Lege Watch

BREAKING Bobby Jindal will veto the pay raise. The Governor announced his decision during an 11 a.m. press conference. WWL broke the story.
UPDATE x2: Just got word from Steve Sabludowsky - the rally has been canceled.

UPDATE: Jindal’s official press release

Jun 30, 2008
Governor Jindal Vetoes Legislative Pay Raise Bill
BATON ROUGE – At a press conference announcing his line item vetoes in the supplemental spending bill today, Governor Bobby Jindal announced that he has vetoed the legislative pay raise bill to more than double legislators’ pay, SB 672.

“I have opposed this pay raise at every turn and from the very beginning. A doubling of legislative pay is clearly excessive and it takes effect prior to the next election, which I believe is bad policy,” Governor Jindal said. “This bill would also have set up a system to give legislators automatic pay raises in the future without additional legislative votes - which is a lack of accountability that we cannot accept.” Continue Reading »

How soon I forget - A CORRECTION to “10 Days to Veto”

My apologies.

It seems I made a grievous error in the article “10 Days to Veto”.

When citing the revised statute “R.S. 42:1120 Recusal from voting” I used the Louisiana Legislatures on-line database to provide the current text of this particular law.

The legislatures database currently states:

§1120. Recusal from voting

A. If any elected official, in the discharge of a duty or responsibility of his office or position, would be required to vote on a matter which vote would be a violation of R.S. 42:1112, he shall recuse himself from voting. Notwithstanding the foregoing, an elected official shall not be required to recuse himself if he prepares and files the statement required by this Section as provided herein. In such case, the elected official shall prepare in writing a statement describing the matter in question, the nature of the conflict or potential conflict, and the reasons why, despite the conflict, the elected official is able to cast a vote that is fair, objective, and in the public interest. Such statement shall be filed within three days of the vote with the chief clerical officer of the respective house of the legislature, of the legislative committee, of the governing authority, or of any other body in which the vote is taken, as the case may be, who shall cause the statement to be recorded in the official journal, minutes, or other official record of the body. In addition, the elected official shall be required to file a copy of such statement as it appears in such published or recorded official journal, minutes, or record, with the appropriate ethics body.

B. This Section shall not be applicable when the elected official is the sole decisionmaker in the discharge of the particular duty or responsibility of his office or position.

C. This Section shall not extend to any act of participation other than voting.

Acts 1979, No. 443, §1, eff. April 1, 1980; Acts 1988, No. 880, §1.

However, this law was just changed by Act 8 of the First Extraordinary Special Session of 2008. This bill was sponsored by Senators:

CHAISSON, ALARIO, AMEDEE, BROOME, CHEEK, CRAVINS,
CROWE, DONAHUE, DORSEY, DUPLESSIS, DUPRE, ERDEY, B.
GAUTREAUX, N. GAUTREAUX, HEBERT, HEITMEIER, JACKSON,
KOSTELKA, LONG, MARTINY, MICHOT, MORRISH, MOUNT,
MURRAY, NEVERS, QUINN, RISER, SCALISE, SHAW,
SHEPHERD, SMITH, THOMPSON AND WALSWORTH

Goodness, that is 33 of our 39 Senators. Only Daley, Cassidy, Gray, LaFleur, Marionneaux, McPherson didn’t sponsor the bill. Now that is simply amazing. Continue Reading »

A reader of my post “Where Oh where has our Ethics Board gone” suggested that I review the ethics case of Arnold & Heaton.

On February 12, 2006, C.B. Forgotston wrote an article titled “Did two Leges violate the Heh, Heh, Heh, Ethics Law?”. Forgotston covers the ethics law we just discussed (R.S.1112; 1120; & 1102).

In addition to providing the relevant laws, Forgotston wrote:

According a media account (here) two leges may have violated the state Heh, Heh, Heh, Ethics Law by voting on matters affecting members of their “immediate family.” The case at hand involves an effort to eliminate the 7 assessors in the New Orleans where the son and brother of two of the assessors voted to kill the effort.

I was just asked: “At what point do legislators have to recuse themselves from voting for things that benefit their family members?” The law requires the two leges to recuse themselves from voting OR to file written reasons why the recusal was not necessary.

My response: “When they get caught.”link

On April 12th, 2007, the ethics board discussed the issue of Representatives Arnold and Heaton filing an injunction against the board for pursuing the ethics charges the board had filed against them. Continue Reading »

There are only 10 days left for Governor Jindal to VETO this bad legislation. Please continue to call, fax, email and/or write the Governor’s office and ask him to VETO this unethical bill. Please also call, fax, email and/or write your representatives in the Senate and the House and ask them to ask Jindal to VETO this bill. Keep the political pressure on.

Yesterday, Governor Jindal made this statement:

“The voters of our state are angry that the Legislature more than doubled their own pay and I agree with them. It was excessive and they should reverse it. I’m sure more voters will take extraordinary steps to show their anger over the pay raise before this is all said and done - that’s how a democracy works.”

Yes, we are angry, very angry. We were promised ETHICS REFORMS by the Governor and our elected officials . What we are getting is more of the same corruption. Our lives are at stake. How can we expect reliable and safe levees? Or safe, adequate roads? Or excellent public schools?

Unfortunately, the way democracy works at this point in time is the next action is up to the Governor. It is not up to the legislature. At this point, it is only down to him. The Governor’s actions are: He can sign the bill; He can let it sit on his desk until July the 8th and become law without his signature; or HE CAN VETO THIS BILL.

We want him to VETO the bill.

Governor Jindal made each and every one of us a campaign promise. He promised us a new wave of ETHICS in the administration of this state. He specifically promised us that he would prohibit the legislature from giving themselves pay raises.

WE EXPECT THE GOVERNOR TO LIVE UP TO HIS PROMISES, ESPECIALLY THOSE HE MADE TO US.

He can VETO this bill because it is UNETHICAL, UNLAWFUL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Continue Reading »

Last month, we scheduled our server for an upgrade this weekend.  Obviously the response to the site here at LegeWatch was unexpected.

The site may experience a few slowdowns or be temporarily unavailable today; we regret any inconvenience and thank you for your patience.

This defense of the pay raise by Senator D.A. “Butch” Gautreaux is very interesting. I do understand that the legislature is feeling abused right now - and in all fairness, we are abusing them right now, I’ve got the tee shirts to prove it. What perplexes me is how they are so out of touch and entrenched in the system - even the new leges - that they didn’t see this coming or comprehend it now that it’s here.

Senator Gautreaux accuses the masses of being “uninformed” and then presents his defense. Maybe this fisking will enlighten him why voters are so angry. Am I uninformed? I was, in the beginning, and now that I am informed, I am more frustrated and angry than I was on June 16th when I created this website.

The Senator writes, “Our goal of $38,000,” - and let’s pause right there. Why $38,000? Other hybrid legislatures in the south do not make nearly so much money, and that figure is considerably more than the figure the committee cited by Jim Tucker recommended. It’s also not in line with what similar legislatures in the south receive. Our neighbors in Texas meet every other year and receive $7,200/year and $139/day. In Arkansas, they get 14,765/year and $130/day. Senator, do your constituents enjoy a lifestyle that is twice or three times as good as our neighbors?

One particularly enraging thing is that the legislature’s pay is difficult to decipher. While legislators defending the raise always cite the base pay, this chart based on figures compiled by the Public Affairs Research Council show that the base pay is just the beginning of the compensation package. It doesn’t even include the generous benefits packages like up to $740 per month toward their health insurance, or mention significant perqs like Tulane scholarships. Senator, whether or not it is your intent, voters feel we are being lied to about the legislature’s actual compensation. Continue Reading »

Hey Bobby…

Where has our ETHICS BOARD gone?
Oh where, oh where has our ETHICS BOARD gone
Oh where, oh where can they be
Their lawyer has quit and their members resigned
Oh where, oh where can they be?

This just in:

Associated Press - June 26, 2008 9:44 PM ET

BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) - A majority of Louisiana’s Ethics Board and the board’s chief lawyer have resigned amid controversy over changes in ethics laws touted by Governor Bobby Jindal.

The four departures today, along with two other recent resignations, leave six vacancies on the 11-member board. That means it can conduct no business until new members are appointed. And at least two other resignations are expected, said Richard Sherburne, the board’s administrator and chief counsel, who also is resigning.

…

Click here for the rest of the WDAM story

Please sir, can we have some ethics?

Only 12 DAYS LEFT til July the 8th.  Please keep calling the Governor and ask him to VETO the pay raise.  Please also call your Legislators and ask them to contact the Governor to ask him to VETO the pay raise.

There’s a great article by Jim Brown at Bayou Buzz. While his reason is different from mine - I object to the amount of time wasted on nonsense like the Sazerac bill - he makes a point near and dear to my heart - we don’t need a full time legislature.

This brings up the question of just how sine qua non many of the proposed laws really are. Is it necessary for the legislature to debate and pass laws, ballyhooed by the current administration, to create the Financial Literacy and Educational Commission, or change the way the state handles workforce training? Any number of these new acts could have and should have been done by Executive Order. The “full time job” argument by many legislators means thinking up new proposals just to stay busy. Dos the state really need that mindset? Texas is able to get the job done once every two years with five times the budget and population as compared to Louisiana.

Do we really want them at it full time, thinking up new ways to tax and regulate us? LegeWatcher G8trgirl noticed that -

There were over 2200 bills submitted for this session………1389 House Bills and 813 Senate Bills. No wonder they “think” they have a full-time job. Is it just me or does anyone else think this is a bit excessive?

No, it’s not “a bit” excessive. Each one of those bills took time and taxpayer money to produce. And when, like Rep. Juan LaFonta, they’re writing bills for crimes we already have laws for, it’s extremely excessive.

There will be a press conference on the corner of Terry Parkway and Carol Sue (the old A&P parking lot) at 1:30pm today. (map) John Roberts of Recall Pay Raise Tucker says that the public is welcome.

So, come out and let the world know how you feel not just about Tucker but the pay raise. And if you’ve made a sign, bring it!

Added - WDSU is on the story.

Forgotston notes what the Times-Picayune does not - legislators continue to be dishonest about the pay raise. In this case, Tim Burns, R-Mandeville; Frank Hoffmann, R-West Monroe; and John LaBruzzo, R-Metairie, pretend to decline the raise but as Forgotston writes,

They may have filed affidavits, but it is too late. They cannot legally refuse the pay raise. (See LA R.S. 42:459) The legal deadline for doing so expired on Tuesday, June 17.

LaBruzzo, for one, is so profoundly out of touch that he reportedly said on Tommy Tucker’s show yesterday that the lege very kindly just gave us a raise by taking a little less of our money than they used to take. I get the impression that he thinks the proles should be grateful and just shut up about the lege pay raise, already. When Tucker replied something to the effect that, “Excuse me! You give me back some of my own money and you have the audacity to call that a pay raise! I don’t think so” LaBruzzo apparently threatened to hang up. Still, according to the Times-Pic article he’s now backpedaling to the point of asking Jindal to veto the pay raise.

Some Representatives are sticking to their guns. Rep. Juan LaFonta stated that voters “have not been amenable to his explanations,” but he’s still taking the pay raise. “This is not a part-time job,” he said. “I’ve spent one hour on my law practice today. I’ve probably spent four or five on representative business.”

Mr. LaFonta seems to have a focus on health issues including HPV mandates and seems to be trying to accomplish something useful with his time in the House. But he has filed no less than seven bills on feel-good timewasters like commendations and declaring holidays. He also filed HB1243, which “provides for” the theft of copper from a religious building, cemetery or graveyard. I certainly understand the sentiment behind such a bill - my church was recently robbed of copper during construction, and the cemetery where my mother in law was laid to rest was robbed of copper urns. But those things were already a crime; do we really need to spend money enacting a new law for this?  Mr. LaFonta would do well to pare his legislative activities down to the bare minimum before he complains that he’s got too much to do.

Legislators are - perhaps - starting to understand just how out of touch they are from the people who sent them to Baton Rouge.  But the responses so far seem like too little, too late.

I just noticed this over at Bayou Buzz and I want to make a clarification:

An “Anti-Pay Raise Rally” WILL BE HELD JULY 7 at the STATE CAPITOL from 2 to 4 p.m. so please save that date. For more information, contact steve@bayoubuzz.com or call 504-339-3924 to help or to attend. The rally is being sponsored by Citizen Can and was idea initiated by Bayoubuzz Publisher, Stephen Sabludowsky.

While LegeWatch is working via this website to arrange buses for our members who are outside of Baton Rouge to attend this rally, Steve Sabludowsky is the rally organizer. He applied for the permit, and it’s his baby. We’re just attending his party, so to speak.

There may have been some confusion because on June 18th I posted information about the requests for a rally and what I thought it might take to pull it off. On June 19th I updated the post to note that I had applied for a permit and was waiting for approval. On June 20th I posted this:

We had originally applied for a permit for this coming Monday, and it was approved. However… after speaking to Steve Sabludowsky about his Citizen Can idea, considering ways that we can have the most impact, and considering that we’ve had emails from folks upstate who want to actually charter buses and come down for it, we canceled our application. Continue Reading »

We’ve been hearing from lots of people who want to recall their legislator and believe me, we want to see them all go. But… everyone, please, take a deep breath and pause long enough to get organized. The Aaron Broussard recall was a perfect example of what not to do. People were outraged, furious, and wanted him gone. Some folks carried around recall petitions, and a few enterprising folks walked their blocks or even a few more. And it was all sound and fury, signifying nothing. The last thing you want is for your legislator to easily survive a recall effort. He’ll be so entrenched that you’ll never get rid of him.

Forgotston has a great post on this to which we’ve been referring people. Some key advice:

Identify those willing to sign the recall petition before starting the formal procedure of actually circulating a petition to get the names signed

This can be done best using the voter list phone numbers organized by streets.

This is NOT a complete checklist, but it may serve as a general roadmap - it’s the plan devised by John Roberts over at Recall Pay Raise Tucker:

1. Get a good leadership team - ideally your entire leadership team including the chairman and vice-chairman and your top volunteers should live in the district.
2. Find out how many registered voters are in that district. You need 1/3 of them to sign, and the clock starts ticking the minute you send in your petition, so don’t send it in yet.
3. Get a list of registered voters from the Secretary of State’s office. The cost is one penny per name, and you want both the inactive and the active voters. You can get it as a computer file so it is easily transferred it into Excel or Access. We can help you work with this if you are not very computer savvy. The list may cost a few hundred dollars, but if you get a dozen people to pitch in $25 each, or some similar plan, then you’re all set.
4. Get your volunteers together - LegeWatch.com is encouraging those who sign up here to help a recall effort even if it’s not their own district. We’re growing an extensive list and while we’ve promised those who sign up not to share the list to protect their privacy, we will gladly contact people on behalf of recall campaigns.
5. Break your registered voter list into manageable sections. Have your volunteers phone those people to see if they will sign, and then report back. In your Excel or Access file, just tag those records as signers.
6. Now send in your petition. The clock starts ticking; you’ve got 180 days.
7. Print out that list, and send people out to collect the signatures.

This way you have the least effort with the most gain - more time is spent in your air conditioned home making phone calls than beating the streets collecting signatures of people who may not even be registered voters or in your district. You end up with a list of valid signatures.

Finally - learn what the legal requirements are - you have to comply with campaign finance laws and regulations. We can try to steer you in the right direction but we are not legal advisers, so do your research - it’s CRITICAL.

This has been done before, and it can be done again.

[Note: I added credit to John Roberts for this roadmap and added a link to the Sec of State website.]