Monthly Archives: February 2012

Screen Shot 2012-02-24 at 11.57.40 PM

The Hayride’s Absurd Attack Against The Louisiana Budget Project 5

by • Local Political News, Media Studies • Tags: , , , , ,

Yesterday, on the website The Hayride, Tom Bonnette, the former Town Talk reporter, posted a hit piece against the Louisiana Budget Project and its founder Melissa Flournoy.

I know Mr. Bonnette, and I know Ms. Flournoy. Mr. Bonnette is plain wrong. His post attacking the Louisiana Budget Project was, in my opinion, irresponsible, unprofessional, and sloppy reporting; it was reckless, bordering on the unethical. Instead of accomplishing what he apparently set out to do– “exposing” the Louisiana Budget Project as a nefarious and egregiously partisan organization (which it most certainly is not), Mr. Bonnette unwittingly exposes his own extremism and biases. With his references to conspiracies like the “new world order” and hackneyed, stupid tropes about the machinations of George Soros, Mr. Bonnette abandons any attempt to frame an objective, truth-seeking narrative and devolves into an almost paranoiac rant. And it’s a shame.

From its inception, the Louisiana Budget Project has been upfront and transparent about its mission, its policy agenda, and its funders. There’s no great mystery here. Anyone with an Internet connection can find this out within ten seconds. No one is attempting to hide anything.

Again, I know many of the folks behind the Louisiana Budget Project and Louisiana Progress, including Ms. Flournoy. Indeed, I actually contributed to The Louisiana Progress Journal. And the plain and simple truth is this: Mr. Bonnette misreported the story. This isn’t a “sham” organization that takes its orders from a boogeyman billionaire intent on ushering in “a new world order;” that is laughable, ridiculous, over-the-top. This is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing Louisiana-centric scholarship on Louisiana issues that uniquely affect working class families. Mr. Bonnette and the folks at The Hayride may not agree with them on substantive policy, and that is absolutely their right. But suggesting that they and dozens of other outstanding organizations all over the country are shams– without conducting an ounce of real research and relying entirely on the fact that a George Soros-backed non-profit organization gave them some funding (which has always been well-known to anyone paying attention)– is shoddy work, and with respect to Mr. Bonnette, it deserves to be called out.

It’s also ironic: If conservatives want to lecture progressives on billionaires giving money to influence politics and policy, then they need to begin by taking a good, hard look in the mirror. The Koch brothers have used their wealth to fund political campaigns that advance economic policies which would make them even wealthier. Soros, on the other hand, has given away billions, all over the world, to help the less fortunate and to expose political and media hypocrisy. Mr. Bonnette mentions Media Matters as an example of Soros’s destructive influence; I think Media Matters is an incredibly valuable resource.

In the past, I’ve called out and criticized two conservative organizations in Louisiana: The Pelican Institute for Public Policy and the Louisiana Family Forum. I criticized the Pelican Institute for holding itself up as Louisiana’s “first think tank,” when, in actuality, it was founded by a New Yorker, created- almost entirely- by out-of-state interests, and built on borrowed scholarship from national conservative think tanks. The Louisiana Budget Project and Louisiana Progress are none of those. And with respect to the Louisiana Family Forum, my criticism was not focused on their sources of funding (with the exception of a nationally-recognized hate group) but on the ways in which they transferred tax-deductible donations from their 501c3 to their political advocacy arm, a 501c4, allowing them to establish a campaign apparatus with tax-deductible money (I don’t know if this is illegal, but it most certainly seems unethical, considering that donations to their 501c4 would otherwise not be tax-deductible). I don’t have the proof, the hubris, or the belief that these conservative non-profits are engaging in some sort of new world order conspiracy; I think they’re guilty of misleading Louisiana. And again, that has never been the case with the Louisiana Budget Project or Louisiana Progress. You can disagree with their policy positions, but as non-profits, they’ve always been on the up-and-up, which shouldn’t be surprising when you consider that both were created by the founder and former President of the Louisiana Association of Non-Profit Organizations (LANO).

I assume that Mr. Bonnette is transitioning from being a journalist into being a partisan blogger, because, without a doubt, his post would never pass muster with his former editors at The Town Talk. It does, however, pass the scrutiny of the editor of The Hayride, Scott McKay, who posted this today on Facebook:

Yeah. Ha. Ha. Ha. Nuclear weapon. Millions of innocent people dead. Parking lot for China. Americans burn the Koran, and we apologize! That’s the last straw! Sand turns into glass (Someone needs to tell David O’Connor that Afghanistan is not a desert). Seriously, this is disgusting, rancid, jingoistic bile, and Scott McKay hopes to capitalize off of his opinions on his website through people like Lt. Governor Jay Dardenne, whose campaign took out $900 in ads on The Hayride.

Thankfully, Louisiana is fortunate to have some intelligent, compassionate, and ethical people who think deeply about policy, people like those involved in the Louisiana Budget Project and Louisiana Progress.

One more thing from Scott McKay’s Facebook, which puts this all into context:

Mr. Bonnette thinks he’s exposed “evil.” He thinks that George Soros, a Hungarian Jew, sent “fellow Jews to slaughter” when he was a child. And why? Because, as a kid, in order to survive, Soros told the Nazis he was a Christian. Mr. Bonnette’s comments, which mimic comments made by people like Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck, are nothing more than hate-mongering hyperbole. It turns my stomach: Blaming a Jewish child for sending “fellow Jews to slaughter” is an almost unfathomably loathsome remark, no matter how you land on the political spectrum. And attempting to connect this stupid conspiracy theory to the Louisiana Budget Project– to pat yourself on the back for “exposing evil”– borders on delusional narcissism.

Screen Shot 2012-02-21 at 11.04.10 PM

Councilman Jerry Jones’s Epic Takedown: “This Is Not The 1960s” Reply

by • Downtown Alexandria, Local Political News, Media Studies

Without a doubt, Greg Aymond and Von Jennings didn’t see this coming.

(Scroll to the 29 minute mark)

Alexandria City Councilman Jerry Jones has only been in office for two months, and already, he is the target of an absurd and scurrilous ethics complaint, a complaint that bears the imprimatur of local attorney and blogger, Greg Aymond.

From almost the moment Mr. Jones was sworn in, Mr. Aymond has publicly criticized and ridiculed him, labeling him an “Uncle Tom,” doctoring photographs of him to make it appear as if he is a slave and, bizarrely, a rabbi (this was meant as an insult), and publishing a series of patently untrue and hateful allegations about him.

As we learned recently, Mr. Aymond’s latest tactic against Councilman Jones: Filing an ethics complaint, alleging, among other things, that he had a charge account at Council President Harry Silver’s men’s clothing store and implying that Jones exchanged his vote for Councilman Silver’s Presidency, neither of which is true. At the heart of the complaint is the allegation that Councilman Jones was not an actual Councilman until his paperwork was processed by the Louisiana Secretary of State, an allegation that is laughable on its face. Jerry Jones, like every other elected or appointed public official in Louisiana, became a duly-recognized official the moment he was sworn in by a judge. At that moment, he became invested with the rights, responsibilities, and powers inherent to his office. Greg Aymond’s complaint, which was filed on behalf of perennial Council meeting gadflies Gayle Underwood and Jules Green, is nothing more than a political farce.

It’s relatively easy to connect the dots here. Jerry Jones was appointed over the objections of three Councilpersons, who had supported Von Jennings for the position. Ms. Jennings, who launched a spectacularly unsuccessful campaign for Alexandria Mayor in 2010 and who, before that, was fired from the City Administration, immediately made clear her intention to challenge Mr. Jones in the November elections. As I can personally attest, Ms. Jennings, as a candidate for Mayor, deployed an almost comically divisive and hate-mongering campaign-by-proxy, and it backfired. The Town Talk fills in the rest of the blanks (bold mine):

Jules Green, a District 4 resident, and Gayle Underwood, who lives in District 5, filed the complaint, Jones said. The duo is represented by Alexandria attorney and blogger Greg Aymond, who has been a vocal supporter of Von Jennings, a candidate against Jones in the upcoming District 3 election.

Aymond has referred to Jones as an “Uncle Tom” on his blog.

….

Jones was appointed that day to replace Jonathan Goins, who resigned on Dec. 2. Mayor Jacques Roy cast the deciding vote after the council was split with three votes in favor of Jones and three votes supporting Jennings, who had the endorsement of many members of the district’s three neighborhood groups.

I take exception with only one thing, the use of the word “endorsement.” Ms. Jennings claimed that she had the “endorsement” of “members” of “neighborhood groups,” but without question, the same could be said about Mr. Jones, who had just as many people speak in favor of his candidacy and just as many votes as Ms. Jennings had. But setting that aside, it should be abundantly clear what is going on. Mr. Jones did not do anything illegal, unethical, or improper, but no doubt, that is not the point; this is about Mr. Jones’s political opponents attempting to foster the implication of impropriety, the hushed rumors of him being “accused” of ethics violations.

But there’s only one problem with this strategy: These people do not know Jerry Jones.

As he forcefully demonstrated today, Councilman Jones may be new to the City Council, but he fully appreciates the ways in which a small group of people have, over the years, colluded with one another in an attempt to consolidate power and personally destroy anyone who poses a threat. And although he may be young and still catching his bearings, Councilman Jones did something today that was bold and refreshing: He exposed the collusion between Greg Aymond– the former member of the Ku Klux Klan and racial provocateur, the man who referred to him as an “Uncle Tom,” the man who considers the noose as a symbol of the “freedom of expression” and, for a long while, brandished it on his website, the man who published a missive about African-American leaders in Alexandria titled “N**** Street Thugs,” the man who said “blacks” are “lacking in ethics”– and a small but vocal group of African-Americans who seek positions of leadership and power.

It’s the nasty underbelly of local politics, an unholy alliance, and as Councilman Jones deftly pointed out, it’s being undertaken by people who will, at one moment, extol the virtues of Martin Luther King, Jr. and denounce the terrible legacy of racism, and yet, at the next moment, seek the service, opinion, and confidence of a man who has spent the last thirty years of his life trafficking in the politics of racial divisiveness. This is not ironic; that is too nice of a word. This is cynical. This is about fueling those flames, re-litigating those battles, re-drawing those lines.

And it won’t work. Jerry Jones represents both the present and the future of Alexandria when he says (bold mine), “There is no big race issue that’s about to happen in the middle of MacArthur Drive with folks attacking each other. This is not the 1960s. This is 2012. We go to school together. This man (Aymond) may have not wanted us to go to school together, but thank God, someone had the sense to let us go to school together.”

“I’m not going anywhere,” Councilman Jones said. And thank God for that.

Screen Shot 2012-02-21 at 4.18.57 AM

Louisiana College’s Stunningly Stupid Lawsuit 7

by • Education

Yesterday, Louisiana College filed suit against the federal government, seeking to prevent the government from enforcing a policy that mandates insurance companies to provide for birth control and contraception medication.

I don’t want to get into the nitty gritty debate. Suffice it to say, I think the Obama Administration struck a fair compromise on this issue, allowing religious institutions the flexibility to maintain their own autonomy while, at the same time, ensuring that vitally important contraceptive coverage is still guaranteed for those women in need, including the nearly 98% of Catholic women who use or have used birth control.

For Louisiana College, in my opinion, this is nothing more than an attempt to grab at the headlines. And truth be told: I’d be cool with Louisiana College’s lawsuit about this if they weren’t the beneficiary of tens of millions of dollars in public subsidization, mostly tax-free. They are, essentially, suing the federal government for requiring that someone else (their insurance provider) pay for birth control for their female employees, because Joe Aguillard and the Dean of their new law school– whatever his name is– don’t want to pay, even indirectly, for birth control. This has nothing to do with abortion, got that? Nothing.

Two men telling women what they can and cannot do with their own bodies, pathetically acting like their beliefs are being assailed, both full of sound and fury but signifying nothing.

To them, I’d say: I have a religious and moral objection to having my tax dollars subsidize your institution. To them, I’d say: There are much worse things than knowing that your money may possibly help someone get birth control. For example, there could be rumors about people engaging in behavior that contradicts Levitical law. But who knows if this is true, right? It’d simply be dangerous, scandalous, disastrous rumors involving someone’s personal life, and after all, that should be beyond the pale.

Yet if LC has to pay, even indirectly (through a private insurer), for someone’s birth control pills, then the administration wants to know about the personal lives of their employees. Apparently, they’re really worried that their female employees could, secretly, be exploiting their own insurance policies to abort babies. (After all, that’s what birth control coverage is about, right? It means aborting babies, right?).

The simplest explanation is this: Louisiana College wants a headline. We’re going to give it to them. They want to be culture warriors. They want to raise money for their ill-begotten law school. That also may happen. They may raise a few bucks off of this ploy.

I recognize that my contribution is indirect, but nonetheless, it exists. So, until you refuse to accept my money and the public’s money to help keep your institution afloat, you can either feign righteous indignation OR you can begin to actually pay proper taxes, like the rest of us, and contribute to the very system from which you disproportionately benefit.

And to the City of Shreveport, Louisiana, to Mayor Cedric Glover: If you are giving Louisiana College a single penny to help them launch their “law” school, then the people of Shreveport need to know that you’re handing their money to these people– politicized cultural “warriors,” zealots who think their religion somehow makes them above the law– because, somehow, they are more “moral.”

I have an ax to grind, to be sure. My grandfather, a medical doctor who is currently a resident of an assisted living facility in Alexandria, helped to invent the birth control pill, when he was a researcher in Michigan during the 1950s. He didn’t make a dime off of it, and I have nothing to gain either by speaking out. But Joe Aguillard and Louisiana College, they’ve been the beneficiaries of taxpayer money for years and years.

To Mayor Glover: With all due respect, drop the funding. I realize it may be difficult (I doubt Governor Jindal has the courage), but if LC is as earnest and as righteous as it claims to be, it can surely survive without being paid by people who are morally opposed to its mission. At the very least, Mayor Glover, you’d force LC to be consistent. And man, that would be awesome.

Screen Shot 2012-02-15 at 4.10.52 AM

The Wrecking Krewe 2

by • Downtown Alexandria, Local Political News, Social Activism

During the last three decades, according to a survey by a group of local preservationists, Alexandria has lost nearly 90% of its historic buildings. In large part, this was due to the construction of Interstate 49, which punctured through the center of Alexandria’s inner-city and Downtown. Indeed, the Alexandria Historic Preservation Commission was first established to save the structure that once served as the local train station; the building was subsequently moved and is now the main terminal for the A-TRANS.

In the back halls of the offices of the Alexandria City Council, you’ll see an amazing caricature of the Alexandria-Pineville skyline from the mid-1980s. I have copy of this painting, which I inherited from my father, and it hangs in my living room. I’ve been looking at this for years and years, and a few days ago, for the very first time, I noticed a small but significant detail: The beloved train station was on the back of a flatbed pick-up truck; it was being saved. I couldn’t believe I’d missed this.

Alexandrians have been stupidly obsessed with demolition. We tore down one of the most beautiful streets in the American South, Bolton Avenue, in order to make room for big box retailers that abandoned the place within a decade and moved to an indoor shopping mall on the edge of town. We impetuously placed asphalt over our beautiful brick streets. City Hall was once an architectural jewel, and we demolished it. We bulldozed the middle of the city during the 1980s and 1990s to make room for an Interstate. Even our most treasured Downtown asset, the Hotel Bentley, has been threatened with demolition.

I fully recognize that Alexandria still suffers with blight and disrepair. But I also know this: Alexandria has a terrible record in confronting these challenges. We suck. Don’t get me wrong: We have some incredible historic preservationists, but we, as a community, suck. We lend way too much credibility and authority to the tear-it-down mentality. Stop it. This mentality ruins the fabric of Alexandria; it undermines our authenticity, our heritage, and our history. It’s not simply about preserving our past; it’s about providing for our future.

The Town Talk may have thought they were being clever and civic-minded when asking for a “Wrecking Krewe;” I think they were being reckless themselves. After decades of demolition in Alexandria, maybe, for once in our lives, we can first demand adaptive reuse. It could save a ton of money, after all. We don’t have to destroy our historic buildings. We don’t have to pour asphalt over our historic brick streets. And we don’t have to realize our collective mistake, a decade from now, and spend millions of dollars to stamp that asphalt to make it look like the bricks we covered.

Screen Shot 2012-02-10 at 1.58.20 AM

Bobby Jindal Is Mooning Louisiana: Lagniappe Reply

by • Education, Local Political News, Media Studies, National News, Satire, Social Activism

Without a doubt, people in Louisiana care about the future of public education, and without a doubt, people are deeply skeptical of Governor Bobby Jindal’s controversial proposal to launch the country’s most expansive school voucher program, a program that, by the numbers, could never possibly work but, still, one that presages an underlying ambition to use taxpayer dollars to build a parallel private education system.

During the last few days, I’ve been somewhat surprised by the number of people who have read and reacted to my post Bobby Jindal Is Mooning Louisiana, both here on my website and on social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, but maybe I shouldn’t be: Since launching this website six years ago, my most “popular” posts have been about education issues. It’s encouraging, because while many may (understandably) ignore the daily political grind, when it comes to education, we are all much more willing to engage. Thank God for that.

And during the last few days, I’ve also learned a few other things, which merit an update.

First and most importantly, Bobby Jindal unveiled his budget today, which calls for laying off over 6,300 people (maybe it’s convenient and comforting rhetoric to say these are just “government jobs,” but no matter how you slice it or dice it, at a time of economic uncertainty, Mr. Jindal seeks to eliminate the jobs of thousands and thousands of Louisianans). Governor Jindal wants to close and/or privatize health care centers and prisons. He wants to privatize New Orleans river ferries (which, essentially, amounts to a tax on the working class citizens who rely on this service every day). He wants to change the pension plans of hard-working public servants so that any one under the age of 55 cannot access his or her pension until they turn 67 years old (which imperils the retirement plans of thousands of families). And Governor Jindal wants to give vouchers to private schools through the State’s Minimum Foundation Program (which is probably unconstitutional).

Mr. Jindal is proposing all of this in order to close a $900 million shortfall, and I’m sure he’d want us all to know: He’s doing all of this without raising any taxes, at least directly. How virtuous of him, I guess.

There’s no doubt that Louisiana must make some difficult decisions, but we also need to be honest with one another.

For one, Bobby Jindal would have never even been in this predicament if he hadn’t pushed for and then signed into law the repeal of the Stelly Tax Plan.

According to the Louisiana Budget Project, Louisiana lost approximately $358 million in revenue in the year after its repeal, and obviously, we’re continuing to lose hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue every single year.

The Stelly Plan was approved through a statewide referendum; the thing was literally on the ballot. Its repeal was not, however.

And it’s proof, here at home, that trickle-down economics simply do not work, that a Republican conservative Governor was willing to overlook the will of the people, through a democratic vote, so that he could provide minimal tax breaks to the wealthy (and reinstate a retrograde tax on the poor and working class).

Today, as Governor Jindal scrambles to put together his budget and calls for firing 6,300 Louisianans and privatizing millions of dollars worth of public assets and services, it’s certainly worth reminding people that this was, in large part, a self-inflicted wound and that the Stelly Plan never threatened Louisiana’s economic competitiveness– though its repeal certainly has.

It’s also worth reminding people that Governor Jindal’s plan to privatize prisons is risky and probably foolish. From a May 2011 report in The New York Times (bold mine):

The conviction that private prisons save money helped drive more than 30 states to turn to them for housing inmates. But Arizona shows that popular wisdom might be wrong: Data there suggest that privately operated prisons can cost more to operate than state-run prisons — even though they often steer clear of the sickest, costliest inmates.

Data? Why should we trust data, especially data printed in The New York Times?

Before I get to the constitutional issues with Jindal’s voucher program, let me get this out of the way: On December 31, 2011, at around 10PM, I boarded the Algiers Point river ferry for the first time in my life. My friends and I wanted to watch the New Years fireworks show on the West Bank– which, by the way, was an excellent idea: The view was spectacular.

The ferries in New Orleans primarily serve two groups of people, the working class and tourists. They’re not glamorous or luxurious by any means; they’re large, industrial boats, and the entire trip takes less than ten minutes. That said, I’m not surprised that someone thinks they can make a quick buck by charging people to use these ferries.

But I am surprised that Governor Jindal wants to privatize the service. As much as he would like to tout that his budget calls for no new taxes, make no mistake: The privatization of river ferries is, effectively, a tax on the hundreds if not thousands of working-class families who use these ferries each and every day. This isn’t just a “quality of life” program; it’s a daily reality for families who don’t have a car, families that don’t necessarily have a voice in Baton Rouge.

So, I propose an alternative solution: Instead of taxing folks who use the ferry to get across the Mississippi River– the lifeblood of Louisiana, Governor Jindal can make up the difference by privatizing the roads around the State Capitol. Come to think of it, I was at the Governor’s Mansion a couple of years ago, and he didn’t even charge me for parking– yet we still have the audacity to charge Saints and Hornets fans to access parking lots paid for by their own taxes!

Make the area around the State Capitol and the Governor’s Mansion a “tax-friendly” district. We don’t need to privatize services and tax people who simply travel between work and home; we can make up the difference by taxing the parking lot of the Governor’s Mansion. $100/hour; without a doubt, his guests can afford it.

On a final, more serious note, back to education: I’m happy that Zack Kopplin and Senator Karen Carter Peterson are reigniting their efforts at repealing the absurd and Orwellian Louisiana Science Education Act, which aims at destroying the integrity of science education in Louisiana by allowing wingnut teachers the ability to teach their wingnut views instead of teaching actual science. We are fortunate to have leaders like Karen Carter Peterson and champions like Zack Kopplin. It’s time to kill that bill.

I’m also happy some state legislators recognize that Bobby Jindal’s proposal to shift vouchers into the State’s Minimum Foundation Program is likely unconstitutional. From WVUE:

“I think that probably has some constitutional problems because that’s supposed to fund public education, and whether, or not you’re for vouchers, or not I just think it’s inappropriate to put the money to pay for vouchers in the MFP formula,” said Senator Ed Murray, D- New Orleans.

What is Senator Murray referring to?

This (bold mine):

(B)  Minimum Foundation Program.  The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, or its successor, shall annually develop and adopt a formula which shall be used to determine the cost of a minimum foundation program of education in all public elementary and secondary schools as well as to equitably allocate the funds to parish and city school systems.  Such formula shall provide for a contribution by every city and parish school system.  Prior to approval of the formula by the legislature, the legislature may return the formula adopted by the board to the board and may recommend to the board an amended formula for consideration by the board and submission to the legislature for approval.  The legislature shall annually appropriate funds sufficient to fully fund the current cost to the state of such a program as determined by applying the approved formula in order to insure a minimum foundation of education in all public elementary and secondary schools.  Neither the governor nor the legislature may reduce such appropriation, except that the governor may reduce such appropriation using means provided in the act containing the appropriation provided that any such reduction is consented to in writing by two-thirds of the elected members of each house of the legislature.  The funds appropriated shall be equitably allocated to parish and city school systems according to the formula as adopted by the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, or its successor, and approved by the legislature prior to making the appropriation.  Whenever the legislature fails to approve the formula most recently adopted by the board, or its successor, the last formula adopted by the board, or its successor, and approved by the legislature shall be used for the determination of the cost of the minimum foundation program and for the allocation of funds appropriated.

Governor Jindal wants to use this program to provide vouchers to private schools. He can’t. He’s prohibited. It’s against the law. MFP funding applies exclusively, by state statute, to public schools in a parish or city school system. During the next few weeks, look for Governor Jindal to defend his rationale by way of saying that other State Supreme Courts have ruled in his favor. And when he and his staff members and apologists say this, it won’t make it true. Jindal’s plan is severely over-reaching. It’s not only a usurpation of public education; it’s manifestly illegal and unconstitutional.

Screen Shot 2012-01-19 at 4.52.31 AM

Bobby Jindal Is Mooning Louisiana 74

by • Education

Originally posted on February 5, 2012:

A few days ago, The Wall Street Journal compared Governor Bobby Jindal’s plans for education reform to Newt Gingrich’s plans for a moon colony. And they weren’t being facetious or ironic. Quoting from their article “Jindal’s Education Moon Shot“:

Newt Gingrich wants the U.S. to return to the moon, but as challenges go he has nothing on Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal’s school reform plans.

Mr. Jindal wants to create America’s largest school voucher program, broadest parental choice system, and toughest teacher accountability regime—all in one legislative session. Any one of those would be a big win, but all three could make the state the first to effectively dismantle a public education monopoly.

In an attempt at praising Jindal’s “reform” efforts, The Wall Street Journal unwittingly reinforced something most rational people already understand: Like Gingrich’s pitch for a colony on the moon, Jindal’s plan for education is irrational, untested, grandiose, and absurd. But at least they got one thing right: While Jindal and company attempt to convince us that they’re merely proposing scholarships, the simple and obvious truth is that they are calling for “America’s largest school voucher program.” Let’s get this out of the way: Jindal’s voucher plan is comically infeasible and impractical. From The Times-Picayune:

Under Jindal’s plan, about 380,000 students would qualify to receive state aid for tuition at a private or religious school, (Senator) Landrieu pointed out.

But even if every private elementary school in the state could immediately grow its enrollment by 10 percent to accommodate an influx of voucher recipients, only about 8,000 seats would be available. Include private high schools and that figure rises to about 11,200.

Jindal, by the way, did not dispute these numbers. He didn’t dispute that his voucher plan cannot and will not work, that there is no possible way he could ever deliver on his promise. Instead, his spokesperson said that Senator Landrieu was “missing the point.” No, no, she’s not. She’s speaking precisely on point: Jindal cannot deliver right now.

Thus far, unfortunately, teacher unions and the superintendents are playing right into Jindal’s hands. The teacher unions are harping on teacher pay and benefits; the superintendents, who stand to gain even more discretionary powers, are distancing themselves as quickly as possible, hoping to appear as apolitical as possible. I wonder, though: Are any of these people aware of the end-game here? Because Jindal’s proposals about performance-based pay and tenure are just window-dressing. On their own, they’re radical, to be sure, but not nearly as radical as Jindal’s end-game. Ultimately, Jindal’s goal, as The Wall Street Journal notes, is not merely to create the country’s “largest voucher program;” it’s about using taxpayer dollars to establish an undemocratic, unprotected parallel education system.

Senator Landrieu points out that we simply don’t have enough private-school openings to accommodate even a fraction of the kids to whom Jindal plans to give vouchers. She’s right, and on its surface, this makes Jindal’s plan foolish. Except vouchers aren’t really the issue either. Surely, Jindal is smart enough to know his numbers simply don’t add up, that there is no possible way he could ever deliver vouchers to even 5% of the kids who qualify. It’s a sham. And it’s meant to be a sham. It’s meant to provide the Governor with the ability to establish a threshold of public dollars per student that Louisianans would be willing to contribute toward the development of a parallel charter and for-profit education system and infrastructure. And he’s aiming at $8,500 per student per year. Again, this is precisely why Mr. Jindal unveiled his program in front of the largest group of business lobbyists in the State of Louisiana; there is a ton of money to be made in privatizing public education.

Mr. Jindal’s proponents will likely point to the charter school model created in New Orleans after the storm. There are many good people doing exceptional things in charter schools and in the Recovery School District, but sorry, it’s absolutely absurd to attribute any marginal successes in New Orleans education to a business model. When charters fail and when charters go bankrupt, which is the case more often than proponents would have us believe, it can be abruptly catastrophic for students and their families. And because of the way most charters are structured, there is little to no accountability when they fail.

I, for one, am tired of Bobby Jindal “experimenting” with Louisiana. Despite the fact that his diploma is from one of the finest public high schools in the country, Baton Rouge Magnet, I don’t believe he is an advocate for public education. For months, my buddy Zack Kopplin, a fellow graduate of Baton Rouge Magnet, pestered the public and the media about the Louisiana Science Education Act (the LSEA). If you need any evidence that Mr. Jindal doesn’t care about the quality of public education, then all you need to do is look at the LSEA, a pernicious and likely unconstitutional piece of legislation that allows public schools to substitute science with religion, a piece of legislation that was brought to you and funded through the generous contributions of the radical religious right– groups like the Discovery Institute and the (in my opinion, shady) Louisiana Family Forum. Mr. Jindal, a Biology major from Brown, likely knows better; he was even criticized by his own college biology professor. But while Mr. Jindal doubled-down on the radical right and signed a bill undermining the integrity of science education in our public schools, Zack did something else: He received endorsements from over 71 Noble Prize laureates calling for a repeal of the law. You know how many Nobel laureates have endorsed Governor Jindal? None. Zero.

When he signed the LSEA, Governor Jindal wasn’t guided by any metrics of academic performance; he wasn’t concerned with preserving the integrity of the institution of public education. Mr. Jindal was merely playing politics. And so it is with his proposed overhaul of education.

The inconvenient truth, ironically, is that public schools in Louisiana have improved during the last few years. Our graduation rates have increased by nearly 6% since 2001; we’re closing the so-called “achievement gap;” test scores are up. There’s no reason to suddenly panic, and certainly, there’s no basis for attempting to completely overhaul the entire education system.

Louisiana, we don’t need to be, once again, turned into Bobby Jindal’s experimental laboratory. We tried that once before, when he was Secretary of the DHH, and it didn’t work out well at all.

Mr. Jindal, despite his impressive academic pedigree, is and has always been manifestly and vehemently opposed to a robust and successful public education system. Our charter schools in New Orleans may be performing better than comparable schools were before the storm, but, really, so what? Who is to say that our public schools wouldn’t have rebounded just as well, had they only been given the same resources, priorities, and treatment as our charters? We strip money from public education, give it to private and quasi-private charters, and then, we wonder about why charters are out-performing public schools. We’re being dangerously naive.

Louisiana is still at the bottom of many public education rankings, and without any doubt, there is a lot of work to be done. But think about this: Every single state that is ranked higher than Louisiana is working with the same toolkit. They’re not giving millions and millions of taxpayer dollars to build a parallel system of education more adept at maximizing private-sector profits (no, this is definitely Bobby Jindal’s “moon shot”); they’re beating Louisiana because they’re investing in themselves. We, on the other hand, are being led by a man who seems all too eager and willing to privatize the most important public institution in the United States of America- the right to an education.

If Bobby Jindal wants to reform public education in Louisiana, then he needs to go back to the drawing board. If he is serious, then he needs to begin talking with educators instead of business lobbyists and radical fundamentalists. If anyone should profit from public education, it should be the people who actually invest their own money, not those who use public dollars for the expressed purpose of dismantling public education.

And if not, Jindal will continue to moon all of us, as he flies toward America’s newest extraterrestrial colony, a slab of rock hurling around the earth, a place that appears in phases and adheres to its own cycles, a land called Gingrich.

Screen Shot 2012-02-03 at 3.26.36 AM

Bettye Jones, Her Own Worst Enemy 3

by • Downtown Alexandria, Local Political News, Media Studies

With all due respect to Bettye Jones, who recently retired from her position as Executive Director of Cenla Pride in order to move closer to her family in suburban Atlanta: What the hell are you talking about?

From David Dinsmore’s comically ignorant and completely misleading article, which was, evidently, paid for by Gannett (bold mine):

This respect comes despite a very public and somewhat ugly battle with Alexandria Mayor Jacques Roy’s administration over funding for Cenla Pride.

Things became so heated and controversial, Jones said, that she caught blame from some people after they perceived Roy’s decision to shut down the Bolton Avenue Community Center for two years as a personal shot against her. Those who worked with her in the neighborhoods, the city and even within the organization began keeping a distance.

“It’s obvious that I can’t make a positive impact in the city of Alexandria now or in the foreseeable future,” said Jones, adding that she had begun planning for her resignation prior to the funding battle.

Dinsmore: FAIL.

The Bolton Avenue Community Center was not “shut down… for two years.” That is an egregious, ridiculous lie. The Bolton Avenue Community Center has never been “shut down.” Portions of the center were temporarily closed FOR RENOVATIONS; that is, the City spent precious money improving the facility. Despite Ms. Jones’s solipsistic revisionism and Mr. Dinsmore’s inexcusably sloppy journalism, Mayor Jacques Roy never “shut down” the facility; instead, he dramatically improved it, and if Mr. Dinsmore had done even a tiny bit of homework, he would have learned of other, more ambitious plans.

I don’t know Bettye Jones personally, but I know, personally, that what she told David Dinsmore of The Town Talk was a complete and total lie. And Mr. Dinsmore should have checked her obfuscating and self-promotional lies before he reported them as fact in the newspaper.

Bettye Jones also told radio talk show host Tony Brown that she was providing $200,000+ worth of services to the City of Alexandria for only $40,000. Prove it, Bettye. Prove it. You can’t.

Tony Brown, a man who is (hilariously) alleged to have 2 MILLION listeners every day, may believe you, but I don’t. Also, to Tony Brown: I doubt I am the only one who thought it was ridiculous that you introduced Ms. Jones as a white woman, like a novelty; it’s as if you were tacitly acknowledging your own racial biases. Some of us prefer to live in the present, and others, like you, prefer to continue fighting the battles of the past.

Regardless, Bettye Jones is and will always be her own worst enemy. The simple and plain truth is: The City decided to defund her salary, because it wasn’t receiving an adequate return on its investment. And this decision wasn’t made by a white man; it was made by an African-American woman.

I wish Bettye Jones the best of luck, but I think David Dinsmore owes the readers of The Town Talk a full-throated retraction. Nothing less. He blatantly misrepresented and misreported the truth.

He can begin with answering this question: Have you, David Dinsmore, ever been inside of the Bolton Avenue Community Center?

February Made Me Shiver 3

by • Self-referential drivel

Eleven years ago, on this very day, I was a freshman at Rice in Houston, 228 miles and an entire world away from my family home in Alexandria, Louisiana. That night, I drove my friends and I to the Macaroni Grill on Westheimer, forcing them, against their will, to listen to the Steve Miller Band along the way.

I pulled into a choice parking spot directly in front of the entrance to the restaurant, and at that moment, suddenly and unexpectedly, I became awash with anxiety. I put the car in park, took the keys out of the ignition, and opened the door.

“Hey, Lamar, do you want your cell phone?” my roommate Saaid asked. I’d left my phone in the car, in the cupholder between the driver and passenger seats.

In the years that followed that moment, I’ve learned about mystical experiences, astral projection, psychedelia, the collective unconscious, and glossolalia. I even earned a degree in Religious Studies. But there’s no substitution for sober intuition: It’s jarring, discombobulating, paranoiac.

“Yeah, I need my phone,” I said, and then I followed with a matter-of-fact statement I’ll always remember (pardon my French): “Something fucked up is happening to my family.”

Before I could even order dinner, my phone rang. It was my Aunt Jean.

“Where are you?” she asked. “Are you in public? Are you sitting down? Your mother needs to tell you something, but you need to be in the right place.”

“I’m leaving right now,” I told her. I grabbed the keys to my car and bolted out of the restaurant. I was wide-eyed and trembling. Until that moment, I’d never realized that the adjectives “shaken” and “heartache” referred to real physical reactions.

My roommate caught up with me in the parking lot. “You’re our ride,” he said. “Where are you going?”

“I’m sorry. I have to go. I think my father is dead.”

“Give me your keys,” he said. “I’ll drive you back.”

As it turns out, in retracing the timeline of events that night, my father died at the same time I pulled into the restaurant’s parking lot, the same time I suddenly felt a surge of anxiety. And no, it’s not as if it was imminent or expected. My father was only 41 years old.

Still, if there is any moral or magic to this story, it is this: That maybe, just maybe, it is possible for us to forge human connections that transcend our understanding of the physical world, that maybe we can be deeply connected to our loved ones, that maybe synchroncity is real and possible.

And maybe, if we’re all lucky enough, as Etta James sang, “life is like a song.”