Landrieu Senate seat imperiled by coming Court decision

Given the direction of the justices’ interlocution, it almost would have to be necessarily have been an intentional fakeout for some part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (“Obamacare’) not to be declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court this summer. It’s never over until the decision actually gets announced by the Court, so in the opinion shopping that will ensue it’s possible that it could stand. But going with the smart money that foresees, at the very least, the excising of the individual mandate, how will this forecasted result affect the political career of Sen. Mary Landrieu?

Louisiana’s only remaining statewide-elected Democrat made infamous by her “Louisiana Purchase” concerning the law, she provided the crucial Senate vote for the matter as a result of a provision slipped into it that would increase the Medicaid reimbursement Louisiana would receive over the next few years. It was a canny political move for her in a sense because she played hard-to-get on a bill she really wanted to vote for in the first place, eliciting a state benefit and a campaign point in her favor. (It also got her a jab as a “prostitute,” making her the original less stupid, less ideologically brain-dead version of a blathering idiot who didn’t get an apology for that remark.)

Since then, Landrieu has continued her liberal ways (as a quick perusal of her voting record shows), but all the while trying to inoculate herself from enough of the larger voting public realizing that her ideology runs counter to its majority’s beliefs through tactical statements and votes, such as in defending interests in increasing oil extraction. Her strategy is to accumulate enough of these non-liberal moments to publicize mostly them in a 2014 reelection campaign, throwing up enough of a fog to deflect sighting her true views.

LA education special interests find new world disorienting

If Louisiana populists, liberals, Democrats, and defenders of the status quo in the issue area of education get tired of any single concept during this legislative session, it is the thought that elections have consequences, as committee deliberations of the House and Governmental Affairs Committee demonstrated this morning.

At stake were a couple of retreads from past sessions. This year’s HB 89 by state Rep. Tony Ligi would prevent local elected bodies from making collective bargaining decisions in executive session, which by law do not have to be in a public setting. It stemmed from an incident two years in Jefferson Parish, where its school board’s members, after a pro-union majority had been defeated in elections, tried to push through additional union recognition in the system. Mainly through (un)lucky timing, it never got implemented and the new board negated any chance of its resurrection.

Last year, Ligi brought forward essentially the same bill as he did this year to the committee. There, his HB 204 got rejected by the same committee – but with a much different membership even as it had a Republican majority then. Then, the bill was defeated by a vote of 8-7, aided by four GOP absences but, more crucially, two Republicans voting for defeat – state Rep. Greg Cromer, no longer part of the committee, and former state Rep. Jane Smith, term-limited and then defeated in a bid for the Senate, in part because of the vote cast by this former Bossier Parish school superintendant.

School reform bills to help districts achieve unitary status

Lost in the shuffle about the major changes that would come in Louisiana education with passage of reform bills is how these alterations can assist in allowing school districts exiting from consent decrees or desegregation orders.

Beginning over three decades ago, many districts in the state found themselves embroiled in one of these kinds of federal court-administered programs, coming about because of pervasive histories of racial discrimination in these jurisdictions. An order comes from a judicial determination of constitutional violation, where the court lays down standards and may issue remedies to achieve them, with monitoring. A decree is where a district voluntarily undertakes actions, approved by the supervising court, designed to correct for a constitutional problem alleged by plaintiffs in exchange for their halting a suit against the district, where failure to do so would lead to revival of the case.

Unitary status is achieved when a court decides six factors (student assignment, faculty, staff, transportation, extracurricular activities, and facilities) indicating minority student populations have been segregated into presumed inferior education opportunities have been addressed to the extent indicating that the school district had eliminated the vestiges of what had been legalized segregation, allowing dissolving of the order or decree. The pace has been slow in Louisiana; 59 of the state’s 69 districts have been subject to one of these, and only 16 of them had exited them as of 2007.

LA primary results show troubled Obama reelection bid

If the Louisiana presidential preference primary is any indicator of the fortunes of Pres. Barack Obama this fall, a second glance tells he’s in trouble.

The results can show how much enthusiasm exists for an Obama reelection relative to a Republican challenger, when investigating turnout, but also keeping in mind that this is an incumbent vs. challenger contest. If, all things equal, there appears a lack of enthusiasm for Obama relative to a GOP challenger in Louisiana, replicated across the county, this would be problematic for Democrats.

At first glance, one might not see in the state’s results anything of particular alarm for Obama. Democrat turnout was less than half of that of the GOP’s, with fewer votes cast, but that’s unremarkable given the dynamics. There’s an incumbent running for the Democrats, and a spirited contest not yet resolved going on for the Republicans. True, this meant more cast votes in the GOP version, and, adjusted for overall registrations in the state, turnout in the 2004 Republican primary with incumbent George W. Bush was about equivalent with Democrat turnout then, signaling perhaps some concern. But, then again, one can point to 1996 with Democrat incumbent Bill Clinton on the ballot where Democrat participants, adjusted for overall registrations, trailed Republicans in turnout. Not only did Clinton win the state, which Obama won’t, but he did win nationally as well.

Losing rhetoric on reform issue confirms LA Dems' decline

If nothing else, resolution of the first half of the public policy contest involving education reform in Louisiana demonstrates the death throes of Democrats as a major political party in Louisiana and the erosion of a two major-party system in the state.

After roughly 25 hours in both committee hearings and floor consideration, HB 976 passed both the panel, about 10 days ago, and the entire House chamber, last week, comfortably. The same occurred with HB 974, using about a quarter of the time. The former would allow students in poorest performing schools priority in receiving state money to pay for attending private or better out-of-district public schools, while the latter created procedures to encourage better matching of pay and other personnel actions to actual educator achievement.

While about 80 percent of partisans lined up on the same side of the issue, Republicans for and Democrats against, most significantly the greatest defections came from the Orleans Democrat delegation, where the most of its members voted for both measures, Orleans, of course, has been the cockpit of reform to date in the state, with most of its schools run the by Recovery School District, all charter schools, and only a few of the remaining left in the Orleans Parish School District not being charters. Whether this indicates ideological preference is one thing, but almost certainly it denotes strong constituent favor for the reforms.

Process may make LA presidential primary count for zip

Soon, Louisiana Republicans can hit the precinct locations across the state to vote for presidential nomination preferences in the party’s primary – and may have it count for nothing.

That’s not because the scheduling of it pushed the shelf life of meaningful input into the process past its due date. A clear frontrunner certain to take the nomination has yet to be established, partly because of wariness over candidates in an election cycle that ought to produce a layup win against the incumbent, partly because the calendar itself produced a more evenly-distributed lineup of contests, and partly because few winner-take-all contests remain on the ballot compared to quadrennial exercises of the recent past. The environment exists to give the state more influence than it has in 16 years, when it allocated some delegates through one of the first caucuses held.

But dramatically reducing influence of the popular vote results could result as an artifact of subsequent congressional district meetings on Apr. 28, and decisions at the Jun. 2 state convention. The state can supply 46 total delegates – 20 allocated from the primary, 18 from the district caucuses, five selected by the party’s Executive Committee, and three (state chairman and two Republican National Committee members) by virtue of their offices.

Reform opponents sabotage selves with bigoted discourse

If he thought polite listening to his views constituted “intimidation,” it’s a wonder Democrat state Rep. John Bel Edwards didn’t fall into catatonia when he heard public records requests had been filed concerning his correspondence with teachers’ unions and for addresses of teachers in his parish. Apparently, despite his words he must not feel so, for if his rants are to be characterized they seem more indicative of his protesting too much in a way that moots any gain Democrats try to get out of framing this particular debate.

This we can tell from the paranoia infused in his remarks about the incident, which attempts to feed a narrative about this presumed “intimidation.” On the floor of the House, Edwards complained that the removal of another legislator from a committee post by the House Speaker, that having administration opponents listen to a news conference of his and having fellow legislators deliver a rejoinder to it, that communications into his district made by an interest group in favor of the reform legislation, and that having this public records request filed by a lawyer who is partner to the executive director of the state Republican Party, were all part of a master plan by that wily, dastardly Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal to stamp out opposition whipped up his poor own little self.

While Edwards may have been channeling his inner Huey and/or Earl Long, fulminating against forces said to inveigh against him, besides giving way too much credit to Jindal as some kind of Svengali, and as well greatly overestimating his own importance, such a spleen venting ignores that the only of these actions taken by Jindal was to have his aides listen to his unpersuasive arguments. With this at least Edwards only hinted at anti-Semitic attitudes (apparently casting the dark-skinned but Catholic Jindal in the role of the “wandering Jew” who manipulates others to his own ends); his Democrat colleague state Rep. Sam Jones went all the way when he compared these supposedly intimidating tactics to those practiced against their own dissident people but especially against Jews by the Nazi Germany regime.

Weakness in own arguments intimidates anti-reformers

It’s hard to decide whether the narrative that Democrats who oppose education reforms championed by Gov. Bobby Jindal are trying to establish is born of simple paranoia, or actual introspection that admits the weakness of their argument.

Yesterday, in public at the Capitol caucus leader of the party state Rep. John Bel Edwards with others launched another round of criticism of the reform, using the same tired and discredited arguments as they have ever since it became obvious this legislation was coming. At the commencement of the tirade, Jindal Administration officials arrived, and quietly listened.

Yet perhaps Edwards had some kind of falshback and thought these guys wore white suits and held restraining devices intended for him. One might have thought so given his remarks afterwards, where he said the polite listening constituted “part of a pattern of trying to intimidate legislators.”

Amend bill to eliminate newspaper corporate welfare

It’s not that the bill is bad because it reduces the longevity requirement, but because the whole notion that certain interests need to be given taxpayer dollars just to republish information that already can be disseminated cheaply, easily, and widely is wasteful corporate welfare.

State Rep. Ray Garafalo’s HB 943 would scale back the time requirement for being in business for a print media outlet to become a governing authority’s official journal. State law requires all entities must bid out these contracts, including state government’s. He argues it would permit a recently-established local outlet to bid for the work, which now is performed by out-of-parish owners.

This attitude precisely illustrates the moral objection to this whole notion that a physical printing must be performed at taxpayer expense when far cheaper and as available alternatives exist in this era of electronic archiving. Here, government is making choices about which private interests may reap the benefit of policy. That happens all the time, but those who prize limited government should recognize that appropriate policy should minimize this, that government should do the function itself if it can be done more inexpensively without loss of quality.

School reform opponents resort to red herring argument

With the express train of education reform in Louisiana thundering their way, opponents of it representing special interests – teachers’ unions, subpar teachers, and politicians wishing to maintain power and privilege and/or ideological purity – who ride the gravy train of more costly, less effective education have sought means by which to derail the express. One such tactic, relying on an idiosyncratic interpretation of constitutional language, in the end may distract but fails as a valid complaint and discouraging factor.

HB 976 by state Rep. Steve Carter and SB 597 by state Sen. Conrad Appel expand a program where families whose children attend adequate or worse schools may attend a higher-ranked public school or private school on money supplied by the state up to a certain level. This structure would improve public education by creating incentives for schools to perform better by wringing out unproductive practices and customary behavior. This allocated money in the instances of the private schools would come from the state Minimum Foundation Program, a formula created by the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education that only can be accepted or rejected by the Legislature.

But opponents argue that these measures run afoul of the Louisiana Constitution, specifically Art. VIII, Sec. 13(B), which reads, “The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, or its successor, shall annually develop and adopt a formula which shall be used to determine the cost of a minimum foundation program of education in all public elementary and secondary schools as well as to equitably allocate the funds to parish and city school systems.” By this reading, since money for private school tuition – under the legislation thought to be reimbursed maximally at $5,000, well below what the state pays on average per student although above the junior high level private school tuition often is above that – would not be coming from the MFP going to a “public” school, allocating money for that purpose cannot occur.