Before votes were cast, Vitter addressed these “rumors” of marital infidelity once again, when he met with a group of Christian conservative pastors including Louisiana Family Forum founder Gene Mills. Vitter assured the reverends he had no “skeletons in his closet.” (Interestingly, one of the multiple sources who confirmed Vitter’s hypocrisy in this meeting was Pastor Grant Storms, the homophobic videographer of French Quarter gays who would later be arrested after two women said they saw him fondling himself in a van overlooking a Lafreniere Park playground.)
How would Grant Storms know something like this? It’s not like he drives around in his van stalking out…. OK, OK, but surely Gene Mills is obviously a man of integrity. It’s not like he’d ever take money from Vitter, even after realizing the man was probably lying to him about the “skeletons in his closet” and was involved in an illegal prostitution ring. Surely that doesn’t square with the values espoused by the good Reverend and the Louisiana Family Forum. Right?
By pure coincidence, simply because I was bored on a Sunday afternoon, I happened to catch this, within minutes, and spread it on Twitter:
Here’s what Lafayette reporter Jim Hummel reported a few hours ago, via Twitter:
(Despite the various screen captures, the record will reflect: I led on both of these stories hours ahead of the LA MSM. Sorry guys and gals; I have to call it as I see it).
Of course, the page is entirely authentic. There’s absolutely no reason to assume otherwise.
Per The Alexandria Town Talkand The Independently Weekly, on Tuesday, Gannett Company, the nation’s largest newspaper publisher and the owner of several major newspapers in Louisiana, including The Shreveport Times and The Town Talk, cut 632 jobs across the country, including 31 jobs in Louisiana.
Press consolidation, which has become more and more common in the last few years, will reduce expenses. In Monroe, 12 full-time and 15 part-time positions will be eliminated with the move. New positions will be added in Shreveport with the consolidation and Monroe employees will be given first option for those positions.
Despite the insistence that this consolidation will not affect delivery or the quality of the paper, Gannett Blog calls attention to Gannett’s announcement that, in preparing for the consolidation, it purchased a “Berliner.” From the official news release:
The Monroe newspaper will be printed at The Times, which recently installed a Berliner press that produces a newspaper with an 18-inch depth. In addition, the Berliner press allows advertisers to place color advertising on every page, which is important in today’s changing media environment.
Berliners are more commonly used in Europe, but Gannett has been slowly rolling out the equipment in the United States.
In simple terms, Berliners fundamentally change the aesthetics and formatting of a newspaper.
Gannett Blog wonders: Is this what The Monroe News-Star will look like now?
Examples of newspapers published on a Berliner press
While Gannett guts newspapers all across the country, consolidates its printing operations, and continues to lay off hundreds of employees, including journalists and editors who have have served their local communities for decades, the wealthy corporate executives at Gannett are only getting wealthier.
In queue with the corporate American dream, Gannett, which owns five newspapers in the state, didn’t just distribute the dreaded employee memo, it also shelled out $3 million in bonuses to its top two execs last year. That’s on top of the combined $17.6 million it paid for salaries alone on its two top dogs, according to a March 25 Poynter Institute blog:
Craig Dubow‘s pay included a $1.75 million all-cash bonus, reports Jim Hopkins. Chief Operating Officer Gracia Martore was paid $8.2 million, with a cash bonus of $1.25 million. The bonuses were awarded partly on the basis of cost-cutting that included layoffs, unpaid furloughs and other austerity measures, according to a shareholders proxy report filed on Thursday. Dubow would get $22.5 million if he quit right now.
Gannett, in many ways, appears to be a model example of the trends documented by The Washington Post. In March of this year, the Associated Press reported:
USA Today owner Gannett Co. increased CEO Craig Dubow’s pay package by 80 percent to $7.9 million last year to reward him for boosting the newspaper publisher’s earnings and reducing debt as revenue fell for the fourth consecutive year.
The largest part of Dubow’s 2010 compensation consisted of stock incentives with a total value when granted of $5 million, according an Associated Press analysis of regulatory documents filed Thursday.
But here’s the irony:
Gannett shares have plunged by nearly 80 percent since Dubow became CEO in July 2005, reflecting a steep downturn in newspaper advertising that has sapped publishers’ main source of revenue.
….
Gannett has been laying off workers and imposing unpaid leaves to save money. Dubow, 56, is trying to do his part by agreeing to lower his $1.2 million salary by least 17 percent through 2011. His salary last year totaled $980,769.
The company eased the pain of last year’s salary reduction by awarding Dubow a cash bonus of $1.75 million, a 21 percent increase from $1.45 million in 2009. He also received other perks totaling $159,465.
Got that? He lowered his salary as an austerity measure, or something like that, but it didn’t matter much. He was awarded with a $1.75 million cash bonus.
Meanwhile, according to some sources, Gannett’s insistence on furloughs only saved the company $10 million, and it remains to be seen whether or not the most recent layoffs and consolidations will increase efficiences and increase profitability or if they’ll simply destroy the very newspapers Gannett apparently hopes to save. After all, it’s almost impossible to run a newspaper without a properly-staffed news room, qualified editors, and an experienced and knowledgeable editorial board.
The Louisiana Coalition for Science (LCFS) is pleased to announce the demise of HB 580, which is official with the adjournment of the Louisiana legislature today, June 23, 2011, at 6:00 p.m. This legislation was, by every indication, nothing more than an attempt to reverse the Louisiana Family Forum’s defeat in its effort to block the approval of new biology textbooks for Louisiana public schools in fall 2010. However, even though HB 580 was another stealth creationism bill, no subject of instruction in public schools would have been safe from its effects.
HB 580, sponsored by Rep. Frank Hoffmann (West Monroe) was moving along under the radar, eclipsed by the publicity surrounding the effort to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA), until Dr. Ian Binns, our LCFS colleague, alerted us to it. If the bill had passed, the purview of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) would have been diluted from being able to “prescribe and adopt” a list of state-approved textbooks to being able merely to “recommend” them. Local school boards would have been given carte blanche to purchase textbooks and other materials that were not even on the list of “recommended” textbooks, and they could have used an unlimited amount of taxpayer dollars to buy them. Moreover, the professional staff of the Department of Education (DoE) would have been written out of their role under current law as participants in the process of reviewing textbooks, overseeing textbook adoption committees, etc. (See the LCFS press release [pdf] and analysis of HB 580 [pdf].)
That prospect has fortunately been averted — for now.
LCFS would like to thank the people who played a role in this outcome. Our greatest gratitude must go toSenator Karen Carter Peterson (New Orleans) and her staff. Working with Zack Kopplin, she sponsored the unsuccessful SB 70, which would have repealed the creationist Louisiana Science Education Act. But she then went above and beyond the call of duty by spearheading the opposition to HB 580 — marshaling “nay” votes from other senators through not one but two Senate votes. So, Senator Peterson, please accept our most sincere thanks. You were wonderful.
The other senators who joined Senator Peterson in voting to protect public school science education by opposing HB 580 also deserve our thanks (in alphabetical order):
In addition, LCFS owes much to one of our own members, Dr. Ian Binns, who not only alerted us to the HB 580 but testified against it — twice — on behalf of LCFS before both the House and Senate Education Committees. Dr. Binns has offered a statement about the successful defeat of the bill:
This is a great moment for science education and education in general for the state of Louisiana. Rep. Hoffmann’s bill would have been another step in the wrong direction for science education in Louisiana. I am thankful for the work of Senator Peterson and the other senators who were brave enough to stand up to Rep. Hoffmann and the Louisiana Family Forum. These senators did the right thing in protecting science education. I hope that this is also the beginning of the end for the Louisiana Science Education Act. I am happy to have played a part in the defeat of HB 580.
We also thank Zack Kopplin — yet again — for being at the Capitol and helping Sen. Peterson and her staff. After doing yeoman’s work, working with Sen. Peterson, to repeal the LSEA, Zack also stepped up to the plate to help defeat HB 580. We offer a statement from Zack as well:
Special thanks to all the legislators who prevented this bill from passing not once, but twice. This has been a good year for our state. We’ve gotten new biology books approved, despite creationists attempts to block them. We’ve stopped an attempt to pass another stealth creationism law. Lastly, we made substantial progress in our attempt to repeal Louisiana’s ‘job-killing’ creationism law and we’ll come back with an even stronger repeal next session.
Last, we thank the local media for paying attention to this bill and informing the public. The Baton Rouge Advocate provided thorough coverage and a powerful editorial in opposition to HB 580. James Gill at theTimes-Picayune outdid himself yet again, awarding the legislature an “F in science.” The Daily Comet andHouma Today ran articles, as did Gambit. Walter Pierce at the Independent Weekly in Lafayette also provided coverage, helpfully getting the word out by linking to the LCFS analysis of the bill.
We conclude by pointing out that the Louisiana Coalition for Science has gone 2 for 3 against the LFF’s creationist agenda in the last 6 months. Although we failed to repeal the LSEA (don’t worry — Zack vows to try again next year), we successfully persuaded BESE to do the right thing and approve new biology textbooks for our public school students. And now we have prevented Hoffmann’s and the LFF’s end run around that decision. And we did it without paid lobbyists and deep-pocketed donors.
Just knowing that we helped to protect the education of Louisiana children is reward enough for us.
**** End ****
PS: In an earlier post, I wrote that Zack’s efforts to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act had attracted the endorsements of 43 Nobel laureates. Make that 44. Earlier this week, Nobel laureate John Mather signed on.
Today, State Senator Butch Gautreaux (D-Morgan City) wrapped up his final legislative session with a headline-grabbing speech detailing the failures and the hypocrisies of Governor Bobby Jindal and his administration. It’s worth reading in full. Here is the text (as prepared for delivery):
Bobby Jindal has been led our state now for approximately three-and-one-half years and I think it is time to acknowledge some of the most notable achievements of his first term as governor of the Great State of Louisiana.
Gov. Jindal, our most traveled governor in Louisiana history has logged well over a thousand hours in State Police helicopters, spending Sundays campaigning in churches mostly in north Louisiana. Additionally, he has logged hundreds of hours in Army National Guard helicopters traveling to the coast after Hurricane Gustav and Ike and the BP oil spill in an effort to point out that President Obama wasn’t there and that the Federal government was doing nothing.
And, while the State of Louisiana struggles with the national recession having unprecedented unemployment, Governor Jindal crisscrosses the United States of America delivering the curious good news of business growth and job creation under his leadership. Of course all the while Jindal’s pointing out that Washington is out of control and that he is prepared to bring his principles of success in on-hands management to our nation—that is once he is back in Louisiana for a visit.
For the wisdom he delivered, millions of dollars were bestowed upon him by his adoring followers for his re-election campaign.
Who can forget Gov. Jindal’s adamant and very public refusal to accept the millions of stimulus dollars from Washington? And who can forget the very generous six foot by two foot presentation checks delivered to each and every parish of the State from the special checking account of Governor Bobby Jindal along with the same inspiring speech, except for the “insert parish name here” part?
I know how special I felt as we accepted the checks in the five parishes I serve. Some were trying to cast dispersions on those special occasions saying that the money doled out was Federal stimulus money, but we know the governor refused those dollars.
Let’s not forget the encouragement Gov. Jindal has given to our eldest military veterans—pinning the state’s veterans during his interrupted out-of-state campaign travel.
And of course, let’s not overlook the encouragement given to the young people of Louisiana. Among those is the opportunity to pay more for an education in state universities while losing courses of study and outstanding professors almost by the minute.
Graduates have much more job opportunities today—out-of-state jobs that is. And special thanks should be given to Gov. Jindal for his attempt to make smoking more affordable.
And for special friends of the governor, great business opportunities have been given, adding big dollars to their bottom lines. Notables coming to light during this legislative session alone are the opportunity afforded to Vantage Health to participate in writing the RFP for an unprecedented awarding of a book of business away from the Office of Group Benefits.
In a meeting in Timmy Teepell’s office attended by the Commissioner of Administration, the Governor’s Chief Council, Teepell and three executives from Vantage Health, OGB CEO Tommy Teague was given the instructions and language to provide a book of business for Vantage Health. How’s that for transparency?
Next we have CNSI, a company with offices in India and the former employer of our newest Health and Hospitals secretary, had the RFP re-written so that they could be eligible for the $34 million-per-year award for handling the Medicare billings and administration. This again was done by Administrative Act, bypassing the legislative oversight. We want to point out that those Louisiana jobs will now headed to points unknown in a continuing Jindal effort on job growth, just not for Louisiana residents.
And now it is my understanding Bobby Jindal will be saving the State of Louisiana $10 million by firing 149 employees at the Office of Group Benefits as soon as I get my butt away from Baton Rouge.
Of course the flip side of this significant savings is that it will cost twice the amount saved in additional costs to the State by placing the PPO plan in the hands of some favored private insurance company as evidenced by the Chaffe Report steadfastly kept under the shield of ‘NEW TRANSPARENCY’ by Gov. Jindal.
The real and yet unreleased final report is more critical of this deal than the draft we saw. The cost of that deal within the Governor’s office will be borne by all Louisiana taxpayers.
While resolutions from the Legislature, District Judges Association, The Office of Group Benefits Board of Trustees and numerous State retiree organizations have been sent to Gov. Jindal opposing the placing of OGB in private hands, the Governor has seen fit to ignore us.
I would be remiss not to sincerely thank the governor for one thing that has stood out this year; it has been a long time since Republicans and Democrats have courageously stood together and in opposition to Bobby Jindal’s efforts to denigrate and devalue the contributions of State employees and retirees along with other administration efforts not in the best interest of Louisiana.
Wow, right?
I know some may think Senator Gautreaux went too far, was perhaps too hyperbolic, too personal, but it’s far important to ask: Was he correct?
1. I’m sure that four-term Governor Edwin Edwards probably traveled more than Jindal has thus far (after all, he was Governor for sixteen years), but it’s highly unlikely that any Governor in the history of Louisiana has ever logged as many hours in travel in any three and a half year span, on the public dime, as Bobby Jindal. It’s not just the helicopter rides on Sundays to small Protestant churches in the rural red lands of North Louisiana; taxpayers have also had to foot bills for Jindal’s personal, out-of-state fundraisers, and they’ve helped pay for Jindal to go on a national book tour. As of March of this year:
An Associated Press review of public records shows Jindal’s out-of-state travels have cost taxpayers $134,000 through the end of last year, 56 percent of it for dozens of trips that weren’t state business.
None of the money has been reimbursed by the governor’s campaign, which has raised more than $12 million for his 2011 re-election and has $9 million in the bank.
That’s the kicker.
Then there’s this:
The Advocate, Baton Rouge’s daily newspaper, revealed in 2008 that Jindal spent more than $180,000 in his first few months in office on State Police helicopter flights for his “political office and faith.”
Jindal tours the country, raising millions of dollars for both his campaign and for his personal banking account, and he doesn’t pretend to be even the least bit interested in exploring the possibility of reimbursing the public tax dollars upon which he must rely to raise campaign contributions (for a non-federal election) and sell (presumably autographed) copies of his “autobiography.”
Don’t get me wrong: I understand the necessity of the Governor traveling with a security detail, but considering over half of his out-of-state travels are not related to his official duties, it shouldn’t be too much to ask for the cash-rich Governor to reimburse his cash-poor State whenever he decides he needs to travel out-of-state to raise money for himself.
4. As Jeremy Alford noted, “The most damning accusations leveled by Gautreaux involved the administration’s ongoing push to privatize the Office of Group Benefits.”
And it appears Gautreaux was spot-on in his characterization. No one in the State has covered this story with as much intensity, insight, and clarity as Tom Aswell at The Louisiana Voice. If you care about these issues, then do yourself a favor and read Mr. Aswell’s extensive coverage; it’s illuminating and provocative. You should start by reading this.
5. Finally, kudos to Butch Gautreaux for his willingness to speak candidly and openly. I named this post “Butch Gautreaux’s Farewell Address,” but hopefully, he continues to speak up for the people of Louisiana.
At the very least, you have to admit that it’s a little ironic: It certainly seems that, thus far, aside from Representative Weiner himself, no other elected official has been more damaged and criticized as a result of the Weiner scandal than Senator David Vitter, Louisiana’s junior United States Senator, a conservative Republican who is best known to the world for his participation, as a client, in the D.C. Madam prostitution ring.
I am not a fan of Andrew Breitbart, and considering his direct involvement in the so-called PimpGate scandal and the attempted shakedown of Shirley Sherrod, I don’t believe he’s in any position to lecture anyone else about ethics or integrity. But like him or not, he’s got a point about Vitter: When you’re a sitting United States Senator and you’re caught up in a prostitution ring, you set yourself up for blackmail and extortion.
Today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington asked the Senate ethics committee to investigate Vitter on charges of “bribery,” because Vitter is, very literally, refusing to agree for a pay raise for Interior Secretary Ken Salazar unless Salazar gives out more permits to Vitter’s friends in the off-shore energy business. From Politico:
Salazar makes about $19,600 less than other Cabinet secretaries because the Constitution prohibits a House or Senate member from being appointed to an executive branch job whose pay has risen during the lawmaker’s term. As a senator from Colorado, Salazar had voted to increase the salary for the Interior secretary. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accepted a lower salary for her post for the same reason.
But when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid suggested raising Salazar’s salary from his current $180,000, Vitter balked and tied it directly to the offshore drilling issue.
CREW says Vitter’s letter crossed the line and wants the ethics panel to investigate and refer the issue to the Justice Department if the evidence warrants.
“Whether it is a defense contractor buying French furniture for a congressman in exchange for earmarks, or a senator who ties a department secretary’s pay raise to approving permits, bribery is bribery,” CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan said in a statement. “Paying off government leaders to influence official actions is against the law, period.”
For the sake of argument, let’s say Vitter’s absolutely right about the Obama Administration’s off-shore permitting policies (which he’s not). You’d still have to admit: Vitter’s tactics are all wrong: Using his power as a United States Senator to withhold payment to a single public employee unless and until this employee changes a policy in a way in which he ostensibly believes will enrich the fortunes of off-shore oil and gas, fortunes that, incidentally, help fund his political campaigns. It’s brazen; it’s arrogant, and I agree that Vitter’s actions merit investigation.
His office’s response to the Politico story about CREW was utterly and pathetically predictable.
Vitter spokesman Luke Bolar rejected the CREW complaint, saying the group “has a clear track record of filing frivolous, political attack complaints.” Bolar added, “If CREW thinks this is bribery, then it should file complaints against Harry Reid for buying votes with the Louisiana Purchase and Cornhusker Kickback.”
It may come as a surprise to Mr. Bolar and Senator Vitter, but there’s actually nothing extraordinarily unusual about attaching an amendment about Medicaid funding to a bill about health care.
Mr. Bolar’s statement is revealing: There’s no adamant denial of Vitter’s quid-pro-quo stance about Salazar’s salary and off-shore permitting; there’s only an attempt to skirt the issue by pointing out things that haven’t also been investigated. And perhaps in his haste to respond, Mr. Bolar implies that the decision to provide Louisiana with its fair share of Medicaid funding, despite its bipartisan support, was merely an attempt by Harry Reid to “buy” the vote of Senator Mary Landrieu.
Anyone else see the irony in Mr. Bolar’s statement? Surely, considering what Rush Limbaugh said of Senator Landrieu at the time, I’m not the only person who thinks David Vitter’s spokesman should know better than to go there. I mean, seriously.
On a final note, back to the Anthony Weiner fall-out:
The most full-throated defense I’ve read about why Vitter should remain and Weiner should depart is from Kevin McCullough (bold mine):
Kevin McCullough, a conservative political commentator, also noted that difference between Weiner and Vitter in a commentary Sunday on TownHall.com.
“Vitter had confessed to his wife, members of his church, and others of his behavior years previous to the revelation,” wrote McCullough.
“Both did decide to stay in their jobs initially, but no doubt one of the biggest reasons was the fact that the American people felt they got a straight story from Vitter, and everyone felt there was much Weiner had not ‘fessed up to.“
Surely, Mr. McCullough is just joking, right?
Americans didn’t get a straight story from David Vitter. Americans got an implicit, carefully-worded admission of a “very serious sin” (singular). Senator Vitter never “fessed up.” He never answered any questions. In fact, he became an expert in dodging questions.
Aside from the fact that Mr. McCullough is absolutely wrong about Vitter’s forthrightness and honesty, there are three other big but important differences between the Anthony Weiner’s scandal and David Vitter’s scandal:
Anthony Weiner, it appears, did not commit any actual crime, though his actions may set a new Congressional standard for stupid, bizarre, arrogant, and pathetic. (As a daily user of social media, I still have trouble understanding how anyone, let alone a United States Congressman, would ever use Twitter for that, or how you could confuse a public tweet with a direct message. And sorry, but the weird pictures he took of himself in the Congressional gym prove that the only thing on steroids in Congress are egos). Regardless, as weird and tawdry and disturbing as the Weiner scandal may have been, he didn’t commit any actual crime.
David Vitter, on the other hand, did commit a crime, at least that is what we are all left to assume from his own “admission.”
Some may also suggest that unlike Anthony Weiner, David Vitter, once caught, readily admitted. This is also simply not true.
Thank you Jeff for taking my call, always a pleasure to talk to the Congressman. Congressman, since spokesperson for the Republican Party William Bennett has said character counts. I would like to put the same challenge to you that I put to Representative Perkins and he accepted. Would you be willing to sign under the penalty of perjury an affidavit saying you have never had an extramarital affair and you have never known, met or been in the company of one Wendy Cortez.
Vitter’s response (bold mine):
Flaming Liberal thank you for repeating all these vicious rumors that my political enemies are trying to bandy about and those rumors are absolutely true and they really don’t belong in any political campaign and I’ve stated very clearly that they’re lies, but I’m not going to start jumping through hoops and taking orders from my political enemies who have absolutely no credibility. So, I’ll speak very clearly about that. I have in the past; I’ll continue to do so.
As Bellinger points out, no, this is not a typo; Vitter did say, “those rumors are absolutely true,” though he obviously misspoke.
It’s also worth noting: Although Bellinger, a self-described liberal, may have been the first person to publicly confront Vitter about these rumors, the rumors were actually first circulated among top Republicans, notably Vincent Bruno. From Fox News (bold mine):
Also Tuesday, details resurfaced about an allegation that Vitter paid weekly visits to a prostitute in the French Quarter in the late 1990s. The allegations were investigated by a Republican rival when Vitter ran for a House seat in Congress in 1999. The seat had been vacated by Robert Livingston, who resigned after disclosure of marital indiscretions.
Vincent Bruno, a member of the state Republican Party’s central committee, said Tuesday that he had confirmed the allegations at the time while working for the campaign of David Treen, a former Louisiana governor running against Vitter.
The allegations never surfaced in the congressional campaign, but The Louisiana Weekly, a New Orleans newspaper, wrote about them in 2002 and 2004. Vitter denied the accusations. The prostitute never spoke publicly about the alleged affair, which was largely ignored by mainstream news organizations.
“She said she was having a paid affair often on Tuesdays and Thursdays at Dauphine and Dumaine,” Bruno said, referring to two French Quarter streets.
“It’s very sleazy, and it’s illegal. But, OK, it doesn’t apply to senators. They’re an elite group,” Bruno said with irony. He has called on Vitter to resign.
There’s no doubt about it: Anthony Weiner lied to the media, to his friends, and to his colleagues before realizing that the barrage of evidence against him would ultimately catch up with him. And then he finally told the truth.
Despite Mr. McCullough’s attempt to suggest otherwise, David Vitter, unlike Anthony Weiner, hasn’t ever told the truth; he’s made implications, and ever since then, he’s been able to skirt by.
The third difference, at least as I see it, between Anthony Weiner and David Vitter: The women Anthony Weiner contacted online may have thought it was perverted, but they haven’t suggested he ever did anything illegal; in fact, one of the women involved actually apologized to Representative Weiner’s wife for “flirting” with her husband.
But the woman at the center of the David Vitter D.C. Madam scandal, Deborah Palfrey, is dead. She killed herself only two weeks after being convicted of money laundering and racketeering. On the day she died, her most famous client, the man most responsible for placing her name in the national media, continued his work as a United States Senator, a position he continues to hold. He never had to testify, and he’s never had to answer any real questions.
By way of background, here’s what Michele Bachmann said in a 2006 debate:
Bachmann: “There are hundreds and hundreds of scientists, many of them holding Nobel Prizes, who believe in intelligent design.”
Unlike Michele Bachmann, Zack Kopplin actually does his homework. When he led the effort to repeal the Louisiana Family Forum’s signature piece of legislation, the Louisiana Science Education Act, an act that allows the teaching of creationism and intelligent design in the public school science classroom, Zack attracted the endorsements of forty-three Nobel Prize laureates.
Today, when Kevin Allman asked Michele Bachmann to name a single Nobel laureate who agreed with her, she, predictably, came up empty.
So, again, for those counting:
Zack Kopplin: 43.
Michele Bachmann: Zero. Zilch. Nada. No one. Nothing. In plain English, the woman is lying.
Friends, we at the Louisiana Coalition for Science would like to be able to say that we are pulling your leg. But we’re not. Louisiana is about to enact into law yet another stealth creationism bill in the form of HB 580 — unless the Senate finally decides to put a stop to this foolishness within the next 13 days when the current legislative session (mercifully) comes to an end. HB 580 passed in the House of Representatives on June 8 with a vote [pdf] of 87 yays, 5 nays, and 13 abstentions. (Thank you, Rep. Walt Leger, Rep. Patricia Haynes-Smith, Rep. Regina Barrow, Rep. Barbara Norton, and Rep. Charmaine Marchand Stiaes.) Louisiana is the embodiment of one of the cardinal rules that every pro-science citizen has to learn: CREATIONISTS NEVER GIVE UP. To which we now add a corollary: CREATIONISTS WANT IT ALL. Louisiana creationists were given the proverbial inch in the form of the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA), and since 2008 they have been industriously grabbing their mile.
Not content with (1) persuading the legislature to pass the creationist Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA) — as if that would have taken any effort at all, (2) convincing the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) to gut its LSEA implementation policy of prohibitions against using creationist materials in science classes, and (3) then convincing BESE that the review procedure for handling parental complaints about such materials should be stacked in favor of creationists, our creationist friends now want even more.
Despite BESE’s being so accommodating, the backers of HB 580 now want to repay BESE by depriving the board of any real control over the kinds of materials that parish and local school boards can adopt — and let the school boards have a blank check to do it. BESE very admirably resisted the Louisiana Family Forum’s attack on the selection of biology textbooks in 2010. They deserve much credit — and have our sincere thanks — for that. But the creationists who have used the board for their own ends for the last three years now want to tie board members’ hands when it comes to any real purview over textbooks. How’s that for gratitude?
HB 580 has been below the radar because of all the publicity surrounding Sen. Karen Carter Peterson’s unsuccessful SB 70 to repeal the LSEA for which Zack Kopplin and the LA Coalition for Science worked so hard. (Thank you, Sen. Peterson and Zack.) But HB 580 has been quietly moving along and could well end up joining the LSEA in the annals of Louisiana creationist history. We’ll stop talking now and let you read about it for yourself in the press release below (download pdf here). In addition, we provide a separate analysis of the bill here [pdf].
TEXTBOOK SELECTION PROCESS ATTACKED BY YET ANOTHER STEALTH CREATIONISM BILL
HB 580 guts oversight of textbook adoption & use of taxpayer funds
Baton Rouge, LA, June 13, 2011
After failing last year to block approval of new biology textbooks by the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE), supporters of the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA) are now backing HB 580, a stealth creationism bill that amounts to an end run around BESE. It also expands the reach of the LSEA by removing from current law crucial protections that ensure quality science education materials. The Louisiana Coalition for Science (LCFS) urges the Senate to reject this bill. (See HB 580 at www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/byinst.asp?sessionid=11RS&billid=HB580&doctype=ALL.)
HB 580 contains the following provisions:
(1) Replaces BESE’s power to “prescribe and adopt” textbooks and instructional materials with the power merely to “recommend.” This will gut the board’s power to protect the quality of science textbooks and learning materials. Students could end up using substandard materials that teach pseudoscience.
(2) Allows local school boards to adopt and purchase — at taxpayer expense — textbooks and other materials that are not on the state list, without proper screening by scientists, educators, and curriculum experts, and with no spending limits. This blank check for bogus materials comes during a severe recession when schools face stiff budget cuts and teacher layoffs.
(3) Eliminates the Department of Education’s crucial role in (a) screening and reviewing textbooks and instructional materials to ensure their quality and (b) assuring that textbook adoption committees are composed of properly qualified members, as currently provided for under current law.
Factors surrounding the introduction of this unnecessary bill raise additional red flags:
HB 580 is among “Bills of Interest” that the Louisiana Family Forum (LFF) is backing through its lobbying arm, Louisiana Family Forum Action.The LFF wrote and promoted the LSEA in 2008. The LFF also tried aggressively but unsuccessfully to block approval of new biology textbooks in 2010.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Frank Hoffmann (District 15, West Monroe), promoted a creationist “academic freedom” policy as Asst. Supt. of Education in Ouachita Parish in 2006. In 2008, he introduced a companion bill to the LSEA, which he shepherded through the House of Representatives. As a member of the Textbook/Media/Library Advisory council last year, he voted against the new biology textbooks after the state textbook adoption committee had already approved them.
Having passed in the House, HB 580 has been assigned to the Senate Education Committee. Since the legislature will adjourn in less than two weeks, a committee meeting must be held soon. The next scheduled meeting is Thursday, June 16. The LCFS will send a representative to testify against the bill.
HB 580 is a bad law that threatens the quality of learning materials on which Louisiana students depend at a time when they need the highest quality science education possible. It is also a disaster for school budgets.
The LCFS urges the Senate to vote against the bill. Concerned citizens should call their Senate representatives and ask them to oppose it.
Like his predecessors, State Representative John LaBruzzo (R-Metairie) apparently enjoys the attention. In 2008, LaBruzzo made national headlines after floating the idea of paying poor women $1,000 each to get their tubes tied, while, at the same time, providing tax incentives for wealthier women to have children. Critics accused him of promoting eugenics, a charge I’m certain he would swiftly deny. Notably, nearly two decades ago, David Duke, the former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, served the same exact district in the Louisiana House of Representatives, and in 1991, just like LaBruzzo, Mr. Duke also made national news after he proposed providing $100 a year to welfare recipients who used a sterilization drug.
For some, to quote Yogi Berra, it was “deja vu all over again.”
Now, Mr. LaBruzzo’s back in the national news. He’s currently proposing a bill that would directly challenge Supreme Court precedent and ban all abortions in Louisiana, except in the event that a mother’s life is in danger. Recently, he compared women who seek abortions to drug users. When the bill was up for discussion in committee, LaBruzzo said, “It doesn’t matter if you’ve voted for every pro-life bill that’s come to this committee. This is THE pro-life bill. This is THE pro-life bill. And I’d think you’d be in a difficult situation if you voted against this bill and tried to convince everybody that you are adamantly pro-life.” John LaBruzzo, you see, owns this issue: Either you vote for his radical bill– a bill that some believe could threaten a woman’s fundamental access to birth control– or you’re against human life.
Enough of the snark. I don’t have any desire, at all, to debate abortion, though I do believe that taxpayers in Mr. LaBruzzo’s district are wasting their hard-earned money paying the salary of a man who seems to be more interested in being a right-wing, ridiculously provocative culture warrior than doing anything concretely for his constituents. Maybe they think it puts them on the map. Maybe they’re just used to that type of representation.
Either way, here’s my challenge to Mr. LaBruzzo and to every single member of the Louisiana legislature. In fairness and in all honesty, it’s not my original idea; it’s my friend’s idea, and I think it has merit.
John LaBruzzo, literally, wants to redefine the legal definition of human life. That’s his right as a lawmaker.
So, let’s be morally and legally consistent, as much as that is possible, even if it is just a massive waste of time and taxpayer money.
If this actually, somehow passes, then it should do so with at least one amendment: The Jindal Amendment.
As the son of Indian immigrants who was born in Baton Rouge, Bobby Jindal, at birth, was an American citizen. His parents may have been citizens of India at the time, but Governor Jindal was born on American soil. In America, he was entitled citizenship by virtue of his birth here in the Gret Stet of Louisiana. It’s difficult for me to believe that Governor Jindal would ever sign into law something that could potentially disqualify the meritoriousness of his own citizenship or the potentiality of future immigrants to enjoy the same rights he has, including the right to, one day, become President of the United States.
So, to members of the legislature and to the Governor, if we’re going to redefine life, we are also duly obligated to redefine citizenship.
Ergo, the Jindal Amendment: To provide that the full privileges, rights, and benefits of natural-born citizenship shall be granted to to all persons conceived within the official, duly-recognized political boundaries of the United States of America.
Years ago, before I went to work for the Mayor and only months after moving back to Alexandria, I met Buddy Tudor in his office on Jackson Street. I’d known Mr. Tudor, who passed away last year, for most of my life, but still, as a kid who was fresh out of college, it was special to be able to meet with Mr. Tudor in a professional setting. His resume was wildly impressive, and so was his family’s legacy. His grandfather helped to build the Hotel Bentley, and nearly fifty years later, he purchased and renovated it, restoring its grandeur. There are buildings named after his family at both Louisiana College and, funny enough, Rice University, my alma mater.
Mr. Tudor told me, on more than one occasion, that before he was diagnosed with cancer, he had wanted to “build the world.” But he wisely limited the scope of his ambition and then beat back against his illness for nearly two decades. I was always deeply impressed with his humility, his honesty, and his commitment to Central Louisiana.
During our meeting, years ago, we discussed his lengthy relationship and love affair with the Hotel Bentley.
Every now and then, he’d send me personal letters about the Hotel Bentley and downtown development. He was always earnest and incredibly pragmatic. When we discussed the possibility of transforming the Bentley into a mixed-use facility, Mr. Tudor politely asserted his opposition. Its highest and best use, he said, was as a hotel, and he was right.
2.
Fred Rosenfeld worked for Buddy Tudor at the Hotel Bentley. Currently, Mr. Rosenfeld operates a fine-dining restaurant and a hotel on federally-owned and publicly-subsidized property, the Bistro on the Bayou and the Parc England Hotel, both of which are located in England Air Park (formerly England Air Force Base). Currently, Mr. Rosenfeld also co-hosts a morning show on the local talk radio station, KSYL.
3.
As many of you already know, I’m moving to Texas in less than two months in order to attend law school at SMU. So, forgive me in advance, but I don’t feel compelled to bite my tongue anymore.
Recently, on his radio show, Fred Rosenfeld has been publicly and blatantly lying about the Downtown Hotels Initiative. He’s lied about the process. He’s lied about the group selected to head up the development. He’s lied about the third-party studies that were conducted. And frankly, I personally believe, based on my own review of profit and loss statements and discussions with the late Mr. Tudor, that he’s also lied about the performance of the Hotel Bentley way back when he was its manager.
He’s not exactly a disinterested third party. He makes a living operating an up-scale boutique hotel on government property. A couple of years ago, when the Alexander Fulton went into bankruptcy, he was selected by Capital One Bank to manage the hotel for $25,000 a month. Shortly after the City took over operations, another operator was selected at a significantly reduced fee, less than half of what Mr. Rosenfeld was charging. Today, the City doesn’t even pay for third-party management.
How can I be so certain?
4.
Because I co-authored the Request for Proposals for the Downtown Hotels Initiative. The document was created on my computer. All of the pictures were taken by my camera.
Because I sat in on nearly every single meeting and participated in hundreds of phone calls about the initiative.
What is he lying about, specifically?
5.
a) That only one group, the group that was selected (Hospitality Initiatives Partnership), actually responded to the Request for Proposals.
Bald-faced lie. We fielded numerous responses, so many, in fact, that we had to create a short-list for interviews. Mr. Rosenfeld should seriously consider picking up the phone and calling HRI in New Orleans, Noble Hospitality in Kansas, and Dudley Ventures Development in Arizona, among others.
b) That Hospitality Initiatives Partnership has no experience in the hotel business. That they’re actually just a group of tax-sheltering architects, or something like that.
I wonder if Mr. Rosenfeld would ever say that directly to Paul Cooper, David Rau, and Roland Fontaine, the principals of H.I.P.
Paul Cooper may be young, but he’s already a veteran in the hotel business. David Rau has won national awards for his work on hotel projects. Roland Fontaine spent the majority of his professional career as an executive with Sheraton and Doubletree.
That’s right: Fred Rosenfeld was publicly removed from the practice of law, after previously being disciplined, suspended, and failing to pass the Multi-State Professional Responsibility Examination. The address listed, funny enough, is the Bistro on the Bayou, the only fine-dining restaurant in the State of Louisiana (as far as I know) that is housed in a building owned by the federal government.
Needless to say, I’d put the qualifications of the good folks at H.I.P. against Mr. Rosenfeld’s qualifications any day of the week.
c) That a third-party report concluded the hotels project would work because of Alexandria’s new airport terminal.
Mr. Rosenfeld’s made this claim repeatedly, and whenever he does, he sounds incredulous and exasperated. The only people who’d ever fly into Alexandria to stay at the Hotel Bentley, he’s suggested, would be the keynote speakers at a convention downtown. The City paid for this expensive study, according to him, but really, it was just a client-driven, ridiculous waste of money. I assume Mr. Rosenfeld is referring to the study conducted by the nationally-renowned firm, RKG Associates. I doubt Mr. Rosenfeld has actually read the report that he publicly lampoons and ridicules, because if he had, there’s no way he could believe it makes such an assertion. Our new airport terminal is value-added, but no one has ever suggested it will result in an exponential increase in tourism. (His criticism is particularly dubious and suspicious, considering he operates the one and only hotel near the airport).
d) That he helped to save the Hotel Bentley.
If you have the opportunity, drive by the Hotel Bentley. It’s been closed since 2004. It’s also worth noting: The profit and loss statements during Mr. Rosenfeld’s tenure as manager speak volumes.
e) That the City of Alexandria wants to spend millions of dollars making a “connection” between the Downtown Hotels complex and $12 million on a new parking garage.
Simply not true. The City would consider building a new town square downtown- a public park- and, if necessary, they’d also consider investing $7.5 million to build an income-producing, mixed-use building that would include parking.
6.
Fair warning: I’m submitting a public records request to the England Authority.
7.
The Bistro on the Bayou does this amazing tuna dish with lemon and Worcestershire.
Do as I say, not as I do for the camera.
