Obama economic policy that features massive increases in government spending and borrowing to cover it with the stated goal of improving economic performance. The learned and informed know well that a transfer of assets from more- productive private sector uses by expanding the money supply and disproportionately moving those funds into the less-productive government sector will serve to weaken, not strengthen the economy in the immediate future, and produce a double whammy with a higher debt burden in the more distant future. Yet Obama pursues this on the double hope that somehow, despite decades of refutation, that Keynesian economics actually is reflected in the real world or the crisis will deepen making radical calls for redistribution of power and wealth more palatable to voters.
The same tactic can be applied to Louisiana. By refusing the waiver, within Louisiana a crisis can be created as the state would be obligated to spend hundreds of millions more of its own money, replicating the tough budget decisions experienced this past budget cycle. These conditions Democrats hope will cause blame to be attached to Jindal and his ideas and thereby erode his chances for future national success, and perhaps even cost him reelection as governor. At the very least, they may wish that Jindal backs off from health care reform plans that, contrary to what Obama is trying to pull on the national level, place less emphasis on government. A decision on whether to grant a waiver may come down to an insistence that Jindal abandon such plans.
Either or both scenarios of Jindal giving up trying to pursue polices that ultimately would demonstrate the bankruptcy of the ideas underpinning Obama and his supporters or his political demise so that he cannot pursue them any longer, by threatening or bringing about the creation of a crisis, would satisfy the left. Surely Jindal realizes what’s on the way and must do his best to make it politically difficult for the left to achieve this outcome. He can try by having his administration talk up the matter, particularly noting that other states are in such a position so it is not an isolated problem, and to bring up the disaster relief repayment waivers of the past. If he can adequately show, in terms based on the principle of fairness, the punitive and partisan nature that a refusal of a waiver or of a change in the law implicates, Obama and the leftists that run Congress may see the political price as too high to block any change.
This decision will have major implications for the state for years to come. Let us hope Louisiana can avoid being trampled by the left’s unquenchable thirst for power and privilege.
12.7.09
Good, bad, and ugly of NW LA legislators, 2009
Previously, this space featured commentary about the this regular session’s most valuable northwest Louisiana legislator, state Sen. Buddy Shaw, as well as its biggest clown, state Sen. Robert Adley. But there are still some awards to give for the recently-completed session for the other good, bad, and ugly from the area’s delegation.
Best Legislation to Become Law: Unlike last year when Shaw had perhaps the best piece of legislation in the state when it cut taxes for the vast majority of taxpayers, little stood out from the northwest Louisiana delegation. Of it all, the best was state Rep. Jane Smith’s HB 559 with gives special breaks for veterans, particularly those disabled in their service, in operating businesses.
Worst Legislation Introduced: HB 705; see discussion below.
Best Legislation to Become Law: Unlike last year when Shaw had perhaps the best piece of legislation in the state when it cut taxes for the vast majority of taxpayers, little stood out from the northwest Louisiana delegation. Of it all, the best was state Rep. Jane Smith’s HB 559 with gives special breaks for veterans, particularly those disabled in their service, in operating businesses.
Worst Legislation Introduced: HB 705; see discussion below.
9.7.09
Landrieu pass illustrates weakening political position
There are two reasons why Lt. Gov. Mitch Landrieu seems to have closed the door on pursuing in 2010 the office his father held and one he twice has run for and appears to prize heavily, mayor of New Orleans – he can’t win because he’s white and his last name is Landrieu. In doing so, he also reveals his uncertain political future.
A 1994 run produced little result, but in 2006 Landrieu made the runoff and many thought he would win with a voting population near black-white parity. Despite being the least mono-racial election for New Orleans mayor in decades – an estimated 20 percent of blacks voted for Landrieu – still he lost to a deeply flawed and weakened incumbent Ray Nagin.
Since then, white candidates have won what in effect are city-wide elections – Arnie Fielkow and Jackie Clarkson have grabbed at-large city council spots although the latter in a special election, and Leon Cannizaro got elected as District Attorney with President Barack Obama on the ballot just last year. But Landrieu’s problem is that his name is not so much associated with his father that might help him with black voters relative to stronger black candidates, but his own and his sister’s that will hurt him relative to white voters.
What Landrieu learned in 2006 is that his support was a mile wide but an inch deep. Even facing the likes of the ridiculed Nagin, he could not entice enough black voters to abandon the incumbent that more than offset his solid white support, but at the same time too many whites see him as too liberal, in part because of professed comfort with big government, in part because he is linked with his sister Sen. Mary Landrieu, for him to stimulate the disproportionate white turnout that would vote for him to beat a quality black opponent.
Being lieutenant governor provides a steady paycheck and it’s the kind of job where it’s difficult to knock off an incumbent, but it’s typically dead-end. Until former Gov. Kathleen Blanco made the leap in 2003, it had not happened electorally. Craven ambition will lead Landrieu to want to vacate his present post eventually, and it is unlikely that conditions ever will change for him to make the mayorality of New Orleans likely. Thus, governor would be the next logical step, but whether in 2011 is another matter.
Gov. Bobby Jindal has had a rough spot here and there but at this point – and two years is a long time politically – he should not have much trouble for reelection purposes and still enjoys high popularity. Landrieu may be wondering whether Jindal will make a stab at the presidency in 2012 which would really require for him to have any chance of success that Jindal stand down for 2011. Recent policy failures by Obama especially as the economy continues to deteriorate and the essential exclusion of two strong opponents, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin voluntarily and South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford somewhat less so, may encourage such a Jindal run, but chances are still that Jindal will wait until 2016 for additional burnishment of his record and possibly facing no incumbent for the White House if he chooses to run for it.
Thus, Landrieu probably will have to wait until 2015, creating plenty of time for other contestants for the state’s top job to emerge. Therefore, the real lesson of this admission of Landrieu’s is he lacks strength to go after what he wants now, and needs to wait out and hope for favorable contingencies to advance his ageing political career.
A 1994 run produced little result, but in 2006 Landrieu made the runoff and many thought he would win with a voting population near black-white parity. Despite being the least mono-racial election for New Orleans mayor in decades – an estimated 20 percent of blacks voted for Landrieu – still he lost to a deeply flawed and weakened incumbent Ray Nagin.
Since then, white candidates have won what in effect are city-wide elections – Arnie Fielkow and Jackie Clarkson have grabbed at-large city council spots although the latter in a special election, and Leon Cannizaro got elected as District Attorney with President Barack Obama on the ballot just last year. But Landrieu’s problem is that his name is not so much associated with his father that might help him with black voters relative to stronger black candidates, but his own and his sister’s that will hurt him relative to white voters.
What Landrieu learned in 2006 is that his support was a mile wide but an inch deep. Even facing the likes of the ridiculed Nagin, he could not entice enough black voters to abandon the incumbent that more than offset his solid white support, but at the same time too many whites see him as too liberal, in part because of professed comfort with big government, in part because he is linked with his sister Sen. Mary Landrieu, for him to stimulate the disproportionate white turnout that would vote for him to beat a quality black opponent.
Being lieutenant governor provides a steady paycheck and it’s the kind of job where it’s difficult to knock off an incumbent, but it’s typically dead-end. Until former Gov. Kathleen Blanco made the leap in 2003, it had not happened electorally. Craven ambition will lead Landrieu to want to vacate his present post eventually, and it is unlikely that conditions ever will change for him to make the mayorality of New Orleans likely. Thus, governor would be the next logical step, but whether in 2011 is another matter.
Gov. Bobby Jindal has had a rough spot here and there but at this point – and two years is a long time politically – he should not have much trouble for reelection purposes and still enjoys high popularity. Landrieu may be wondering whether Jindal will make a stab at the presidency in 2012 which would really require for him to have any chance of success that Jindal stand down for 2011. Recent policy failures by Obama especially as the economy continues to deteriorate and the essential exclusion of two strong opponents, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin voluntarily and South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford somewhat less so, may encourage such a Jindal run, but chances are still that Jindal will wait until 2016 for additional burnishment of his record and possibly facing no incumbent for the White House if he chooses to run for it.
Thus, Landrieu probably will have to wait until 2015, creating plenty of time for other contestants for the state’s top job to emerge. Therefore, the real lesson of this admission of Landrieu’s is he lacks strength to go after what he wants now, and needs to wait out and hope for favorable contingencies to advance his ageing political career.
8.7.09
Hypocritical, immature legislators react to Jindal vetoes
More vetoes were rung up by Gov. Bobby Jindal, and more wailing and gnashing of teeth from the comically hypocritical to the ignorantly profane were issued forth by his ideological opponents.
One Jindal bill victim was HB 785 which would have created a new political subdivision with sweeping regulatory powers, causing concern for the governor. Despite the reasonableness of the objection, this left the bill’s author state Rep. Sam Jones sputtering, “I fear that maybe it’s punitive … the reasons given to me certainly don’t wash.” Jones argued it was similar to an existing local government elsewhere – but just because it’s been done before doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, and Jindal’s veto certainly was appropriate.
However, it’s not surprising Jones would think in terms of vindictiveness; as a member of former Gov. Kathleen Blanco’s Administration, he likely had input into the “punitive” vetoes she used to cast. Jones’s selective and situational indignation is thereby duly noted and snickered at.
One Jindal bill victim was HB 785 which would have created a new political subdivision with sweeping regulatory powers, causing concern for the governor. Despite the reasonableness of the objection, this left the bill’s author state Rep. Sam Jones sputtering, “I fear that maybe it’s punitive … the reasons given to me certainly don’t wash.” Jones argued it was similar to an existing local government elsewhere – but just because it’s been done before doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, and Jindal’s veto certainly was appropriate.
However, it’s not surprising Jones would think in terms of vindictiveness; as a member of former Gov. Kathleen Blanco’s Administration, he likely had input into the “punitive” vetoes she used to cast. Jones’s selective and situational indignation is thereby duly noted and snickered at.
7.7.09
LA legislator's excuse reminds of her insignificance
So state Rep. Pat Smith is all upset because Gov. Bobby Jindal cast a line item veto against a project she sponsored. For the second year in a row, Jindal vetoed appropriations for the Louisiana Art and Science Museum in Baton Rouge, and what particularly galls her is entities such as the Louisiana Political Hall of Fame in Winnfield and Sci-Port in Shreveport escaped Jindal’s pen.
But to say it is a form of “retaliation” concerning her voting record, especially on a bill concerning disclosure by the governor’s office, is pure fantasy on her part. Reasons abound to demonstrate why.
First, while Jindal is never going to say he “retaliated” against any legislator, at the same time he offers a plausible reason for the vetoes – no regional impact compared to something like Sci-Port. Second, Smith was just one of many legislators to vote against Jindal’s preferences on not just that bill but also many more, so if that were Jindal’s decision criterion, a whole host of measures from a wide array of legislators should have been struck by him. Third, even if Jindal seemed to decide things this way, Smith was by no means Jindal’s biggest critic or obstacle to his agenda.
State Sen. Lydia Jackson, for example, sponsored legislation very opposed by Jindal to reverse already-implemented tax deductions. When the initial try was ruled unconstitutional by House Speaker Jim Tucker and not dealt with in that chamber, she tried again by amending her bill onto a House bill. On the floor in debate of these bills she criticized Jindal, and even in committee on a bill dealing with disclaimers on state publications she ripped into the Jindal Administration. She took every chance great and small to harangue Jindal over their policy differences, so if Jindal was in a retaliatory mood Jackson should be his obvious target. And – you guessed it – Sci-Port is in Jackson’s district.
It’s possible that a Jindal line item veto here or there might be designed to send a message. However, Jindal seems to do what he says in terms of projects meeting criteria such as public submission and discussion and statewide or regional impact when viewing the totality of his choices to retain or snip. Certainly the Baton Rouge museum didn’t close down because it didn’t get state money last year, validating the decision then and now.
And if Jindal were going to punish a legislator, let’s be frank, evidence is Smith simply isn’t that important or worth it. So the proper interpretation of her remarks is not that they have any validity, but that they reflect a big ego spilling out of a puny politician simultaneously searching to be taken seriously and to try to make excuses as to why she can’t deliver the goods.
But to say it is a form of “retaliation” concerning her voting record, especially on a bill concerning disclosure by the governor’s office, is pure fantasy on her part. Reasons abound to demonstrate why.
First, while Jindal is never going to say he “retaliated” against any legislator, at the same time he offers a plausible reason for the vetoes – no regional impact compared to something like Sci-Port. Second, Smith was just one of many legislators to vote against Jindal’s preferences on not just that bill but also many more, so if that were Jindal’s decision criterion, a whole host of measures from a wide array of legislators should have been struck by him. Third, even if Jindal seemed to decide things this way, Smith was by no means Jindal’s biggest critic or obstacle to his agenda.
State Sen. Lydia Jackson, for example, sponsored legislation very opposed by Jindal to reverse already-implemented tax deductions. When the initial try was ruled unconstitutional by House Speaker Jim Tucker and not dealt with in that chamber, she tried again by amending her bill onto a House bill. On the floor in debate of these bills she criticized Jindal, and even in committee on a bill dealing with disclaimers on state publications she ripped into the Jindal Administration. She took every chance great and small to harangue Jindal over their policy differences, so if Jindal was in a retaliatory mood Jackson should be his obvious target. And – you guessed it – Sci-Port is in Jackson’s district.
It’s possible that a Jindal line item veto here or there might be designed to send a message. However, Jindal seems to do what he says in terms of projects meeting criteria such as public submission and discussion and statewide or regional impact when viewing the totality of his choices to retain or snip. Certainly the Baton Rouge museum didn’t close down because it didn’t get state money last year, validating the decision then and now.
And if Jindal were going to punish a legislator, let’s be frank, evidence is Smith simply isn’t that important or worth it. So the proper interpretation of her remarks is not that they have any validity, but that they reflect a big ego spilling out of a puny politician simultaneously searching to be taken seriously and to try to make excuses as to why she can’t deliver the goods.
6.7.09
Caddo schools play politics despite charter success
As a pair of its schools have officially gone under state control as of last week, political pouting by Caddo Parish school administration is going to get just that little bit more difficult as a result of the recent releasing of standardized test scores that cast more doubt on the direction the district is heading.
The results showed that yet another Caddo school has fallen into the danger zone that culminated in two such schools being taken over by the state’s Recovery School District at the end of this month. Ridgewood Middle School became the 14th, or now about one-fifth of the total, of the district’s schools to be put on the warning list. If there was any silver lining to this, it was on the basis not of overall scores as the previous 13 had been nailed, but on sub-groups scores.
To date, the other schools that have spent too many years on the list have escaped state takeover because of individual operating agreements made with the state while others have been subsumed into the “Caddo Plan” which is an attempt to create themed schools, pump in some more money to them, and tinker with personnel. Unfortunately, the latter is unlikely to produce the kind of change needed to get these schools up to snuff because it does not change the system that produced low performances in the first place.
In order to accomplish this, the district needs to look at the dramatic improvements seen in Orleans Parish. Most of the schools there have been taken over by the state, but that’s not what has really caused some impressive progress. Rather, it has been that almost all of the schools left under the Orleans Parish School District, and many now in the RSD, have become charter schools.
By way of comparison (for the exact methodology, please refer to a previous posting) at the 4th grade level in the RSD charter school students outperformed their regular school peers by 28 percent, at the 8th grade level in the RSD by 41 percent and in the OPSD by 43 percent, and on the Graduate Exit Exam in the OPSD (excluding the magnet high school Benjamin Franklin) by 53 percent. Keep in mind that, overall, these schools draw from similar populations and the typical per student cost in a charter school there was substantially lower than in the regular schools.
In short, charter schools have done much better in the education mission using fewer resources, primarily because they can avoid some of the bureaucracy and regulations inherent to the remainder of the monopolistic one-size-fits-all public school system, especially in personnel matters without great union interference and political machinations that often accompany questions surrounding teachers and principals. It should be no accident this was the model chosen by the state for the two Caddo school taken over.
Yet not only did the Caddo Plan decisively turn its back on the charter school model for its own revamping, but district administrators, claim everybody save the district itself, seemed to go out of their way to impede the startups of the incipient Linwood Public Charter School and Linear Leadership Academy, requiring state intervention to facilitate the transition. This should not be unexpected since in the eyes of too many Caddo administrators and School Board members these are now “competitors” and casting their eyes south they know they are unlikely to win a battle of achievement against them if history (and theory) is any guide.
Which is a lamentable attitude because it puts politics ahead of children. If things play out as expected, in a few years noticeable improvement will have occurred at the two new charter schools and they will have significantly better performing students than in the academically unacceptable schools still in the grip of the CPSD, absent any significant change from the district’s current course. Only then with this evidence may the district finally decide to move from trying to make a better buggy whip to creating an automobile by moving genuinely and enthusiastically in the direction of charter schools.
Meanwhile, years will have been wasted and children will have missed a better chance to reach their potentials. The lesson already is there; no rational reason exists for the district not to embrace the charter concept for its worst performing schools at all levels, only reasons relating to the continued maintenance of power and privilege of existing special interests inside and outside of the district.
The results showed that yet another Caddo school has fallen into the danger zone that culminated in two such schools being taken over by the state’s Recovery School District at the end of this month. Ridgewood Middle School became the 14th, or now about one-fifth of the total, of the district’s schools to be put on the warning list. If there was any silver lining to this, it was on the basis not of overall scores as the previous 13 had been nailed, but on sub-groups scores.
To date, the other schools that have spent too many years on the list have escaped state takeover because of individual operating agreements made with the state while others have been subsumed into the “Caddo Plan” which is an attempt to create themed schools, pump in some more money to them, and tinker with personnel. Unfortunately, the latter is unlikely to produce the kind of change needed to get these schools up to snuff because it does not change the system that produced low performances in the first place.
In order to accomplish this, the district needs to look at the dramatic improvements seen in Orleans Parish. Most of the schools there have been taken over by the state, but that’s not what has really caused some impressive progress. Rather, it has been that almost all of the schools left under the Orleans Parish School District, and many now in the RSD, have become charter schools.
By way of comparison (for the exact methodology, please refer to a previous posting) at the 4th grade level in the RSD charter school students outperformed their regular school peers by 28 percent, at the 8th grade level in the RSD by 41 percent and in the OPSD by 43 percent, and on the Graduate Exit Exam in the OPSD (excluding the magnet high school Benjamin Franklin) by 53 percent. Keep in mind that, overall, these schools draw from similar populations and the typical per student cost in a charter school there was substantially lower than in the regular schools.
In short, charter schools have done much better in the education mission using fewer resources, primarily because they can avoid some of the bureaucracy and regulations inherent to the remainder of the monopolistic one-size-fits-all public school system, especially in personnel matters without great union interference and political machinations that often accompany questions surrounding teachers and principals. It should be no accident this was the model chosen by the state for the two Caddo school taken over.
Yet not only did the Caddo Plan decisively turn its back on the charter school model for its own revamping, but district administrators, claim everybody save the district itself, seemed to go out of their way to impede the startups of the incipient Linwood Public Charter School and Linear Leadership Academy, requiring state intervention to facilitate the transition. This should not be unexpected since in the eyes of too many Caddo administrators and School Board members these are now “competitors” and casting their eyes south they know they are unlikely to win a battle of achievement against them if history (and theory) is any guide.
Which is a lamentable attitude because it puts politics ahead of children. If things play out as expected, in a few years noticeable improvement will have occurred at the two new charter schools and they will have significantly better performing students than in the academically unacceptable schools still in the grip of the CPSD, absent any significant change from the district’s current course. Only then with this evidence may the district finally decide to move from trying to make a better buggy whip to creating an automobile by moving genuinely and enthusiastically in the direction of charter schools.
Meanwhile, years will have been wasted and children will have missed a better chance to reach their potentials. The lesson already is there; no rational reason exists for the district not to embrace the charter concept for its worst performing schools at all levels, only reasons relating to the continued maintenance of power and privilege of existing special interests inside and outside of the district.
2.7.09
Jindal makes progress with item vetoes, but more remains
Another year, another set of line item vetoes for Gov. Bobby Jindal to cast, and those that he did indicate he’s still selectively serious about priorities in state spending. Last year, Jindal got rid of over 250 items. This year’s (not including all the contingency items in HB 1) number were only a little more than a fifth of that total, in part no doubt because Jindal showed he meant business last year.
HB 881 served as the main vehicle for what are now called “member amendments” (those placed in on request of a legislator for a nongovernmental or local government agency), for which Jindal has stated certain criteria will serve. While a few of the vetoes were technical funding matters from the previous year, on the remainder and those for local governments, Jindal stressed several themes, beginning with they had to be submitted formally which a few were not:
Regional or statewide impact by an NGO. For example, money for Scouts organizations and Veterans of Foreign Wars posts which are centered around small areas of the state were jettisoned. Requests from urban areas, in number of requests and their sizes, particularly were at risk, despite some organizations having affiliations with politically well-connected individuals. Several of these appeared to have multiple grant opportunities from other governments to access.
HB 881 served as the main vehicle for what are now called “member amendments” (those placed in on request of a legislator for a nongovernmental or local government agency), for which Jindal has stated certain criteria will serve. While a few of the vetoes were technical funding matters from the previous year, on the remainder and those for local governments, Jindal stressed several themes, beginning with they had to be submitted formally which a few were not:
Regional or statewide impact by an NGO. For example, money for Scouts organizations and Veterans of Foreign Wars posts which are centered around small areas of the state were jettisoned. Requests from urban areas, in number of requests and their sizes, particularly were at risk, despite some organizations having affiliations with politically well-connected individuals. Several of these appeared to have multiple grant opportunities from other governments to access.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)