Left misleads on LA rebalancing criminal laws

As most of Republican Gov. Jeff Landry’s criminal justice reforms as legislation heads to his desk for his signature into law, Louisiana’s political left is working overtime to cast aspersions on measures reversing the ethos behind changes predecessor Democrat Gov. John Bel Edwards had enticed, despite data showing very much such assertions are baseless.

In essence, Landry’s increases severity of sentences for some crimes, for 17-year-olds convicted of some crimes, and lengthens incarceration time for many convicts. Edwards’ had done the opposite, on the theory that the existing measures were cost ineffective, or that any reduction in crime was more than offset by costs involved. Indeed, more vocal advocates of the so-called “smart on crime” approach actually argued that you could have it both ways, reduced crime and costs.

At the very least, the left wishes to delegitimize Landry’s restoration with claims along the lines that being “tougher” on crime won’t make much of a difference, if not make matters worse, and certainly would cost more. A typical leftist view on the philosophy behind his package is “there is no firm empirical evidence that confirms” that “more stringent punitive measures [are] a criminal deterrent.”

Another Supreme Court map failure benefits Cox

The soap opera concerning possible reapportionment of Louisiana’s Supreme Court districts looks to spill over to a third try in the 2024 Regular Session of the Louisiana Legislature, caught up in electoral politics directly affecting at least one declared candidate for the open Second District seat later this year.

At the First Extraordinary Session, the Senate refused to move a bill that would have accomplished this. It did so again this week during the Second Extraordinary Session, although under somewhat different circumstances.

Crucial to understanding the machinations involved, consider the context. Nothing legally requires the state to do this. As judicial elections cover offices not considered policy-making and therefore not necessary to represent constituencies, neither equal apportionment nor guarantees that district arrangements not impair the ability of minority groups to elect candidates of their own choosing apply to judicial reapportionment questions. Thus, Louisiana’s current environment of seven districts with enormous population districts and just one majority-minority district in a state where about a third of the population claims black ancestry is perfectly constitutional.

LA should prohibit preying on pregnant girls

If Louisiana wants to boost parental rights, protect some lives, and make Democrat California Gov. Gavin Newsom waste some of his money, it should join other states in making criminal activity that attempts to spirit unemancipated minor girls out of state to receive abortions.

This week, Newsom announced that he would dip into his own leftover campaign funds – perhaps a bit prematurely, as he collected these dollars in defense against a recall petition he successfully beat back, but another appears on the way – banked by an affiliated organization to fund media buys in several states that have, in the case of Idaho since last year, or are considering laws these laws. He already ran some in Tennessee and says he’ll spend millions.

Recognize this, of course, as a last-minute ploy to sell himself as a replacement for Democrat Pres. Joe Biden, whose low polling numbers and consistent running behind and significantly Republican former Pres. Donald Trump in the polls have increased the chances that party powerbrokers will try to stage an intervention to get him to desist in attempted reelection. An ad or two appearing in conservative states isn’t going to make any difference in whether laws of this nature pass or fail, but it does raise his profile.

Legislature needs to add sore loser provision

A major tweak that the Louisiana Legislature should make to its recent changes to candidate qualifying for certain offices would prevent “sore losers” from trying to game the system.

Earlier this year, the state instituted semi-closed primary elections to determine partisan general election candidates, essentially nominating them for office. Starting in 2026, this will apply to all federal legislative candidates as well as members of plenary statewide executive and judicial bodies. The law will make parties award nominations thus eligibility to run in the general election using their labels, where they can be joined by candidates not from a recognized party – currently the two major plus Greens, Libertarian, and Independent – on the general election ballot. In these primaries, only party members and any no party registrants who choose only on party’s ballot may participate.

But the law doesn’t prevent someone from running in a party primary who loses then to run in the general election under any label other than recognized parties’ or as no party. This subverts the idea of preventing other parties’ registrants to determine a party’s sole general election participant, even if the loser runs under another or without a label.

BC cuts tiny part of venture capitalist losses

The chickens continue to come home to roost over Bossier City’s profligacy of the past three decades as its agenda of government as economic development machine through interventions into the local economy with taxpayer dollars cascade from failure to failure.

Recently, headlines about how the city has squandered wealth and opportunity have focused on the duplicative Walter O. Bigby Carriageway and provision of expensive recreation for a tiny minority of city residents or for non-residents while discouraging other residents from using these facilities. But while these come from relatively recent poor decisions, there are some huge expenses with little payoff in the past often forgotten.

At over $65 million in cost, the Brookshire Grocery Arena has turned into a perennial money-loser. Since its opening in 2000, it had only three years where it turned a profit, the last in 2006. Its total losses through 2022 have been a startling $9.655 million. And while some of its desperate boosters (echoing arguments made about the millions of dollars going into city park facilities restricted to out-of-towner use) claim it can make that up through taxes paid by visitors to arena events, it’s laughable that non-residents to arena events during their trips could have bought in the city goods worth $386.2 million, the break-even point.

Landry implements crucially-good ITEP reforms

Given the bad hand Louisiana’s Constitution dealt him, Republican Gov. Jeff Landry did his best and largely successfully to fix problems created in the past few years with the state’s Industrial Tax Exemption Program.

ITEP reflects a constitutional power defined by the mostly gubernatorial-appointed Board of Commerce and Industry and the Department of Economic Development which allows it to exempt manufacturing firms from property taxes from value added to property used for discrete projects that create new or expand operations. However, the Constitution vests the final power in the hand of the governor whether to approve whatever emerges, so he can create the conditions for acceptance through an executive order, in essence saying that unless requests forwarded to him meet standards he articulates, he won’t approve these.

Historically, such supervision was minimal, leading to almost any project within the constitutional boundaries meeting approval, until Landry’s predecessor Democrat John Bel Edwards radically changed the rules, and for the worse. Understanding the negative impact begins with acknowledging that ITEP exists because of Louisiana’s confiscatory property tax rates insofar as these apply to business.

Changes only can improve LA public defense

Opposition to changing governance of Louisiana’s indigent defense from an appointed board to a gubernatorial designee generated more heat than light and shouldn’t derail an improvement to a system as yet never quite fixed.

SB 8 by Republican state Sen. Mike Reese may end up the most controversial bill of the Legislature’s Second Extraordinary Session of 2024. Its initial hearing dragged on for hours with support voiced for it by State Public Defender Remy Starns and a few others, but most of the time was taken by opponents, many connected to public defense.

The bill would remove the Louisiana Public Defender Board from policy-making, leaving only an advisory role, transferring that to the public defender. Rather than he be an appointee of the Board, the governor with Senate confirmation would make the appointment, for two years. This would put contracting and chief district defender hiring solely in the hands of the public defender, among other things, rather than by the Board which currently has five gubernatorial appointees (from each appellate district), four from the chief justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court, and one each from the leaders of each state legislative chamber, serving overlapping four-year terms.

Data point to Summer EBT as unneeded in LA

Louisiana’s political left has a full-court press on to try to score political points over the Republican Gov. Jeff Landry Administration decision not to dole out more cash to lower-income households with children – all the while ignoring data that supports that decision.

Liberal politicians and special interests have criticized the choice not to participate in the Summer EBT program, which gives cash benefits of $40 a school-aged child for three months in the summer. It’s estimated that it would have shoveled $71 million to state families out of federal monies.

Of course, that attitude acts as if this is free money, when in fact Louisiana taxpayers will bear the costs through their federal taxes, an increase in federal debt that they eventually will have to pay back with interest, and/or with a reduction in services elsewhere. Further, plenty of other programs exist to address food needs, including a couple geared specifically toward school children in the summer that operate far more efficiently than the Summer EBT design, as well as more general programs that cover the same clientele base, principally the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program that in Louisiana pays a family of two $535 a month.

Over execution, Hollywood may help LA save cash

As with most candidates for governor last year, the winner Republican Gov. Jeff Landry disappointed on the issue of Louisiana’s Motion Picture Investors tax credit, but maybe he’s hit on a less-direct way to skin a cat over the issue of expanding capital punishment options.

The film tax credit is notorious for its waste of taxpayer dollars, costing the state typically hundreds of millions of dollars annually with only a fraction returning to the treasury in the form of income taxes on those employed in production, sales taxes for good related to filming, and the like. It functions as a form of corporate welfare, which largely goes into the pockets of out-of-state interests, that no other industry in the state enjoys to that degree. The latest, most optimistic statistics available show it returns 23 cents on the dollar while costing $13,300 for each job, mostly part-time, “created.”

Gubernatorial candidates, if anything, with the exception of GOP ex-state Rep. Richard Nelson, campaigned in favor of the giveaway. That included Landry, even though his ally now Speaker of the House Republican Phillip DeVillier had tried to amend the legislation last year to extend the program to gradually wean the state off it.

Tax fatigued voters may doom Bossier renewal

In April, most Bossier City residents will be solicited to slap upon themselves again a large amount of property taxes, and to a smaller degree parish residents outside of municipalities face the same. As a result, chances are good that at least some portion of current taxes will be rejected.

All of Bossier City, Bossier Parish, and the majority part of both encapsulated in the Cypress Black Bayou Recreation and Water Conservation District have cued up property tax renewals on the Apr. 27 ballot. The State Bond Commission last week approved for the date a pair of city levies for 8.32 and 2.71 mils for public safety, the parish levy 7.43 mils for the library system, and the district levy of 1.54 for general operations and capital outlay.

The four are for ten years, although the district’s starts in 2025 while the other two wouldn’t renew until 2026. If all were approved, city property owners with a $225,000 primary residential property within the district boundaries would reestablish onto themselves $350.88 annually in property taxes; those not in the boundaries would add back $327.78; and outside a municipality in the district would sign on again to $134.55, and those only in the parish would re-up to $111.45. (Parish Administrator Butch Ford’s shack, which permits him to evade legal prohibition against his employment, is valued so low, below the homestead exemption, that his taxes paid won’t change regardless of the outcome of the parish and district votes.)