Imitation is the sincerest flattery, so I thank the author of this note posted at Moon Griffon’s web site, although I’m not sure whether this blog qualifies me as a member of the “right-wing destruction machine” because, as readers know, it focuses on policy and fact, not a “goal of personal ruin through vicious attack politics.”
(However, it doesn’t seem to work the other way. Since I started this blog mere months ago, I am told that more than one disgruntled person with some power in politics has gone complaining to my public university employer, all over postings that often get fewer than 100 hits a day, and a university representative has made certain inappropriate requests regarding modification of material on this university-unrelated blog. But this is a story for another time.)
Even if this note were a forgery it captures perfectly the zeitgeist/kultursmog of establishment political elites in Louisiana, of the indignance that their divine right to rule be questioned. Regardless, if indeed there is some kind of move afoot to create a Democrat/Blanco/Landrieu etc. spin machine on the web designed to “highlight their inconsistencies, or deconstruct their policies and reframe them to our advantage, in our own language … [o]r we point out where they’re engaged in folly or mendacity or just plain old greed or meanness,” it largely will fail, mainly because this strategy totally does not understand what those of us who have raised their ire are trying to do.
For one thing, I use fact and logic in my postings to demonstrate the fundamental errors Democrats have in their guiding political philosophy (if it can be called that) or the conclusions they draw from selective use of information. The Democrat left does not understand this because they cannot bring themselves to admit that their views are, as proven by events, bankrupt, and long since have been replaced by a politics of personal, rather than community, interest, based on the wielding or power rather than doing the right thing. Thus, because they now resort themselves to a strategy of “personal ruin through vicious attack politics” in the absence of any valid ideology, they mistakenly assume all others do as well.
In short, they have disarmed themselves intellectually and thinking, reasoning persons realize this and thus gravitate to the arguments myself and others present. Personally, I welcome any attempt to do what the memo says. I challenge them to find “inconsistencies … folly or mendacity or just plain old greed or meanness” in what I write; I urge them to try to “deconstruct” and “reframe” because, by their self-handicapping, the reasonable person easily sees the vacuity of their arguments. By the very nature of the fundamental differences between views, mine based on truth, reason, and coherence, and theirs, unmitigated emotion without fact or logic to substantiate except the notion that they want to take what they think is theirs from those who have genuinely earned it, they surrender in the battle of ideas.
The memo’s concern for anonymity also is illustrative. I freely admit who I am (indeed, to the endangerment of my career) and what my ideas are. The memo writer recognizes the fraud that his allies’ ideas are and so counsels to keep the identities and agendas of the efforts contributors as secret as possible. This is an obvious admission of the weakness of their arguments.
Finally, while the idea of trying to use humor is a winner, it’s clear the writer does not understand it. The idea of calling their masterminds behind the effort the “Working Group” is itself funny, but surely not in the way he intended. Because, when was the last time you could honestly say the liberal Democrat agenda actually championed the “working man?” These people seek to take more and more of the “working man’s” resources through higher and higher taxes and fees, strive to restrict his liberties more and more through government regulation of the crassest kind, and seek to disempower him through disinformation – the thing I try in my postings to correct. For ultimately, if I tell one side of the story and they tell another, what really burns them up is, by definition, my side is more persuasive. Which is why they must adopt, as the writer urges, this strategy of projecting what they falsely see in their opponents to what they do.
So, let’s bring it on! And to make it easier to distinguish the sides involved, if the defenders of the status quo, the ones how have helped Louisiana into the fiscal, ethically-challenged mess that we are in want to call themselves the “Working Group,” then I’ll gladly take the appellation that they would give to those like me – the “Serfs.” Because that’s how they think of us, here to serve them as they pursue their political careers and any enrichment they see themselves worthy of accruing as a result of that activity – at our expense, of course. This “knighted” and “royal” classes in reality have it all backwards, and, as long as people like me, Moon Griffon, C.B. Forgotston, and others many of whom appear on the left-hand side of this page continue to point out this highly inconvenient fact, they are going to try to distract people from a debate on the issues because, frankly, they think you’re too stupid to know any better.
At present we may be Serfs in Louisiana, but one thing we are not is stupid.
17.8.05
Education "good" news isn't so good, but neither is "bad" news so bad
There’s good news and bad news for Louisiana education, but the bad actually might be good and the good bad.
The good news on the surface is that American College Testing standardized testing composite scores did not go down; in fact, they have inched up over the past few years. Around 85 percent, one of the highest proportions in the country, of Louisiana high school students take this test, mostly because almost all four-year public universities in the state require certain scores for admission and Tuition Opportunity Program for Students scholarships.
The bad news is that at 19.8, this score resides well below the national average of 20.9 (which, worse, itself reflects only minimal ability and also remains unchanged from last year). One could argue that because more Louisiana students take the ACT than in almost any state (save four), marginal students who might not take it in other states (without a TOPS scholarship waved in their face as incentive) are not included in the totals to dilute downward the average score. But, as it turns out, among the states that have the ACT as a requirement for entrance to a public university, only Mississippi scores lower (it being one of the four states where more students take it than Louisiana).
The good news on the surface is that American College Testing standardized testing composite scores did not go down; in fact, they have inched up over the past few years. Around 85 percent, one of the highest proportions in the country, of Louisiana high school students take this test, mostly because almost all four-year public universities in the state require certain scores for admission and Tuition Opportunity Program for Students scholarships.
The bad news is that at 19.8, this score resides well below the national average of 20.9 (which, worse, itself reflects only minimal ability and also remains unchanged from last year). One could argue that because more Louisiana students take the ACT than in almost any state (save four), marginal students who might not take it in other states (without a TOPS scholarship waved in their face as incentive) are not included in the totals to dilute downward the average score. But, as it turns out, among the states that have the ACT as a requirement for entrance to a public university, only Mississippi scores lower (it being one of the four states where more students take it than Louisiana).
16.8.05
Louisiana ACLU representative shows bigoted ideological slip
Bigotry against religion lives in Louisiana, so the statements of the state’s American Civil Liberties Union executive Director Joe Cook demonstrate. On camera, he blithely stated, in reference to the organization’s allegations that the Tangipahoa Parish School Board was countenancing support of religious belief that it found unacceptable after a court ruling on the matter,
“They don’t want to abide by the agreement,” said Cook. “They have always crossed the line of separation of church and government… They believe they answer to a higher power, in my opinion… which is the kind of thinking you had with the people who flew airplanes in the buildings in this country and people who did that kind of thing in London.”
(It should be noted that the judge who issued the order, Chief Judge of the Louisiana Eastern District Ginger Berrigan, once was a state ACLU official.)
Cook later attempted damage control by trying to rephrase his sentiments as saying that it’s dangerous to have people who believe they “answer to some higher religious power than the Constitution of the United States of America.” Naturally, these statements do not equate; Tangipahoa Parish School Board members take an oath to obey local law and defend the state and national Constitutions, are elected and execute the duties of their offices in the open and, most importantly, at least I am unaware that any of them affirm that they follow religious practices they interpret as condoning murder.
Cook’s attempt also shows a profound ignorance of the fact that many of the Framers of the Constitution were very religious men and who also declared religious ideas and belief as cornerstones behind the principles of the Constitution. Their words and actions (religious ceremonies were held in the U.S. House chamber for decades, for example) demonstrate that the ideas behind the Constitution had religious origins. In short, to follow the Constitution (as originally written for the most part, not including meanings from outside it imposed on it by court fiat inconsistent with its original intent) is an extension of belief in a higher power, and following the document a requirement of it.
This slip, the outright admission by the representative the leftist ACLU that to it those who believe in God are to be equated with terrorist murderers, is not surprising in that it appears to be an attitude prevalent within the organization, but is in that its leader was careless enough to broadcast it. This is why we must understand that the true ACLU agenda does not concern itself with “rights,” but with a political agenda marked by loathing for those who are different from its members on this issue. It’s now obvious to all that the emperor has no clothes.
If the state’s ACLU is to regain what little credibility it had, its board must fire Cook and then mandate sensitivity training in the area of tolerance for religious believers for itself, its officers, and local chapter board members and officers. If the ACLU does not cleanse itself of this bigotry now, it will merely confirm that it pursues an agenda at odds with the vast majority of Americans, one which mocks their beliefs, an agenda based on hatred which ultimately harms America.
“They don’t want to abide by the agreement,” said Cook. “They have always crossed the line of separation of church and government… They believe they answer to a higher power, in my opinion… which is the kind of thinking you had with the people who flew airplanes in the buildings in this country and people who did that kind of thing in London.”
(It should be noted that the judge who issued the order, Chief Judge of the Louisiana Eastern District Ginger Berrigan, once was a state ACLU official.)
Cook later attempted damage control by trying to rephrase his sentiments as saying that it’s dangerous to have people who believe they “answer to some higher religious power than the Constitution of the United States of America.” Naturally, these statements do not equate; Tangipahoa Parish School Board members take an oath to obey local law and defend the state and national Constitutions, are elected and execute the duties of their offices in the open and, most importantly, at least I am unaware that any of them affirm that they follow religious practices they interpret as condoning murder.
Cook’s attempt also shows a profound ignorance of the fact that many of the Framers of the Constitution were very religious men and who also declared religious ideas and belief as cornerstones behind the principles of the Constitution. Their words and actions (religious ceremonies were held in the U.S. House chamber for decades, for example) demonstrate that the ideas behind the Constitution had religious origins. In short, to follow the Constitution (as originally written for the most part, not including meanings from outside it imposed on it by court fiat inconsistent with its original intent) is an extension of belief in a higher power, and following the document a requirement of it.
This slip, the outright admission by the representative the leftist ACLU that to it those who believe in God are to be equated with terrorist murderers, is not surprising in that it appears to be an attitude prevalent within the organization, but is in that its leader was careless enough to broadcast it. This is why we must understand that the true ACLU agenda does not concern itself with “rights,” but with a political agenda marked by loathing for those who are different from its members on this issue. It’s now obvious to all that the emperor has no clothes.
If the state’s ACLU is to regain what little credibility it had, its board must fire Cook and then mandate sensitivity training in the area of tolerance for religious believers for itself, its officers, and local chapter board members and officers. If the ACLU does not cleanse itself of this bigotry now, it will merely confirm that it pursues an agenda at odds with the vast majority of Americans, one which mocks their beliefs, an agenda based on hatred which ultimately harms America.
15.8.05
Statistics show to boost Louisiana's population, cut taxes
As more dismal statistics come out demonstrating Louisiana’s lack of allure for living in it, reflected by relative population changes of the state versus others, let us digest upon the following remark:
Elliott Stonecipher, a political pollster and demographer based in Shreveport … said state officials should be trying to find out why people are leaving the state, and they should reshape state economic and taxation policies both to reduce out-migration and to entice people to move in.
As I have argued, (and so have C.B. Forgotston, Moon Griffon, and still others), Stonecipher’s conjecture that tax policy has consequences rings quite true. Given census data and that from the Tax Foundation, this is not difficult to test.
I corralled three sets of data for each of the states plus the District of Columbia: total state tax burden (including local taxes) in 2005 (in percent, which for most states has changed little over the past few years, Louisiana being an exception), net migration for 2000-2004 (in percent increase), and total population change from 2000-04 (in percent increase). Then I computed two relationships, between 2005 tax rate and population change, and between the rate and net migration. The theory here is that higher tax burdens on residents encourages them to leave and discourages others from coming, which also gets reflected in population changes.
For readers into statistics, here’s what I got: for population change, the Pearson product-moment correlation is -0.22, and for migration it is -0.30 (note: we are looking at the entire population of 51 jurisdictions so significance tests are superfluous). For readers not into statistical analysis, what this means is tax rates are moderately correlated to population and migration; as these rates increase, the rate of population increase and rate of in-migration increase go down.
Ranking 16th in tax burden (10.3%), 44th in population change (+1.05%), and 43rd in in-migration (-1.66%), one can see why Louisiana is where it is on these numbers. Stonecipher has a plea in this regard: “I can't prove that's what's happening. But the state should be doing research to see if that's true. There's an elephant in the room, and nobody wants to acknowledge it.”
Well, I just showed something was there. The state can start its research if it likes, but much better to solve the problem would be some tax cutting at the first opportunity. Gov. Kathleen Blanco seems bent on a special session for teacher pay raises in January; instead, she needs to make it one dedicated to lowering taxes.
Elliott Stonecipher, a political pollster and demographer based in Shreveport … said state officials should be trying to find out why people are leaving the state, and they should reshape state economic and taxation policies both to reduce out-migration and to entice people to move in.
As I have argued, (and so have C.B. Forgotston, Moon Griffon, and still others), Stonecipher’s conjecture that tax policy has consequences rings quite true. Given census data and that from the Tax Foundation, this is not difficult to test.
I corralled three sets of data for each of the states plus the District of Columbia: total state tax burden (including local taxes) in 2005 (in percent, which for most states has changed little over the past few years, Louisiana being an exception), net migration for 2000-2004 (in percent increase), and total population change from 2000-04 (in percent increase). Then I computed two relationships, between 2005 tax rate and population change, and between the rate and net migration. The theory here is that higher tax burdens on residents encourages them to leave and discourages others from coming, which also gets reflected in population changes.
For readers into statistics, here’s what I got: for population change, the Pearson product-moment correlation is -0.22, and for migration it is -0.30 (note: we are looking at the entire population of 51 jurisdictions so significance tests are superfluous). For readers not into statistical analysis, what this means is tax rates are moderately correlated to population and migration; as these rates increase, the rate of population increase and rate of in-migration increase go down.
Ranking 16th in tax burden (10.3%), 44th in population change (+1.05%), and 43rd in in-migration (-1.66%), one can see why Louisiana is where it is on these numbers. Stonecipher has a plea in this regard: “I can't prove that's what's happening. But the state should be doing research to see if that's true. There's an elephant in the room, and nobody wants to acknowledge it.”
Well, I just showed something was there. The state can start its research if it likes, but much better to solve the problem would be some tax cutting at the first opportunity. Gov. Kathleen Blanco seems bent on a special session for teacher pay raises in January; instead, she needs to make it one dedicated to lowering taxes.
14.8.05
Why did Bossier City hand over $21.5 million for little gain?
The good news is Bossier City has taken in around $1.7 million in sales taxes from Bass Pro Shops and the rest of the Louisiana Boardwalk since the former opened. The bad news is, we don’t know how much of that was beggared from the metropolitan economy and Bossier City paid $21.5 million for that privilege.
Since the Boardwalk opened roughly three months ago, it’s my guess, given that Bass Pro Shops generated $852,000 in sales taxes in 2004 that about $1.4 million of the total is attributable to it. Better, probably a few hundred thousand of that represents sales that came from outside the metropolitan area. This means created revenue for the city.
Estimating then that the Boardwalk has contributed $300,000 that means it’s bringing in about $3,500 a day in sales tax revenues. Unfortunately, the large majority of that probably does not come from outside the metropolitan area – that is, there’s really nothing at the Boardwalk that could not be substituted for elsewhere in the area unlike Bass Pro Shops – leaving only the small portion of visitors from outside the area who came expressly to hang at the Boardwalk as the only source of newly “created” sales tax revenue.
However, for the moment let’s ignore the fact that beggaring Shreveport’s economy is harmful to Bossier City (in fact, probably more Bossier workers cross the river to go to their jobs every day than stay on the east side of the Red) and assume that $2,000 a day of that money comes from people who otherwise would not have patronized a Bossier City establishment. Also ignoring investment and interest rate factors, and also eliminating the $20 million Bossier City spent on improving the infrastructure in and around the Boardwalk that means the $21.5 million Bossier City plunked down to give a parking garage to the private sector will take nearly 30 years year to be paid back out of additional sales taxes! (Not being so generous and more realistic with these assumptions potentially adds decades more.)
11.8.05
Agency's embarrassing admission holds key to saner state spending
Hopefully, the snafu that led to Louisiana’s Department of Labor discovering it was $10 million “short” in funding can teach policy-makers some valuable lessons. They are:
Stop with the budget gimmickry. Governments at all levels everywhere engage in a host of tricks either to find more money to spend in a given budget cycle or to manipulate the numbers to allow circumvention of a certain spending or revenue ceiling. (Remember the Louisiana Recovery District, used to get around the state’s limit on deficit spending for continuing operations in 1988?). Apparently, use of these tactics got DOL into trouble.
Review meaningfully the nature and purpose of each funded government program. The need to reduce spending has caused one DOL program to be terminated because DOL finds the function of that one substantially is being done elsewhere in government. Why wasn’t this duplication of services discovered before? Didn’t we just have a whole Legislature and the governor review a record-sized budget and this never was brought out? And how long has this been going on?
10.8.05
Walford's votes sinking his continued electoral career
Appropriate to my musings earlier this week about 2006 Shreveport mayoral politics, now comes the City Council tie vote which defeated Councilman Thomas Carmody’s motion to take advantage of the new state law allowing municipalities to use a 300-foot direct measurement, rather then the existing measurement by official paths of conveyance, to determine distance of potential licensed alcohol sellers from schools and churches.
It’s a vote that, along with several others, could well shape this election and those for City Council. On these votes, mainly dealing with lifestyle or social issues and the building of a publicly-owned convention center hotel, Carmody and his Republican colleague Mike Gibson have found themselves on the opposite side to Monty Walford, a (white) Democrat. The Republicans generally have voted for measures which would please social and economic conservatives, while Walford typically has done the opposite.
At present, Walford almost is the only white Democrat elected in Caddo Parish for local office, besides Shreveport Mayor Keith Hightower, and as such sentiments have arisen for him to try to repeat Hightower’s fusionist electoral victories – some whites and blacks siphoned from Republican or black candidates, enough to win. Certainly, historical data extrapolated to the present indicates that if a white Democrat makes it out of the mayoral primary he stands an excellent chance of winning the general election.
But Walford’s problem is he may well not make it out of a primary if his opponents are of the caliber of these other city councilmen and the likes of state Rep. Cedric Glover. With his voting behavior of the past two-and-a-half years indicating positions likely to turn off conservatives and having a substantial black candidate out there, too few votes exist to get him into the top two finishers in the primary. His only hope is for a field to be flooded by as many three substantial Republicans – his council colleagues plus state Sen. Max Malone – and at least two substantial black Democrats – Glover plus television station manager Ed Bradley – that actually may fragment black and conservative votes enough to allow him to squeak through.
However, it is likely that some consolidation of support will occur around a Republcian and black candidate, so Walford essentially would have no chance in that scenario and thus ought not to pursue the office. Which means perhaps he should run for re-election to the council – but neither is that a very good deal. His District, B, contained a bare majority of registered whites in 2002 when he eked out narrow wins to get into the general election and then the general election itself against a black Democrat. The latest figures show that has slid to 47.2 percent, 200 fewer whites than blacks, and by 2006 this figure trends to just 46 percent, a full 3.7 percent difference. Adjusting for turnout differential and crossover voting, Walford is projected to find himself on the short end of the stick against a black candidate.
That’s assuming Walford can even make it to the general election. He barely edged out a Republican last time, but then there were slightly more white Democrats than Republicans registered in the district. As of now, white Republicans outnumber white Democrats by 250, and some conservative registered Democrats aren’t going to like Walford’s record to vote for him as opposed to a Republican.
So Walford may feel he has nothing to lose in a run for mayor which could complicate matters for Republicans, but at this time, chances are that for whatever he runs he will lose regardless.
It’s a vote that, along with several others, could well shape this election and those for City Council. On these votes, mainly dealing with lifestyle or social issues and the building of a publicly-owned convention center hotel, Carmody and his Republican colleague Mike Gibson have found themselves on the opposite side to Monty Walford, a (white) Democrat. The Republicans generally have voted for measures which would please social and economic conservatives, while Walford typically has done the opposite.
At present, Walford almost is the only white Democrat elected in Caddo Parish for local office, besides Shreveport Mayor Keith Hightower, and as such sentiments have arisen for him to try to repeat Hightower’s fusionist electoral victories – some whites and blacks siphoned from Republican or black candidates, enough to win. Certainly, historical data extrapolated to the present indicates that if a white Democrat makes it out of the mayoral primary he stands an excellent chance of winning the general election.
But Walford’s problem is he may well not make it out of a primary if his opponents are of the caliber of these other city councilmen and the likes of state Rep. Cedric Glover. With his voting behavior of the past two-and-a-half years indicating positions likely to turn off conservatives and having a substantial black candidate out there, too few votes exist to get him into the top two finishers in the primary. His only hope is for a field to be flooded by as many three substantial Republicans – his council colleagues plus state Sen. Max Malone – and at least two substantial black Democrats – Glover plus television station manager Ed Bradley – that actually may fragment black and conservative votes enough to allow him to squeak through.
However, it is likely that some consolidation of support will occur around a Republcian and black candidate, so Walford essentially would have no chance in that scenario and thus ought not to pursue the office. Which means perhaps he should run for re-election to the council – but neither is that a very good deal. His District, B, contained a bare majority of registered whites in 2002 when he eked out narrow wins to get into the general election and then the general election itself against a black Democrat. The latest figures show that has slid to 47.2 percent, 200 fewer whites than blacks, and by 2006 this figure trends to just 46 percent, a full 3.7 percent difference. Adjusting for turnout differential and crossover voting, Walford is projected to find himself on the short end of the stick against a black candidate.
That’s assuming Walford can even make it to the general election. He barely edged out a Republican last time, but then there were slightly more white Democrats than Republicans registered in the district. As of now, white Republicans outnumber white Democrats by 250, and some conservative registered Democrats aren’t going to like Walford’s record to vote for him as opposed to a Republican.
So Walford may feel he has nothing to lose in a run for mayor which could complicate matters for Republicans, but at this time, chances are that for whatever he runs he will lose regardless.
9.8.05
More reform, not spending, produces Louisiana education gains
Gov. Kathleen Blanco led a cheering session at the Louisiana Head Start Association meeting, at which
Blanco noted that she successfully pushed for a $20 million addition to the state's classes for 4-year-olds -- LA4 -- amid countless studies that show learning gains for students from poor families who take part. “That is why I am such a strong proponent of LA4 and Head Start,” she said. The state spends $55 million per year for public school classes for 4-year-olds. The classes are in 41 of Louisiana's 68 school districts. Head Start services, which were part of the "Great Society" programs launched in the mid-1960s, operate in every parish.
The only problem is, of course, that the evidence contradicts the assertion that Head Start produces any return on investment for most children. As detailed in their No Excuses: Closing the Racial Gap in Learning, Abigail and Stephen Thernstrom demonstrate that any beneficial effect that Head Start has on student learning almost always evaporates in two years. In other words, the state gets little for its $55 million investment.
Instead, Blanco needs to concentrate on the educational accountability reforms begun under Gov. Mike Foster, which, to her credit, she had left unaltered. But, if anything, she needs to loosen requirements of state control which hamper reform efforts. The Center for Education Reform gives Louisiana a grade of “C” when it comes to the necessary reforms to improve education. This judgment reflects the test scores released last week that show far too many schools fail to meet criteria of acceptability in education.
Or, to put it another way, if one equates improving education with raising teachers’ salaries (a dubious proposition at best unless accountability measures for teachers are instituted as well), with this amount of money classroom teachers would have enjoyed a $1,000 raise. Instead, we labor on with this fiction that more money, rather than more commitment, expectations, and hard work from both teachers and students, will produce better secondary education in Louisiana.
Blanco noted that she successfully pushed for a $20 million addition to the state's classes for 4-year-olds -- LA4 -- amid countless studies that show learning gains for students from poor families who take part. “That is why I am such a strong proponent of LA4 and Head Start,” she said. The state spends $55 million per year for public school classes for 4-year-olds. The classes are in 41 of Louisiana's 68 school districts. Head Start services, which were part of the "Great Society" programs launched in the mid-1960s, operate in every parish.
The only problem is, of course, that the evidence contradicts the assertion that Head Start produces any return on investment for most children. As detailed in their No Excuses: Closing the Racial Gap in Learning, Abigail and Stephen Thernstrom demonstrate that any beneficial effect that Head Start has on student learning almost always evaporates in two years. In other words, the state gets little for its $55 million investment.
Instead, Blanco needs to concentrate on the educational accountability reforms begun under Gov. Mike Foster, which, to her credit, she had left unaltered. But, if anything, she needs to loosen requirements of state control which hamper reform efforts. The Center for Education Reform gives Louisiana a grade of “C” when it comes to the necessary reforms to improve education. This judgment reflects the test scores released last week that show far too many schools fail to meet criteria of acceptability in education.
Or, to put it another way, if one equates improving education with raising teachers’ salaries (a dubious proposition at best unless accountability measures for teachers are instituted as well), with this amount of money classroom teachers would have enjoyed a $1,000 raise. Instead, we labor on with this fiction that more money, rather than more commitment, expectations, and hard work from both teachers and students, will produce better secondary education in Louisiana.
8.8.05
Dynamics of 2006 Shreveport mayor's race prove interesting
With qualifying a bit over a year away, the Shreveport Times decided to run a couple of articles about the 2006 mayor’s race. Fair enough; let’s see where in general things stand even though, as always, very much will change in the ensuing year.
Two things make for some special dynamics in this contest. First, it will be an open seat given the two-term limitation on present Mayor Keith Hightower. Second, the city is on the cusp of electorally becoming a majority-black city. Its population currently has a black plurality, but because black voter registration lags that of whites, a white plurality still exists – but now below 50 percent for the first time in recorded history.
Even more fascinating, doing a statistical study of trends in registration shows that, at current rates, the number of registered blacks in Caddo will exceed that of whites at the end of June, 2006 – about three months before the election. To make matters still more interesting, we can predict the same turnout gap will persist as we saw in the 2002 city races, 2.4 percent more whites than blacks. This translates into predicted excess of whites rather than blacks voting at about 1,288.
And to make matters downright compelling, a 1994 study I did of the mayor’s race runoff showed about 7 percent of blacks voted for the white Republican candidate while about 14 percent of whites voted for the black Democrat. Translated into 2006 projections, this means that in this kind of runoff the black Democrat starts with a 1,766 vote advantage, or 4.4 percent. (Analysis also shows that the least-mobilized group, “other race,” breaks slightly to a black Democrat as well.)
So the first rule of the contest is this: any black Democrat who can get through the blanket primary up against a white Republican stands a pretty good chance of winning, given this spread. Thus, the second rule becomes, if you are a white Republican, your chances are best by having another white Republican in a runoff. (Chances are a white Democrat would capture more white voters who might have voted for a white Republican than they would lose in terms of black voters switching to the Republican or discouraged and not voting without a black candidate, so that won’t work for this hypothetical Republican, but I need to look at this more closely.)
Is this latter scenario possible? It could happen only if black Democrats flooded the field and divvied up potential black votes in the primary. But, at this point, this looks unlikely, with just two names that could be considered big, state Rep. Cedric Glover and television station manager Ed Bradley, having indicated there is a good chance they will run. This means, among interested Republican candidates with any realistic chance of winning, only term-limited current officeholders would have great incentive to take a stab – state Sen. Max Malone and Shreveport City Councilman Thomas Carmody.
But it also leaves a strong Republican candidate such as Councilman Mike Gibson in a quandary. The numbers demographically only will get worse for white Republicans, yet to give up what seems to be a safe council seat for a very uncertain foray to capture the mayor’s office entails quite a risk. And there are other dynamics as well (the effects of minor candidates and white Democrats) which can be explored in a future posting.
Two things make for some special dynamics in this contest. First, it will be an open seat given the two-term limitation on present Mayor Keith Hightower. Second, the city is on the cusp of electorally becoming a majority-black city. Its population currently has a black plurality, but because black voter registration lags that of whites, a white plurality still exists – but now below 50 percent for the first time in recorded history.
Even more fascinating, doing a statistical study of trends in registration shows that, at current rates, the number of registered blacks in Caddo will exceed that of whites at the end of June, 2006 – about three months before the election. To make matters still more interesting, we can predict the same turnout gap will persist as we saw in the 2002 city races, 2.4 percent more whites than blacks. This translates into predicted excess of whites rather than blacks voting at about 1,288.
And to make matters downright compelling, a 1994 study I did of the mayor’s race runoff showed about 7 percent of blacks voted for the white Republican candidate while about 14 percent of whites voted for the black Democrat. Translated into 2006 projections, this means that in this kind of runoff the black Democrat starts with a 1,766 vote advantage, or 4.4 percent. (Analysis also shows that the least-mobilized group, “other race,” breaks slightly to a black Democrat as well.)
So the first rule of the contest is this: any black Democrat who can get through the blanket primary up against a white Republican stands a pretty good chance of winning, given this spread. Thus, the second rule becomes, if you are a white Republican, your chances are best by having another white Republican in a runoff. (Chances are a white Democrat would capture more white voters who might have voted for a white Republican than they would lose in terms of black voters switching to the Republican or discouraged and not voting without a black candidate, so that won’t work for this hypothetical Republican, but I need to look at this more closely.)
Is this latter scenario possible? It could happen only if black Democrats flooded the field and divvied up potential black votes in the primary. But, at this point, this looks unlikely, with just two names that could be considered big, state Rep. Cedric Glover and television station manager Ed Bradley, having indicated there is a good chance they will run. This means, among interested Republican candidates with any realistic chance of winning, only term-limited current officeholders would have great incentive to take a stab – state Sen. Max Malone and Shreveport City Councilman Thomas Carmody.
But it also leaves a strong Republican candidate such as Councilman Mike Gibson in a quandary. The numbers demographically only will get worse for white Republicans, yet to give up what seems to be a safe council seat for a very uncertain foray to capture the mayor’s office entails quite a risk. And there are other dynamics as well (the effects of minor candidates and white Democrats) which can be explored in a future posting.
7.8.05
Nursing home pot calls industry critics black
Like a stuck pig, every time a well-placed jab comes from well-informed critics of Louisiana’s nursing home industry, if it has anything to do with Shreveport media, you can count on local nursing home owner and industry official Denny “Kit” Gamble to squeal using facts and logic that only the uninformed are likely to buy.
In response to a critical letter about the industry to the Shreveport Times, Gamble again goes into his routine of trying to justify the unjustifiable, starting by writing that Louisiana has the lowest Medicaid (of which Louisiana nursing homes get about 85 percent of their business, topping the nation) reimbursement rate. Of course, he fails to report this figure is influenced downwards by the fact that Louisiana, almost alone among states, pays for empty beds and whose other averages of financial support of nursing homes together are at the top of all the states.
He then whines about how some nursing homes are going out of business even as their average profit is above 15 percent. Never mind this is a result of overexpansion because too many poor businessmen, thinking they could live off escalating revenues from taxpayers forever, now find health care economics going against them.
But these complaints about finances aim towards the larger point, the defense of the poor record that Louisiana nursing homes have in quality of care. Gamble has the chutzpah to hint that, despite all the facts showing the privileged financial position that nursing homes enjoy in the state, that it is lack of funding that causes these problems! And then he accuses the letter writer to which he responds of a hidden agenda in publicizing nursing home records of violations.
In fact, Gamble’s own company has had major problems in keeping up quality standards. While its Shreveport Guest House showed just one major violation in its last annual report conducted by the state, its Shreveport Spring Lake facility’s report showed seven violations with “potential for more than minimal harm,” and its Shreveport Manor Guest Care Center had 10 of these with two additional “immediate jeopardy” citations. In Ruston, things get worse with its Alpine facility where all five results are “potential for more than minimal harm” a year after a finding of “actual harm.” Worst of all is its Bastrop Cherry Ridge facility, with its latest annual report containing seven “potential for more than minimal harm” and three “actual harm” citations.
If Gamble is going to suggest that reports of care problems among Louisiana nursing homes are exaggerated and driven by bad faith agendas, he needs to put his own house in order before he has any moral authority to criticize others’ reporting on his problems.
In response to a critical letter about the industry to the Shreveport Times, Gamble again goes into his routine of trying to justify the unjustifiable, starting by writing that Louisiana has the lowest Medicaid (of which Louisiana nursing homes get about 85 percent of their business, topping the nation) reimbursement rate. Of course, he fails to report this figure is influenced downwards by the fact that Louisiana, almost alone among states, pays for empty beds and whose other averages of financial support of nursing homes together are at the top of all the states.
He then whines about how some nursing homes are going out of business even as their average profit is above 15 percent. Never mind this is a result of overexpansion because too many poor businessmen, thinking they could live off escalating revenues from taxpayers forever, now find health care economics going against them.
But these complaints about finances aim towards the larger point, the defense of the poor record that Louisiana nursing homes have in quality of care. Gamble has the chutzpah to hint that, despite all the facts showing the privileged financial position that nursing homes enjoy in the state, that it is lack of funding that causes these problems! And then he accuses the letter writer to which he responds of a hidden agenda in publicizing nursing home records of violations.
In fact, Gamble’s own company has had major problems in keeping up quality standards. While its Shreveport Guest House showed just one major violation in its last annual report conducted by the state, its Shreveport Spring Lake facility’s report showed seven violations with “potential for more than minimal harm,” and its Shreveport Manor Guest Care Center had 10 of these with two additional “immediate jeopardy” citations. In Ruston, things get worse with its Alpine facility where all five results are “potential for more than minimal harm” a year after a finding of “actual harm.” Worst of all is its Bastrop Cherry Ridge facility, with its latest annual report containing seven “potential for more than minimal harm” and three “actual harm” citations.
If Gamble is going to suggest that reports of care problems among Louisiana nursing homes are exaggerated and driven by bad faith agendas, he needs to put his own house in order before he has any moral authority to criticize others’ reporting on his problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)