LA town's woes used to push leftist economic blather

It’s unfortunate when the struggles of a small town get used for questionable polemic purposes, but that’s what happened when a liberal media figure descended upon Lake Providence to try to convince us that we’re responsible for a non-existent problem that our presumed ignorance prevents us from fixing.

In trying to sell its political Hadacol to the country, the American left harps upon the notion of economic “inequality,” that somehow it is the sign of a sick economy and society that permits wide variations in the level of wealth among its people. From a theoretical perspective, that’s sheer nonsense: the left by trying to focus on relative amounts of wealth rather than absolute amounts, the increase of which that then may cause greater disparity, ignores the proper object of policy on which conservatism concentrates, trying to improve everybody’s lot. Rather than redistribute wealth as liberalism mandates, conservatism concerns itself with creation of wealth as it recognizes that poverty comes from practices that inhibit individual initiative and ability to contribute to society as the inhibitors of gaining wealth. After all, as study of social mobility shows, when policy focuses on the conditions to make this possible, indeed a rising tides does lift all boats, even if some get pushed higher than others.

The policy of stoking envy by the left loses when challenged because while there is a subset of people who are fine with living in semi-squalor, hands out and responsibilities and freedom forsworn, the majority wants policies that deliver the opportunity for it to improve its lot. The left traditionally has tried to distract the people from this by claiming the system is rigged, but only a limited portion of the public is psychologically disposed to accept that.

Cassidy slowed by conservatives' self-immolation trait

So Rep. Bill Cassidy a quarter-century ago expressed skepticism about the Strategic Defense Initiative and more defense spending in general. That these remarks of the then-Democrat, now leading Republican candidate for the Senate in Louisiana got reported at all underscores a phenomenon about the propensity for Democrats to make themselves into a ring and fire outwards at their political enemies, while Republicans do a 180 and fire at each other.

Since then, Cassidy has become considerably older and wiser, as his lifetime American Conservative Union voting record of nearly 87 attests, higher than the chamber’s GOP member average of around 84. Yet among some conservatives, he still remains suspect with all sorts of convoluted and unconvincing efforts to paint his as the same as the incumbent that he challenges Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu, no doubt rooted on by the Landrieu campaign that hopes this results in discouraging enough of the conservative vote to fail to turn out to vote in Cassidy and/or has his campaign waste resources by feeling it must respond to the baseless charge that he is not conservative enough.

Only this past week another presumed answer for the small cabal calling Cassidy impure, state Rep. Alan Seabaugh, passed on a candidacy and then endorsed Cassidy, while new Louisiana resident Rob Maness picked up the first substantial endorsement from conservatives that Cassidy has not gotten, which gives him a chance to pull in third-party spending of about 10 percent of what Cassidy has on hand. And don’t be surprised if it wasn’t Landrieu opposition research that found the 1988 letter to the editor now being publicized.

Invalid critiques of privatization fit Kennedy profile

After his long stint in statewide elected office, we’ve learned one thing about Treas. John Kennedy: if something is his idea, even if it has warts, he’ll promote it as the greatest thing since sliced bread, but if somebody else comes up with something else based on the same concept with solid evidence to confirm, he’ll criticize it. His comments about privatization of state hospital operations provide an object lesson in this trait.

Kennedy has tried over the last several years to make himself a cottage industry about running state government efficiently and not wastefully. His specialty has been to repeat endlessly some bromides along these lines that, at best, are hit-or-miss in value, in part because some suggestions are too simplistic to work, and others of them already are being done. Typically, such recommendations have little or nothing to do with his actual job title, because he’s always seen that as a springboard to higher office.

This has driven him to a frustrating inconsistency reflected both in terms of general ideology and on specific issues. A decade ago, as the sitting Democrat treasurer he was running as a liberal for the Senate seat eventually won then by Sen. David Vitter. Half a decade ago, he had transfigured into a conservative, having switched his partisan identification prior to his last treasurer reelection, to challenge unsuccessfully for the seat now slipping away from Sen. Mary Landrieu.

Landrieu wandering deeper into political minefield

The gift that keeps on giving for electoral opponents of Louisiana’s Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu also seems to have an interesting anatomical effect: it’s causing her nose to grow longer and longer as she resorts to distraction and outright lying to prevent being known as an ignoramus or two-faced, perhaps both, to the continued deterioration of her reelection effort.

As the internal contradictions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) become increasing public and part of the public consciousness, its shortcomings have put Landrieu, who provided the crucial vote for its passage, into full defensive mode. Most damaging to her is the provision in it that is stripping apparently as many as 16 million current health insurance policyholders of their coverage, forcing many into far more expensive policies if they can afford them at all. Even though this has been part of the program’s rules for years since its passage, only now has she apparently become concerned enough to want to sponsor legislation that would prevent this.

Naturally, this incident highlights one of these contradictions – the law and its accompanying regulations are designed to force people out policies that don’t meet the new imposed minimums for scope of coverage, making many people to pay for services they don’t want any may not even be able to use or afford or be fined, which serves to decrease the number of those covered. This was chosen by Democrats like Landrieu not to try to extend coverage to as many people as possible, but to force them to pay more for coverage in order to expand money coming into the system to attempt to jigger lower rates for some others; in other words, wealth redistribution. At the same time, over the long run it is hoped to force enough people out of the system so as to raise pressure for installation of a single-payer, universal health care system, in that the payers of fines will want that to become an insurance payment rather than for nothing and those paying high rates can be convinced this is caused not by government regulation, but by evil insurance companies exploiting the faulty free market.

Presumed strength turns to weakness in CD 5 race

The clash of experience vs. enthusiasm renews in the Fifth Congressional District contest, resulting in a hair-splitting exercise that shows, as usual, experience can give you a leg up in these showdowns.

The central problem for both candidates in the race, Republicans state Sen. Neil Riser and newcomer Vance McAllister, is to distinguish themselves from each other as their announced conservative ideologies create little policy distance between the pair. As the frontrunner from the start, various opponents prior to the runoff tried two related strategies to contrast themselves with Riser.

One was predicated on the existence of large distaste for elected officials in general, or in practical terms trying to paint Riser as some part of political establishment. The problem was that Riser didn’t fit this profile well, having only been in office a grand total of six years and prior to that and continuing being a successful businessman. Thus only McAllister, an equally successful businessman who was unlike the other major candidates who all had elected office experience, could get any traction out of this strategy.

Voters school Caddo Commission for its arrogance

When the Caddo Parish Commission decided to ask voters to lengthen term limits from three to five, it gambled with extension of the property tax for debt on capital improvements on the same ballot. On Oct. 19, it lost in the worst way possible.

Hubris has crept over the Commission in recent years, fueled by the natural gas bonanza. Pay has crept up to a level far beyond what part-timers should earn running an outfit far smaller than Shreveport or the Caddo Parish School District, courtesy of it being tied to parish employee salary increases. The large surpluses of the people’s money they socked away began to loosen their wallets differently when they found a way to give millions of dollars to a manufacturer of three-wheeled automobiles turned down by other governments. But while the roughly $50 million banked was enough from which to speculate, it wasn’t enough to scale back or eliminate the renewal of the 20-year levy projected to bring in almost $24 million over that span put in front of the voters

And perhaps because of the $22,000 annual part-time salary, under the cover of the recent charter review panel that said the question could be looked at, the move was on first to eliminate term limits, but then in the face of negative public reaction and from some commissioners, that was compromised to present voters with a charter amendment to set the number at five – demonstrating the feet of clay of the commissioners who had opposed wiping out limits entirely, for few members in the 175-year history of the parish of the Commission or its predecessor ever served more than 20 consecutive years. Substantively, it was little different from having none at all.

Legislators should cut losses over scholarship records

Members of the Louisiana Legislature were sticking pins into their New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu dolls after his making them look foolish in their effort to prevent release of consent forms signed by students that score a Tulane University scholarship that are doled out by legislators.

Landrieu without quibble released all of these forms from his years as mayor, where he has assented to 20 different recipients for a year’s worth over the past four years. The mayor times five and each legislator are allowed to present an annual full scholarship to a Louisiana resident in an ancient arrangement between Tulane and the state. City regulations actually present Landrieu a choice from a list of eligible recipients vetted by a board frequently refreshed designed to erase as much politics as possible from the process.

Contrast this with the sinking ship policy presently being perpetrated by Legislative staffers, who surprisingly and contrarily to the opinion of every other lawyer or person who can read the English language have declared such documents are not a public record, despite a broad waiver of confidentiality by applicants and a court ruling nearly two decades old that seems to leave little ambiguity as to these being public records. Yet neither House Clerk Butch Speer (who was on the losing end of the 1994 case) nor Senate Secretary Glenn Koepp could give any convincing reason related to the law (R.S. 44:1 et seq.) that would justify their refusal. Even so, they exactly have refused to release such records from 2010 as requested by media outlets.

Continue quest for right-sized LA govt with Library review

This Saturday the 2013 edition of the Louisiana Book Festival will come off, and the circumstances of its reemergence provide an example to Louisiana government in general, and to the State Library of Louisiana in particular.

The Festival is an all-day affair that showcases Louisiana-authored books, those connected with the state, and those who write about it. Beginning in 2002, through 2009 it relied mostly on state funding, but with the Pres. Barack Obama-inspired non-recovery of the country’s economic fortunes, budget pressures on Louisiana cut out that funding and 2010 saw no such event.

But Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne, who also has the portfolio of overseeing tourism and culture efforts in the state and as such also has the State Library under his aegis, took the lead in arranging for private funding of the event that was leveraged into obtaining federal government funding. Since 2011, the Festival has gone on without any state funding.

Partisan diatribes disserve improving LA outlay results

How the state ended up committing $1.825 million to build a Louisiana first, a kind-of gubernatorial library/parish historical center, illuminates both the political intricacies that can imprint themselves on the capital outlay process and how observers who do not or who do not care to understand that process can end up promulgating a distorted and unserious view of it.

Last week, five months after the idea first surfaced in legislation, the legacy media became aware that the state had authorized this amount, in conjunction with $75,000 from the city of Franklin, to renovate the top floor of its town hall for a combination archive of documents from and historical center presenting information about the gubernatorial terms of former Gov. Mike Foster. Additionally, it is planned to present some information about the terms of his grandfather, former Gov. Murphy J. Foster, in that office, as well as items about parish history that include a number of other prominent political figures.

This upset the partisan chattering class, although not without reason. Nearly $2 million is a chunk of change that can make a substantial difference, and whether this use of it as opposed to alternatives certainly is debatable. But the tenor of the commentary heaped sole blame on Gov. Bobby Jindal, whose first jobs in state government were as an appointee directly and one step removed by Foster, postulating that their long-standing friendship provided motive for Jindal by his own fiat to implant that money into the budget, and then subsequently to get an initial $300,000 of it appropriated through the State Bond Commission to get the project underway, which only afterwards the issue seemed to come to public consciousness.

Obamacare implosion to sink Landrieu chances further

Veteran political observer John Maginnis declared that the partial government shutdown of the first half of October produced no real political winners or losers among Louisiana federal government elected officials. He’s quite correct, but the real story is how this will be a non-issue compared to the ongoing issue and the reverberating ramifications of the internal contradictions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) on the fortunes of Senate candidates.

Maginnis notes that while polling data in Louisiana, from the Democrat-aligned firm Public Policy Polling, conducted toward the end of that period showed by 47-32 percent respondents were less likely to want to vote for GOP Senate candidate Rep. Bill Cassidy and gave incumbent Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu a 48-41 lead, data from the Republican-oriented firm Harper Polling revealed Landrieu led only 46-44 and 45 percent said they would vote for a Republican for Senate while just 41 percent for a Democrat. This poll, however, was conducted just before Oct. 1.

Interestingly, the PPP numbers actually improved for Cassidy from the middle of August, when he was supposedly down to Landrieu by 10 points and he gained a point in projected vote. Further, the latest still showed Landrieu could not crack 50 percent approval among voters; historically, incumbents who cannot do this a year from an election almost always end up losing. And this was with Cassidy rated unknown by 55 percent of voters and the 45 percent who ventured a likeability rating on Cassidy about split; typically, as quality challengers become better known, they gain proportionally more in liking than disliking among voters, to the detriment of the incumbent’s vote share.