Left launches initial demagoguery against tax changes

Already one can envision the mouse spinning away in the wheel inside the heads of Louisiana’s leftist policy-makers, trying to come up with a line of attack to stop the badly-needed tax simplification on tap for the state’s tax code. Their first try doesn’t seem very promising.

Gov. Bobby Jindal seems to have developed a pattern of choosing thematic approaches to each legislative session, and shortly after the conclusion of the most recent (with education reform, of a high-quality type as it turned out, that one’s theme) he alerted the world that simplification of Louisiana’s corporate and personal tax codes, with among the highest top income rates and most exemptions of all the states, would get a deserved overhaul if he had anything to do about it next session. He plans to lower rates in exchange for fewer exceptions, allied with an effort in the Legislature to review those exceptions.

Of course, this threatens directly both the left’s power and privilege as well as its core faith in an America rigged in favor of the wealthy, where it responds to this imaginary environment by trying to use government to rig America in favor of its special interests. The system Jindal prefers removes government from making decisions about winners and losers, i.e. who gets exceptions and who doesn’t, while these opponents precisely want government to maximize exceptions because of the control it gives them as a tool to keep power and privilege flowing their ways, and to keep higher rates in order to satisfy their craving to redistribute for ideological salvation and to buy electoral support.

Defending miserable schools shows inappropriate priorities

A segment of those against education reform in Louisiana flowered fully this week in protests they pitched at the Recovery School District’s office in New Orleans, reminding the state of the necessity of keeping them away from influencing educating and of the desperate need of reform.

The demonstrations, comprised of truant students, parents, teachers, and alumni of two high schools, one whose charter operator was being changed and the other that soon will get merged into another, followed on previous days’ refusals of some students to attend classes at both. They “demanded” the undoing of certain personnel changes and cancellation of the merger.

The main controversy came regarding the merger of L.B. Landry High with O. Perry Walker. Personnel, including one popular coach/academic counselor, were let go at the former because of much lower enrollments. District resources realignment had led to changing enrollment patterns away from the school, as it emphasized getting students into higher-performing schools, and population losses as a result of the hurricane disasters of 2005 have created an overbuilt infrastructure. The coach in question, who was offered the chance to stay on as an unpaid assistant, had presided over an alumni group that wanted to take over the Landry charter rather than see the merge, so opponents speculated this caused his removal from a paid position.

Both sides right in politically-tinged surplus funds dispute

Take an isolated passage of an arcane bill, throw in even more arcane constitutional requirements, and stir in future gubernatorial politics to get a delightful concoction of controversy over the disposition of an apparent fiscal windfall coming Louisiana’s way.

Last month, the state reported that it expected that income tax collections would be up over $212 million over what was forecast for the past fiscal year, although when netting out other things the expected excess would be $130 million. In legal terms, this becomes reality only after the Revenue Estimating Conference recognizes it, with its next meeting set for the middle of December. Normally, as long as the bonus is from recurring sources and not over the state expenditure limit, as would be in this case, the state is free to spend it as it likes.

The Gov. Bobby Jindal Administration has plans for $94 million of it, to finance a gap in cuts triggered in the state health care system by a sudden decision by the federal government to stop paying the state excess Medicaid funds, just after the new fiscal year began Jul. 1. Unless $94 million materializes one way or the other, further cuts will have to be made that already have generated plenty of controversy. But a dispute has arisen over whether an appropriations bill to fund this year’s budget allows this.

Approving amendment reduces protection of elderly

Perhaps the most arcane, and in monetary terms by far the most significant, amendment coming up for Louisiana voters to choose whether to ratify this fall is Amendment 1. Cursory attention to it may lead to a wrong conclusion in vote choice.

Amendment 1 would prevent the Medicaid Trust Fund for the Elderly from being “swept,” or the process used when excess money builds up in a dedicated fund that then may be used for other obligations, through a special appropriations bill. It would join a small number of the largest funds that, given the nature of their purposes, have independent and very predictable funding streams and uses to which they are put (except for the Bond Security and Redemption Fund, a pass-through vehicle for revenues that assures state debt gets paid).

This would create an outlier, for the Fund has a narrow purpose: mainly to provide a cushion to support Medicaid payments to nursing homes and for the remainder to home- and community-based services, among other things, this mix determined by department policy although the law gives nursing homes the first crack at funds from earnings. By statute, only the interest could be swept, which, given it started with a $500 million principal balance a dozen years ago, is now cushioned by less than $20 million. It has only a relatively tiny revenue stream, from the sale of specialty license plates and penalty payments by nursing homes.

Practically, theoretically, special session a bad idea

Bad reasons inherent to the request recommend against the Louisiana Legislature calling itself into special session under the terms set forth by state Rep. Dee Richard. Let’s start with the practical and wind up with the theoretical that by itself that should bury the idea.

In the proposed call, Richard asks:

• To legislate relative to requirements for legislative approval necessary prior to the closure, privatization, or reduction of the occupancy, personnel, services provided, or level of funding of a state-operated healthcare facility or human services district.
• To legislate relative to requirements for submission for legislative approval of any plan or proposal intended to result in the sale of any LSU system hospital; and relative to requirements for submission for legislative approval of any plan or proposal intended to result in signing or executing a cooperative endeavor agreement with any private provider to operate any LSU system hospital; and relative to requirements for submission for legislative approval of any plan or proposal intended to result in any level of reduction of services below those provided on June 30, 2012, at any LSU system hospital.
• To legislate relative to requirements for legislative approval necessary prior to the closure, privatization, or reduction of the occupancy, personnel, services provided, or level of funding of a state-operated correctional facility.
• To legislate relative to the reestablishment of correctional facilities, healthcare facilities or human services districts, and the funding thereof, as provided for in House Bill no. 1, as enrolled, of the 2012 regular session.

This would begin Nov. 26 and last as many as 15 days. That means the session could cost taxpayers as much as roughly $1.2 million, which doesn’t exactly commend itself in this situation where the items come as a reaction to cost-savings moves in a money-strapped state. Still, a supporter of these ideas could argue it would be worth it in order to get these into law.

LA health care change alarmism unrelated to reality

It never ceases to amaze that in the cut-out world of the left its acolytes miss one of the most glaring of the many contradictions inherent in liberalism: the simultaneous belief that the presumably embattled lower class is rational enough to succeed were it not for being disadvantaged by some bogeyman such as big business, the wealthy, moneyed interests, Christian fundamentalists, Republicans, conservatives white males, etc., yet is too irrational to make choices in the marketplace. The reaction of them to upcoming reduction of Louisiana’s state-owned health provision infrastructure illustrates their schizophrenia perfectly.

Last week, an altered plan to reduce spending in Louisiana’s public charity hospitals was announced. In response to the federal government’s sudden retraction of money erroneously given to the state for Medicaid, which constituted the vast majority of revenues coming into that system, almost a fifth of the budget or about $500 million had to be vacuumed from the system. The plan, which covered only the seven institutions in the southern system, leaves most of those institutions with fewer than 20 beds and closes some operating rooms and specialty areas.

It’s the definitive move towards getting the state out of the hospital business in exchange for it to focus more efficiently and effectively on delivering health care to the indigent, but, as is all too typical, those invested in the idea of government provision of goods and services to the point where the sky falls at the excising of a single penny from the public sector wail and gnash their teeth at the prospect. Another cause célèbre, the closure of the Southeastern State Hospital for mental health also animates their panic.

Politics more than need explains plan for N.O. hospital

It’s not so much that it’s a matter of one hand of government not knowing what the other is doing, but a complex interplay of genuine need and political wants which explains why the state and City of New Orleans both are building hospitals just miles from each other.

The state continues with its effort to build a brand new charity hospital in New Orleans to replace the in-the-breach interim facility just west of the building site. This new facility has faced criticism over its size in a market already above the national average in beds per thousand population (about 10 percent higher at 3) and consequent cost. Yet simultaneously the city is building a facility in New Orleans East around the site of the old Methodist Hospital, to be operated by a nonprofit religious organization but governed and funded through the Orleans Parish Hospital Service District A, a state-created entity but a component of New Orleans.

The legal structure of this district intends to operate a hospital as an enterprise, without use of taxpayer funds other than a city payment to run it. To date, its funding has come from grants or in-kind contributions and revenues from opening an urgent care clinic. But the intent is for the creation of a full-service hospital even though it would create even more beds in the New Orleans metropolitan area and with 80 beds ridiculously over-bed New Orleans East at about 10 per thousand. The compelling argument, claims the city, is that no emergency services presently cover in the area without having to go over a major patch of water – six traffic spans to the west to other New Orleans/Jefferson hospitals, two east to the Slidell area, and one south to St. Bernard. Thus, potential bottlenecks exist that could cost lives in an emergency situation.

Closing barn door on tax exceptions later better than never

It’s never too late to close the barn door after the horse has gotten out, as some Louisiana legislators demonstrated again as part of approving the details of new tax breaks established earlier this year.

The Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget had to approve of regulations issued by the Department of Economic Development incident to the new laws. But the natives seemed a bit restless and did not want to do the usual rubber stamping of anything proposed in this regard, no doubt because of the state’s continued precarious budget position and the exposure the issue of exceptions to the tax code increasingly is receiving, with a select legislative committee overseeing the matter.

Eventually, they went along with it, but only after grilling department officials to ascertain that some kind of oversight would occur. These concerned tax rebate agreements that could be offered to employers that would require their approval after a review by an independent, third-party economist aimed at making sure the state will get more tax revenue from the new jobs created than the tax money lost with the credit.

Issues emerge from forum to help voters decide PSC race

Candidates for the open District 2 seat of the Louisiana Public Service Commission participated in a forum where interesting questions arose about the operation of and service on the PSC, also shedding light on a court case dealing with financing the body, all of which help the public evaluate the PSC and its current or potential members.

One question concerned whether candidates for the office should accept contributions for campaigning from utility companies, one of the kinds of firms whose activities may be regulated by the PSC. The fronturnners called this acceptable and said they had already taken such funds, while the also-rans, none of whom to date have filed a campaign finance report implying they have raised little money, said candidates should abjure from taking them.

But the problem with the latter approach is it unfairly restricts the free speech rights of shareholders of those companies, while their special interest opponents would face no barrier. And why single out utility companies when others, like motor carriers, regulated by the PSC would face no ban? If a candidate out of personal preference declines such funds, that’s his business, but mandating that stricture puts the state in the position of tipping the scales against a certain industry, as it already does in similar restrictions against gaming concerns.

Populism explains dearth of intellectual conservative media

Has the New Orleans Times-Picayune woken up and smelled the coffee? Who would have thought that apparently a closet conservative lurked at what’s left of it? That’s the impression one gets upon reading James Varney’s first opinion piece, and, although the issue he brings up isn’t exactly a burning one of the day, it’s interesting and deserves investigation.

Varney appears to have replaced the T-P’s rotund, pale female true-believing liberal columnist, joining the retained relatively thinner, dark male true-believing liberal one (and guest appearances seemingly planned from the aged, pickled leftist curmudgeon) on its opinion roster – which in and of itself is quite a statement. That balance now appears in the offing for the paper’s assigned opinion writers shows that T-P management perceives in order to catch the eyeballs that have begin deserting the printed word in droves, for the first time in decades it might actually want to present on a regular basis arguments sympathetic to the views of the majority in the metropolitan area, Louisiana, and in the country – in full contradiction to its reliably liberal (if not the state media’s worst offending) editorial page.

In his initial effort, Varney advances a question about why conservative opinion journals seem rare around the area, concluding that he doesn’t actually know why, only that digital offerings will increase access. Well, after 30 years of writing conservative opinion pieces and having spent about as long studying conservative philosophy in and out of the academy, some of this in New Orleans and most of it in Louisiana, I can answer that for him.