Skip to content

Archive for October 17th, 2007

Oct 17

1 Comment

Ieyoub Revelation Exposes Jindal Health Care Hypocrisy

Richard Ieyoub has revealed that during his tenure as State Attorney General, then-Governor Mike Foster and then-Director of Health and Hospitals Bobby Jindal worked to block Louisiana from receiving its share of a large settlement from the tobacco industry. Acting in his capacity as legal representative of the State of Louisiana, Ieyoub sought damages in a multi-state federal lawsuit to compensate the State for health care expenses to treat illnesses caused by tobacco products: thank-you-for-smoking.jpg

In 1996, Jindal was the Republican Foster administration’s secretary of the state Department of Health and Hospitals when Ieyoub, a Democrat, filed suit against tobacco companies to recoup the state’s medical costs in treating smoking-related illnesses.

Tobacco interests used affidavits sworn out by Foster and Jindal to attempt to squash Ieyoub’s lawsuit.

The tobacco interests argued in court filings that the Foster and Jindal affidavits showed Ieyoub did not have the authority to sue on behalf of the state and DHH.

The affidavits amounted to an abbreviated list of facts, including that Foster and Jindal were not consulted on the decision to sue the tobacco companies. In January 1997, state District Judge Wilford D. Carter of Lake Charles’ 14th Judicial District ruled Ieyoub did have the authority to file suit.

Ieyoub is not the first to highlight Jindal’s questionable actions; three weeks ago, candidate Foster Campbell brought it up at the Baton Rouge Press Club Forum:

Campbell said Jindal “talks about ethics (in his ads) but he doesn’t come to debates.” He said that when Jindal was head of the state Department of Health and Hospitals he opposed the move to sue the tobacco companies, even though he knew tobacco-related illnesses were costing the state millions of dollars each year in Charity Hospital treatments.

Jindal’s statements contrast heavily with those of retired politician Mike Foster, who did considerably less to spin away his opposition to the lawsuit:

Foster said Monday in a telephone interview that he was opposed to suing the tobacco companies despite the settlement that the state received.

“I’m not a big suing fan,” he said, adding that he also opposes smoking.

Foster said he does not remember the affidavit filed in the case.

Jindal said he signed the affidavit because attorneys from both sides said that would end his involvement with the case.

He said his opinion on whether the suit should have been filed is irrelevant.

As a long-time political figure often lauded for his intellect, it is hard to believe Jindal didn’t know full well which side of the controversy his signature was supporting. One would think that a politician who claims to support preventative medicine in order to improve state health-care outcomes would jump at the opportunity to recoup state money lost in treating preventable illnesses caused by smoking or chewing tobacco products.

Assuming he did realize the consequences of his actions, it is unclear whether he felt that scoring political points against Democrat Richard Ieyoub was more important than supporting the Attorney General in ensuring that the State of Louisiana received its fair cut of the settlement. What is clear, however, is Jindal’s willingness to accept thousands of dollars for the tobacco industry in his bids to be a Congressman from Louisiana. These are the contributions that the Political Action Committees of Big Tobacco has given medical champion Bobby Jindal (via opensecrets.org):

Altria Group Inc PAC (Philip Morris)

3/24/2005

$1,000

Lorillard Tobacco Company PAC

5/10/2005

$1,000

R J Reynolds PAC

6/14/2006

$1,000

R J Reynolds PAC

7/22/2005

$1,000

R J Reynolds PAC

5/13/2005

$1,000

R J Reynolds PAC

2/28/2005

$1,000

R J Reynolds PAC

10/21/2004

$1,000

R J Reynolds PAC

10/15/2004

$1,000

R J Reynolds PAC

9/24/2004

$1,000

US Smokeless Tobacco PAC

3/24/2006

$1,000

US Smokeless Tobacco PAC

5/26/2006

$1,000

Congressman Jindal’s efforts to wiggle out of his obstructive subservience to the tobacco industry is yet another example of the point that perceptive writers have been making for months: the rhetoric of Bobby Jindal the politician is diametrically opposed to the reality of Bobby Jindal the fundraiser.

Oct 17

9 Comments

Bobby Jindal’s Real Record on America’s Veterans and Military

LOUISIANA IS HOME TO MORE than 337,000 veterans, 55,000 of whom live in the First Congressional District, represented by Congressman Bobby Jindal. In one of his most recent television ads, Bobby Jindal defends himself against the accusations that he has voted against our veterans, implying that such a claim is absurd. Yet, at the same time, Jindal has refused to argue against any of the specifics. Here are the facts, provided by a third-party watchdog:

Jindal Voted Against Giving the National Guard Access to TRICARE. In May 2005, Jindal voted against a motion to recommit the Fiscal 2006 Defense Authorization to the House Armed Services Committee with instructions to include language that would extend access to the military’s TRICARE health insurance program to all reservists and National Guard members. According to Congressional Quarterly, “The provision would pull $180 million from the Defense Department’s budget for base closings in order to cover the cost of allowing any reservists to sign up for TRICARE health care coverage.” The motion was rejected 211-218. [HR 1815, vote 221, 5/25/05; Congressional Quarterly, 5/23/05]

    Jindal Praised the National Guard for their Katrina Response. “The National Guard and active-duty military response saved lives and provided much-needed assistance and medical care to thousands of people during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita,” Jindal said. [Jindal press release, 5/11/06]
    41 Percent of the Louisiana National Guard Is in Iraq. 923 Louisiana U.S. Army Reservists and 5,280 Louisiana National Guard members have been deployed in Iraq (41 percent of Louisiana National Guard members). [Center for American Progress, “The Reserves in Your Hometown,” http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b237662.html]

Jindal Voted For Budget That Cut Veterans Health Care By $13.5 Billion. In 2005, Jindal voted for final passage of the $2.6 trillion budget conference report for 2006. The report cut Medicaid spending by $10 billion, spent every penny of the Social Security surplus, increased the national deficit by $167.5 billion over 5 years and paved the way for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Furthermore, the conference report cut funding for veterans’ health care by $13.5 billion over five years. Yet the budget still found room for $106 billion in tax cuts for those who need it the least. [HR 95, Vote 149, 4/28/05; House Budget Committee Democratic Caucus, “Summary and Analysis of FY 2006 Budget Resolution Conference Report,” 4/28/05]
Jindal Opposed $100 Million Increase for Military Personnel. In 2005, Jindal voted against a proposal to the budget to increase funding for military health care by $100 million and transitional job training for military personnel by $50 million. The proposed increase failed, 200-229. [HR 1268, Vote 76, 3/16/05]

Jindal Opposed Ending the Military Families Tax. In May 2006, Jindal voted against motion to recommit the FY07 Department of Defense Authorization to the Armed Services Committee with instructions to include language that would eliminate the requirement that widows and orphans of deceased or fully disabled military personnel who receive pensions under the Defense Department’s Survivor Benefits Program have those benefits reduced by the amount received from the Department of Veterans Affairs’ Dependent and Indemnity Compensation program. The Military Families Tax penalizes more than 50,000 survivors in military families, most of whom are widows. These widows lose their military survivor benefits under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) if they receive VA Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) benefits because their spouse has died of a service-connected injury. Specifically, the spouse’s SBP benefit is reduced dollar for dollar by the amount of the DIC benefit – a $993 deduction per month. This harms the 53,000 survivors who continue to pay this unfair tax. The motion was rejected 202-220. [HR 5122, vote 144, 5/11/06; Leadership document, 5/11/06]
Jindal Voted Against Better Employment And Debt Assistance For Troops
Jindal Voted Against Additional Job Assistance to Veterans Returning from Overseas. In 2005, Jindal opposed a motion to the Job Training Improvement Act to provide extra assistance to veterans who are returning from conflicts overseas. Many veterans returning from the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq may need skills and training to obtain or retain their jobs while Reservists who have spent a year or more overseas have put their careers on hold to serve our country. Four out of 10 members of the Guard and Reserve forces lose income when they leave their civilian jobs for active duty. Many left for the war thinking they would be deployed for 6 months and have ended up staying for a year or even longer and may be shipped out again. Additionally, many Guard and Reservists are self-employed or run small businesses and face the daunting task of reestablishing their businesses after their release from active duties. The 2 years after they return from service are the most difficult. The motion failed, 197-228. [HR 27, Vote 47, 3/2/05; Statements by Rep. Kildee, 109th Congressional Record, pg. H915, 3/2/05; Statement by Rep. Schakowsky, 109th Congressional Record, pg. H2074, 4/14/05]

Jindal Voted Against Debt Assistance for Returning Guard & Reservists. In 2005, Jindal voted against a motion to the 2005 bankruptcy reform bill to exempt members of the National Guard and Reserve from the means test in the bill if their debt was a result of active duty or was incurred within two years of returning home from their service. The overall bill imposed a new means test on Americans who filed for bankruptcy protection. Those with incomes above the median for their state, and who could pay at least $6,000 over five years, would have to develop a plan to repay creditors. Previously, debtors had the option of asking a bankruptcy judge to erase their debts in return for forfeiting some of their assets. Four out of 10 members of the Guard and Reserve forces lose income when they leave their civilian jobs for active duty. Many left for the war thinking they would be deployed for 6 months and have ended up staying for a year or even longer and may be shipped out again. Additionally, many Guard and Reservists are self-employed or run small businesses and face the daunting task of reestablishing their businesses after their release from active duties. The 2 years after they return from service are the most difficult. The motion to protect Guard and Reserve volunteers failed, 200-229. [S 256, Vote 107, 4/14/05; Los Angeles Times, 4/15/05; Statement by Rep. Schakowsky, 109th Congressional Record, pg. H2074, 4/14/05]

Oct 17

6 Comments

Jindal’s Alexandria Strategy: Skip School and Canvass Neighborhoods

Around 8:30 this morning, my doorbell rang. Outside, there was a young white girl who looked to be around 13 years old holding a pile of Bobby Jindal push cards. Today, Tuesday, October 16, 2007 (the blog is published in GMT) is, in fact, a school day, but while most children were in school, a group of teenage girls “decided” to skip class in order to canvass Alexandria neighborhoods with Bobby Jindal push cards.

Representative Jindal arrived in Alexandria a few hours later, and coincidentally, he was met by a crew of teenage girls. It is always great when young people decide to become engaged in our democracy, but when young people are told to skip school and go to work for a candidate (with the promise that they will meet him later in the afternoon), they’re not engaging in the process; they are being used to do a candidate’s legwork. Today in Alexandria: (Photo courtesy of The Town Talk)

 

 

Oct 17

10 Comments

Bobby Jindal: A Career Politician And A Multi-Millionaire

Today, CenLamar received a number of visitors who were all after the same information: Is Bobby Jindal a millionaire? I had made a brief mention of Representative Jindal’s personal wealth, which he is required to disclose, in a previous post. Apparently, the issue has also caught the attention of candidate John Georges, who wonders when Bobby Jindal had the time to make all of that money.

Jindal once told The Times-Picayune, “I tried to be born wealthy, but that plan didn’t work.” Jindal may have not been born wealthy, but he certainly became wealthy.

Way back in April, when John Breaux was considering whether or not to enter the governor’s race, Dan Z. at Jindal is Bad wrote about Jindal’s fortunes in a post entitled “Bobby Jindal the Millionaire?“. Dan did his homework and discovered, through Open Secrets, that in 2005, Bobby Jindal estimated his personal net worth to be between $1.18 million and $3.17 million. By 2006, Jindal’s assets were estimated to be worth between $1.3 million and nearly $3.5 million, making Jindal one of the wealthiest members of Congress (ranked 118 out of 435).

The average salary of a US Congressman is $165,200 per year plus benefits. It’s a good-paying gig, but it’s still difficult to understand how Jindal could have played with over $1 million in “transactions” in 2005.

So how does one become a multi-millionaire while in Congress?

In his 2005 financial disclosure form, Jindal makes brief mention of his wife’s position with Albemarle, a publicly-traded chemicals company, but he does not disclose her income. However, according to his statement, Jindal owns more than $100,000 in Albemarle stock, $100,000 in an Albemarle “Equity Interest Trust,” a $15,000 Albemarle retirement fund, and $50,000 in an Albemarle mutual fund. Even if one supposes these assets actually belong to Jindal’s wife, they still account for less than 10% of Bobby Jindal’s net worth. The bulk of Jindal’s fortune is in money market and mutual funds, and as his financial disclosure form proves, Jindal is an active trader.

In April, a reader named “Lizzie” responded to Dan Z.’s post. She wrote:

I have never known someone this young who has spent a lifetime in government and still has both of their parents living amass this type of net worth.

Is he required to disclose his wife’s salary arrangement with Albermarle, a Baton Rouge company which she apparently telecommutes to from the home he had to move to in order to get elected to Congress?

Her company is heavily regulated by the government and holds government contracts. It also has no offices in New Orleans. Normally I would say the spouse should be off limits but when you look at his net worth, it raises some questions.

Again, it is worth reiterating: Jindal did not disclose any information about his wife’s “salary arrangement,” but it is clear that his interest in Albemarle accounts for only a fraction of his wealth.

What remains unclear, however, is which stocks and mutual funds have made Jindal so wealthy.

Jindal was in the private sector only briefly. When he was 24 and fresh out of college, he spent a year working for the consulting firm McKinsey and Company. During the past twelve years, Jindal has worked exclusively in the public sector.

There may be a perfectly legitimate explanation for Jindal’s sudden wealth, but the point still needs to be made. Because, for some reason, the Louisiana media has continued to lead us to believe that Boasso and Georges are the only “millionaires” in this election.

Bobby Jindal may not want us to believe that he is a multi-millionaire, but if he plans on ridding the state of “corruption” and instituting real “ethics reforms,” he needs to come clean about his own finances. And while he is at it, maybe he can tell us how he managed to become a multi-millionaire in the public sector. More importantly, we should ask: Why are the substantial majority of his assets “liquid investments?” You only need one thing to buy stock: Cash. In Jindal’s case, lots of cash.