Second spot choices show mixed results for reform

Looks like questions are getting answered concerning recent potential leadership changes in the state, in a way mixed for political reform.

One was Sec. of State Jay Dardenne’s announced entry into the lieutenant governor’s contest this fall to succeed Lt. Gov. Mitch Landrieu who will be assuming his new elective office of New Orleans mayor in early May. This is a clear sign that Gov. Bobby Jindal’s hope of savings some bucks and streamlining government through elimination of the nearly-useless office is likely to fail.

Since it would require a constitutional amendment which means at least two-thirds of each chamber of the Legislature must approve followed by a majority vote of the people – a referendum that would occur at the same time as the election to fill the unexpired spot in question – that Dardenne, whose current office likely would inherit some of the duties of the abolished office and become the new successor to the governor if that office disappears, does not fear leaving his current spot only to find his new job is disappearing into his old. This means his political intelligence must have the bill probably never making it out of the Legislature.

Of course, if somehow it does by the end of the session near the end of June and he feels it could get voter approval, he always could fail to qualify shortly thereafter. Still, this would require spending a decent chunk of money campaigning to that point so he must feel the odds are not in the favor of legislative approval.

The other was the apparent imminent appointment of state Rep. Joel Robideaux to the Speaker Pro-Tem position in the state House. With the body split essentially evenly between Republican and Democrats but with Speaker Jim Tucker being a Republican, to honor this close division somebody from the GOP could not realistically be favored by Tucker. Robideaux is one of three independents in the House.

Black and younger Democrat state Rep. Rick Gallot and old-timer white Democrat Noble Ellington also declared intentions for the post, but not only appear to be splitting the support among Democrats. Further, some Acadiana Democrats (Robideaux is from the Lafayette area) are lending support to the nonpartisan (Gallot and Ellington are from north Louisiana). This gives plenty of capital for Tucker to forward Robideaux’s name and for the latter to win the leadership election at the commencement of the session.

This is good news for reformers, of which Gallot and Ellington are anything but, and ironic for Republicans. Robideaux ran as an independent only because of an internecine feud within the local GOP and while maintaining that label after his special election win in 2004 votes fairly reliably with Republicans. Thus, what at the time looked like an embarrassing defeat for the party actually turns to its advantage now. This ascension also would make Robideaux a favorite to become the new Speaker after Tucker leaves on term limits after 2011.

Reformers might be nonplussed at the dim prognosis of the amendment regarding the second slot in the executive branch, but getting Robideaux in the second slot in the House, even if it largely is symbolic in terms of wielding real power, is as good as reformers could have hoped for at any time during the life of this Legislature.

LA must pay closer attention to delivering disabled help

It may not be coincidental, but surely Louisiana is looking much more carefully into how it delivers Medicaid services to the developmentally disabled as a result of budget crises and a lawsuit concerning delivery of such services.

The same day the state announced it was going to alter this delivery, particularly in the mental health area, a family sued the state arguing it was not complying with federal law regarding provision of services to a developmentally-disabled man. Courtesy of the federal Olmstead court decision in 1999 and the state’s Barthelemy court decision in Louisiana in 2001, state governments must, when possible, deliver such services in the least-institutionalized manner.

The family argues that cuts in service, prompted by large budget deficits with a state fiscal structure that forces the largest absolute reductions to be made in the area of health care, will force unnecessarily the man into an institution instead of receiving home care, by lopping off hours allocated per day from 24 to seven or fewer. The state notes that there is no absolute right to unlimited care provided by the state.

Jindal, Cao lead on Medicaid issue; Landrieu obstructs

-->

If he puts his money where his mouth is, Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal will have Louisiana move in a very positive direction to cope with budgetary problems and set up better state fiscal policy-making for the future. Unfortunately, Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu seems more interested in playing politics than in finding solutions.

In his latest remarks, Jindal gave broad parameters to his agenda over the next few months, and welcome they are. He absolutely ruled out tax increases and said the state would concentrate on cutting spending, correctly identifying how to boost economic development and make state government the right size. Further, he pledged to try to alter the state’s fiscal structure to provide for a more-rational mechanism by which to cut spending so that it did not disproportionately fall on health care and higher education, such as freeing dedicated monies and allowing more control by universities over tuition as long as they performed adequately (modeled after Virginia’s plan). Also, he said he would work towards getting the federal government to remedy an unintended consequence of its formula to distribute Medicaid dollars that artificially inflated Louisiana’s share of paying for the program because of federal recovery dollars for the hurricane disasters of 2005 – perhaps the most serious fiscal problem the state faces in the short term.

Regrettably, Landrieu seems unwilling to help out on this last part. In discussing a proposal by Democrat Pres. Barack Obama to have a bipartisan meeting concerning health care policy, she continued to stay unusually wedded to the current Democrat plan that would bring higher costs and taxes for lower quality. Perhaps this should not be unexpected since she was ridiculed for, even as a large majority of the state’s residents were against the plan, her support of it after it was revealed an amendment to its Senate version giving the state perhaps over $300 million concerning the Medicaid formula got put into it at her behest. Then when political conditions made the plan impossible, she dug in even more in her support of it through a bizarre speech on the Senate floor. In short, she has invested herself so heavily into a plan that cannot pass and which is detested by a majority of her constituents that she cannot see the wisdom in cutting her losses and abandoning it in favor of genuine political solutions.

Particularly relevant as a solution is H.R. 4047 by Republican Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao which would make the adjustment requested by Jindal and is co-sponsored by every member of the Louisiana House delegation. If Landrieu were serious about trying to get what she claims she wants, she would abandon the flawed Obama changes and clearly articulate her support for Cao’s bill.

Ironically, in her comments about Obama’s pitch, Landrieu cast doubt on whether Republicans would be honest in her intentions when she seems to exhibit a lack of that on the Medicaid formula issue. Petulantly insisting that passing a bill based on the same flawed philosophy that cannot get public support, any real bipartisan support, or necessary majorities to move forward and holding hostage the Medicaid fix as part of that is irresponsible and demonstrates Landrieu’s greater interest in insisting on following blind ideology rather than in realistic efforts to help Louisiana.

Musical chairs in the offing for ambitious LA politicians

With the elections of Democrats Lt. Gov. Mitch Landrieu as New Orleans mayor and state Rep. Karen Peterson, currently the Speaker Pro-Tem, to the state Senate, the musical chairs have started early in Louisiana state government, creating some interesting succession scenarios.

For the state’s second job, Landrieu’s choice not to leave it until shortly before his mayoral inauguration sets interesting dynamics. With talk intensifying about eliminating the job for money-saving and logistical reasons after the current term ends in early 2012 as a result of no elected incumbent being there for months after Landrieu leaves, it’s possible that a bill to do so will be well through the Legislature by that time. Two-thirds of each chamber must approve, followed by a majority vote of the people which would be held at the same time as the election to replace the temporary gubernatorial appointee to finish the term.

By the end of April, legislators should have sense of the bill’s likelihood of passage and this could affect substantially offers to fill the seat temporarily, which Gov. Bobby Jindal has said would go to somebody who will pledge not to run for it in the general election, and to run to finish the term. The temporary appointee likely would be a Republican and/or Jindal loyalist either at the end of a political career, or had a long-serving career and recently retired from it, or is looking for a little visibility for a future but not immediate career. One thing it will not be would be a Democrat, as the stakes simply are too high to have a situation of vacancy even during a time span of a few months just in case the office becomes vacant within that window for whatever reason, as this would give such a Democrat a big leg up to run for it in 2011.

If the winds seem to be blowing fairly convincingly for the elimination of the lieutenant governor’s job among the judgment of legislators by the beginning of May, more interest among sitting term-limited legislators approaching the end of their political careers might manifest as they will see this as an easier ticket on which to wrap up their service than jockeying in a race for a job that has no future. But if elimination seems uncertain, interest will be light in the appointive six-month job and interest in running for the replacement job will perk up substantially. If the bill fails to get out of the Legislature, interest by legislators will go through the ceiling since it would not cost them their seat to win; if it does get out but voter approval seems uncertain, a fair amount of interest still will remain for qualifying by term-limited legislators that will begin over a month after adjournment.

Two leading names suggested for the appointive job – former House Speaker Hunt Downer and Department of Natural Resources Secretary Scott Angelle – are interesting in that they also have been linked to running for the Third District of the U.S. House, itself a possible lame duck seat that may be apportioned away, this fall. Selection of one of them would indicate passing on this contest and might leave the other as one of the favorites if entering. But either they will enter prior to Jindal’s selection or very shortly thereafter, given by then only four months will remain until the party primaries. If both do, this may tip that former state Sen. Ken Hollis could be the leading candidate.

Assuming there is ambiguity about whether the office will be eliminated, one figure that will not run is Republican Sec. of State Jay Dardenne, who stands to become next in line to the governorship if it is done away with. Nor would Republican Treasurer John Kennedy run, whose position now would be much higher profile. Others who are more influential legislators who are not term-limited also would be unlikely to run (unless bored with their present post), since they would give up a sure seat and reelection to run for a job that may last only a year, and would have to campaign twice in a year to get their old seat back. Thus, the field mostly would be term-limited legislators.

The dynamics differ somewhat when dealing with the House pro-tem position, as no spending nor voluntary leaving of a seat is necessary. Clearly favored here is state Rep. Rick Gallot given the demographic and partisan composition of the House. With a virtual 50/50 split between parties and with Speaker Jim Tucker being a Republican, a black Democrat normally almost would be required as pro-tem choice with over half of House Democrats being black.

However, Gallot has a choice laid down to him by Tucker: either be the (largely symbolic) second-ranked officer or be chairman of the House and Governmental Affairs Committee that will control the redistricting process, but not both. Him being term-limited, look for Gallot to take the House’s second spot and perhaps try to parlay that into the state’s second position. But should he remain in this chairman’s role, the next choice could be interesting.

Tucker cannot pick a Republican, given the close split in the House. Yet he could pick state Rep. Joel Robideaux, an independent who votes more often with Republicans if he wants a more reform-minded colleague. Otherwise, he could go with an old warhorse who has served in the Legislature longer than any other House member, Democrat state Rep. Noble Ellington. He won’t be much of a reformer, but his sclerotic nature as a political force may allow Tucker to ignore him largely in pushing a more conservative agenda.

Tucker promises his pick within a week, and certainly by the time three months have passed we’ll know what has developed concerning the job a step away from Jindal’s.

Jindal pleased, establishment not, by sensible report

(This one is for you, Jimmy and Randy Steele)

Louisiana’s Postsecondary Education Review Commission wrapping up its formal work drew some resistance to Gov. Bobby Jindal’s quest to reform public higher education. But that is to be expected from a hidebound regime, and in its reaction to the recommendations showed it is becoming more alarmed at how inevitable and beneficial reform is going to impact traditional and present arrangements.

PERC got most of it right: consolidating higher education boards will save money and clarify mission and implementation (including program duplication issues); increased institutional control over tuition rates will improve alignment of resources to institution; stressing progress towards graduation over enrollment will mean less wasted effort (and tax dollars) on education that doesn’t much get used or makes an no real impact on low achieving/unmotivated students; and raising admissions standards at all baccalaureate institutions will reduce tax dollars inefficiently used on students not capable or ready to attend such universities.

Landrieu win salvages career, creates state intrigue

-->

As disappointing as Lt. Gov. Mitch Landrieu’s 2006 defeat for mayor of New Orleans to the very flawed Ray Nagin, the Democrat’s win here in 2010 is as impressive, and has immediate repercussions across the Louisiana political landscape.

Personally, Landrieu needed a win to salvage his political career, and a big win to get it really going. After his ignominious 2006 defeat which meant his only semi-high profile political achievement to date was managing to win the (if there never were an absence in the governor’s office the rather insignificant) lieutenant governorship. This bode poorly for his ever aspiring to a more exalted position and a loss would have essentially ended any hopes of going beyond his current job. A big win without even necessitating a general election means he could leverage this new job into a credible run for the Senate (if his sister decides she can’t stand the self-generated heat and he wants to serve only a single term) in 2014 or the governorship in 2015.

Statewide, interesting conflicts look set to emerge. Gov. Bobby Jindal has made a good case for eliminating the lieutenant governor’s job and with no elected incumbent in the slot that makes it much easier to carry out this money-saving, confusion-reducing move. However, this reduces the number of offices politicians, especially those term-limited in the Legislature, can pursue so there may be some resistance from them for its demise. However politically unworkable the plan was with an incumbent, now it becomes a whole lot easier to pull off.

Cao, Melancon hurt by wanting review of military law

-->

As the U.S. military follows White House orders to review its policy on the permissibility of those who practice homosexuality serving in its ranks, among Louisiana members of Congress and aspirants to those positions most Republicans argue with logic against changing current policy, while Democrats emote without logic in favor of it.

Present law is that anyone about whom there is genuine evidence demonstrating that he acts on homosexual relations is to be discharged from the military. There is very good reason for this, as any attitudes that interfere with optimal functioning of combat-related units are to be discouraged. Having sexual impulses trump martial virtues endangers lives.

However, more to the point, in keeping with the understanding that self-identity regarding sexual preference is a function not of any built-in biological necessity but, rather, in undertaking certain actions, is that any member of the military in a combat unit (by definition all men) who is undisciplined enough to express physically these feelings towards any other member of the unit demonstrates a flaw that detracts from the unit’s performance and can put its members at risk when these feelings interfere with decisions that should be based upon military considerations. That’s what the law is there to protect against.

Decision makes more imperative LA ethics alteration

A ruling by Louisiana’s First Circuit Court of Appeals lends some urgency to the reform suggested by the Gov. Bobby Jindal Administration and others regarding ethics enforcement.

The judges ruled that the Louisiana Board of Ethics could not appeal into the judicial system rulings made by the Ethics Adjudicatory Board – comprised on two panels with an alternate picked at random annually from administrative law judges. It cited state law that did not permit this kind of administrative appeal nor that granted the Board of Ethics this legal recourse. While state law does allow appeal of declaratory opinions, it does not for actual controversies decided.

However, ability to do this has been suggested by the Jindal Administration which, as the court confirmed, would require legal changes, both to the Administrative Procedures Act and to the Ethics Code. This salutary effect would be consistent with the prosecutorial role of the Board of Ethics as it deals with some matters that have penalties akin or even ore stringent than the criminal code.

This idea is consistent with the notion that ethics matters are quasi-criminal in nature. The maximum penalty in many cases is a $10,000 fine per violation – akin to some criminal penalties – and can be much higher if some kind of illicit gain was involved by the act amounts which already may be appealed to the First Circuit. Further, the Board of Ethics if it believes a criminal act has taken place can recommend criminal prosecution. Thus, it would seem logical that if an administrative court disagrees, the right of appeal by the board should be there. This especially should be an option now that the burden of proof is higher than it had been previously before when the Board of Ethics itself also adjudicated cases. It also should work both ways. Defendants should be able to appeal into the judiciary given the large penalties possible.

What to date has been an academic exercise now is reality. This session of the Legislature needs to make these adjustments for better quality justice and fairness in these matters.

Due diligence could prevent using unethical contractors

It looks as though all will end well for both Caddo Parish schools and Filipino teachers, as their visa problems not of their own doing seem to be getting resolved. But more care on the part of the district would have meant this never had to happen in the first place.

While unions by their nature to society are more destructive than constructive institutions, at least the Louisiana Federation of Teachers and its national parent followed through on complaints by the immigrant teachers. Yet besides the question of whether anything illegal occurred, larger policy questions for the likes of the Caddo School District are why due diligence appeared not to have been performed and what to do about it now.

Beginning in 2007, a couple of Louisiana districts contracted with Universal Placement International, Inc. to provide teachers from The Philippines for areas in which seemed to have a shortage of domestic applicants. Caddo and some others also have done so since the 2008 school year. The company took care of all the legal work and presented teachers most of whom have done a satisfactory job, if not better.

Make loosening LA dedications part of larger strategy

Perhaps energized by his service leading the Commission on Streamlining Government, state Sen. Jack Donahue has proclaimed the time has come to make “undedicated” certain funds in Louisiana’s fiscal structure. It’s a good start, but not a panacea for the constricted regime.

Donahue correctly notes that with so much money required to be funneled to certain purposes – of the state’s $9.1 billion that flows into the general fund about $5 billion is dedicated, and of the $14.6 billion that comes into state coffers from other state sources the corresponding figure is about $3.9 billion – that leaves reduced flexibility for budgeting. As a result, with about 40 percent of state-generated money tied up of the remainder about three-quarters of the remainder end up financing health care (the largest in absolute terms) and higher education (in terms of its overall receipts, the largest relative recipient of state money not dedicated). Thus, these two areas bear the brunt of any budget adjustments.

Reform of this would require that dedicated revenue streams not go to all of the 293 statutory- and 35 Constitution-dedicated funds (a helpful list of all funds as of the beginning of this fiscal year is here and balances as of the end of the third quarter in the statutory funds are here). Thus, more discretionary money would be available that might reduce monies flowing to purposes now dedicated that are considered of lower priority than those from the areas that have no dedication, given the optimal use of the incremental dollar in question.

But it’s not as simple as that. Just because nearly $9 billion potentially could be loosened doesn’t mean either it wise to do so or in the cases that it may be that substantial redirection could occur. Many of the higher-ticket items go to some pretty important priorities, such as the Minimum Foundation Program (unique among all dedications in that it is the most difficult to redirect in times of necessity) for elementary and secondary education and the Budget Stabilization Fund to act as a savings account.

Further, some things are essentially a necessity. Funds set up to satisfy court judgments, things tied to debt such as (unwisely, courtesy of a former commissioner of agriculture who way overstayed his tenure) the Boll Weevil Eradication Fund, and the Medicaid Trust Fund for the Elderly to comply with federal guidelines are among these.

Finally, a large number of these dedications are collected from a discrete number of payers that don’t create very large balances. There are dozens of regional and local education funds, tourism funds, conservation funds, and the like that citizens of local jurisdictions only pay into and theoretically only receive the benefits, as well as associations of industries and professions who use the state to collect funds from their kind by law that then are dispersed for their own purposes. Here, the question is of fairness where if money comes from a small group, it ought to go back roughly to that group, and they don’t provide much in the way of revenues anyway.

Thus, the “undedication” of funds by the Legislature and constitutional amendment can be only one part of a larger strategy. Another part would be to make it easier for money to be sliced out of such funds in times of budgetary deficit – keep the procedures the same, but make the fractions that can chopped out without going to the most drastic means higher (as was attempted last year). Finally, the state should get out the business entirely of collecting and holding onto money for a number of local entities and groups. If the St. Landry Parish School District, for example, wants to get a cut of gaming revenue to use to enhance career and technical education initiatives, contracts between it and Evangeline Downs can allow for the money to go directly to that authority instead of it being a matter of state law and oversight. Or, if the seafood industry wants to promote and market oysters by tacking on a five cent fee to every oyster tag sold, let it make this an assessment on its own members without involving the state. Let these entities be their own bankers and not drag the state or state law into it.

Even such a comprehensive strategy as this may not spring loose as much as $100 million. Still, spreading most of that out to health care and higher education can offset cuts that, if deficit projections today are realized tomorrow, could go past the present inconvenient level and into the detrimental.