THE GOOD: A new one that was made a substitute for converted bill SB 105 – SB 742 by Sen. Rob Marionneaux would prohibit smoking indoors in any publicly-owned building or most buildings involved in commercial activities.
THIS WEEK FOR THE GOOD: HB 59 was deferred by committee; HB 108 with minor amendments passed House; HB 109 with minor amendments passed House; HB 604 passed committee; HB 909 with minor amendments passed committee; SB 25 with minor amendments passed committee and Senate; SB 33 passed Senate; SB 410 with minor amendments passed committee; SB 415 was withdrawn; SB 647 passed committee; SB 742 passed committee.
THIS WEEK FOR THE BAD: HB 641 passed committee; SB 639 with minor amendments passed committee and Senate; SB 693 passed committee; SB 700 with minor amendments passed committee.
MONDAY: SB 526 and SB 669 are scheduled to be heard by the Senate Retirement Committee;
WEDNESDAY: SB 602 is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Committee on Commerce, Consumer Protection, and International Affairs.
SCORECARD:
(Again, a reminder: some numbers will fluctuate because of similar bills being heard, which may make their numbers higher than the numbers listed as “good” or “bad” introduced. If more than one similar bill makes progress, all will be recorded. However, if any ever become legislation, there should be no duplication; only the fate of one of them would be reflected at the end.)
Total House introductions: 1368; total Senate introductions: 743.
Total House good bills: 30; total Senate good bills: 18.
Total House bad bills: 18; total Senate bad bills: 19.
Total House good bills heard in House committee: 25; total Senate good bills heard in Senate committee: 11.
Total House bad bills heard in House committee: 8; total Senate bad bills heard in Senate committee: 18.
Total House good bills passing committee: 8; total Senate good bills passing committee: 8.
Total House bad bills passing committee: 2; total Senate bad bills passing committee: 5
Total House good bills passing House: 4; total Senate good bills passing Senate: 4
Total House bad bills passing House: 0; total Senate bad bills passing Senate: 2
29 April 2006
26 April 2006
Committee action, Apr. 26: HB 909, HB 489, HB 490, HB 818, HB 641
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 909 by Rep. Peppi Bruneau would get the Secretary of State’s office to enter into agreements with other states to share information about voters. Especially with so many displaced voters from the state, this could increase ballot security. Some amendments were adopted to clear up language. Presently, other SOS employees contacted other states to discover whether Louisiana voters were registered there. The idea of a compact is growing in popularity that would get states to compel each other, so the change would bring the voluntary exchange of information on a regular basis. Voter rolls all around would be better.
Also, the bill would encourage the consolidation of polling places. Many voters and candidate poll watchers preferred it. It also would make enforcement of electioneering law easier. The bill passed the House and Governmental Affairs Committee unanimously.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 489 by Rep. Jalila Jefferson-Bullock would cut the residency requirement to register to vote from 30 to 7 days. But the committee felt that, without current real-time election books (such as linked databases and computers to access them at all voting locations), multiple registrations and voting could occur since seven days was too short of a time to make sure something like this wouldn’t happen. As such, her bill was deferred.
She tried next with HB 490 would allow any registered voter in the parish to vote by paper ballot in the wrong precinct on election day. But Secretary of State Al Ater saw a number of logistical problems – how many, commissioners would have to assemble ballots according to races, no precinct register for a person to sign which could allow for multiple voting. He said this was an advantage of early voting, where people could go to one central location. Potentially, changes in technology could solve some of these issues, but that now was not the case. Going to an assigned polling place and casting one ballot was the only reliable way to have ballot security, Ater said.
Several Democrats on the committee kept bringing up the point that paper ballots were used in early voting for the New Orleans election. They were reminded each time that the ballots could not be compiled or even counted on a timely basis and could enormously increase the commissioners’ workloads. “Nobody is against this bill,” chairman Rep. Charlie Lancaster said, “we just can’t figure out a way to do it.” As such, Jefferson also asked for deferral.
Her HB 818 provides that a person who is involuntarily displaced from his place of residence by a gubernatorially declared state of emergency does not lose his resident status if he intends to return to the place of residence. Again, there were questions about how logistically this could work out, in terms of measuring “intent” and for how long the intention would be good for. However, after discussion it was thought current law already could permit this, resulting in another deferral.
Finally, her HB 641 would extend the temporary nature of satellite voting in state (until 1/1/07) and also to allow it out of state (until 7/16/07). Bruneau pointed out there just was no way to enforce Louisiana law extraterritorially, logistical issues aside, and that the current process worked well so the state had no need to pursue this. Jefferson claimed the state had not done enough. And Rep. Charmaine Marchand said that presidential elections were coming up and displaced people still may not be back, so if it was addressed now it could be done by then (even though the bill would cut it off before 2008).
Lancaster also pointed out that other solutions existed, such as absentee voting, so this was not imperative. Rep. Loulan Pitre also said the temporary satellite sites were justified only because of the unusual nature of the elections and the threat of federal intervention, and that this current bill was at a different time about a different matter that he thought was beyond what was necessary.
The bill passed 5-4 with all Democrats voting in favor and all Republicans against. Democrat Rep. Billy Montgomery was absent.
QUOTES OF THE DAY:
“I would suggest that is voter intimidation to the infinite degree.”
Ater when, during testimony, was asked whether when a voter requested an absentee ballot from the state if the attorney general’s office could not also include a letter informing them of income tax responsibilities.
“Every once in awhile, dead folks vote, but fewer did in this last election.”
Rep. Juan LaFonta, joining the accolades to Ater in running the New Orleans elections.
“I was looking for an old ballot box … so we started looking through some of the old [tin, no longer used warehoused] ones and found uncounted ballots in them.”
Bruneau, in discussing the danger of paper ballots in reference to the use of them in HB 490.
THURSDAY: SB 280, SB 410, and SB 439 are scheduled to be heard by the Senate Education Committee; SB 347 and SB 700 are scheduled to be heard by the Senate Labor and Industrial Relations Committee; SB 647 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Local and Municipal Affairs Committee.
HB 909 by Rep. Peppi Bruneau would get the Secretary of State’s office to enter into agreements with other states to share information about voters. Especially with so many displaced voters from the state, this could increase ballot security. Some amendments were adopted to clear up language. Presently, other SOS employees contacted other states to discover whether Louisiana voters were registered there. The idea of a compact is growing in popularity that would get states to compel each other, so the change would bring the voluntary exchange of information on a regular basis. Voter rolls all around would be better.
Also, the bill would encourage the consolidation of polling places. Many voters and candidate poll watchers preferred it. It also would make enforcement of electioneering law easier. The bill passed the House and Governmental Affairs Committee unanimously.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 489 by Rep. Jalila Jefferson-Bullock would cut the residency requirement to register to vote from 30 to 7 days. But the committee felt that, without current real-time election books (such as linked databases and computers to access them at all voting locations), multiple registrations and voting could occur since seven days was too short of a time to make sure something like this wouldn’t happen. As such, her bill was deferred.
She tried next with HB 490 would allow any registered voter in the parish to vote by paper ballot in the wrong precinct on election day. But Secretary of State Al Ater saw a number of logistical problems – how many, commissioners would have to assemble ballots according to races, no precinct register for a person to sign which could allow for multiple voting. He said this was an advantage of early voting, where people could go to one central location. Potentially, changes in technology could solve some of these issues, but that now was not the case. Going to an assigned polling place and casting one ballot was the only reliable way to have ballot security, Ater said.
Several Democrats on the committee kept bringing up the point that paper ballots were used in early voting for the New Orleans election. They were reminded each time that the ballots could not be compiled or even counted on a timely basis and could enormously increase the commissioners’ workloads. “Nobody is against this bill,” chairman Rep. Charlie Lancaster said, “we just can’t figure out a way to do it.” As such, Jefferson also asked for deferral.
Her HB 818 provides that a person who is involuntarily displaced from his place of residence by a gubernatorially declared state of emergency does not lose his resident status if he intends to return to the place of residence. Again, there were questions about how logistically this could work out, in terms of measuring “intent” and for how long the intention would be good for. However, after discussion it was thought current law already could permit this, resulting in another deferral.
Finally, her HB 641 would extend the temporary nature of satellite voting in state (until 1/1/07) and also to allow it out of state (until 7/16/07). Bruneau pointed out there just was no way to enforce Louisiana law extraterritorially, logistical issues aside, and that the current process worked well so the state had no need to pursue this. Jefferson claimed the state had not done enough. And Rep. Charmaine Marchand said that presidential elections were coming up and displaced people still may not be back, so if it was addressed now it could be done by then (even though the bill would cut it off before 2008).
Lancaster also pointed out that other solutions existed, such as absentee voting, so this was not imperative. Rep. Loulan Pitre also said the temporary satellite sites were justified only because of the unusual nature of the elections and the threat of federal intervention, and that this current bill was at a different time about a different matter that he thought was beyond what was necessary.
The bill passed 5-4 with all Democrats voting in favor and all Republicans against. Democrat Rep. Billy Montgomery was absent.
QUOTES OF THE DAY:
“I would suggest that is voter intimidation to the infinite degree.”
Ater when, during testimony, was asked whether when a voter requested an absentee ballot from the state if the attorney general’s office could not also include a letter informing them of income tax responsibilities.
“Every once in awhile, dead folks vote, but fewer did in this last election.”
Rep. Juan LaFonta, joining the accolades to Ater in running the New Orleans elections.
“I was looking for an old ballot box … so we started looking through some of the old [tin, no longer used warehoused] ones and found uncounted ballots in them.”
Bruneau, in discussing the danger of paper ballots in reference to the use of them in HB 490.
THURSDAY: SB 280, SB 410, and SB 439 are scheduled to be heard by the Senate Education Committee; SB 347 and SB 700 are scheduled to be heard by the Senate Labor and Industrial Relations Committee; SB 647 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Local and Municipal Affairs Committee.
24 April 2006
Floor action, Apr. 24: HB 108, HB 109, HB 311, HB 547, HB 760, HB 815
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 108 by Rep. Peppi Bruneau would eliminate a loophole in current ethics law that allows contract lobbyists who spend not more than $500 not to register as a lobbyist of the executive branch. Bruneau argued that anybody who appears in somebody else’s behalf should register, with the penalty for doing can void the lobbyist’s contract. He said all the state needed to know is who is representing who, and nothing else. It wouldn’t affect “citizen” lobbyists, and even if there is no remuneration for the contract, it would apply. It wouldn’t matter whether the contract was oral or written.
The bill passed 97-1.
DID YOU KNOW?
Bruneau also authored HB 109, which is like HB 108 except it covers the legislature. Rep. John Alario, who had queried about this for HB 108, had accepted an amendment that contracts be filed with the Clerk of the House of Secretary of the Senate (implying they do have to be written). Bruneau had no objection.
The bill passed 103-1.
DID YOU KNOW?
Bruneau also spoke for HB 311 dealing with whistleblower statutes. The bill created one procedure for an employee victimized of an unfair reprisal due to revelation of illegal activities in government. The bill states that cases brought before a court if resolved there would remove any obligation for the Board of Ethics to review the case and resolve it. Previously, either route could be taken.
The bill passed 98-0.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 547 by Rep. Troy Hebert got sent back to the calendar at his request. This tries to legislate that a governor, governor-elect, or gubernatorial can’t influence the picking of the Legislature’s leadership. Since Gov. Kathleen Blanco can be expected to veto this bill which would make any progress towards its becoming law futile, and Hebert gave notice he would recall it at a later date, something is going on behind the scenes with it.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 760 by Rep. Steve Scalise would prevent confiscation of firearms during an emergency unless there is reasonable suspicion that the weapon where it can be carried legally would be used illegally. Scalise pointed out that during Hurricane Katrina confiscations occurred at the whim of local authorities. He said it would not make legal arms already illegal, and observed over 700 confiscated guns still had not been returned in Orleans Parish and the law would bring the state into compliance with the Second Amendment.
Rep. Jack Smith argued it might reduce the latitude of peace officers in preserving order. He used the example of an intoxicated person having a firearm on the street not being able to have his firearm confiscated under this law. But Scalise said the law allowed an officer who thought this person was a threat to make an arrest for public drunkenness and therefore confiscate the firearm. He noted that the deterrent effect of having a lawfully-armed public would aid in keeping order in emergencies.
Rep. Cedric Richmond argued that the law would require a physical arrest for a firearm to be confiscated. Scalise pointed out unlawful possession was not covered by the bill, and that as long as weapons are not concealed, possession is lawful.
Rep. Ken Odinet objected to blaming law enforcement for being too zealous in confiscation, but did not argue against the bill. Richmond later clarified his objections, saying he thought the bill should apply for people in their homes, but thought the bill should state only a citation to appear in court, not an arrest, could trigger the provision allowing for confiscation. He argued, again, the bill would force a physical arrest which either reduced law enforcement latitude too much or would result in overzealous arresting to the detriment of the accused. He offered an amendment to that effect.
Rep. Mike Strain, however, pointed out that Richmond’s amendment would be too restrictive, that even something like failure to move on or obey a police order could be used as spurious reasons for confiscation. Scalise also pointed out that even traffic enforcement officers could confiscate weapons with this amendment, and said the amendment would gut the purpose of the bill. “You don’t want to have a gun confiscated just because you parked illegally” during an emergency, he argued.
Smith supported the amendment, saying “bad guys” had guns too, not violating laws, and police couldn’t prevent suspicious people with unconcealed weapons in questionable places from being disarmed. “You’re endangering them,” he said, referring to police officers, with the bill in its current posture. “We don’t need vigilantes” he remarked, implying that police ought to be able to prevent people from roaming streets with legal arms during emergencies. But Rep. Pete Schneider said the Louisiana Sheriff’s Association approved of the bill in its current form.
Richmond closed, agreeing the bill should protect those on their property, but that officers should have more discretion with people on the street or elsewhere. The amendment failed 30-65.
The bill passed 102-0.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 815 by Rep. Bodi White was returned to the calendar. It creates a school district around the new city of Central, to the consternation of some and was the object of a contentious committee meeting. However, it passed committee easily so it was interesting that White would pull it for now, announcing his intention to call it later.
QUOTES OF THE DAY:
I don’t know about every parish … in Orleans Parish, it’s sometimes encouraged.
Scalise, in discussing public drunkenness relative to HB 760.
They fall out of the sky and write you a citation.
Scalise, talking about how quickly it seems parking citations get written up in Orleans Parish.
His constituents should rest assured I have his wife unload it every morning.
Rep. Ernest Wooton, after Rep. John LaBruzzo said he regularly carried a firearm.
TUESDAY: HB 29, HB 84, HB 148, HB 640, and HB 992 are scheduled to be heard in the House Civil Law and Procedure Committee; SB 25 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Judiciary C Committee.
HB 108 by Rep. Peppi Bruneau would eliminate a loophole in current ethics law that allows contract lobbyists who spend not more than $500 not to register as a lobbyist of the executive branch. Bruneau argued that anybody who appears in somebody else’s behalf should register, with the penalty for doing can void the lobbyist’s contract. He said all the state needed to know is who is representing who, and nothing else. It wouldn’t affect “citizen” lobbyists, and even if there is no remuneration for the contract, it would apply. It wouldn’t matter whether the contract was oral or written.
The bill passed 97-1.
DID YOU KNOW?
Bruneau also authored HB 109, which is like HB 108 except it covers the legislature. Rep. John Alario, who had queried about this for HB 108, had accepted an amendment that contracts be filed with the Clerk of the House of Secretary of the Senate (implying they do have to be written). Bruneau had no objection.
The bill passed 103-1.
DID YOU KNOW?
Bruneau also spoke for HB 311 dealing with whistleblower statutes. The bill created one procedure for an employee victimized of an unfair reprisal due to revelation of illegal activities in government. The bill states that cases brought before a court if resolved there would remove any obligation for the Board of Ethics to review the case and resolve it. Previously, either route could be taken.
The bill passed 98-0.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 547 by Rep. Troy Hebert got sent back to the calendar at his request. This tries to legislate that a governor, governor-elect, or gubernatorial can’t influence the picking of the Legislature’s leadership. Since Gov. Kathleen Blanco can be expected to veto this bill which would make any progress towards its becoming law futile, and Hebert gave notice he would recall it at a later date, something is going on behind the scenes with it.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 760 by Rep. Steve Scalise would prevent confiscation of firearms during an emergency unless there is reasonable suspicion that the weapon where it can be carried legally would be used illegally. Scalise pointed out that during Hurricane Katrina confiscations occurred at the whim of local authorities. He said it would not make legal arms already illegal, and observed over 700 confiscated guns still had not been returned in Orleans Parish and the law would bring the state into compliance with the Second Amendment.
Rep. Jack Smith argued it might reduce the latitude of peace officers in preserving order. He used the example of an intoxicated person having a firearm on the street not being able to have his firearm confiscated under this law. But Scalise said the law allowed an officer who thought this person was a threat to make an arrest for public drunkenness and therefore confiscate the firearm. He noted that the deterrent effect of having a lawfully-armed public would aid in keeping order in emergencies.
Rep. Cedric Richmond argued that the law would require a physical arrest for a firearm to be confiscated. Scalise pointed out unlawful possession was not covered by the bill, and that as long as weapons are not concealed, possession is lawful.
Rep. Ken Odinet objected to blaming law enforcement for being too zealous in confiscation, but did not argue against the bill. Richmond later clarified his objections, saying he thought the bill should apply for people in their homes, but thought the bill should state only a citation to appear in court, not an arrest, could trigger the provision allowing for confiscation. He argued, again, the bill would force a physical arrest which either reduced law enforcement latitude too much or would result in overzealous arresting to the detriment of the accused. He offered an amendment to that effect.
Rep. Mike Strain, however, pointed out that Richmond’s amendment would be too restrictive, that even something like failure to move on or obey a police order could be used as spurious reasons for confiscation. Scalise also pointed out that even traffic enforcement officers could confiscate weapons with this amendment, and said the amendment would gut the purpose of the bill. “You don’t want to have a gun confiscated just because you parked illegally” during an emergency, he argued.
Smith supported the amendment, saying “bad guys” had guns too, not violating laws, and police couldn’t prevent suspicious people with unconcealed weapons in questionable places from being disarmed. “You’re endangering them,” he said, referring to police officers, with the bill in its current posture. “We don’t need vigilantes” he remarked, implying that police ought to be able to prevent people from roaming streets with legal arms during emergencies. But Rep. Pete Schneider said the Louisiana Sheriff’s Association approved of the bill in its current form.
Richmond closed, agreeing the bill should protect those on their property, but that officers should have more discretion with people on the street or elsewhere. The amendment failed 30-65.
The bill passed 102-0.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 815 by Rep. Bodi White was returned to the calendar. It creates a school district around the new city of Central, to the consternation of some and was the object of a contentious committee meeting. However, it passed committee easily so it was interesting that White would pull it for now, announcing his intention to call it later.
QUOTES OF THE DAY:
I don’t know about every parish … in Orleans Parish, it’s sometimes encouraged.
Scalise, in discussing public drunkenness relative to HB 760.
They fall out of the sky and write you a citation.
Scalise, talking about how quickly it seems parking citations get written up in Orleans Parish.
His constituents should rest assured I have his wife unload it every morning.
Rep. Ernest Wooton, after Rep. John LaBruzzo said he regularly carried a firearm.
TUESDAY: HB 29, HB 84, HB 148, HB 640, and HB 992 are scheduled to be heard in the House Civil Law and Procedure Committee; SB 25 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Judiciary C Committee.
23 April 2006
Legislative regular session through Apr. 21
Bill filing has ceased for the session. Check out the final numbers below on the scorecard.
THE GOOD: HB 1207 by Rep. Kay Katz would remove monies borrowed by a corporation from the computation of its franchise tax, currently done by only Louisiana and Oklahoma. HB 1260 by Rep. Mike Powell would increase school discipline and employee safety by increasing punishments on students threatening violence on school personnel; HB 1264 by Rep. Steve Scalise would outlaw partial-birth abortions; HB 1277 by Rep. Peppi Bruneau would increase ballot security by getting the state to share voter registrant information with other states to ensure that a person is not registered in more than one state; HB 1347 by Rep. Bodi White establishes a pilot school voucher program (similar bill: SB 689); SB 669 by Sen. Art Lentini would make elected officeholders who commit a felony in the course of their duties ineligible to receive retirement benefits; SB 681 by Sen. Joe McPherson would continue to keep a lid on overexpansion of nursing homes;
THE BAD: HB 1316 by Rep. Karen Carter would require for the next few years that funding going to Orleans Parish entities would continue at a level higher than the population currently could justify; HB 1340 by Rep. Cheryl Gray would extend the wasteful temporary practice of allowing Orleans voters to vote in satellite locations outside of the parish to residents in any parish affected by a declared disaster at any time; HB 1361 by Rep. Michael Jackson would ease ethics requirements for certain people affiliated with the Louisiana Educational Television Authority; SB 693 by Sen. Robert Adley would reduce competitive insurance coverage and introduce more politics into the pricing of insurance;
THIS WEEK FOR THE GOOD: HB 108 passed committee; HB 109 passed committee; HB 429 was deferred by committee; HB 514 passed committee with minor amendments and with minor amendments passed House; HB 815 with minor amendments passed committee; SB 33 passed committee with minor amendments.
THIS WEEK FOR THE BAD: SB 639 passed committee with minor amendments.
Bills filed in the Senate essentially the same to those already filed in the House: SB 700 (HB 194).
SCORECARD:
Total House introductions: 1363; total Senate introductions: 741.
Total House good bills: 30; total Senate good bills: 16.
Total House bad bills: 18; total Senate bad bills: 19.
Total House good bills heard in House committee: 13; total Senate good bills heard in Senate committee: 7.
Total House bad bills heard in House committee: 2; total Senate bad bills heard in Senate committee: 12.
Total House good bills passing committee: 6; total Senate good bills passing committee: 3.
Total House bad bills passing committee: 1; total Senate bad bills passing committee: 2
Total House good bills passing House: 2; total Senate good bills passing Senate: 1
Total House bad bills passing House: 0; total Senate bad bills passing Senate: 1
THE GOOD: HB 1207 by Rep. Kay Katz would remove monies borrowed by a corporation from the computation of its franchise tax, currently done by only Louisiana and Oklahoma. HB 1260 by Rep. Mike Powell would increase school discipline and employee safety by increasing punishments on students threatening violence on school personnel; HB 1264 by Rep. Steve Scalise would outlaw partial-birth abortions; HB 1277 by Rep. Peppi Bruneau would increase ballot security by getting the state to share voter registrant information with other states to ensure that a person is not registered in more than one state; HB 1347 by Rep. Bodi White establishes a pilot school voucher program (similar bill: SB 689); SB 669 by Sen. Art Lentini would make elected officeholders who commit a felony in the course of their duties ineligible to receive retirement benefits; SB 681 by Sen. Joe McPherson would continue to keep a lid on overexpansion of nursing homes;
THE BAD: HB 1316 by Rep. Karen Carter would require for the next few years that funding going to Orleans Parish entities would continue at a level higher than the population currently could justify; HB 1340 by Rep. Cheryl Gray would extend the wasteful temporary practice of allowing Orleans voters to vote in satellite locations outside of the parish to residents in any parish affected by a declared disaster at any time; HB 1361 by Rep. Michael Jackson would ease ethics requirements for certain people affiliated with the Louisiana Educational Television Authority; SB 693 by Sen. Robert Adley would reduce competitive insurance coverage and introduce more politics into the pricing of insurance;
THIS WEEK FOR THE GOOD: HB 108 passed committee; HB 109 passed committee; HB 429 was deferred by committee; HB 514 passed committee with minor amendments and with minor amendments passed House; HB 815 with minor amendments passed committee; SB 33 passed committee with minor amendments.
THIS WEEK FOR THE BAD: SB 639 passed committee with minor amendments.
Bills filed in the Senate essentially the same to those already filed in the House: SB 700 (HB 194).
SCORECARD:
Total House introductions: 1363; total Senate introductions: 741.
Total House good bills: 30; total Senate good bills: 16.
Total House bad bills: 18; total Senate bad bills: 19.
Total House good bills heard in House committee: 13; total Senate good bills heard in Senate committee: 7.
Total House bad bills heard in House committee: 2; total Senate bad bills heard in Senate committee: 12.
Total House good bills passing committee: 6; total Senate good bills passing committee: 3.
Total House bad bills passing committee: 1; total Senate bad bills passing committee: 2
Total House good bills passing House: 2; total Senate good bills passing Senate: 1
Total House bad bills passing House: 0; total Senate bad bills passing Senate: 1
19 April 2006
Committee action, Apr. 19: HB 815
DID YOU KNOW?
Rep. Bodi White’s HB 815 would create Louisiana’s 69th school district, Central, Louisiana’s newest city. Indeed, the main rationale for the city’s creation was the have a separate school system from East Baton Rouge’s. In front of the House Education Committee, he and others argued the public did not trust the EBR system, scores were heading down, and students were heading to private schools and other parishes. Creating a Central district they argued would turn this around. White conceded this would cost money, but that they would be worth increasing the quality of education. In fact, smaller schools systems, on a per student basis, they argued would cost less.
Rep. Lelon Kenney asked if the supporters had any empirical evidence to back their claims. White said he didn’t, but his extensive community involvement gave him confidence in his projections. He thought the district would attract 2,500-3,000, especially with many new homes going up.
Rep. Avon Honey questioned a new system’s ability to fund itself. White argued they would follow the same path as nearby Baker and Zachary, and that the state computed a support figure from the state at about Baker’s level, $6,100 per student. Supporters also pointed out the system had no plans to incur debt. Honey also wanted to them to “address the makeup” of the student body. White didn’t quite know how to answer such a question, other than to say the racial composition would be about 85 percent white.
Honey kept pressing: “What if the percentages don’t meet expectations?” But opponents said that was irrelevant, but did point out that Zachary had seen an increasing percentage of minority students since its inception. Honey brought up the financial aspect again, and White reiterated that the process worked for Zachary’s transition and should work for Central. If Zachary had developed into the highest-performing district in the state, why couldn’t Central?
Rep. Regina Barrow also doubted the bill. She said the continued division of the existing district would be creating duplication of services and might be wasteful. White pointed out many larger metropolitan areas had many school districts and performed education well, and that as long as financial numbers showed the new system and the old did not financially suffer, decentralization was beneficial.
Rep. Mike Powell asked about impact of falling achievement, noting that East Baton Rouge was relatively the state’s worst in improvement. White said he knew of many cases that when students we rezoned away from the Central area and left for private schools, and thought they would return with a Central district.
Charlotte Placide, superintendent of EBR schools, opposed. She said fixed costs would not go down much as a result of this move, so per pupil costs would become more expensive. In particular, retiree costs she said should be passed along to the new district. She defended having a fund surplus and should not be penalized for that and said they are working on improving scores. She claimed students were returning to the district from private schools.
Noel Hammatt, vice president of the EBR school board, said the bill would disproportionately increase the proportion of students drawing on greater resources. He also said it would leave a “more segregated” system. He objected to “separating out” better performing students. It may be too big, but said smaller was not better when factoring race in income statistics, he argued. “Balkanization” of school was not the long-term answer, by “creaming” better, less costly, students from some districts. He also said this threatened the system’s escape from the consent decree because of segregation.
EBR School Board president Pat Smith said the district could not support creating a district that would be “90 percent white.” She promised the district would do a better job. She also said it would be unfair for debts incurred within the breakaway district not be transferred to it. “Reconsider the entire process,” she asked.
Other opponents were less diplomatic. One of those involved in the lawsuit questioning Central’s incorporation said he could never support a move whose sole purpose was to “segregate,” that it was all about race, accusing supporters of having bad attitudes and being disingenuous, because Central had no history as a “real” city. Another said it would be “scary” to have students return from private schools because Central would not be diverse enough, calling it “resegregation,” and made veiled threats about continuing litigation. He also pointed out Zachary maintained much more racial diversity when it separated. Another said to support the measure was support for resegregation.
Rep. Monica Walker couldn’t understand why when Baker, then about half minority, made the same arguments as Central yet was not accused of having racial motives while Central’s supporters were, a question that essentially went unanswered. Walker could not get Placide to change her opposition if retiree costs were shifted to Central.
Rep. A.G. Crowe pointed out that Baker now had a greater percentage of blacks, so he didn’t see why the bill would have any pernicious effect in terms of segregation. The implication that black families were moving to Baker because of its having a separate school system seemed to go over Placide’s head, who rambled on about attendance zones. Hammatt answered one question by saying the bill let “blessed” people leave and costs will not go down because “we’ll keep the same number of teachers.”
Powell pointed out that the Central area had lost 23 percent of its students, 50 percent of its families were sending children to private schools, and the area had a 23-point decline in test scores. “Schools are in decline, scores are going down … we need to keep emotions down and look at the data … we need to be concerned about the children. I’ve heard enough rhetoric about race … I think the discussion needs to be about the children, not the motives of adults,” he said, drawing consternated noises from the witnesses.
Rep. Don Trahan said he was concerned why he had seen such an academic decline in EBR, where other school systems like Caddo and Lafayette with similar demographics had not experienced that, implying leadership might be at fault. Rep. Hollis Downs made that complaint more specific and also touted Lincoln Parish schools, saying they were racially diverse, with many at-risk children, yet it was a higher-performing district. Hammatt argued that breaking statistics down further would show EBR has greater challenges.
White closed by pointing out Central followed the Constitution in its separation, and that people were voting with their feet in terms of quality of education and of life, and one of the newly elected Central officials testified as such. Resegregation, he pointed out meant that government, not families, would be choosing where to live.
Rep. Tank Powell moved to report favorably, but Honey made a motion to defer. The latter failed 2-12. Powell’s passed by the 12-2 margin; in both cases, Honey and Rep. Austin Badon were the pair (Barrow was absent).
THURSDAY: HB 1136 is scheduled to be heard in the House Insurance Committee.
Rep. Bodi White’s HB 815 would create Louisiana’s 69th school district, Central, Louisiana’s newest city. Indeed, the main rationale for the city’s creation was the have a separate school system from East Baton Rouge’s. In front of the House Education Committee, he and others argued the public did not trust the EBR system, scores were heading down, and students were heading to private schools and other parishes. Creating a Central district they argued would turn this around. White conceded this would cost money, but that they would be worth increasing the quality of education. In fact, smaller schools systems, on a per student basis, they argued would cost less.
Rep. Lelon Kenney asked if the supporters had any empirical evidence to back their claims. White said he didn’t, but his extensive community involvement gave him confidence in his projections. He thought the district would attract 2,500-3,000, especially with many new homes going up.
Rep. Avon Honey questioned a new system’s ability to fund itself. White argued they would follow the same path as nearby Baker and Zachary, and that the state computed a support figure from the state at about Baker’s level, $6,100 per student. Supporters also pointed out the system had no plans to incur debt. Honey also wanted to them to “address the makeup” of the student body. White didn’t quite know how to answer such a question, other than to say the racial composition would be about 85 percent white.
Honey kept pressing: “What if the percentages don’t meet expectations?” But opponents said that was irrelevant, but did point out that Zachary had seen an increasing percentage of minority students since its inception. Honey brought up the financial aspect again, and White reiterated that the process worked for Zachary’s transition and should work for Central. If Zachary had developed into the highest-performing district in the state, why couldn’t Central?
Rep. Regina Barrow also doubted the bill. She said the continued division of the existing district would be creating duplication of services and might be wasteful. White pointed out many larger metropolitan areas had many school districts and performed education well, and that as long as financial numbers showed the new system and the old did not financially suffer, decentralization was beneficial.
Rep. Mike Powell asked about impact of falling achievement, noting that East Baton Rouge was relatively the state’s worst in improvement. White said he knew of many cases that when students we rezoned away from the Central area and left for private schools, and thought they would return with a Central district.
Charlotte Placide, superintendent of EBR schools, opposed. She said fixed costs would not go down much as a result of this move, so per pupil costs would become more expensive. In particular, retiree costs she said should be passed along to the new district. She defended having a fund surplus and should not be penalized for that and said they are working on improving scores. She claimed students were returning to the district from private schools.
Noel Hammatt, vice president of the EBR school board, said the bill would disproportionately increase the proportion of students drawing on greater resources. He also said it would leave a “more segregated” system. He objected to “separating out” better performing students. It may be too big, but said smaller was not better when factoring race in income statistics, he argued. “Balkanization” of school was not the long-term answer, by “creaming” better, less costly, students from some districts. He also said this threatened the system’s escape from the consent decree because of segregation.
EBR School Board president Pat Smith said the district could not support creating a district that would be “90 percent white.” She promised the district would do a better job. She also said it would be unfair for debts incurred within the breakaway district not be transferred to it. “Reconsider the entire process,” she asked.
Other opponents were less diplomatic. One of those involved in the lawsuit questioning Central’s incorporation said he could never support a move whose sole purpose was to “segregate,” that it was all about race, accusing supporters of having bad attitudes and being disingenuous, because Central had no history as a “real” city. Another said it would be “scary” to have students return from private schools because Central would not be diverse enough, calling it “resegregation,” and made veiled threats about continuing litigation. He also pointed out Zachary maintained much more racial diversity when it separated. Another said to support the measure was support for resegregation.
Rep. Monica Walker couldn’t understand why when Baker, then about half minority, made the same arguments as Central yet was not accused of having racial motives while Central’s supporters were, a question that essentially went unanswered. Walker could not get Placide to change her opposition if retiree costs were shifted to Central.
Rep. A.G. Crowe pointed out that Baker now had a greater percentage of blacks, so he didn’t see why the bill would have any pernicious effect in terms of segregation. The implication that black families were moving to Baker because of its having a separate school system seemed to go over Placide’s head, who rambled on about attendance zones. Hammatt answered one question by saying the bill let “blessed” people leave and costs will not go down because “we’ll keep the same number of teachers.”
Powell pointed out that the Central area had lost 23 percent of its students, 50 percent of its families were sending children to private schools, and the area had a 23-point decline in test scores. “Schools are in decline, scores are going down … we need to keep emotions down and look at the data … we need to be concerned about the children. I’ve heard enough rhetoric about race … I think the discussion needs to be about the children, not the motives of adults,” he said, drawing consternated noises from the witnesses.
Rep. Don Trahan said he was concerned why he had seen such an academic decline in EBR, where other school systems like Caddo and Lafayette with similar demographics had not experienced that, implying leadership might be at fault. Rep. Hollis Downs made that complaint more specific and also touted Lincoln Parish schools, saying they were racially diverse, with many at-risk children, yet it was a higher-performing district. Hammatt argued that breaking statistics down further would show EBR has greater challenges.
White closed by pointing out Central followed the Constitution in its separation, and that people were voting with their feet in terms of quality of education and of life, and one of the newly elected Central officials testified as such. Resegregation, he pointed out meant that government, not families, would be choosing where to live.
Rep. Tank Powell moved to report favorably, but Honey made a motion to defer. The latter failed 2-12. Powell’s passed by the 12-2 margin; in both cases, Honey and Rep. Austin Badon were the pair (Barrow was absent).
THURSDAY: HB 1136 is scheduled to be heard in the House Insurance Committee.
15 April 2006
Legislative regular session through Apr. 14
This was a short week given holidays and the unfortunate death of Rep. John Alario’s wife. Next week probably will be too, since the Legislature is taking Monday off.
THE GOOD: HB 1163 by Rep. Glenn Ansardi would allow repurchase at fair terms of expropriated property by its original owners or heirs after 15 years of non-use. SB 645, SB 647, and SB 648 are similar to HB 116 and other Orleans Parish consolidation bills.
THIS WEEK FOR THE GOOD: HB 850 with minor amendments passed House; SB 1 with major amendments passed Senate; SB 27 with minor amendments passed committee.
THIS WEEK FOR THE BAD: SB 433 with minor amendments failed to pass Senate; SB 513 passed Senate.
WEDNESDAY: SB 602 is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Commerce, Consumer Protection, and International Affairs Committee.
SCORECARD:
Total House introductions: 1195; total Senate introductions: 656.
Total House good bills: 29; total Senate good bills: 15.
Total House bad bills: 16; total Senate bad bills: 19.
Total House good bills heard in House committee: 6; total Senate good bills heard in Senate committee: 4.
Total House bad bills heard in House committee: 2; total Senate bad bills heard in Senate committee: 11.
Total House good bills passing committee: 2; total Senate good bills passing committee: 4
Total House bad bills passing committee: 1; total Senate bad bills passing committee: 2
Total House good bills passing House: 1; total Senate good bills passing Senate: 2
Total House bad bills passing House: 0; total Senate bad bills passing Senate: 1
THE GOOD: HB 1163 by Rep. Glenn Ansardi would allow repurchase at fair terms of expropriated property by its original owners or heirs after 15 years of non-use. SB 645, SB 647, and SB 648 are similar to HB 116 and other Orleans Parish consolidation bills.
THIS WEEK FOR THE GOOD: HB 850 with minor amendments passed House; SB 1 with major amendments passed Senate; SB 27 with minor amendments passed committee.
THIS WEEK FOR THE BAD: SB 433 with minor amendments failed to pass Senate; SB 513 passed Senate.
WEDNESDAY: SB 602 is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Commerce, Consumer Protection, and International Affairs Committee.
SCORECARD:
Total House introductions: 1195; total Senate introductions: 656.
Total House good bills: 29; total Senate good bills: 15.
Total House bad bills: 16; total Senate bad bills: 19.
Total House good bills heard in House committee: 6; total Senate good bills heard in Senate committee: 4.
Total House bad bills heard in House committee: 2; total Senate bad bills heard in Senate committee: 11.
Total House good bills passing committee: 2; total Senate good bills passing committee: 4
Total House bad bills passing committee: 1; total Senate bad bills passing committee: 2
Total House good bills passing House: 1; total Senate good bills passing Senate: 2
Total House bad bills passing House: 0; total Senate bad bills passing Senate: 1
11 April 2006
Floor action, Apr. 11: SB 47, 433
DID YOU KNOW?
SB 433 would loosen existing ballot security measures that would make registrants give positive identification at least once before voting by mail. Sponsor Sen. Cleo Fields said he knew of no other state that requires people who registered by mail had to show up at least once at polls to vote, before ever voting by mail. He explained it extended the legislation from the last special session, which cut off the ability to do this Jul. 16. There was no debate. It was defeated 15-22, and Fields gave notice to reconsider, which meant it could yet be brought up again. Of the affirmative votes, 10 were by black Democrats (all such in the chamber), and all 12 such being Democrats.
DID YOU KNOW?
You would think SB 47, which would create special orange-colored license plates for two-time convictions of drunk driving for the car’s registrants, would have been a slam dunk. Instead, Sen. Ben Nevers got some spirited questions concerning the bill, wondering whether it improperly stigmatized operators of vehicles who did not have the convictions, and whether it worked at cross purposes to existing laws that put interlock systems on doors to prevent those convicted from driving without passing a sobriety test (because those persons might be discouraged from driving their own cars). But it did end up passing 33-2.
QUOTE OF THE DAY
I drove under the influence of alcohol…. It’s not feel-good legislation.
Nevers, in arguing for why his bill that would create special license plates should be forcibly issued to registrants which have two drunk driving convictions should be passed.
WEDNESDAY:
SB 87, SB 166, SB 167, SB 293, SB 293, and SB 301 are scheduled to be heard by the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee.
SB 433 would loosen existing ballot security measures that would make registrants give positive identification at least once before voting by mail. Sponsor Sen. Cleo Fields said he knew of no other state that requires people who registered by mail had to show up at least once at polls to vote, before ever voting by mail. He explained it extended the legislation from the last special session, which cut off the ability to do this Jul. 16. There was no debate. It was defeated 15-22, and Fields gave notice to reconsider, which meant it could yet be brought up again. Of the affirmative votes, 10 were by black Democrats (all such in the chamber), and all 12 such being Democrats.
DID YOU KNOW?
You would think SB 47, which would create special orange-colored license plates for two-time convictions of drunk driving for the car’s registrants, would have been a slam dunk. Instead, Sen. Ben Nevers got some spirited questions concerning the bill, wondering whether it improperly stigmatized operators of vehicles who did not have the convictions, and whether it worked at cross purposes to existing laws that put interlock systems on doors to prevent those convicted from driving without passing a sobriety test (because those persons might be discouraged from driving their own cars). But it did end up passing 33-2.
QUOTE OF THE DAY
I drove under the influence of alcohol…. It’s not feel-good legislation.
Nevers, in arguing for why his bill that would create special license plates should be forcibly issued to registrants which have two drunk driving convictions should be passed.
WEDNESDAY:
SB 87, SB 166, SB 167, SB 293, SB 293, and SB 301 are scheduled to be heard by the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee.
10 April 2006
Floor action, Apr. 10: HB 850
DID YOU KNOW (even if we wish we didn’t)?
A sad note: Rep. John Alario’s wife died Sunday night. Practically speaking, it will cancel House committee meetings and the session on the day of her funeral services, Wednesday.
DID YOU KNOW?
Rep. Gary Beard’s HB 850 would outlaw campaign contributions from somebody involved in disaster rebuilding to an official who gave him a contract that was negotiated and not bid out. The prohibition would be for three years. He was at pains to say it had to be a person entering into the contract for it to apply, not an entity of elected officials. Rep. William Daniel thought it did apply to entities, which Beard insisted it did not. Daniel said the Legislature had dealt with a design-build contract, but Beard corrected him by saying it Legislature gave the authority to pursue the contract, but did not enter into the contract.
Rep. Taylor Townsend argued the bill was unnecessary since already laws revealed who was giving contributions, so it was too limiting to prevent contributions. He also tried to connect the Legislature in its duties as having a “direct supervision” over contracts of agencies it had oversight over, which would then prohibit contributions to legislators. Beard pointed out contracts never come under direct Legislative supervision. He also asked “Where’s the need for this?”
Rep. Charlie DeWitt suggested expanding it, saying why should it be all right only “during hurricane time.” Yet he turned argumentative when Beard rejected his suggestion of returning the bill to the calendar to add the revision, with Beard suggesting DeWitt putting forward his own bill. Rep. Hollis Downs also took him up on it. Beard said he had no objection, but his main purpose was to show the nation that Louisiana was a good steward of recovery funding.
Rep. Cedric Richmond said this was “criminalizing” certain contributions when no crime necessarily had been committed. Beard said it was more important to avoid the appearance of impropriety. Richmond said he was bothered by legislators having to say “we don’t steal” all the time. In closing, Beard repeated this was for the sake of reform and “good government.”
The bill passed 62-31.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
I can’t really convey this one in a manner that is understandable if you didn’t actually hear it, but Rep. Warren Triche said he was unable to bring up when scheduled HB 783 which regulates import of non-indigenous constrictor snakes because of something to do with animal control personnel being swallowed by a snake and his inability to shoot it.
A sad note: Rep. John Alario’s wife died Sunday night. Practically speaking, it will cancel House committee meetings and the session on the day of her funeral services, Wednesday.
DID YOU KNOW?
Rep. Gary Beard’s HB 850 would outlaw campaign contributions from somebody involved in disaster rebuilding to an official who gave him a contract that was negotiated and not bid out. The prohibition would be for three years. He was at pains to say it had to be a person entering into the contract for it to apply, not an entity of elected officials. Rep. William Daniel thought it did apply to entities, which Beard insisted it did not. Daniel said the Legislature had dealt with a design-build contract, but Beard corrected him by saying it Legislature gave the authority to pursue the contract, but did not enter into the contract.
Rep. Taylor Townsend argued the bill was unnecessary since already laws revealed who was giving contributions, so it was too limiting to prevent contributions. He also tried to connect the Legislature in its duties as having a “direct supervision” over contracts of agencies it had oversight over, which would then prohibit contributions to legislators. Beard pointed out contracts never come under direct Legislative supervision. He also asked “Where’s the need for this?”
Rep. Charlie DeWitt suggested expanding it, saying why should it be all right only “during hurricane time.” Yet he turned argumentative when Beard rejected his suggestion of returning the bill to the calendar to add the revision, with Beard suggesting DeWitt putting forward his own bill. Rep. Hollis Downs also took him up on it. Beard said he had no objection, but his main purpose was to show the nation that Louisiana was a good steward of recovery funding.
Rep. Cedric Richmond said this was “criminalizing” certain contributions when no crime necessarily had been committed. Beard said it was more important to avoid the appearance of impropriety. Richmond said he was bothered by legislators having to say “we don’t steal” all the time. In closing, Beard repeated this was for the sake of reform and “good government.”
The bill passed 62-31.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
I can’t really convey this one in a manner that is understandable if you didn’t actually hear it, but Rep. Warren Triche said he was unable to bring up when scheduled HB 783 which regulates import of non-indigenous constrictor snakes because of something to do with animal control personnel being swallowed by a snake and his inability to shoot it.
07 April 2006
Legislative regular session through Apr. 7
THE BAD: SB 637 by Sen. Charles Jones would put make taxpayers perform the job of campaigns by giving campaigns a free ride in obtaining the names and addresses of displaced voters. SB 639 by Sen. Ben Nevers would create a special district to facilitate building a wasteful reservoir for “economic development” purposes.
THIS WEEK FOR THE GOOD: HB 361 was favorably reported by committee; HB 562 was involuntarily deferred by committee; HB 850 was favorably reported by committee; SB 1 was reported favorably by committee; SB 18 passed Senate.
THIS WEEK FOR THE BAD: HB 1129 was reported favorably by committee; SB 150 failed Senate; SB 291 with minor amendment failed Senate; SB 433 was reported favorably through suspension of rules; SB 513 was reported favorably by committee; SB 637 was reported favorably through suspension of rules.
SCORECARD:
(Note: some numbers will fluctuate because of similar bills. If more than one similar bill makes progress, all will be recorded. However, if any ever become legislation, there should be no duplication; only the fate of one of them would be reflected at the end.)
Total House introductions: 1154; total Senate introductions: 643.
Total House good bills: 28; total Senate good bills: 12.
Total House bad bills: 16; total Senate bad bills: 19.
Total House good bills heard in House committee: 4; total Senate good bills heard in Senate committee: 4.
Total House bad bills heard in House committee: 2; total Senate bad bills heard in Senate committee: 9.
Total House good bills passing committee: 2; total Senate good bills passing committee: 3
Total House bad bills passing committee: 1; total Senate bad bills passing committee: 3
Total House good bills passing House: 0; total Senate good bills passing Senate: 1
THIS WEEK FOR THE GOOD: HB 361 was favorably reported by committee; HB 562 was involuntarily deferred by committee; HB 850 was favorably reported by committee; SB 1 was reported favorably by committee; SB 18 passed Senate.
THIS WEEK FOR THE BAD: HB 1129 was reported favorably by committee; SB 150 failed Senate; SB 291 with minor amendment failed Senate; SB 433 was reported favorably through suspension of rules; SB 513 was reported favorably by committee; SB 637 was reported favorably through suspension of rules.
SCORECARD:
(Note: some numbers will fluctuate because of similar bills. If more than one similar bill makes progress, all will be recorded. However, if any ever become legislation, there should be no duplication; only the fate of one of them would be reflected at the end.)
Total House introductions: 1154; total Senate introductions: 643.
Total House good bills: 28; total Senate good bills: 12.
Total House bad bills: 16; total Senate bad bills: 19.
Total House good bills heard in House committee: 4; total Senate good bills heard in Senate committee: 4.
Total House bad bills heard in House committee: 2; total Senate bad bills heard in Senate committee: 9.
Total House good bills passing committee: 2; total Senate good bills passing committee: 3
Total House bad bills passing committee: 1; total Senate bad bills passing committee: 3
Total House good bills passing House: 0; total Senate good bills passing Senate: 1
05 April 2006
Committee action, Apr. 5: HB 562, HB 361, others
DID YOU KNOW?
Before going any further, I had wanted to look in on the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee today checking in on a number of important election-related bills. But the room in which it meets, Room F, is the only one not set up to provide a televised or even audio feed. Why? (Readers, help me out if you can; from the notes I get from some of you, some of you are pretty knowledgeable about the ways of the Legislature.)
Instead, but perhaps as equally important, are other election-, and ethics-, related bills in the House and Governmental Affairs Committee (the House wisely putting cameras in all committee rooms).
Before anything came up, in the review of the election code heard by the committee (in order later to give substance to an existing bill), the simmering argument about flexibility of voting and registration flared up. Rep. Juan LaFonta claimed Louisiana voters were “forced” to lose their registrations in Orleans Parish when given voter registration options in other states. But, among others, Rep. Peppi Bruneau pointed out this was a matter of federal law, that when being offered benefits in another state a person had to be asked whether they wanted to register vote. If they did, then notice would be given the Louisiana to strike that voter from the rolls. LaFonta complained this was “purging” voting rolls, to which Bruneau responded, “It’s a violation of everybody else’s rights if somebody can vote twice.” LaFonta made no comment.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 668 by Rep. Art Morrell, which would loosen campaign ethics requirements, got deferred. HB 129 was brought up which suddenly was relevant rather than duplicative. The Senate yesterday had considered the bill’s near-twin, SB 83 by Sen. Charles Jones, which would reduce the time to keep copies of campaign finance documents from six to three years, and failed by one vote because of the objections of Sen. Robert Barham who did not seem to realize (even if this had been brought up in the Senate’s committee) that the electronic records would be kept indefinitely. It passed without objection.
HB 361 by Rep. Charlie Lancaster closed an undesirable loophole in existing campaign finance law which discriminated against candidates for an office already in one house running for a seat in a special election in the other, making them unable to raise money (because of the law HB 668 would try to undo) while other candidates not in the Legislature could. It passed without objection.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 562 by Rep. Mike Powell would give the people the opportunity a veto power over the ability of the Legislature to raise it own salary. Powell argued that this provided an additional means of accountability over legislators. Rep. Rick Gallot asked whether Powell would support a raise, saying he was basing his decision on whether to support the bill (even as he previously had said he wouldn’t vote for it) on that. He answered he would only if the bill (a constitutional amendment) went into effect. If in effect, he couldn’t say, noting there was a process that would have to be gone through before he could answer. Gallot pressed the issue, and Powell repeated his answer. Gallot accused Powell of posturing, although himself he couldn’t say whether he had whether he had supported a pay raise.
But Bruneau wanted to continue, and asked whether the per diem was included, Powell said it would not since it was automatically tied to the federal rate, thus not a matter of legislative approval. Bruneau recommended maybe an amendment to tie salaries to inflation was appropriate; Powell answered he might support that, if this change was put into effect. Bruneau said he disagreed with this underlying philosophy. Lancaster then suggested why not bring the same philosophy to appropriations? Powell said that was matter of the public weal, not to put money into legislators’ pockets, and thus different.
Rep. Billy Montgomery moved favorable passage, even as he expressed reservations that this should be in the Constitution. Powell said his approach was appropriate because it was a basic contractural rule, not a matter of policy.
Gallot made a motion to defer, because he said Powell was “trying to keep us from getting a raise.” That was taken first, with Gallot being joined by Reps. Jeff Arnold and LaFonta, while Montgomery and Reps. Jalila Jefferson-Bullock and Mert Smiley voted against. This left it to Lancaster as chairman casting the deciding vote, yes, effectively killing the bill 4-3.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
“There’s an argument about that around here, too.”
Lancaster, when Powell said the difference between an appropriation and a salary increase in the Legislature was the latter went into legislators’ pockets.
THURSDAY: HB 253 is scheduled to be heard by the House and Governmental Affairs Committee; HB 1136 is scheduled to be heard by the House Insurance Committee.
Before going any further, I had wanted to look in on the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee today checking in on a number of important election-related bills. But the room in which it meets, Room F, is the only one not set up to provide a televised or even audio feed. Why? (Readers, help me out if you can; from the notes I get from some of you, some of you are pretty knowledgeable about the ways of the Legislature.)
Instead, but perhaps as equally important, are other election-, and ethics-, related bills in the House and Governmental Affairs Committee (the House wisely putting cameras in all committee rooms).
Before anything came up, in the review of the election code heard by the committee (in order later to give substance to an existing bill), the simmering argument about flexibility of voting and registration flared up. Rep. Juan LaFonta claimed Louisiana voters were “forced” to lose their registrations in Orleans Parish when given voter registration options in other states. But, among others, Rep. Peppi Bruneau pointed out this was a matter of federal law, that when being offered benefits in another state a person had to be asked whether they wanted to register vote. If they did, then notice would be given the Louisiana to strike that voter from the rolls. LaFonta complained this was “purging” voting rolls, to which Bruneau responded, “It’s a violation of everybody else’s rights if somebody can vote twice.” LaFonta made no comment.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 668 by Rep. Art Morrell, which would loosen campaign ethics requirements, got deferred. HB 129 was brought up which suddenly was relevant rather than duplicative. The Senate yesterday had considered the bill’s near-twin, SB 83 by Sen. Charles Jones, which would reduce the time to keep copies of campaign finance documents from six to three years, and failed by one vote because of the objections of Sen. Robert Barham who did not seem to realize (even if this had been brought up in the Senate’s committee) that the electronic records would be kept indefinitely. It passed without objection.
HB 361 by Rep. Charlie Lancaster closed an undesirable loophole in existing campaign finance law which discriminated against candidates for an office already in one house running for a seat in a special election in the other, making them unable to raise money (because of the law HB 668 would try to undo) while other candidates not in the Legislature could. It passed without objection.
DID YOU KNOW?
HB 562 by Rep. Mike Powell would give the people the opportunity a veto power over the ability of the Legislature to raise it own salary. Powell argued that this provided an additional means of accountability over legislators. Rep. Rick Gallot asked whether Powell would support a raise, saying he was basing his decision on whether to support the bill (even as he previously had said he wouldn’t vote for it) on that. He answered he would only if the bill (a constitutional amendment) went into effect. If in effect, he couldn’t say, noting there was a process that would have to be gone through before he could answer. Gallot pressed the issue, and Powell repeated his answer. Gallot accused Powell of posturing, although himself he couldn’t say whether he had whether he had supported a pay raise.
But Bruneau wanted to continue, and asked whether the per diem was included, Powell said it would not since it was automatically tied to the federal rate, thus not a matter of legislative approval. Bruneau recommended maybe an amendment to tie salaries to inflation was appropriate; Powell answered he might support that, if this change was put into effect. Bruneau said he disagreed with this underlying philosophy. Lancaster then suggested why not bring the same philosophy to appropriations? Powell said that was matter of the public weal, not to put money into legislators’ pockets, and thus different.
Rep. Billy Montgomery moved favorable passage, even as he expressed reservations that this should be in the Constitution. Powell said his approach was appropriate because it was a basic contractural rule, not a matter of policy.
Gallot made a motion to defer, because he said Powell was “trying to keep us from getting a raise.” That was taken first, with Gallot being joined by Reps. Jeff Arnold and LaFonta, while Montgomery and Reps. Jalila Jefferson-Bullock and Mert Smiley voted against. This left it to Lancaster as chairman casting the deciding vote, yes, effectively killing the bill 4-3.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
“There’s an argument about that around here, too.”
Lancaster, when Powell said the difference between an appropriation and a salary increase in the Legislature was the latter went into legislators’ pockets.
THURSDAY: HB 253 is scheduled to be heard by the House and Governmental Affairs Committee; HB 1136 is scheduled to be heard by the House Insurance Committee.
03 April 2006
Committee action, Apr. 3: HB 1129
DID YOU KNOW?
If you want to see how it’s been done for so long in the Louisiana Legislature, look no further than long-time, power-broker state Rep. Charlie DeWitt (in the stead of Chairman state Rep. John Alario who is out on a family emergency -- thanks to an anonymous reader for that information) and his handling of the House Appropriations Committee. His dispatching of several bills only increased in speed by the time the last on the agenda, HB 1129 by Rep. Francis Thompson came up.
Thompson’s bill would allow monies collected in conjunction with operation of Poverty Point Reservoir to be used for purposes best described as “economic development,” specifically to plow back in those funds into the Poverty Point Retirement Development Community and the Black Bear Golf Club. This is a controversial issue because of Thompson’s connection to the enterprise, such as his brother being director of the golf course, so one might think a little time might be devoted to this enterprise.
Given by DeWitt the chance to speak on his bill, Thompson got about 10 words out before DeWitt queried whether there were any objections to the bill’s favorable reporting, immediately declared there were none, and so moved. Even Thompson walked away, muttering, “I wish I could have gotten some questions so I'd know what to expect in the future.”
That’s the way it’s been done for so long in the Legislature.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
See above.
TUESDAY: SB 1 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Judiciary A Committee.
If you want to see how it’s been done for so long in the Louisiana Legislature, look no further than long-time, power-broker state Rep. Charlie DeWitt (in the stead of Chairman state Rep. John Alario who is out on a family emergency -- thanks to an anonymous reader for that information) and his handling of the House Appropriations Committee. His dispatching of several bills only increased in speed by the time the last on the agenda, HB 1129 by Rep. Francis Thompson came up.
Thompson’s bill would allow monies collected in conjunction with operation of Poverty Point Reservoir to be used for purposes best described as “economic development,” specifically to plow back in those funds into the Poverty Point Retirement Development Community and the Black Bear Golf Club. This is a controversial issue because of Thompson’s connection to the enterprise, such as his brother being director of the golf course, so one might think a little time might be devoted to this enterprise.
Given by DeWitt the chance to speak on his bill, Thompson got about 10 words out before DeWitt queried whether there were any objections to the bill’s favorable reporting, immediately declared there were none, and so moved. Even Thompson walked away, muttering, “I wish I could have gotten some questions so I'd know what to expect in the future.”
That’s the way it’s been done for so long in the Legislature.
QUOTE OF THE DAY:
See above.
TUESDAY: SB 1 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Judiciary A Committee.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)