Instruct lucky Republicans on proper LA Legislature role

If you see one of the few Republicans to sign on to the idea floated by state Rep. Dee Richard, ultimately failing, to call a special session to review recent state responses to budget deficit conditions, offer to stake him at the craps table because this is one guy who knows when to roll the dice to get a natural – even if he may not properly understand his job.

Altogether, 49 of the 144 legislators signed the effort that would have inserted much more decisively the Legislature into the policy implementation process. That’s greater than a third of seated members, but it did not allow for advancing to a vote whether to have the session since a third was needed in both chambers and the House was five to the good yet the Senate four to the bad. The session would have allowed rewriting of laws to allow for greater legislative insertion into the policy implementation process and could have undone the budgetary adjustments, many of which downsized or closed government facilities in a handful of legislators’ districts.

Observers who for political reasons desire fomenting opposition to Gov. Bobby Jindal simply for the sake of conflict and inefficiency in state government, or the gullible who thought anything meaningful could happen by the session’s emergence, even if just the symbolism of a chimerical “legislative independence” appeared as a result, rooted for success in the matter. Of the legislators involved, the large majority of signatories being Democrats, representing about half of all the legislators of that party, fit the former motive. But the GOP signatories had a very different motive – raising their political profiles while coming across as “concerned” about how the cuts impacted their constituencies.

GOP petitioners gamble their, LA Legislature's power

Emitting a yawp for “legislative independence” at the expense of losing personal and Legislative power? For a handful of Louisiana Republican members of the House of Representatives, it’s a gamble they take hoping to avoid this consequence.

As noted previously, an effort for the Legislature to call itself into special session to pursue an agenda injurious to efficient policy implementation would turn the body into little more than the equivalent of the Transportation Security Administration for Louisiana on budget implementation, with the chambers frisking executive decisions to find any evidence of policies that could right-size state government and/or impede their abilities to feed statewide or constituency-based special interests at taxpayer expense that assist in their reelections, and then to try to eliminate any offensive implementation decisions that threaten their reelections and/or trouble their faiths in big government. The first of four steps, getting a chamber, the House, to sign a petition to put the matter to a vote, has been achieved.

The author of the effort, state Rep. Dee Richard, enthusiastically waxes that should it come to pass the session could be used to reverse recent cost-cutting reformations made to state government. Of course, nothing of the sort will happen, and not just because the math does not add up to produce enough votes to override a veto of any of the reforms by their executor Gov. Bobby Jindal, but also because by the time the session concludes, a large share of the implementation will have become an accomplished fate.

Legislators need not sacrifice power to satisfy left's agenda

If perhaps state Rep. Dee Richard can manage to swing a third of the Senate to request a special session of the Louisiana Legislature, setting up a needed majority vote in both chambers to have it, or even that doesn’t transpire, the best thing he can do is declare a misinterpreted victory now before sending the Legislature into one of the Pyrrhic variety.

In essence, he has announced the task to meeting is a quarter-way there with the assent of 38 House members to the petition. A similar performance by senators by the end of Friday will set up the vote to hold it. Regardless of whether that happens, at the close of Friday if he’s smart Richard will hail the effort as a sign of vigor in and independence of the Legislature, and leave it at that.

Of course, in real life it’s nothing of the sort. Instead, his limited success to date is part of the dying bray of liberalism and populism as significant political forces in the state. The rationale for the session, as previously noted, is to pass laws that would make the Legislature the equivalent of the Transportation Security Administration for Louisiana on budget implementation, with the chambers frisking executive decisions to find any evidence of policies that could right-size state government and/or impede their abilities to feed statewide or constituency-based special interests at taxpayer expense that assist in their reelections, and then to try to eliminate any offensive implementation decisions that threaten their reelections and/or trouble their faiths in big government.

End solar credits, industry greed, raiding taxpayer wallets

The Louisiana Legislature’s Revenue Study Commission grinds on, with its most recent review revealing greed, arrogance, and presumption of the highest order.

The legislative panel is investigating the utility of tax breaks granted by the state, with an eye towards eliminating those that do not sufficiently bring benefits to the state. One of the most egregious offenders in that regard is the absurdly generous credit given to solar panels that enriches few at the expense of the people.

On top of a generous federal tax credit of 20 percent, the state in the waning days of the Gov. Kathleen Blanco Administration passed a law that lards on another 50 percent for solar or wind construction for the first $25,000 in expenses (most installation costs will go above this level, many way above it). The most recent figures indicate that costs $13 million a year, and the generosity is such that the forgone dollars are expanding rapidly.

Impending race to show which Republican joins Court

Get ready for a unpredictable Supreme Court District 5 contest to replace retiring Chief Justice Kitty Kimball where the only thing predictable about it is the winner will be a Republican.

Judicial contests in Louisiana take on peculiar characteristics. Legally, judges can’t organize their own campaigns but may have committees do so on their behalf. The public perceives that the office cannot be overly political, clinging to the idea that ideology should not affect decisions, which also affects campaigning. As a result, these tend to be low-information affairs with less issue guidance for voters, magnifying name recognition’s influence on the vote. The effect becomes particularly acute when no incumbent runs for a spot on the state’s highest court.

Thus the two most important factors in these are campaign money spent and endorsements. Reviewing these factors for the five Republicans, two Democrats and one no-party contestant in a district roughly five-eighths white, one-third black with the majority of Democrats blacks and majority of whites Republicans begins with whether a Democrat can make it to the inevitable runoff.

Kennedy comment only fuels perception as opportunist

Treasurer John Kennedy’s assumed gubernatorial candidacy took a hit last week with an incident that goes against the narrative he has tried painstakingly to create and, worse, feeds the one that has kept him from advancing beyond this one and only elective office he ever has held.

The state swallowed a bitter pill last week when it decided to fork over as much as $95 million in a bond retirement deal for the Mercedes-Benz Superdome, because the interest rate environment and lapsing of a special federal income tax exemption would make the eventual payouts even higher through 2036. Essentially, the state made the wrong bet on interest rates and has gotten caught in a situation where it would have paid high rates for many years to come.

The state entity that runs the building, the Louisiana Stadium and Exposition District, bears part of the blame for accepting the broker’s idea, but the ones who work out the details are in the Treasury Department headed by Kennedy. He also, as part of that office, runs the State Bond Commission and was present on Mar. 6, 2006, when the $294 million sale went through and was the only item on the agenda.

Fewer than half of LA amendments deserve approval

This space already has delved into why the voting public should reject on the Nov. 6 ballot Amendment 1. Eight other changes to the Louisiana Constitution also need vetting.

Amendment 2 has received by far the most publicity, which would introduce the “strict scrutiny” standard to any state government attempts to restrict firearm usage. Some opponents argue that it could make it more difficult for legal authorities to prosecute criminals regarding gun possession, but any reasonable understanding of the doctrine would not support that contention. Given the continuing demonstration of the salutary impact that increased gun ownership has on the quality of life, this deserves passage.

Amendment 3 tackles the complex subject of retirement legislation by trying to give more time to understand it by filing these kinds of bills earlier in a legislative session. But it creates practical problems, such as when a new Legislature is sworn in new members would have almost no time to even introduce such bills. Further, it creates asymmetry in power relations against those who would want to change things, as a sooner filing would allow for more time to have specific vested interests create defensive strategies. And, the bills can change substantially anyway throughout the process, negating earlier revelation if that even is necessary to understand them. The Constitution, and House and Senate rules, already give retirement as a subject special treatment meaning they must be filed earlier than other bills, which thus needs not be expanded upon nor be allowed to become that much more difficult to change by cluttering the Constitution further with this requirement, so this needs to be rejected.

LA Supreme Court repeats past abdication of rule of law

A partially ad hoc composition of the Louisiana Supreme Court decided that two wrongs indeed make a right, securing a small defeat for the rule of law in the state.

Comprised of three temporary judges, the Court ruled that Assoc. Justice Bernette Johnson would assume the title of Chief Justice come the retirement of the existing Chief Justice Kitty Kimball at the end of the year. A dispute arose because while she had participated in making decisions on the Court two months prior to another member and four years longer than another, Johnson had been elected to the Court almost six years and two years, respectively, after the others. The Constitution stipulates that the justice with the “oldest point of service” takes this position.

The problem was, Johnson participated in cases while as a member of a circuit court as a trick to placate a suit brought against the state, which has no black majority district to elect a judge to the Court. Instead of waiting until the next scheduled redistricting occurred, or doing it then and there, or even doing anything at all because no constitutional violation ever was established, because of political considerations to keep secure the seat of an existing Democrat, the relevant state officials, Democrats all, proposed the elevation on a temporary basis a circuit judge, which turned out to allow for Johnson eventually to assume that role. After redistricting in 2000, she won the newly-drawn seat.

Bossier City seeks to throw more good money after bad

In case you didn't know, Bossier City Mayor Lo Walker quietly is running a reelection campaign. Joining him are most of the councilors. But with a presidential reelection ongoing, he and the Bossier City Council may not want that in the background to draw comparisons with Pres. Barack Obama, even as their election tries will be a few months after his attempt. For they emulate his economic strategy despite its demonstrated failure, as they fail at their own version of it.

Democrat Obama famously declared the country had to boost its deficit spending by trillions of dollars about three years ago in order to turn around the nation’s economy. A compliant Congress with Democrats in charge did his bidding. The month the authorization for this spending occurred, the unemployment rate was 8.2 percent. Today the unemployment rate is the same and through last October there are 2.2 million fewer non-farm private sector jobs since Obama took office, courtesy of an economy sputtering at a 1.7 percent annual growth rate in gross domestic product since the month after the first package began, less than half the rate below historic norms generally and especially for a post-recessionary period (on average, in the third year after the four deepest previous recessions started – all as bad or worse than this one that ended in mid-2009 – real GDP climbed 7.6 percent; in 2011 its increase was an anemic 2 percent).

In other words, Obama squandered trillions of extra dollars and since has proposed more of the same deficit spending that has deteriorated the U.S. financial condition significantly, in the process retarding recovery. But although Walker is a Republican and so are most of the Council’s members, they did the same locally. Now that the city prepares to complete the 2013 version (hopefully avoiding the bleak 2012 situation that was so bad they had to scale it back before even passing it), one might hope the imperative of an election year finally might bring a modicum of fiscal restraint.

Jindal acing Landrieu on relief issue portends challenge?

Maybe if he had let the barb go by without reaction the incident wouldn’t tell us anything. But because Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal didn’t issue a pass to Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu, the idea that Jindal will bail out of office a year early to contest and take her seat continues to simmer.

Given the dynamics of national politics, if he wishes an extended future in that arena, as previously noted Jindal should make his pledge that he has the job he wants look a bit hollow by challenging her. And if he contemplates such plans, he nudged their way towards implementation with his exchange with Landrieu over government relief funding for the impact of the recent Hurricane Isaac.

Landrieu started this when she complained about linkage that Republicans had placed upon replenishing funds for the Federal Emergency Management Administration after the hurricane. They wanted commensurate cuts in other areas to shift money to FEMA. Rightfully so, because, contrary to Landrieu’s belief, the federal government isn’t made of money and with deficit spending far beyond the pale over the past nearly four years, a crisis situation (perhaps intentionally so) has been created on this issue.