Brown Bag Lunch #5: Louisiana's Budget — Giving It All Away

Brown Bag Lunch #5 centered on Louisiana's recurring budget problems. Jan Moller of the Louisiana Budget Project and Representative Katrina Jackson of Monroe were the speakers. Both made the case that the state's budget problems are self-inflicted wounds that are the result of run-away tax expenditure policy.

Mr. Moller maintains that the policy dates back to the initial attempts to undo the impact of the voter-approved Stelly Plan. Rep. Jackson says that at least one-third of the state's budget problems can be traced directly to tax expenditure policies initiated by the Jindal administration. She also makes the case that it is irresponsible to be making cuts in essential state services without knowing the true cost of the state's tax expenditure program — that is, those programs through which the state waives and exempts taxes, or rebates tax dollars to companies and individuals.

In the first video from the event, Mr. Moller makes the basic case that the seemingly endless string of budget shortfalls are problems governor and lawmakers created themselves.


In the second segment of his talk, Mr. Moller says that the state's budget problems will get worse before they get better and that a combination of external and internal forces might force, at the very least, a cost-benefit analysis of the 464 tax exemptions the state has on its books. Those exemptions cost state government $4.8 Billion every year.



Representative Katrina Jackson is the author of HB-1104 which would require that agencies and departments administering state tax breaks, incentives, exemptions, and rebates, provide annual reports on the fiscal and economic impact of those tax expenditures. She said her bill brings transparency and accountability to an area of the state budget where none currently exists.



Representative Jackson said the purpose of HB-1104 is to bring the same kind of transparency and fiscal responsibility to tax expenditures as is applied to line items in the state budget. She agrees with the Louisiana Department of Revenue and the Legislative Auditor that tax expenditures are every bit as real expenditures of state dollars as are line items. There needs to be the same level of accountability applied to those expenditures. They must deliver a return to the state on those investments.



On Tuesday, the Revenue Estimating Conference announced that the state will experience another revenue shortfall in the current fiscal year that ends on June 30. The hole is estimated to be just under $300 million. Cuts in programs will have to be enacted in order for the Governor and Legislature to comply with their constitutional mandate to keep the budget in balance.

Bobby Jindal's Bait & Switch Shop Special of the Week

Hey! Bobby Jindal's Bait & Switch Shop is having a special on State Employee Retirement this week.

Check out the details in this new spot!

Presentations from Cecilia Education Issues Forum

Speakers who took part in the Education Issues Forum at Cecilia High School on Sunday have made their presentations available for download.

Click here to download the PDF version of the presentation delivered by Louisiana Retired Teachers Association's Graig Luscombe.

To download the PDF version of the presentation by Bambi Polotzola of the Louisiana Developmental Disabilities Council, click here.

Bryan Alleman provided great information regarding issues and concerns, as well as how to engage legislators on education issues in the session. You can download the PDF of his presentation by clicking here.

This summary includes links to resources that show the effectiveness (or lack of) for educational reforms, as well has how to stay on top of developments at the session.

NEWER! Here is the presentation by Parks Primary Principal Bonnie Thibodeaux on the Compass teacher evaluation system and its shortcomings. Ms. Thibodeaux's school is recognized as an excellent school by the State of Louisiana under its current grading system.

The Kept Speaker: Fiscal conservatives got rolled by the Governor, but Jim Tucker did just fine

When Governor Bobby Jindal swooped into Baton Rouge last Friday to back the Senate version of the state's two budgets (the current fiscal year and the upcoming fiscal year), House Speaker Jim Tucker bemoaned the fact that the Governor had backed two budgets that did not reflect the values of fiscal conservatives.

It's a view Tucker has repeated on a number of occasions since the session ended. It was a frustrating end to the session for Tucker, who spent most of his time frustrating friends and foes alike. The trouble started with his ham-handed handling of the election of Joel Robideaux of Lafayette to the position of Speaker Pro Tempe. Tucker dished out some tough love to people who he said had broken commitments made to him on the vote. A tinge of bitterness stayed in the air for the rest of the session.

But, fate stepped in during April when Governor Bobby Jindal decided to relocated to Plaquemines Parish to lead the state's response to the BP Gulf Gusher. That cat being away gave Tucker room to play and, man, did he have a run.

Tucker took control of the budget process. He doggedly pursued the long-cherished dream of Louisiana conservatives of closing large swaths if not all of the LSU Hospital system (formerly the Charity Hospital System. He chased his plan to consolidate all of the higher education boards in the state only to find that his handling of the Robideaux election and aftermath would deny him success on this score.

He was steadfast in his position on how the state could borrow from and repay money from the so-called Rainy Day Fund. He refused to recognize the final estimate of the state's economists on the size of the hole in the current year budget, thereby setting the stage for a climactic showdown with the Senate and his nemesis Senate President Joel Chaisson II.

All the while, Tucker and his favorite Democratic Representative Jim Fannin went to the four-corners offense on the budget, holding onto to it as long as they possibly could. When the House approved HB-1 with just two weeks left in the session, the bill reflected Tucker's vision of the future of state government.

It pretty much scared the hell out of everyone in the Senate and anyone with a conscience. At a time when the state is giving more than $7 billion in tax breaks to businesses and the well-heeled, Tucker's budget would have shut down four or more LSU Hospitals, forced the closure of several state college campuses, and made yet another round of deep cuts in Medicaid. Total state layoffs including the hospital closings, the campus closings and the other reductions in state payrolls could have reached 10,000. That number does not even address the loss in healthcare jobs in the private sector resulting from the Medicaid cuts.

At a time when Jindal and his allies were running around the state and in federal courtrooms predicting economic Armageddon over the temporary loss of about 3,000 to 5,000 deep water drilling and support jobs, hurling that number of state workers out of their jobs at the same time created something of an appearance issue that even the Governor could not ignore.

Tucker was unfazed. Maybe he knew the drilling job numbers were a sham or maybe he just does not care about the impact of massive job losses on the state economy; either way, Tucker pushed on.

Then Jindal flew in and took away all of Tucker's fun. The Speaker ended up voting against the budget, as did group of other House members. In the end, Tucker found out that Speakers only have power so long as the Governor lets them have it, or if the Governor is preoccupied with other matters.

It is testimony to just how draconian Tucker's budget was that eliminating 3,000 state jobs, cutting $25 million from Medicaid reimbursements, $25 million in cuts for higher education, and guts funding for the arts was considered something of a victory.

Whatever relief might exist could well be short-lived if state revenues continue their downward trend, wrecking the assumptions on which the budget was built. But, if needed, those cuts will be made by the Jindal administration.

On the Sunday, the second-to-last day of the session, Tucker got some help cushioning the blow of his Wiley Coyote-like defeat on the budget. He won legislative approval to have the swank apartment in the Pentagon Barracks that had previously been the realm of the Lieutenant Governor designated as the quarters of the Speaker of the House.

That apartment had been extensively remodeled by Mitch Landrieu when he was Lieutenant Governor. Landrieu spent about $1 million in taxpayer money on the renovation and that drew howls from fiscal conservatives.

So, to the Speaker go those spoils. For Tucker, now a man with a considerable list of foes in the Capitol and the House, the challenge will be to keep that job title that brings the perk heading into the final year of his term.

The perk is his — if he can remain Speaker.

Jindal's Oil and Sand Woes

Bobby Jindal has problems with oil and sand these days. Each is where he would prefer they not be.

The oil on the Louisiana coast is on our few sandy beaches and spreading into our seafood-rich marshes, threatening long-term damage to both.

The sand in Jindal's heretofore well-oiled legislative machine threatens to exacerbate his problems with three years of state budgets as well as deny him the claim to fame that he needs to continue his national political quest — privatizing state services, particularly health services.

The impact of the still uncapped and unfettered BP Gulf Gusher continues to ominously build. More fisheries have been closed, this time in so-called "inside waters" — areas not out in the open Gulf, but adjacent to it. The order, issued late Saturday by the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, according to The Advocate, includes closures of most of Barataria Bay, all of Caminada Bay north of Grand Isle, and most, if not all, of Terrebonne and Timbalier bays. The closure order effectively shut down all fishing in the Grand Isle, Grand Terre, Four Bayous Pass, Red’s Pass, Lakes Pelto and Barre and all points in the Cocodrie area.

BP this week conceded that the gusher at the bottom of the Gulf is bigger than they earlier indicated. For weeks, the company maintained that 5,000 barrels per day were blowing into the Gulf from their drilling site. After finally connecting a tube into the leaking pipe on the Gulf floor, BP said the pipe was drawing up 5,000 barrels per day of oil but that oil was still leaking. That confirmed earlier suspicions based on the limited amount of video of the spill that a lot more oil was escaping than BP had admitted to.

BP also had to admit late in the week that their suction tube was not getting anywhere near 5,000 barrels of oil to the surface, that it was less than half that amount. Today, the news got even worse. BP now has zero credibility on the size of the gusher or the degree of success they are having in trying to deal with it. Imagine what the real numbers are. BP had real reasons for underestimating the size of the spill.

Jindal: Drill, Baby, Drill Dredge, Baby, Dredge

Bobby Jindal, like most good Republicans, has never paid much attention to environmental issues. He's paid some lip service to coastal protection but there is no environmental initiative of any significance with his name attached to it.

There is now, however, a plan initially developed by Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser to build sand berms in the coastal waters that Jindal has been touting as the best hope to keep BP's oil off the coast and out of our coastal marshes.

The plan is changing even as it is under review by the U.S. Coast Guard and the Army Corps of Engineers. As it has become a matter of public discussion, serious doubts have been raised about the plan by people who have much deeper knowledge about Louisiana's coast than do the newly converted Republican environmentalists Jindal and Nungesser.

Interestingly, the national media has discovered that there are numerous coastal experts who have done extensive research on Louisiana's coast who happen to be employed on projects operating on the campuses of Louisiana's public colleges and universities. There is no public indication that Jindal or members of his administration have been in touch with any of these people.

What the so-called Smartest Guy in the Room knows about the coast was taught to him by Billy Nungesser. Ponder that for a minute.

Jindal has ordered the Louisiana National Guard to begin some dredging near Elmer's Island. He said it was to prove the concept behind the Nungesser plan. But, unless the Coast Guard gives its approval to the work, it is possible that BP will not cover the cost of that work. It has been a while since Jindal has spent time in Baton Rouge, but surely he must recall that the state is in a budget crisis?

Jindal has continued flying and boating around the coast, trailing photographers and reporters with him along the way. A fawning conservative blogger tagged Jindal's approach as "governor-as-action-hero," forgetting for the moment the difference between talking and doing.

What Jindal has not been able to muster is results. For a man whose campaign coffers are littered with the names and dollars linked to energy companies, Jindal has not proven particularly effective at opening the doors he used to get campaign donations to get additional help to the region to deal with the gusher, its impact, or its aftermath.

What we do know is that, on the Louisiana coast, Bobby's in charge. Except when he's not.

BR Harder than BP

In some significant ways, the BP Gulf Gusher is an easier issue for Jindal than the current legislative session. After all, Jindal is not calling the shots. He's allowed the luxury of second-guessing both the federal government and BP.

Baton Rouge, though, is another animal and, since Jindal has gone coastal, things appear to be spinning out of control on the budgets (2010, 2011 and 2012). Members of the House have risen up to fight Jindal and Alan Levine's attempts to privatize broad swaths of state-owned healthcare infrastructure.

House Appropriations Chairman Jim Fannin raised the possibility that the session could end without a budget in place for the next fiscal year. He did not mention whether that prospect included the possibility of not being able to close the hole in the budget for the current fiscal year.

While the BP catastrophe has enabled Jindal to fly around playing 'that dashing young executive in his state-owned helicopter,' he was elected to govern and he has done precious little of that in the last month.

The depths of Jindal's problems at the Capitol were on full display on Thursday when a healthy majority of the House (64-27) voted to require legislative approval of privatization contracts of longer than three years at the state's mental hospitals in Mandeville, Jackson and Pineville. House Bill 1443 is being pushed by Democratic caucus leader John Bel Edwards of Amite and St. Francisville Republican Tom McVea.

They got the bill out of the House Health and Welfare Committee on a 13-3 vote earlier in the month, then beat back three Republican attempts to water down the bill on the floor of the House on Thursday. None of the votes were close.

DHH Secretary Alan Levine, whose department pushing the privatization drive, thumbed his nose at Edwards and McVea in the Times-Picayune on Sunday, saying the bill won't affect the current privatization efforts in Jackson, as the privatization contracts under consideration there would be for less than three years. But it could affect the long-term plans for turning over mental-health services in Pineville to a private contractor.

Levine's taunting of the legislators does not indicate that he recognizes the change that has taken place in the House in recent weeks as the implications of the privatization move have become clear and Jindal has been away playing beachcomber.

Even more dangerous for the administration is a bill introduced by Republican Representative Kirk Talbot of River Ridge that would create legislative oversight on all state contracts. House Bill 1316 is due to be heard in the House Appropriations Committee tomorrow. The roots of the bill apparently come out of the Government Streamlining Commission hearings where it was revealed that state government has more than 5,000 professional service contracts operating at any given time.

Talbot's bill puts the Edwards/McVea bill in a context that undermines Jindal's privatization rationale. If state government spending is bloated, is the problem state employees or is it the explosion of unexamined, frequently no-bid professional services contracts? If it is, then is the solution still more contracts?

If a solid majority of the House is opposing Jindal on privatization, the Senate is going to be even tougher.

Jindal Operating Outside the Constitution

Democratic Senator Joe McPherson of Woodworth claims that the entire privatization scheme being pushed by Jindal is unconstitutional. McPherson told The Advocate in an article published today that the proposed state budget bill is filled with language amendments that are really substantive law changes that should require separate legislative approval.

McPherson told the Advocate he is particularly concerned about three pages of substantive health-care policy changes inserted in the budget bill’s section on state Department of Health and Hospitals financing.

McPherson pointed The Advocate to a 1977 court case that he said addressed the matter of using the budget bill to set state policy, rather than separate legislation.

A key court case governing the issue involved a dispute between Gov. Edwin Edwards and then-House Speaker E.L. “Bubba” Henry. In that 1977 case, the court concluded that all appropriations bills are banned by the Louisiana Constitution from containing substantive policy more appropriately enacted in separate legislation.

In the same case, the court said the Louisiana Legislature can include “qualifications, conditions, limitations, or restrictions on the expenditure of funds which would not be dealt with more properly in a separate bill.”

McPherson says that elements of the DHH portion of the budget involve sweeping policy changes that have not been subject to legislative review, particularly changes in state Medicaid policy.


In that same article, Levine appeared to say that he was prepared to go ahead on the privatization unless the Legislature specifically moved to stop him.

In comments to the Times Picayune, Levine raised the prospect of Jindal vetoing the privatization legislation.

On Solid Ground?

Jindal's attention-grabbing gig on the coast was put in some context this week when it was revealed that he's already being paid for his book, "On Solid Ground" which was ghost written and will be published by right-wing publisher Regnery Publishing. The book deal was announced in February and is scheduled to be released in July.

At the time it was announced, it was considered to be the soft launch of Jindal's presidential campaign. At the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans in April, Jindal said he was not running for president in 2012 thereby saving himself the embarrassment of a weak showing in a weak field of candidates.

The book was scheduled to hit stores after the end of the current legislative session, where Jindal was expected to emerge triumphant from another few months of dazzling legislators and the public with his brilliance.

Things have taken another turn. Fannin raised the possibility that the budget work might not get done during the session, requiring a special session in July. That kind of crisis in Baton Rouge might be able to draw Jindal back to the Capitol, but it's no guarantee. The national media will probably still be hanging out on the coast because the problems associated with the gusher will not have disappeared but have the very real possibility of being much worse than they are now.

Into this uncertain environment will come Jindal's book which he did not write and — judging by his dependence on federal stimulus dollars for his budget and federal aid to help mitigate the impact of the BP gusher — it will be about principles that he no longer holds.

The best answer might be for Regnery to ship the books directly to the coast where they can be put directly work in the effort to protect Louisiana's coast and marshes. Use the books as booms, Bobby! It might be a way to spare you from further embarrassment.

King Tuck: Equal Opportunity Exasperator

When then Governor-elect Bobby Jindal announced his support for Republican Jim Tucker to be Speaker of the House in late 2007 there were guffaws when Jindal said he was doing so as part of his desire to avoid the kind of intense partisanship that had come to plague Washington, D.C., where Jindal had spent a fair amount of time over the previous decade.

Tucker, after all, had been leader of the House Republican Caucus in the previous term where he had a well-earned reputation for ratcheting up partisanship through his opposition to various initiatives of Democratic Governor Kathleen Blanco.

That Tucker could somehow shed his partisan skin by ascending to leadership of the full House seemed ludicrous to many.

This week, Tucker proved his doubters wrong as he took up the work of unraveling Jindal’s plan to close budget gaps in the current and next fiscal years with the same enthusiasm and tenacity (obstinacy?) as he did in foiling Blanco’s budget moves four years ago.

Jim Tucker is proving himself to be an equal opportunity disrupter of the well-laid plans of Louisiana governors.

King Tuck Reshapes State Government

In ways unprecedented for a legislative leader, Jim Tucker has had a powerful impact on reshaping state government in Louisiana. In 2009, Tucker led the successful push wrest away control of what will replace ‘Big Charity’ hospital from LSU. He also directed the creation of the Tucker Commission that has proposed a radical reshaping of higher education in the state.

As the recent dustup over the election of a new speaker pro tempore demonstrated, Tucker is perfectly willing to punish anyone who crosses him, regardless of party affiliation.

Tucker won election to the House representing District 86 (a district that includes both the gated community of English Turn and the blue-collar community of Terrytown) in 2001. He is term limited. Tucker is using his stint as speaker to advance some long-standing conservative critiques of Louisiana state government regardless of whose toes get stepped on in the process.

He's had his brush with ethics issues, but that did not stop the "ethics governor" from supporting Tucker's election as speaker.

Tucker and Jindal share a general approach to government — a general dislike of government as a deliverer of services and a strong aversion to tax increases. That shared belief is a significant factor in the state’s current budget crisis. Tucker has repeatedly stated that “the state does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem.”

Tucker, even more than Jindal, has had a hand in creating the current crisis, in no small measure thanks to his role as head of the House Republican caucus during Governor Blanco’s tenure. In the final year of Governor Blanco’s term, her push for business tax cuts was at least partially motivated to try to win Republican support (PDF) for increased spending on education, which Republicans (led by Tucker) paid lip service to but generally opposed.

Tucker is not always opposed to increased government spending. In 2008, Tucker supported legislation that would have tripled the pay of legislators. Tucker, who led the fight in the House in support of the pay raise, tried framing the issue in good government terms.

“We want to have good, quality people running for the Legislature, to get a good cross-section of the state," not just the wealthy who can afford to spend time in Baton Rouge for at least one session a year, Tucker said. "I am concerned about the average Joe who can't afford to come here. ... This is not the priesthood where you take a vow of poverty."

No, in Tucker’s view, that vow should be required of public employees. Tucker has led the effort to restructure state employee retirement programs to shift from defined benefit pensions to 401k programs that significantly reduce the state’s liability for those pensions, but also — as has been shown in the private sector — significantly lower the income of those retirees covered.

Calling Jindal’s Bluff

In the current session, Tucker has sought to use his power as Speaker with less hesitancy than in the past, the most public instance being his punishment of those (including Republicans) who voted against Lafayette independent Rep. Joel Robideaux in the election for speaker pro tempore. After a close public vote, Speaker Tucker changed committee assignments for a number of members who he said had not kept their word to him regarding the vote.

The blatant power play sparked alarm from the governor’s office and even among some of Tucker’s most ardent apologists.

If anyone thought the reaction might have tempered Tucker’s approach they were proven wrong this week when Tucker announced that the House would not take up the matter of fixing the $360 million hole in the budget for the current fiscal year until May when there would be only a matter of days left in the fiscal year.

Tucker’s move focused on the element of Jindal’s plan for fixing the hole that appears to have crossed two of the Speaker’s trip wires. The first was taking money set aside to pay a settle a dispute with the federal government over the use of Medicaid funding. The governor may have abandoned his former aversion to using one-time money to fix recurring budget problems, but Tucker has not.

The second trip wire was how Jindal proposed to cover the payment on the settlement, which everyone expects will have to be paid in the state’s 2010-11 fiscal year. Stunningly, Jindal announced that he is counting on President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats being able to win an extension of the economic stimulus program which would mean an additional $300 million or more in federal Medicaid funding for Louisiana. Jindal is not only counting on the money, he declared himself confident that the D.C. Democrats would prevail on the issue.

Tucker apparently recoiled at Jindal’s admission of his dependence on national Democrats to bail the state out of its budget crisis.

This week, Tucker called Jindal’s bluff, saying he would delay the House taking up the proposed fix for the current budget for a couple of weeks to see if Jindal’s political prognosticating was worth banking on. Tucker said he would wait to take up the measure to give congressional Democrats the opportunity to advance their Recovery Act extension.

Tucker’s move puts legislators in a precarious position. They are constitutionally mandated to balance the state budget each year. Waiting until mid- to late-May to fill this hole will mean that whatever solution to the shortfall is implemented, will be rushed into place. With Jindal and Tucker both opposed use of the so-called rainy day fund to close this year’s budget gap (they’d rather use that to plug holes in the next fiscal year budget), and with revenue options non-existent within the already compressed window to deal with the problem, the debate between Tucker and Jindal will be over how to make the use of one-time money appear to look like recurring money.

An Equal Opportunity Exasperator

Jindal, like Blanco before him, is learning that it’s no fun to have Tucker working against you. Tucker was a thorn in Blanco’s side, particularly in the final two years of her term, and that was when he merely headed a caucus. Now, as speaker, Tucker is proving that he is committed to using the powers of his office to advance the approach to government that he believes in.

For Jindal, Tucker’s lesson in the art of the bi-partisanship approach to exasperating is coming at an inopportune time.

With the Senate ready to work with Jindal to close the budget gap now, Tucker has emerged as an obstacle to the governor’s budgetary slight of hand. With bigger budgetary holes to fill in the next fiscal year (and potentially still larger ones to fill the following year), Jindal is using every trick he can muster to stave off the kinds of budget cuts in healthcare and higher education that he knows will do serious damage to the thing that matters most to him — his re-election prospects.

Tucker, on the other hand, won’t be speaker after the 2011 election. He is at the peak of his political power now. There are no guarantees that he can win election to higher office. If he is going to make an impact on the shape of state government, now is his time to do it.

The divergence in the scope and timing of Tucker’s ambitions and Jindal’s are stark.

Jindal’s aspirations are not confined to Louisiana, but they rest on he is re-election as governor next year. His chances of doing that are going to rest in large measure on his ability to address the state’s budget challenges without being perceived to be inflicting lasting damage on the state’s future prospects (something already called into question by supporters of higher education and healthcare in the state). Jindal’s national ambitions also rest on his fidelity to the conservative credo against tax increases. As his admission of his dependence on President Obama’s recovery spending makes clear, Jindal has hit an intellectual dead end on that path.

Tucker, on the other hand, would not be particularly bothered by the prospect of having to make the kinds of cuts in state spending that would put Jindal’s re-election in jeopardy. Tucker is as true a believer in the conservative approach to governance as Jindal is an opportunistic one. This is a clash of style as well as substance.

Tucker Controls Jindal’s Fate

There will likely be two ugly fiscal year budget fights between now and the statewide elections next year — the budget for the next fiscal year that will be decided in the current session and the budget that will be decided in next year’s election year Regular Session. Jindal’s political fate, in large measure, is tied to how those budgets address state needs. Tucker will have as much influence on the final shape of those budgets as will Jindal.

Kathleen Blanco was not running for re-election and found dealing with Tucker exasperating. Jindal prizes re-election more than anything. Tucker is in position to set the price of that prize to an unprecedented extent. Not since Willie Rainach rose to prominence as a leader of White Citizen Councils in the late 1950s and early 1960s has a single legislator had so much power to influence the political fate a governor.

The dance between Jindal and Tucker that plays out over the next few weeks will shape the political terrain for next year’s elections. Tucker's tenure as speaker sunsets with that same election that will determine Jindal's future. In the interim, what transpires in Baton Rouge will revolve around Tucker.

Jindal is in a tight spot. He has hitched his political fate to a pair of political polar opposites: Barack Obama and Jim Tucker.

Can he really be the smartest guy in the room?

The Jindal Way: ‘Every Man an Hourly Employee’

In Bobby Jindal’s Louisiana, more people work as cashiers, retail salespeople and laborers than in any other categories of workers. If Jindal had his way, the state’s future will look a lot more like that than, say, the technology and new industry future envisioned by Mike Foster’s “Vision 20/20” (PDF) economic development strategy. (Foster’s strategy was based on an accurate the assessment of Louisiana’s potential, but came too late in his administration to have had a chance to prove itself.)

In Jindal’s personal assessment of Louisiana (informed no doubt by the comments of those many Louisiana businessmen who have handed him campaign checks), our problem is that higher education is not turning out enough skilled workers to satisfy the needs of Louisiana businesses. It’s an odd line of thinking to be held by a Rhodes Scholar biology graduate from Brown University whose adult life has been spent almost entirely as an employee of either the state or federal government.

For some in the state’s business community, converting higher education to a vo-tech program with football teams is a long-held dream.

That perspective gives Jindal the policy justification and political cover for his work of throttling higher education at four-year colleges while proposing that the state’s nascent community college system take up some of the slack — except that he’s cutting them, too. If education was all that four-year institutions did, Jindal’s approach might be more palatable. But, as studies of the economic impact of the University of Louisiana System statewide and LSU’s main campus in Baton Rouge have shown, higher education is big business in Louisiana with a big economic impact on the state as a whole, but especially on the communities where those campuses are located.

University-based research and technology transfer initiatives have been the base upon which strong regional economies have been built in various parts of the country, notably the Research Triangle Park in North Carolina, Silicon Valley in California, and in the Austin, Texas, area. Under governors Mike Foster and Kathleen Blanco, Louisiana finally got serious about pursuing those development models, committing state dollars to build university research capacity and encouraging the development of university infrastructure to attract researchers, research dollars and private sector support.

These are long-term strategies that require patience and persistence, things that do not come naturally to Jindal. The current fiscal crisis and the national campaign cycle have combined to arrest Jindal’s development of these traits.

It took “the intervention at the Mansion” of four of Jindal’s predecessors last year to keep him from inflicting a $220 million cut on higher education. He pared it down to half of that. Now, with the crisis worsening, Dave Treen is dead, Buddy Roemer has gone all Tea Party on us, leaving only Mike Foster as someone Jindal might heed from among last year’s team. Governor Blanco would offer him sound advice, but as Jindal’s governorship is based on being the anti-Blanco the likelihood of him taking it is almost as remote as his chance of being the Republican nominee for President in 2012.

That higher education is going to get whacked was made certain with the appearance of the newest hole in the state’s budget. Faced with what he knew to be a large budget shortfall but mindful of the damage a responsible call for tax increases would do to his national political standing among conservatives, Jindal’s executive budget for the next fiscal year abandons his previous ironclad rule against using one-time spending to shore up the state budget. He wants to grab money from the Tax Amnesty Program and raid various trust funds to avoid more cuts that are already unpopular with voters.

The problem now for Jindal is that he so effectively sold his previous stance that his former allies like the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry and fiscally conservative groups like the Public Affairs Research Council have lined up to oppose him. Even some of his erstwhile allies in the Legislature are aghast at the change of direction.

With the hole in the current fiscal year budget, some of that one-time money might have to be carried back into this year in an effort to avoid late year budget cuts that will force months-long employee furloughs (that is, months without pay!) at campuses across the state, the cancellation of summer school classes, and the halt of construction projects.

Furloughs will have a devastating impact on the families of those working in higher education, ranging everywhere from the administrative level down to janitorial services. People not paid means money taken out of circulation in communities. If bringing jobs to a community has a multiplier effect, taking money out of a community has a negative impact — (a denominator effect?) —that must nearly match that.

The cuts in higher education being contemplated in the last quarter of this state fiscal year (now until June 30) could — by themselves — precipitate what will be known as the Jindal Recession. He will own it because his policies will have caused it.

But, higher education isn’t the biggest sector that Jindal’s policies are wrecking.

That would be healthcare.

The 'Jindal Knows Healthcare' Myth
Saying that Bobby Jindal understands healthcare is like saying used car salesmen understand automobile design and manufacturing.

Jindal earned his chops as Mike Foster’s first secretary of the Department of Health and Hospitals. He earned it by cutting spending in the department, particularly Medicaid spending. His ‘success’ there was so brutal that it cost him the 2003 governor’s race.

Jindal has never understood that behind every government budget dollar there are people dependent on the service that dollar delivers. Nowhere is that more true than in the Medicaid program. Medicaid is a safety net program. It exists to provide access to care for those in our society who cannot otherwise get it, particularly the young, those with chronic disease, and the disabled.

That Jindal made his name by cutting cost in Medicaid is to say that Jindal worked to deny access to services and to care. Yes, he eliminated fraud in the medical transportation program, but the bulk of the savings he found came through a redefining of what services were available and who would be eligible for them. To Jindal, these were just budget numbers. To the people who had them, these were services taken away.

Jindal’s approach has not changed after stints with the Bush administration and in the Congress. He brought in Alan Levine from Florida to manage DHH. Levine came to Jindal’s attention after implementing a managed care pilot project in Florida’s Medicaid program. Levine tried to get the Bush administration to sign off on a similar plan in the final days of that administration, but the plan arrived too late to get approval.

The managed care approach to Medicaid combines Jindal’s indifference to human need with a Bush-era style of crony capitalism. The idea is to reduce the state’s Medicaid spending by bringing in a private sector administrator to run the program that would set limits on the types and frequency of care available to Medicaid patients.

That is, the plan proposes to save money by adding another layer of bureaucracy — a private sector hand in the till — Medicaid spending will somehow magically go down. Think about that for a second. That program manager will be expected to take over administration of the program and save the state money in the process.

The only way that can possibly work is by denying services to those dependent upon the program.

But, as former DHH secretary and current head of LSU Hospitals Dr. Fred Cerise revealed recently, privatization of Medicaid service delivery in the Baton Rouge area is going to drive up the cost of delivery of those services.

This is crony capitalism because the real winners in privatization schemes like this are not the consumers of those services or the taxpayers; the real winners are the companies that win those lucrative contracts. If this sounds familiar, then you were either a victim of the Bush/Cheney era approach to FEMA or read the stories about American reconstruction scandals in Iraq.

All of this is obvious to those now fighting Jindal’s attempt to privatize the homes for the disabled across the state. In a recent legislative hearing on the budget, a parent of a disabled child who is a resident at Pinecrest Supports and Services Center near Pineville plaintively told lawmakers, "I have not heard anything about a better level of care for our family.”

No, because the level of care does not figure into the Jindal Way. It’s not a number. In Jindal’s world, numbers are real; people are not — at least not those who might actually need government services.

Hundreds of state workers who deliver the services at centers like Pinecrest and other state facilities will lose their jobs, undermining the economies of the communities where they reside.

The state’s portion mental health services program will be all but eliminated under Jindal’s proposed budget. The state wants to discharge 118 patients from state-run psychiatric hospitals and place them in privately run group homes. Another 138 beds in state-run facilities would be privatized.

Again, privatization is being pushed as a solution to the state’s budget crisis but privatization has not been shown to be a money-saver nor has it been demonstrated that the quality of care will not be affected by the changes.

Next Year, We Take Down 'Charity'

Jindal is committed to taking this a step further in their next budget when he wants to develop and implement a plan to shut down much if not all of the LSU Hospital system (formerly known at the Charity Hospital System).

This has been the long-cherished dream of conservatives and it will be presented as a budget necessity. But, it is nothing but a naked ideologically driven move designed to prop up Jindal’s conservative credentials. The closure of these hospitals has been Jindal’s goal all along. Jindal is now citing the impact of the Affordable Care Act as the justification for the move he craves to make. Jindal says the problem is that the Affordable Care Act will do away with the Disproportionate Share Program of compensating hospitals for providing care to the uninsured.

True enough, but the Affordable Care Act will bring coverage to 800,000 Louisiana adults (PDF)who do not now have coverage so that there will be fewer people without insurance coverage or the ability to pay for care.

In fact, the Affordable Care Act will bring $17 billion in new healthcare funding annually into Louisiana through a combination of tax credits to businesses, subsidies to individuals, and expansion of the Medicaid program. If anything, Louisiana will need more medical capacity, not less.

Typical of an ideologue, Jindal is committed to a course of action and he’s not going to let the facts stand in his way.

When the Revenue Estimating Conference makes their official end of the fiscal year deficit estimate next Wednesday, all of Louisiana will get a much clearer picture of just how far down Jindal is willing to push this state in order to attempt to continue his political climb.

Get ready to feel pretty low on the totem pole, Louisiana.

Democratic Louisiana: "It Started With Jindal's Stelly Flip"

This article is "The Big Blue One" from Volume 1, Number 1, of Democratic Louisiana, a Louisiana d2d project.

Repealing the income tax portion of The Stelly Plan was not on Bobby Jindal’s agenda when he became governor in 2008, but as sentiment in the House grew for repeal, the new governor moved to leap in front of the parade that championed the repeal.

Under the Stelly Plan, which was approved by state voters in 2002 while Mike Foster was governor, the state sales tax on food for home consumption and the sales tax on natural gas, electricity, and water for residential use was lowered on January 1, 2003, from 3.9 cents to 2 cents per dollar. Taxes on those items were then eliminated on July 1, 2003. To replace revenue lost through Stelly, individual income tax brackets were adjusted upward.

The plan was not popular with those in the top two state income tax brackets where individuals paid up to $500 more in taxes each year.

In the 2007 statewide elections, Jindal romped to a primary win over a fragmented gubernatorial field and Republicans picked up significant representation in both the state House and Senate.

During the 2008 regular session of the Legislature, Jindal first opposed the repeal of the income tax provisions of the Stelly plan because of the loss of revenue would be too steep (about $358 million per year). Sensing the political momentum and not wanting to disappoint his conservative backers, Jindal flipped on the issue and endorsed the repeal. With the new governor’s backing, repeal passed easily. And Louisiana was sent careening down the road towards a financial crisis.

It did not take long for trouble to appear.

In December of 2008, the state discovered that it had a projected budget deficit for the 2008-09 fiscal year that nearly matched the cost of the Stelly repeal, dollar for dollar: $341 million.

The repeal of the income tax portion of the Stelly Plan is a mistake that keeps on giving as it deprives the state of significant revenue each year. Viewed another way, counting the budget proposed by Jindal and now being considered by the Louisiana Legislature, the repeal of the income tax portion of the Stelly plan has cost state government more than $1 billion dollars in revenue it otherwise would have had to meet rising need.

The Jindal Way: Afflicting the Afflicted

What rising need? The Louisiana Budget Project (LBP), a non-partisan arm of the Louisiana Association of Nonprofit Organizations, monitors and reports on state government spending and how it affects the Louisiana’s low- to moderate-income families. In LBP's review of Jindal’s 2011 Executive Budget ("Louisiana's Fiscal Crisis"), the organization notes,

“between January 2005 and January 2010, families using food stamps increased 20 percent. Medicaid enrollments increased 13 percent from pre-Katrina levels. The number of enrolled students at four-year institutions increased 3 percent between 2004 and 2009, from 214,144 to 220,381. At community colleges, enrollment increased 37 percent during the same time period, from 50,920 to 69,940. The state’s unemployment rate increased from 5.4 percent in December of 2004 to 7.3 percent in December of 2009."

Yet, confronted with these growing demands, Jindal has steadfastly refused to take any step to increase state revenues. Why? Because agreeing to increase taxes or fees would damage his national prospects among conservative Republicans whom he has courted assiduously since his election.

Jindal’s resistance to raising taxes or seeking other ways to raise revenue combined with the fact that healthcare and higher education are the only areas of the state budget not constitutionally protected from cuts has produced a budget balancing approach best summed up as “comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted.”

Jindal’s calculation appears to be that he can build campaign for president (“The Louisiana Way” branding of his budget approach and the upcoming book some one wrote for him) on the backs of Medicaid recipients and providers and those in higher education.

Had the status quo held that might have been possible. But, as everyone knows, Louisiana’s economy has been floating on a sea of federal disaster dollars since the storms of 2005 (with more injected after the storms of 2008). That money is beginning to taper off. The LBP says federal dollars accounted for more than half of the state’s budget in 2009-10, and that will drop to 45% in the current budget.

And, with Jindal’s Republican colleagues in the Congress fighting to stop even the extension of unemployment benefits, the likelihood of additional federal economic recovery dollars is uncertain at best. The potential loss of those dollars is what sparks the talk of Louisiana’s budget going “over a cliff” next year.

That has forced Jindal to try to deny the undeniable (the state needs more revenue) by attempting shift program costs onto local governments, particularly local public school systems.

Jindal’s Blind Spot: Services Are Delivered By and Go To People

But, behind every number in a state budget is a human story. Dating back to his days when he was wrecking the public health network as Mike Foster’s secretary of the Department of Health and Hospitals, the evidence is that Bobby Jindal has never understood this basic fact.

And here is where Jindal’s anti-tax fanaticism is inflicting its greatest toll on the state.

Jindal’s budget cuts, particularly in Medicaid, reduce access to care for the poorest among us. Medicaid provides access to care for children, pregnant women and the disabled. Medicaid is a huge program in our state and Jindal and legislators have found making cuts there relatively easy because of the size of the program. Medicaid is an insurance program. It does not give money to patients, it pays for patient care by paying providers — doctors, nurses, hospitals — for that care. The reason providers are turning away Medicaid patients is that the state of Louisiana keeps cutting the amount of money they will pay those providers to give that care.

So, Medicaid budget cuts impact not just the poor and the disabled, they also impact the healthcare provider community. The Louisiana Hospital Association (LHA) said Jindal’s proposed budget 2009 cuts would have cost nearly 2,000 healthcare jobs in our state. The final budget last year lessened those cuts, but subsequent deficit projections and cuts have brought additional compensation cuts, which are driving cutbacks in clinics and hospitals across the state.

Jindal’s budget cuts are wiping out good paying jobs across Louisiana. Yes, he is reducing the number of state employees, but Medicaid cuts are costing the state thousands of healthcare jobs each year and the cuts in higher education are shutting down programs, costing hundreds of instruction and support jobs, and sending research dollars out of the state that otherwise would have come here. At the K-12 level, Jindal is trying to push costs down to local school systems and eliminating programs intended to improve the performance of students in the critical early grades.

Compounding the error are recent revelations that outsourcing of state services particularly in the areas of health and social services will actually drive up the cost of operating those programs, and it is clear that Louisiana is merely a prop for Jindal’s political posturing on the national political stage.

Louisiana is historically a low-wage state. The jobs that Jindal’s cuts are forcing in healthcare, higher education and K-12 are not jobs that will make people rich, but they are good jobs that support middle class families and that have a high probability of including benefits packages for the people holding them.

And while Jindal saved 1,300 or so low-wage jobs in Union Parish by subsidizing the purchase of a bankrupt chicken plant, his cuts are forcing far larger losses of better paying jobs in the public and private sectors.

Bobby Jindal is sacrificing those good Louisiana jobs at the altar of his national political ambition.

Coming Friday: “Jindal’s Way: Economic Carnage”

If Democrats own healthcare, we can own the Governor's Mansion in 2012

It's not often that Harry Reid and Alan Levine team up on anything, but they did today in laying out the path to Democratic success in Louisiana in the 2011 statewide elections.

That path will be healthcare. Specifically, it will be Governor Bobby Jindal's ideological rigidity on taxes in the face of what will be draconian (criminal?) cuts in healthcare in the state budget over the next two years. With healthcare and higher education still the only funding streams not constitutionally protected and the state facing a billion dollar revenue shortfall, Jindal will force the Legislature to make heavy cuts in both programs.

Last week, the Baton Rouge Advocate carried a story saying the higher education cuts will amount to 60 percent over the next two years. No mention of healthcare, but that's where the bulk of the cuts will be and for two reasons. First, that's where the money is (Medicaid is a $6 billion program). Secondly, no one in the Legislature is lobbying to protect the interests of the poor, the handicapped and those with special needs — the victims of these coming cuts. Oh, the hospitals, nursing homes and doctors will object, but you won't see anything resembling the "Intervention at the Mansion" earlier this year where all of the non-imprisoned former governors got together to tell the Boy Governor that he just could not cut $200 million-plus from higher education.

No notables stood up for Medicaid clients then. And none will do it in the coming session.

They are, in the current world of Louisiana politics, "expendable."

That's what happens when Democrats forget who they are and who they represent and buy into the conceit that they can get elected if they run as 'Republican-lite' candidates. Ultimately, they are not Democrats and their votes show it.

Today, Jindal's DHH Secretary Alan Levine dropped the first of what will be many shoes. According to The Advocate, he announced another round of Medicaid budget cuts made necessary because of rising enrollments in the program and the inability of the department to implement cuts fast enough. Poverty is up in Louisiana. Unemployment is up. The number of companies offering health insurance coverage is falling through the floor.

So, Levine, working within Jindal's "No Taxes for Any Reason" straight jacket, is ordering more cuts. This is, of course, a result of issues in the current fiscal year. This isn't even related to the even bigger cuts that will be needed next year.

Senator Harry Reid handed Louisiana Democrats a gift today by including the Public Option in the bill that the U.S. Senate will debate and vote on in a couple of weeks. Word is that the bill will include an "opt out" clause for states to leave the public option.

Is there any doubt as to which way the Jindal administration and Louisiana Republicans will lurch on this? Levine has been taking part in Louisiana Republican Party workshops talking against healthcare reform. Jindal's path to the national Republican stage requires he follow the party's rejectionist strategy, so he will clearly push to have the state opt out of the public option.

But, here's where it gets interesting.

Depending on the year, anywhere between 17 and 25 working age Louisiana adults are uninsured. In July, the Baton Rouge Business Report quoted a spokesman for BlueCross/BlueShield of Louisiana who said that only 30 percent of Louisiana small businesses offer health insurance to their employees and that the number is falling due to skyrocketing rates.

While no one will speak up for Medicaid patients, surely someone will speak up for the rights of the working uninsured and fight the Jindal administration's expected push to, in fact, opt out of the public option — the path to provide affordable coverage to those working age residents without coverage.

The 2011 statewide elections will be the battle ground where this fight takes place. Jindal, if he follows his current course, will have cut higher education by three-quarters of a billion dollars. He will have cut a billion in healthcare spending, eliminating services, shutting institutions, impacting the families of the disabled, the sick and the infirm.

This election will take place on a re-districted state Legislative map. Every district will be redrawn, and it will be pretty radically different due to post-2005/2008 storm induced population shifts.

Democrats should be easy to distinguish from Republicans. The Republicans will be the ones saying they are sorry for the pain, injury and even deaths their cuts inflicted, but that they had no choice. Democrats will be the candidates motivated by outrage at the callous, depraved disregard for the health and well-being of their fellow citizens.

Jindal will be vulnerable in 2011. He will have revealed that everything said about him in 2003 was true — that his knowledge of numbers is matched only by his inability to see the people behind the numbers in state budgets and programs. The healthcare ads that Kathleen Blanco ran against him in 2003 — those credited with sealing her victory then — will ring prophetic.

This man is devoid of compassion and is blinded by his ambition. Our state is paying — and will pay — a fearful price for his limitations.

But, elections are about changing course.

Harry Reid has just set up Louisiana Democrats to take our state back, to walk it back from the brink.

It will be a hard fight — beating incumbents always is. The Louisiana Committee for a Republican Majority (David Vitter's homage to Tom DeLay) did not quite succeed in taking over either house of the Legislature, but they succeeded just enough to give Jindal the ability to defeat tax increases that could stave off some of these cuts. They will also work to ensure that the re-districting process is skewed to favor Republicans.

They, too, are setting him up for defeat — and the members of the House and Senate they sent there to do their ideologically driven work.

The world has shifted. They have not changed. The opportunity to oust them is ripening.

Races to watch

Here is set of links to races worth watching as the returns come in tonight.

The first link is to the statewide races. Go, Foster Campbell! I will not vote for Mitch Landrieu, so I'm skipping the lieutenant governor's race in the voting booth. Has he ever lifted a finger for a Democrat not named Landrieu?

In the Legislature, let's start with the senate races.

The District 7 race on the Westbank of the Mississippi River in the New Orleans area should be interesting. Democrats David Heitmeier and Jonathan Bolar are opposed by LCRM-backed Paul Richard. This race is where I first stumbled across the LLC cluster bucks model of circumventing campaign finance laws. The race was brought to my attention by someone from New Orleans who called me after my appearance on the Jim Brown Program in New Orleans.

The District 9 race in Jefferson Parish has Democrat David Gereighty in a three-way race against two Republicans to succeed term-limited Senator Ken Hollis. It's good to see a Democrat positioned to take advantage of the ongoing war among the Republicans that is simmering in some places, boiling over in others.

The District 25 race in southwest Louisiana pits Democrat Gil Pinac against a pair of Republicans. This is a large geographic district that covers a large swath (parts of four parishes) of the 7th Congressional District. Pinac is no liberal, but he has resisted overtures to go back to the Republican Party (I hear he was a Republican at one time).

The District 28 race in the northern part of Cajun country is the race to succeed term-limited Senate President Don Hines. The leading candidate in this race is current state Representative (and founder of the Legislative Democratic Caucus) Eric LaFleur. I'm not sure that the LCRM has gone after LaFleur yet, but they have given money to groups that are opposing him. Look for them to jump in big in this race if there is Democrat vs. Republican run-off.

The District 30 race in western Louisiana pits Democrats Terry Fowler and John Smith against Democratic National Committeeman Buddie Leach. Leach is awash in oil and gas money. Terry Fowler has been working on this race for two years and has run a dogged but well-financed campaign. I'm pulling for Fowler in this one.

On to the House, again in numerical order!

House District 25 in the Alexandria area is where the LCRM bared its fangs in radio ads so vicious, deceptive and offensive that the Republican candidate they were intended to benefit had to disavow them in order to remain a credible candidate. Chris Roy, Jr., is the Democratic target of the LCRM ads. Glenn Beard is the other Democrat in the race. The squirming Republican in the race is Lance Maxwell who, try as he may, is tied to the LCRM through the radio ads and through the in-kind contributions his campaign accepted from them.

House District 31 in Lafayette and Vermilion parishes is shaping up into a close race. I thought Don Trahan would be toast here, but when Charley Buckels (who lost to Trahan by fewer than 100 votes four years ago) dropped his challenge to Trahan and opted to run for the BESE board, it was clear something was up. Since then, some Republicans have rallied around against independent Nancy Landry, but the LCRM stepped into the race this week and angered some Republicans (specifically Senator Mike Michot) by making up quotes from him in support of Trahan. Michot responded with media statements and robo-calls throughout the district saying that he had not endorsed Trahan. If Trahan loses here, he should thank the LCRM for pulling him under.

House District 39 covers northern Lafayette Parish, southern St. Landry and eastern St. Martin. Raymond "La-La" Lalonde is the Republican standard bearer here, indicating the difficulty the party has had recruiting candidates in its quest to grab majority control of the Legislature. LaLonde has gotten some support from LCRM, Bollinger Shipyards and New York real estate tycoon Howard Rich. That's provided him some cash, but it remains to be seen if an old-line politician seeking a comeback can find the votes to make the run-off against three younger Democratic opponents. The Democrats are former Carencro mayor Tommy Angelle, Bobby Badon and newcomer Stephen Ortego. A run-off is coming, it's just a question of whether there will be a Republican in it.

House District 40 sits in the heart of St. Landry Parish and much of it in Opelousas. Elbert Guillory is the incumbent, having won the seat in a special election in the spring. However, Guillory's voting record, strong support from Republican circles, and revelations that he has taken $10,000 from Howard Rich have put him on the defensive. Freshman Opelousas City Councilman Brian Thomas got into the race late, but has waged an energetic campaign. Word has it that Thomas has backing from a number of prominent St. Landry political leaders, so don't be surprised if there is a Guillory/Thomas run-0ff here.

House District 42 in Acadia and Lafayette parishes pits LCRM darling and former Crowley mayor Isabella delaHoussaye against Democrat Jack Montoucet. Montoucet comes across as a down-to-earth guy. He speaks French in his spots. All but two of the precincts in this district are in Acadia Parish. It should be a close race.

House District 43 in south Lafayette Parish. This is the race to succeed Ernie Alexander who many (including Ernie) feel was forced out of the race when Mike Michot pushed Page Cortez into the race. Much like Michot did with Mike Foster when Michot defeated Max Jordan, Cortez has clung to Michot throughout the campaign. Cortez has been helped immensely by the Michot camp's successful orchestration of a mainstream media campaign against his opponent, Patrick LeBlanc. LeBlanc and his brother are said to be players in an investigation of county officials in Texas who apparently did not report contributions and favors LeBlanc's company allegedly provided them. For the elites in Lafayette, LeBlanc's chief crime appears to be opposing the Michots. Some civic-minded group should have set up field showers outside precincts in this district.

House District 44 is on the eastside of Lafayette Parish and there are five candidates (all Democrats) vying to succeed term-limited Wilfred Pierre. This is a strong field of candidates. The main question will be how will Consolidated Government Councilman Chris Williams fare? Williams, who came to prominence with ties to Raymond Blanco, lost is cool during the effort to win support for renaming a major Lafayette street in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, defaced the council's dais, prompting charges to be filed against him. Now that the dust has settled from that, it will be interesting to see if he can still play on his perceived victim hood and turn that into votes. The candidates to watch are Fred Prejean and Terry Landry. Prejean is a community leader who has served on the planning commission. Terry Landry is the former head of the Louisiana State Police. Attorney Derriel McCorvey is a formidable candidate, who may cut into Williams' base. Ricky Hardy is a long-time member of the Lafayette Parish School Board with proven vote-getting ability.

House District 50 centers in the Franklin area but includes parts of Iberia, St. Martin and St. Mary parishes. Former Franklin mayor Sam Jones, who spent the past four years working for Governor Kathleen Blanco, heads the field in this all-Democrat, three-man race. The other candidates are Allen McEllroy and Kenny Scelfo, Jr.

House District 51 finds incumbent Democratic Representative Carla Dartez in a jam. She's got two Democratic opponents (Estelle Mahoney and Nick Morris) and a Republican. The Republican is getting help from the LCRM. The Department of Homeland Security is helping the Republican, too, arresting Dartez' husband (who happens to be a member of the Democratic State Central Committee) on charges of hiring five (count 'em, five) illegal aliens. Would this be selective enforcement with a political motivation? Nah! Not with the Bush administration! This race stretches across parts of St. Mary, Assumption and Terrebonne parishes.

House District 67 in East Baton Rouge Parish features an all-Democratic field, but with environmental attorney David Brown trying to lead a progressive takeover of the seat. The other candidates in the race are Metro Parish Councilwoman Lorri Burgess and Patricia Smith. Brown, who is white, is trying to pull together a multi-racial, progressive coalition that could serve as a model for other progressive campaigns across Louisiana in years to come.

House District 77 pits Democratic firebrand and successful businesswoman Angelique LaCour against a pair of Republicans. The district is centered in St. Tammany Parish, with some precincts spilling over into Tangipahoa Parish. Angelique has had to fight moribund Democratic Party (let's be honest; they're more like clubs) in those two parishes. She could make the run-off with a split Republican vote.

House District 78 sits entirely in Jefferson Parish and Democrat David Quidd is taking on four Republicans in this race. It will be interesting to see if David's sound reasoning can make headway for the party against this gang of ideologues spouting the conservative buzzwords of the day to what must be considered the heart of Louisiana Republicanism.

House District 94 is something of a rematch of the spring special election, but with subtle changes that could signify big differences in the outcome. Republican Nick Lorusso won this seat in the special election this spring, beating Democrat Deborah Langhoff into the run0ff by just over 80 votes. Langhoff had done all of the heavy lifting in the primary, decrying the dynastic attempt of incumbent Representative Peppi Bruneau to manipulate the election process in order to hand his seat to his son Jeb. The LCRM trashed Langhoff in the final days of the campaign, allowing Lorusso to make the runoff. But, Langhoff's campaign against the manipulation paid off for Lorusso, who handily defeated Jeb Bruneau in the runoff. Now, Adrian Bruneau is carrying the family name in what has turned out to be a much more bitter Republican family feud than the spring election. Langhoff, meanwhile, has been running the grassroots campaign she did not have the time to run in the short-cycled special election in the spring. If there is a run-0ff in this race, Langhoff will be in it and there will be a group of pissed off Republicans who might not be able to bring themselves to endorse the Republicans who trashed them in this primary.

I believe Langhoff either wins outright tonight or makes the run-off. The LCRM will come back to attack her if there is a run-off, but voters know Deborah now. She's one of them. The LCRM will have their work cut out for them. And, this time, we'll be ready!

Money And Deception

The Louisiana Committee for a Republican Majority (LCRM) sprinted into today's election with a fresh infusion of cash.

In a special report filed with the State Board of Ethics Campaign Finance office on Friday, the LCRM reported receiving a $100,000 contribution from Koch Industries of Wichita, Kansas, and $2,500 from Michael T. Gray of Metairie.

Like most of the corporate contributors to LCRM, Koch is a privately held company that has its roots in the oil and gas industry. Like the others, it has deep and close ties to the Republican Party. Koch, in fact, has been a direct beneficiary of the Bush administration's willingness to ignore environmental laws and their violation, though the company proclaims itself a solid steward of the environment.

Michael T. Gray appears to be a member of the family that runs Gray & Company, which has already contributed $100,000 to LCRM. Maybe they made him pick up the tab for another working dinner at Drago's?

Meanwhile, the LCRM has been active in the field. In House District 31 in Lafayette and Vermilion parishes, the LCRM dropped no fewer than four direct mail pieces in support of incumbent Republican Don Trahan. One piece, featured a photo of Trahan along with pictures of retiring District 43 Representative Ernie Alexander and Senator Mike Michot, urging voters to keep "Lafayette's Winning Team." The flip side featured glowing quotes about Trahan from Alexander and Michot.

The only problem is that Michot is not backing Trahan. The Senator, who was re-elected without opposition, made that clear in statements to the press and through robo-calls throughout the district on Friday, which declared that he had not authorized the statement and had not endorsed Trahan.

The overall quality of the four pieces the LCRM dropped for Trahan was poor. They have the look of canned copy, with the appropriate name and photographs dropped in where needed (as detailed in Michot's complaint, "appropriate" would not be the correct word to use here).

The tone, certainly when compared to the LCRM's spring offensive in the House District 94 special election, was tame.

That was not the case for radio spots the LCRM has run in the Alexandria area against Democrat Chris Roy. According to the blog, CenLamar, the spots are so vicious that the intended beneficiary, Republican House candidate Lance Maxwell, has tried to distance himself from the LCRM and its ads.

Man, it sure would be nice to have an MP3 copy of those ads! The LCRM pieces for Trahan will be posted later today.

Anyone else who receives LCRM-sponsored materials (it will say so on mailed pieces) please forward them to this site via email link on the homepage and we'll continue building the archive of what we're calling "The Trail of Smears."