The latest news on Shreveport’s convention center’s finances contained more bad news than boosters of it imagined. Brought to fruition along with its associated hotel by former mayor Keith Hightower, with legislative assistance by current Mayor Cedric Glover, it ran up a larger deficit for the past year than predicted, nearly $2 million – despite the fact it did more business than predicted.
City and operating officials naturally found a number of extraneous factors to try to explain this away, but in doing so ignored the reality that the benefits brought about by the center and its accompanying hotel never will bring greater benefits than costs to the city. Even the simplest analysis of the numbers, using just rough estimates of debt repayment, operating expenses, and generous guesses about tax revenues generated, show only the most unrealistic assumptions forecast anything but annual losses from significant to staggering.
Meanwhile, the city carries a huge debt approaching $1 billion thanks in part to the approximately $150 million spent on these items, while simultaneously it needs hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure repairs with little left on its debt ceiling to take care of them in the near future. Spending the amounts the city blew on these items, combined with the extra borrowing capacity that would have been freed up could have taken care of about half of the infrastructure problems, and the $1 million annually the center is expected to lose (within a decade; officials admit losses will exceed that for now) could have paid for things like improved crime-fighting and athletic conference headquarters with plenty left over.
Policy-makers knew these things, yet built the center and hotel (when the private sector refused to do so) anyway, because of reasons of ego, political gain, and to put more money at the trough so that their friends and special interests could benefit at the public’s expense. But, most importantly of all, they tried to justify this with the ridiculous notion that it is government, not people, who provide the spark for economic development.
Unfortunately, this behavior is not limited to the west bank of the Red River. Bossier City’s leaders also have committed follies of this sort, spending about half of what Shreveport did on an arena and parking garage that also never will have the benefits of their operations exceed their costs without similar wildly optimistic and unrealistic assumptions. Their stupidity is only slightly less because they did it with cash rather than debt – but cash that could have been used to make Bossier City an economic development dream rather than a home for revenue-draining monuments to elected officials.
Both cases should provide ample warning to the citizenry and the prospective voters among them to beware politicians who say economic development comes from spending the people’s money in building buildings rather than allowing citizens to keep it and getting government out of their way.
27.2.07
Judge's actions usurp authority, deny Odom speedy justice
Nowhere yesterday were the disadvantages of judge-made law more evident than in the actions concerning the corruption trial of Louisiana Agriculture Secretary Bob Odom, risking a just conclusion to the affair and complicating voters’ task in his upcoming reelection bid..
First, Judge Donald Johnson of the 19th state District threw out two of the six counts by substituting his own interpretation of the law. These regarded money laundering, over a technicality where state law appeared only to make illegal such schemes involving cash rather than checks.
Disregarding the fact that legally checks act as cash if they don’t overdraw and are signed by someone with the legal power to do so, and that it was extremely unlikely that the Legislature intended to make money laundering by cash illegal but not that by check, Johnson decided these charges had to be severed from the case. Properly, if he had any doubts at all, Johnson should have investigated legislative intent, which is appropriate for judges to use in gray areas such as this, rather than substitute his own opinion about what he thought the statute meant, which is inappropriate.
The severing of the two counts itself was controversial. Johnson had done the same in an earlier phase of the trial but was overruled by the Louisiana Supreme Court, saying the case had to go together as a package. Prosecutors argued Louisiana law permits only they to decide whether to sever so the entire case should be heard by a higher court. Because prosecutors did not want to go along with Johnson once again taking the law into his own hands, he dismissed the entire case. Fortunately, prosecutors will appeal the action.
Johnson (who has a history of playing fast and loose with judicial interpretation) based his usurpation on a belief that the case, after four years had to “move forward.” But in taking these actions, he actually is slowing down the process by forcing more appeals that, if previous rulings are a guide, will serve only to mandate restarting the process in the first place. (In fact, it has been going on so long that there was question whether Johnson had jurisdiction in the case any more.)
If Odom truly is innocent, he should welcome expeditious efforts to clear his name. Instead, his legal team has seemed to care more about filing motions and trying to stop the trial than to get it over with so he can show his innocence, if he is, to the world
And voters deserve this as well. Already Democrat Odom has drawn Republican state Rep. Mike Strain as an opponent. Dragging out the trial by questionable rulings from Johnson only serves to interject the case squarely into the election itself. Speedy completion of the entire trial, which is what the prosecutors argue will happen if, as they contend, their motion to appeal removes it from Johnson and send it to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, for these reasons is highly desirable.
First, Judge Donald Johnson of the 19th state District threw out two of the six counts by substituting his own interpretation of the law. These regarded money laundering, over a technicality where state law appeared only to make illegal such schemes involving cash rather than checks.
Disregarding the fact that legally checks act as cash if they don’t overdraw and are signed by someone with the legal power to do so, and that it was extremely unlikely that the Legislature intended to make money laundering by cash illegal but not that by check, Johnson decided these charges had to be severed from the case. Properly, if he had any doubts at all, Johnson should have investigated legislative intent, which is appropriate for judges to use in gray areas such as this, rather than substitute his own opinion about what he thought the statute meant, which is inappropriate.
The severing of the two counts itself was controversial. Johnson had done the same in an earlier phase of the trial but was overruled by the Louisiana Supreme Court, saying the case had to go together as a package. Prosecutors argued Louisiana law permits only they to decide whether to sever so the entire case should be heard by a higher court. Because prosecutors did not want to go along with Johnson once again taking the law into his own hands, he dismissed the entire case. Fortunately, prosecutors will appeal the action.
Johnson (who has a history of playing fast and loose with judicial interpretation) based his usurpation on a belief that the case, after four years had to “move forward.” But in taking these actions, he actually is slowing down the process by forcing more appeals that, if previous rulings are a guide, will serve only to mandate restarting the process in the first place. (In fact, it has been going on so long that there was question whether Johnson had jurisdiction in the case any more.)
If Odom truly is innocent, he should welcome expeditious efforts to clear his name. Instead, his legal team has seemed to care more about filing motions and trying to stop the trial than to get it over with so he can show his innocence, if he is, to the world
And voters deserve this as well. Already Democrat Odom has drawn Republican state Rep. Mike Strain as an opponent. Dragging out the trial by questionable rulings from Johnson only serves to interject the case squarely into the election itself. Speedy completion of the entire trial, which is what the prosecutors argue will happen if, as they contend, their motion to appeal removes it from Johnson and send it to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, for these reasons is highly desirable.
26.2.07
Likely GOP LA success may foreshadow 2008 elections
Louisiana Republicans, both candidates and supporters, should take heart that an observer of politics in the state who often displays poor judgment in its analysis has written the Democrats might do well in the 2007 state elections. Such a Pollyanna attitude in the face of present evidence only will serve to make his party’s state fate more miserable in the fall while ignoring that Louisiana GOP gains may signal future national electoral fortunes.
Actually, columnist Wiley Hilburn’s miscalculation at least does not rise to the level of imbecility shown in some of previous efforts – here, it’s just bad judgment. Hilburn argues that Democrat Gov. Kathleen Blanco shouldn’t do so badly against Republican Rep. Bobby Jindal because (1) Jindal is so closely tied to an “unpopular” Pres. George W. Bush, (2) that Blanco is potentially popular in northern Louisiana which could spread across the state, and (3) the other Democrat candidate Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell can be popular enough to detach votes from Jindal.
None of this is true. Bush may be having troubles in other states, but not Louisiana. The last poll done of his job approval in the state, November, 2006, showed just a narrow 51-47 disapproval of Bush – and as his numbers have gone up nationally in the past three months, he well may have moved into positive territory in the state.
In the only nonpartisan statewide poll of the governor’s race to date (which itself is over a month old), Jindal was cleaning Blanco’s clock by over 25 points. Campbell, as it turns out, essentially takes away just a few percentage points from Blanco only. Interestingly, Jindal’s lead is narrowest in north Louisiana – but it’s still a lead, and this in the least populated region of the state with (using Campbell’s district as a proxy for north Louisiana) over 38 percent of the population being black, means Jindal is pulling 76 percent of the white vote to Blanco’s 13 percent in the region. And, to remind, only six percent in the statewide poll were undecided at this point, meaning Blanco has little room to improve. (Hilburn’s scientific way of countering this evidence – Blanco got what he thought was an enthusiastic reception at two engagements.)
To confirm the absurdity of Hilburn’s supposition, in the past three special election contests with any partisan competition, the insurance commissioner’s race did not even feature a Democrat, for the secretary of state’s contest a Democrat barely made the general election runoff and promptly withdrew, and in the District 1 House race, a Republican swamped the field in a district previously held by a Democrat. A lot can happen over the next nine months, but all signs indicate decent, perhaps spectacular, GOP gains in Louisiana; any Democrat operative lacking cognizance of this to incorporate into his electoral strategy endangers his party’s chances later this year.
And it would not be an accident for the state to be a bellwether for the rest of the country. Witness the GOP mayoral and statehouse wins in 1993 right after Democrat wins the previous year, foreshadowing the big Republican gains of 1994. Or check out the 2005 statehouse gains made by the Democrats preceding last year’s Congressional change in power. With this anticipated result, if also the GOP continues to consolidate power in Mississippi and Republicans retain the Kentucky statehouse, more than likely, rather than a laggard of Democrat national forces as Hilburn muses, Louisiana will turn out to be the leading indicator for 2008 demonstrating recent national Democrat gains were idiosyncratic and temporary.
Actually, columnist Wiley Hilburn’s miscalculation at least does not rise to the level of imbecility shown in some of previous efforts – here, it’s just bad judgment. Hilburn argues that Democrat Gov. Kathleen Blanco shouldn’t do so badly against Republican Rep. Bobby Jindal because (1) Jindal is so closely tied to an “unpopular” Pres. George W. Bush, (2) that Blanco is potentially popular in northern Louisiana which could spread across the state, and (3) the other Democrat candidate Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell can be popular enough to detach votes from Jindal.
None of this is true. Bush may be having troubles in other states, but not Louisiana. The last poll done of his job approval in the state, November, 2006, showed just a narrow 51-47 disapproval of Bush – and as his numbers have gone up nationally in the past three months, he well may have moved into positive territory in the state.
In the only nonpartisan statewide poll of the governor’s race to date (which itself is over a month old), Jindal was cleaning Blanco’s clock by over 25 points. Campbell, as it turns out, essentially takes away just a few percentage points from Blanco only. Interestingly, Jindal’s lead is narrowest in north Louisiana – but it’s still a lead, and this in the least populated region of the state with (using Campbell’s district as a proxy for north Louisiana) over 38 percent of the population being black, means Jindal is pulling 76 percent of the white vote to Blanco’s 13 percent in the region. And, to remind, only six percent in the statewide poll were undecided at this point, meaning Blanco has little room to improve. (Hilburn’s scientific way of countering this evidence – Blanco got what he thought was an enthusiastic reception at two engagements.)
To confirm the absurdity of Hilburn’s supposition, in the past three special election contests with any partisan competition, the insurance commissioner’s race did not even feature a Democrat, for the secretary of state’s contest a Democrat barely made the general election runoff and promptly withdrew, and in the District 1 House race, a Republican swamped the field in a district previously held by a Democrat. A lot can happen over the next nine months, but all signs indicate decent, perhaps spectacular, GOP gains in Louisiana; any Democrat operative lacking cognizance of this to incorporate into his electoral strategy endangers his party’s chances later this year.
And it would not be an accident for the state to be a bellwether for the rest of the country. Witness the GOP mayoral and statehouse wins in 1993 right after Democrat wins the previous year, foreshadowing the big Republican gains of 1994. Or check out the 2005 statehouse gains made by the Democrats preceding last year’s Congressional change in power. With this anticipated result, if also the GOP continues to consolidate power in Mississippi and Republicans retain the Kentucky statehouse, more than likely, rather than a laggard of Democrat national forces as Hilburn muses, Louisiana will turn out to be the leading indicator for 2008 demonstrating recent national Democrat gains were idiosyncratic and temporary.
25.2.07
LSU system charges of others' bias appears hypocritical
A favorite tactic of those losing an argument is to try to impugn the proponents of the prevailing side. Academicians properly trained particularly try to refute opposing views by pointing to problems of data, research method, and logic in interpretation. Thus, it is sad to see the top academic official in Louisiana’s most prestigious university system trying to discredit study results by trying to shoot the messenger.
Louisiana State University system President Bill Jenkins had harsh words for a study soon to be released by the Public Affairs Research Council, whose contents remain unknown in detail precisely because PAR is circulating its contents to interested parties before making public a final version. It deals with health care redesign in Louisiana.
This is a highly unusual, pre-emptive step, to make public this discontent before report contents even are known. As such, we can speculate that PAR finds the current indigent health care system in the state, largely overseen by LSU hospitals, to be inferior to redesign arguments to move it away from a money-goes-to-the-institution (used only by Louisiana) to a money-follows-the-person regime because that will produce better overall patient outcomes with money being more efficiently spent.
We don’t know this, but from Jenkins’ criticism, that would be the implication, as Jenkins publicly terms it “inaccurate, incomplete, unrealistic and biased.” Whether so is best left to analyzing the report after its release, but Jenkins destroys the credibility of his statement in advance when he then argues the conclusions are tainted as PAR's research was at least partially funded by private health care providers that, as Jenkins contends, “will profit from dismantling the state's existing health care delivery system.”
Never mind that PAR has strict procedures that guard against such bias being introduced into work, much less that any such bias should be obvious in any issued report thus meaning Jenkins’ criticisms at this time are unnecessary and premature. But most laughable is the kettle-calling-the-pot-black situation here, as LSU and the state are just as easily charged with lack of objectivity on this matter.
Let’s think about this, who is Jenkins employed by? That’s right, the LSU Board of Supervisors who have consistently knocked any change in policy that would take hundreds of millions of dollars out of their pockets and reduce their number of employees by thousands. Let’s face it, by their own definition of who is “unbiased” to study the policy, Jenkins and LSU are hypocrites.
Unfortunately, academia in Louisiana often is seen as overly-politicized, and Jenkins’ (and no doubt therefore the Board’s, his employer’s) remarks and actions in this situation do nothing to suggest otherwise. (As an employee of the LSU system of whom technically Jenkins is my boss, the views expressed here obviously are mine and not those of the LSU system or of my direct employer LSUS … but I wish on the matter of health care redesign we agreed.)
Louisiana State University system President Bill Jenkins had harsh words for a study soon to be released by the Public Affairs Research Council, whose contents remain unknown in detail precisely because PAR is circulating its contents to interested parties before making public a final version. It deals with health care redesign in Louisiana.
This is a highly unusual, pre-emptive step, to make public this discontent before report contents even are known. As such, we can speculate that PAR finds the current indigent health care system in the state, largely overseen by LSU hospitals, to be inferior to redesign arguments to move it away from a money-goes-to-the-institution (used only by Louisiana) to a money-follows-the-person regime because that will produce better overall patient outcomes with money being more efficiently spent.
We don’t know this, but from Jenkins’ criticism, that would be the implication, as Jenkins publicly terms it “inaccurate, incomplete, unrealistic and biased.” Whether so is best left to analyzing the report after its release, but Jenkins destroys the credibility of his statement in advance when he then argues the conclusions are tainted as PAR's research was at least partially funded by private health care providers that, as Jenkins contends, “will profit from dismantling the state's existing health care delivery system.”
Never mind that PAR has strict procedures that guard against such bias being introduced into work, much less that any such bias should be obvious in any issued report thus meaning Jenkins’ criticisms at this time are unnecessary and premature. But most laughable is the kettle-calling-the-pot-black situation here, as LSU and the state are just as easily charged with lack of objectivity on this matter.
Let’s think about this, who is Jenkins employed by? That’s right, the LSU Board of Supervisors who have consistently knocked any change in policy that would take hundreds of millions of dollars out of their pockets and reduce their number of employees by thousands. Let’s face it, by their own definition of who is “unbiased” to study the policy, Jenkins and LSU are hypocrites.
Unfortunately, academia in Louisiana often is seen as overly-politicized, and Jenkins’ (and no doubt therefore the Board’s, his employer’s) remarks and actions in this situation do nothing to suggest otherwise. (As an employee of the LSU system of whom technically Jenkins is my boss, the views expressed here obviously are mine and not those of the LSU system or of my direct employer LSUS … but I wish on the matter of health care redesign we agreed.)
24.2.07
Special elections signal trouble for incumbents, Democrats
Two trends concerning 2007 elections to the Louisiana Legislature hypothesize that revulsion against incumbents will magnify to the benefit of Republicans. Special House elections today presented no signs of invalidating either supposition.
While none of the contests obviously featured an incumbent, two of them had a candidate who was a high-profile incumbent in another position. In District 4, Shreveport City Councilman Calvin “Ben” Lester found himself out in the cold, missing a runoff from the all black Democrat field that sent former Caddo Parish Commissioner Patrick Williams and former City Councilman Larry Ferdinand to next month’s election. Lester certainly did not help his own cause with recent ethical problems concerning both campaign finance and legal services issues.
In District 1, current Caddo Parish Commissioner Jim Morris did win (going away) – but he also was a Republican in a formerly Democrat district deemed very vulnerable for takeover as a result of term limits (prematurely in this case becaue of the untimely death of Roy “Hoppy” Hopkins). This result, combined with the special election result for Senate District 16 in December, would seem to indicate that in this kind of district an experienced Republican will do well, but in other districts where term limits have kicked in, woe be an incumbent legislator of any party facing a quality opponent.
A few elections a trend doesn’t make, but simultaneously they demonstrate anti-current-legislative-incumbency and GOP momentum may play big roles in elections later this year.
While none of the contests obviously featured an incumbent, two of them had a candidate who was a high-profile incumbent in another position. In District 4, Shreveport City Councilman Calvin “Ben” Lester found himself out in the cold, missing a runoff from the all black Democrat field that sent former Caddo Parish Commissioner Patrick Williams and former City Councilman Larry Ferdinand to next month’s election. Lester certainly did not help his own cause with recent ethical problems concerning both campaign finance and legal services issues.
In District 1, current Caddo Parish Commissioner Jim Morris did win (going away) – but he also was a Republican in a formerly Democrat district deemed very vulnerable for takeover as a result of term limits (prematurely in this case becaue of the untimely death of Roy “Hoppy” Hopkins). This result, combined with the special election result for Senate District 16 in December, would seem to indicate that in this kind of district an experienced Republican will do well, but in other districts where term limits have kicked in, woe be an incumbent legislator of any party facing a quality opponent.
A few elections a trend doesn’t make, but simultaneously they demonstrate anti-current-legislative-incumbency and GOP momentum may play big roles in elections later this year.
22.2.07
Redesign secondary school curricula, exit exam
A sad reality I face every day as a university professor is, in one way or another, providing feedback to students unprepared for college work that signals to them their plight. It’s unfortunate because, theoretically, students who meet our admissions standards ought to be prepared for college work – especially since a number of them will have received “scholarships” from the state indicating, at the very least, they should be capable of college work.
While many students wash out or have initial difficulty in college because their attitudes aren’t right, that many were not adequately prepared further vexes as a public policy problem because a high school diploma in Louisiana, requiring passage of a defined curriculum and exit exam, with a sufficient grade point average theoretically defines college preparedness. Yet if a significant number of those who pass the courses with the required GPA and the exam are unprepared, there is a disconnection in the system.
The purpose of the exit exam, the Graduate Exit Exam, is to provide a standard beyond internal evaluation at each school. Somebody strolling through Louisiana high schools would notice vast differences in the demands being made on students, so the GEE attempts to present a uniform assessment of performance statewide. Students must pass it to get a diploma.
However, some fault the GEE for providing incentive for the school to focus on teaching to pass it, which may detract from knowledge and skills acquisition needed to succeed in college. If that is the case, then one of two decisions or both of them must be made and implemented. One would be to shape the GEE more to a facsimile of a college entrance exam. This would require consultation between state secondary and university systems to make the exam both indicative of knowledge and skills desired to be imparted in high school and those useful to collegiate success.
The problem would be that this would limit the GEE’s ability to assess whether students capably had completed high school for those intending not to go to college. Hence, secondly, a GEE variant for these individuals must be developed. It could be set up so that for the 11th grade testing that the student would choose which track, collegiate or not, to pursue, with a different GEE for each. The difference would be that a TOPS award, the “scholarship” program, would come automatically with a passage of the “collegiate” GEE, but would not with the passage of the vocational-oriented GEE. But passage of either would suffice for a high school diploma.
This strategy would require some redesign of high school curricula. All such schools would have to offer a vocational track which the student would have to decide (say prior to entering the 11th grade) whether to pursue but the curriculum for which would be constructed to satisfy the “vocational” GEE requirements. The “collegiate” GEE then would then have as a dual purpose testing for the ability to succeed in college, much as the ACT test does currently.
With the proper design, students will have a better chance of succeeding in both high school and college (whether they will is a matter mostly up to them, and partly as a result of teacher quality, a subject best taken up at another time). At the very least, it would make less likely under-prepared consuming resources from which they cannot benefit in college at the expense of those who can.
While many students wash out or have initial difficulty in college because their attitudes aren’t right, that many were not adequately prepared further vexes as a public policy problem because a high school diploma in Louisiana, requiring passage of a defined curriculum and exit exam, with a sufficient grade point average theoretically defines college preparedness. Yet if a significant number of those who pass the courses with the required GPA and the exam are unprepared, there is a disconnection in the system.
The purpose of the exit exam, the Graduate Exit Exam, is to provide a standard beyond internal evaluation at each school. Somebody strolling through Louisiana high schools would notice vast differences in the demands being made on students, so the GEE attempts to present a uniform assessment of performance statewide. Students must pass it to get a diploma.
However, some fault the GEE for providing incentive for the school to focus on teaching to pass it, which may detract from knowledge and skills acquisition needed to succeed in college. If that is the case, then one of two decisions or both of them must be made and implemented. One would be to shape the GEE more to a facsimile of a college entrance exam. This would require consultation between state secondary and university systems to make the exam both indicative of knowledge and skills desired to be imparted in high school and those useful to collegiate success.
The problem would be that this would limit the GEE’s ability to assess whether students capably had completed high school for those intending not to go to college. Hence, secondly, a GEE variant for these individuals must be developed. It could be set up so that for the 11th grade testing that the student would choose which track, collegiate or not, to pursue, with a different GEE for each. The difference would be that a TOPS award, the “scholarship” program, would come automatically with a passage of the “collegiate” GEE, but would not with the passage of the vocational-oriented GEE. But passage of either would suffice for a high school diploma.
This strategy would require some redesign of high school curricula. All such schools would have to offer a vocational track which the student would have to decide (say prior to entering the 11th grade) whether to pursue but the curriculum for which would be constructed to satisfy the “vocational” GEE requirements. The “collegiate” GEE then would then have as a dual purpose testing for the ability to succeed in college, much as the ACT test does currently.
With the proper design, students will have a better chance of succeeding in both high school and college (whether they will is a matter mostly up to them, and partly as a result of teacher quality, a subject best taken up at another time). At the very least, it would make less likely under-prepared consuming resources from which they cannot benefit in college at the expense of those who can.
21.2.07
Kennedy actions serving state and his political interests
Louisiana Treasurer John Kennedy has kept his streak going, rare until recently among statewide elected officials, of speaking and acting in a commonsensical manner the opposite of the special-interest-favoring, good-old-boy ethos predominant in the state. If he continues, he may present reformers of the conservative and/or Republican stripes next year the necessity of having to take a leap of faith.
Only last week, Kennedy, in his role of serving on special state committees, properly and publicly voiced displeasure at a plan to bring less accountability to the State Bond Commission and to engineer quietly a potentially far-reaching financial transaction. During this term as treasurer almost always, and sometimes with a lone voice, Kennedy has advocated sensible spending priorities and transparency in government.
These actions have led some to wonder, since the vast majority (but not all) of the good-old-boy crowd calls themselves Democrats, why Kennedy still identifies with that label, and further speculation runs rampant that Kennedy will switch to the Republicans and launch a bid challenging Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu in 2008. On the surface, this seems to be the optimal plan for Kennedy to achieve higher office, as he could present himself as the only other major candidate in that contest by taking away support another GOP candidate could get.
But it also raises an uncomfortable question for GOP supporters who would like nothing better than to get a Republican in and Landrieu out. Kennedy also ran for Senate in 2004, but in that contest his reformist tendencies were cloaked in left-wing rhetoric. That appeared to be a tactical decision on his part, thinking that eventual winner Sen. David Vitter would appeal to the right and Democrat Chris John would be boxed into the center by having a candidate like Kennedy come in from the left. It obviously didn’t work as Kennedy finished, if respectably, in third.
If Kennedy does have eyes on this office with this path, he will need to keep hewing to this line. The GOP may not be entirely convinced that he has put away his liberalism and other long-time Republicans such as (if he doesn’t win this year’s governor’s race) state Sen. Walter Boasso could be tempted to tackle Landrieu. A penchant for Kennedy publicizing every opportunity for contrasting his views against the populist majority of the state’s officeholders’ would be as much to promote good policy as to prove his trustworthiness to Louisiana Republicans.
Only last week, Kennedy, in his role of serving on special state committees, properly and publicly voiced displeasure at a plan to bring less accountability to the State Bond Commission and to engineer quietly a potentially far-reaching financial transaction. During this term as treasurer almost always, and sometimes with a lone voice, Kennedy has advocated sensible spending priorities and transparency in government.
These actions have led some to wonder, since the vast majority (but not all) of the good-old-boy crowd calls themselves Democrats, why Kennedy still identifies with that label, and further speculation runs rampant that Kennedy will switch to the Republicans and launch a bid challenging Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu in 2008. On the surface, this seems to be the optimal plan for Kennedy to achieve higher office, as he could present himself as the only other major candidate in that contest by taking away support another GOP candidate could get.
But it also raises an uncomfortable question for GOP supporters who would like nothing better than to get a Republican in and Landrieu out. Kennedy also ran for Senate in 2004, but in that contest his reformist tendencies were cloaked in left-wing rhetoric. That appeared to be a tactical decision on his part, thinking that eventual winner Sen. David Vitter would appeal to the right and Democrat Chris John would be boxed into the center by having a candidate like Kennedy come in from the left. It obviously didn’t work as Kennedy finished, if respectably, in third.
If Kennedy does have eyes on this office with this path, he will need to keep hewing to this line. The GOP may not be entirely convinced that he has put away his liberalism and other long-time Republicans such as (if he doesn’t win this year’s governor’s race) state Sen. Walter Boasso could be tempted to tackle Landrieu. A penchant for Kennedy publicizing every opportunity for contrasting his views against the populist majority of the state’s officeholders’ would be as much to promote good policy as to prove his trustworthiness to Louisiana Republicans.
20.2.07
Breaux entry unlikely to prevent GOP gubernatorial win
As Gov. Kathleen Blanco’s reelection chances continue to wallow, some Louisiana Democrats continue to hope some miraculous candidate on their side emerges to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Now they have increased hope latched onto Democrat former Sen. John Breaux as a potential savior. Should this happen, it would change the dynamics of the contest, but it’s not likely to change the results.
There are several reasons why Republican current candidate Rep. Bobby Jindal should be favored if it ever came down to this matchup in the general election runoff. First, Jindal has a tremendous head start in fundraising. Breaux has many connections and if Blanco bowed out a process could begin of defunding her campaign account and trying to move it over to his, but Breaux will not outspend Jindal in this contest by any significant amount, if at all.
Second, Breaux has been gone from the electoral scene and state for a couple of years, working in a profession wounded by recent unethical behavior by some lobbyists, an issue so important that apparently it was of some influence in determining the outcome of the 2006 elections. Jindal has been politically active and essentially campaigning for the past two years
Finally, Breaux is much more vulnerable on issues that Democrats might wish. It’s not hard to envision Jindal and other major Republican candidate state Sen. Walter Boasso hammering Breaux on a number of things – plenty of past votes showing how liberal Breaux has been in Washington, questioning how Breaux’s 32 years in office did not produce stronger levees, why only now Breaux has come out in favor of reform of Louisiana’s inefficient indigent health care system while Jindal has advocated it for a decade, etc. GOP candidates will have plenty of money to explain Breaux’s warts, something none others in their position have had since Breaux’s first attempt at the Senate.
The campaign theme would be very simple: in 32 years, as Louisiana fell further and further behind on almost every policy metric – economic growth, health care, education – where was John Breaux? What did he ever do to try to prevent this collapse, much less anything successful? What one thing did he ever do for the state, period?
Expect much of this exposure of Breaux to come at the hands of Boasso, for Breaux’s candidacy would eat much more into his support than Jindal’s. This would be a bonus to Jindal, who mainly could sit on the sidelines while one of his strongest opponents chips away at the strength of the other.
A Blanco withdrawal and Breaux entry would cripple Boasso’s chances, and about wipe out any small chance Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell would have to win. Almost certainly Breaux and Jindal would tangle in the runoff. But the fact is, Breaux is not well-positioned for a political resurrection in a climate where then state is slowly turning against good-old-boy politicians (especially of the kind associated with Prisoner #03128-095). The overall dynamic will not change – the GOP, Jindal specifically, would remain favored to win the office.
There are several reasons why Republican current candidate Rep. Bobby Jindal should be favored if it ever came down to this matchup in the general election runoff. First, Jindal has a tremendous head start in fundraising. Breaux has many connections and if Blanco bowed out a process could begin of defunding her campaign account and trying to move it over to his, but Breaux will not outspend Jindal in this contest by any significant amount, if at all.
Second, Breaux has been gone from the electoral scene and state for a couple of years, working in a profession wounded by recent unethical behavior by some lobbyists, an issue so important that apparently it was of some influence in determining the outcome of the 2006 elections. Jindal has been politically active and essentially campaigning for the past two years
Finally, Breaux is much more vulnerable on issues that Democrats might wish. It’s not hard to envision Jindal and other major Republican candidate state Sen. Walter Boasso hammering Breaux on a number of things – plenty of past votes showing how liberal Breaux has been in Washington, questioning how Breaux’s 32 years in office did not produce stronger levees, why only now Breaux has come out in favor of reform of Louisiana’s inefficient indigent health care system while Jindal has advocated it for a decade, etc. GOP candidates will have plenty of money to explain Breaux’s warts, something none others in their position have had since Breaux’s first attempt at the Senate.
The campaign theme would be very simple: in 32 years, as Louisiana fell further and further behind on almost every policy metric – economic growth, health care, education – where was John Breaux? What did he ever do to try to prevent this collapse, much less anything successful? What one thing did he ever do for the state, period?
Expect much of this exposure of Breaux to come at the hands of Boasso, for Breaux’s candidacy would eat much more into his support than Jindal’s. This would be a bonus to Jindal, who mainly could sit on the sidelines while one of his strongest opponents chips away at the strength of the other.
A Blanco withdrawal and Breaux entry would cripple Boasso’s chances, and about wipe out any small chance Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell would have to win. Almost certainly Breaux and Jindal would tangle in the runoff. But the fact is, Breaux is not well-positioned for a political resurrection in a climate where then state is slowly turning against good-old-boy politicians (especially of the kind associated with Prisoner #03128-095). The overall dynamic will not change – the GOP, Jindal specifically, would remain favored to win the office.
19.2.07
Processing tax chance may cost LA development projects
Even though it’s about eight months away, the uncertainty concerning the outcome of Louisiana’s governor’s election may claim economic development prizes badly needed by the state.
Louisiana is in the running for the nation’s first new oil refinery in about three decades, a proposed joint venture between Kuwait and an American company, although it has not yet been decided whether the idea will be pursued and both Texas and New Mexico also are in the running should it happen. The state also is competing with Alabama for a steel manufacturing plant which could provide hundreds of million of dollars worth of jobs and revenues. Obviously, the German firm will decide on the location that will maximize its profits.
But placing Louisiana at a competitive disadvantage for the steel facility is energy prices, which are significantly higher than those likely to be charged at the site in Alabama. The supplier would be Entergy, which has higher costs because of older equipment. More modern equipment including oil-burning generators would reduce the cost of electricity production to a more-competitive position.
Louisiana is in the running for the nation’s first new oil refinery in about three decades, a proposed joint venture between Kuwait and an American company, although it has not yet been decided whether the idea will be pursued and both Texas and New Mexico also are in the running should it happen. The state also is competing with Alabama for a steel manufacturing plant which could provide hundreds of million of dollars worth of jobs and revenues. Obviously, the German firm will decide on the location that will maximize its profits.
But placing Louisiana at a competitive disadvantage for the steel facility is energy prices, which are significantly higher than those likely to be charged at the site in Alabama. The supplier would be Entergy, which has higher costs because of older equipment. More modern equipment including oil-burning generators would reduce the cost of electricity production to a more-competitive position.
17.2.07
Welcome hospital plan defeat reveals interesting dynamics
The state got a good, unexpected Carnival throw last week from the Louisiana House of Representatives when it failed to muster a majority to allow funding for any aspect of a new Louisiana State University hospital in New Orleans.
Constructing a replacement for the ravaged existing facility got caught in the crossfire of three issues. First, the mail balloting of this ensued when the Legislature’s Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget overrode a Louisiana Recovery Authority decision to send forward only $74 million to plan and buy land for it, instead approving $300 million that could have started the building of it. Second, given the surplus of hospital beds in the metropolitan New Orleans area, there is great questioning whether such a facility on the scale it has been conceptualized is needed. Third, supporting the grandiose version was seen as validating the present indigent care system while refusing to redesign health care in any meaningful way in the state, holding onto the inferior money-given-to-the-institution rather than money-follows-the-person concept.
The 50-37 defeat provides an interesting window on the political scene because it was unexpected. First, it shows the GOP really is getting organized, as most of the votes against the plan came from near-unanimity on its members’ parts, rebelling against the committee comprised almost totally of Democrats (indeed, of the few Republicans on it of over 20 members, only state Rep. Steve Scalise can be considered taxpayer-friendly).
Second, it lays bare the politicized nature of higher education governance in the state, since those shocked at the failure of it to pass including Gov. Kathleen Blanco blamed the Louisiana State University system, represented by its Board of Supervisors, for not “lobbying enough” for the measure to pass. A very unfortunate fact of life in Louisiana is academic institutions, because of a political culture that overemphasizes special interests and underemphasizes merit, are unusually influenced by political decisions, in this case because the indigent care system in the state largely was put into the hands of the LSU system.
Third, it demonstrates the weakened nature of Blanco and the politics of post-hurricane recovery. She easily could have tried to cajole some people to vote in support – in fact, it was really no-shows that prevented passage who with a simple gubernatorial reminder well might have had the motion carry. However, the LRA largely is her tool, so she had disincentive to lobby for a decision that countered its. But also, during this election year with the stakes so high and her political capital running so low, she will want to save her efforts for matters that have a wider and/or more visible impact on a large portion of the Louisiana population.
However it happened, it constitutes an entirely welcome development and buys more time for sharper thinkers and public concern to build to engineer true health care redesign.
Constructing a replacement for the ravaged existing facility got caught in the crossfire of three issues. First, the mail balloting of this ensued when the Legislature’s Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget overrode a Louisiana Recovery Authority decision to send forward only $74 million to plan and buy land for it, instead approving $300 million that could have started the building of it. Second, given the surplus of hospital beds in the metropolitan New Orleans area, there is great questioning whether such a facility on the scale it has been conceptualized is needed. Third, supporting the grandiose version was seen as validating the present indigent care system while refusing to redesign health care in any meaningful way in the state, holding onto the inferior money-given-to-the-institution rather than money-follows-the-person concept.
The 50-37 defeat provides an interesting window on the political scene because it was unexpected. First, it shows the GOP really is getting organized, as most of the votes against the plan came from near-unanimity on its members’ parts, rebelling against the committee comprised almost totally of Democrats (indeed, of the few Republicans on it of over 20 members, only state Rep. Steve Scalise can be considered taxpayer-friendly).
Second, it lays bare the politicized nature of higher education governance in the state, since those shocked at the failure of it to pass including Gov. Kathleen Blanco blamed the Louisiana State University system, represented by its Board of Supervisors, for not “lobbying enough” for the measure to pass. A very unfortunate fact of life in Louisiana is academic institutions, because of a political culture that overemphasizes special interests and underemphasizes merit, are unusually influenced by political decisions, in this case because the indigent care system in the state largely was put into the hands of the LSU system.
Third, it demonstrates the weakened nature of Blanco and the politics of post-hurricane recovery. She easily could have tried to cajole some people to vote in support – in fact, it was really no-shows that prevented passage who with a simple gubernatorial reminder well might have had the motion carry. However, the LRA largely is her tool, so she had disincentive to lobby for a decision that countered its. But also, during this election year with the stakes so high and her political capital running so low, she will want to save her efforts for matters that have a wider and/or more visible impact on a large portion of the Louisiana population.
However it happened, it constitutes an entirely welcome development and buys more time for sharper thinkers and public concern to build to engineer true health care redesign.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)