Jindal’s Unconstitutional “Tim Tebow” Law Proves Louisiana Legislature Cares More About Football Than Education ⁵

In many parts of Texas, high school football isn’t simply a tradition; it’s a religion, a way of life, and a mega-million dollar industry. It’s been the subject of bestselling novels, movies, and at least one hit network television show, Friday Night Lights, based on the novel of the same name. Last year, a high school in Allen, Texas made international headlines after opening a $60 football stadium, a decision that perfectly epitomizes the enormous imbalances in public education funding and financing. When the stadium in Allen was under construction, Texas Governor Rick Perry, along with the state legislature, cut more than $5 billion from public education.

Although Louisiana may not be known for high school football extravagance, football is still a religion for many of us; our NFL team, after all, is the Saints. In fact, for the fourth year in a row, more professional football players (per capita) hail from Louisiana than from any other state. Louisiana high school football may not be as glamorous or as well-funded as our Texan neighbors, but we know how to cultivate talent. And although Louisiana high school football games aren’t played in mega-million dollar stadiums, they still generate significant revenue.

Last year, when Governor Bobby Jindal swept through his education “reform” initiative, which included the most expansive school voucher program in the country, I imagined, perhaps cynically, that financially struggling private schools would be likely to exploit the program and offer a disproportionate number of vouchers to star athletes attending academically struggling public schools.

Take, for example, Evangel Christian Academy in Shreveport, a football powerhouse. During the last twenty years, Evangel has won a dozen high school football championships, a fact made even more impressive when you consider its high school opened in 1990. But in those twenty-three years, Evangel, despite its prowess on the football field, has only graduated two National Merit Scholars. (There were two in my graduating class at a public high school in Alexandria, at least four the year before. In fact, my Louisiana public high school even had a National Merit Scholar in its very first year).

Now, to be fair, I have no way of knowing whether or not Evangel Christian Academy is using the voucher program as a way of recruiting athletes to play for its football team. And unfortunately, neither does Superintendent John White or anyone else in charge, because the State of Louisiana doesn’t actually oversee which students are approved or denied for vouchers; the school does. Currently, there is no way to demonstrate that a private school is exploiting the voucher program to disproportionately recruit star athletes (even when they claim a “lottery” selection process; a lottery, after all, can always be rigged). But we do know this (bold mine):

A mother named Trailais Tillman signed up her son, Aidan, to receive a voucher. Aiden was zoned to go to a public school that is failing. She was thrilled when the lottery resulted in her son receiving a school voucher for a private school called Evangel Christian Academy.

There was a big problem, though. Aiden has autism. Evangel Christian Academy told Trailais Tillman that the school does not have the services that he needs. This means that even through Aiden was selected to receive a school voucher he cannot accept it.

Again, I hate to sound cynical, but Aiden is better off at a public school that is legally obligated to provide him with individualized special education. Either way, his story perfectly demonstrates the problem with Jindal’s voucher program– trapping the most vulnerable students into struggling schools and then reallocating already-scant resources to unaccountable private schools.

Bobby Jindal’s program uses taxpayer dollars to actively discriminate against mentally and physically disabled children. Period.

And guess what? Bobby Jindal doesn’t deny it. The Louisiana Department of Education actually issued a response to the story about Aiden. They claimed their hands were tied because non-public schools weren’t required to adhere to federal laws that protect disabled students. If Governor Jindal wants to provide tens of millions of dollars every year to private schools, then he should be championing an analog of the IDEA Act for Louisiana, instead of cowardly ducking behind it.

His voucher program has very little to do about “saving education.” So-called “school choice” provides conservatives with the ability to do two things they’ve always wanted to do: Monetize public education and eliminate all of the annoying attendant liabilities and obligations– like adequately providing for the disabled or not discriminating against students on the basis of their religion.

This has nothing to do with helping those who are most affected by failing public schools. If the goal is to decimate and further marginalize a struggling inner-city neighborhood or rural community, then one of the best ways is to strip away the funding it needs to maintain and operate its most important civic institutions– its public neighborhood schools, to gut those institutions of all but the most vulnerable, effectively transforming our public schools into federally-mandated special education centers for the mentally and physically disabled and for children who struggle academically.

So, back to football, because, apparently, that is what our legislature really cares about:

During the next month, the legislature will consider three different bills that aim to force the Louisiana High School Athletic Association to reconsider its decision to create two different high school football championships, one for public schools and one that, essentially, is for private schools. Additionally, the State Senate will consider a bill that repeals a series of laws about the LHSAA that the Louisiana State Supreme Court recently declared unconstitutional.

The irony is: Unlike Governor Bobby Jindal or the majority of the Louisiana legislature, the Louisiana High School Athletic Association actually has standards. The LHSAA doesn’t like it when member schools attempt to cheat the system by stealing athletes from other schools. They understand that high school athletics, particularly high school football, can be a cash cow, and as a result, there may be an incentive for some schools to “game” the system.

A couple of months ago, the Jindal Administration’s and the Louisiana legislature’s attempts at coercing the LHSAA were dealt a death blow at the Louisiana State Supreme Court. You can read the case here. It’s a doozy.

But the facts are pretty simple: the Louisiana legislature, at Jindal’s behest, passed a bill that required the LHSAA to allow home school students the ability to participate in their sanctioned events. Basically, home school students would become “free agents” in the lucrative world of high school football. The law violated the LSHAA’s own bylaws, which provide a framework for qualifying schools and students.

Jindal, under the banner of “school choice,” attempted to force the LHSAA, by law, to change its practices, even though neither he nor the legislature attempted to interfere with the bylaws of other, privately-held Christian athletic associations. Moreover, the Jindal administration asked the courts to rule that the LHSAA was a “quasi-public” organization, a distinction that likely made no real difference. The LHSAA was organized as a private non-profit corporation. Labeling it “quasi-public” merely meant the legislative auditor could review its annual financial reports, something already done by the IRS or anyone with a subscription to GuideStar.com.

In their amicus brief to the Louisiana Supreme Court, the Jindal administration spends an inordinate amount of time talking about Tim Tebow. Quoting (bold mine):

Perhaps the most well-known beneficiary of Florida’s Craig Dickinson Act is Tim Tebow. The statute allowed Tebow, who was home-schooled, to play football at Allen D. Nease High School in Ponte Verde, Florida. Tebow’s exploits as a high school football player are the stuff of legend in Florida. It is also common knowledge that Tebow, as the quarterback of the University of Florida football team, won the Heisman Trophy in 2007 — the award given to the most outstanding college football player in the country. Tebow helped lead the University of Florida football team to two college football national championships — one in 2006 and another in 2008. At the end of his college football career, Tebow held the all-time Southeastern Conference records for passing efficiency and rushing touchdowns. As a result of his accomplishments on the football field, Tebow became perhaps the most recognizable ambassador for the University of Florida and currently is a prominent professional quarterback in the National Football League.

It is a bit sobering to realize that if a student athlete like Tebow were residing in Louisiana today, the LHSAA would be opposing legislation that would allow him, as a home-schooled student, to play high school football and perhaps pursue an athletic scholarship to a university like LSU. In other words, if the LHSAA were to prevail here and have Louisiana’s legislation declared unconstitutional, the LHSAA would thwart the development of home-schooled student athletes like Tebow in Louisiana.

No, this is not a joke, though the majority of the Louisiana State Supreme Court may have a different perspective: They were not impressed or convinced by Jindal’s pathetic “Tim Tebow” argument, and not only did they hold the LHSAA is, in fact, a private non-profit organization that is legally allowed to establish its own bylaws, they also struck down the entirety of Jindal’s “Tim Tebow” laws as unconstitutional.

If you want to understand why, exactly, the Louisiana legislature is considering a series of bills that would effectively ban public high schools from participating in LHSAA-sanctioned events, here’s your answer: The Jindal Administration, in its push for “school choice,” has been attempting to chip away at the authority of the LHSAA, an organization primarily comprised of actual educators, because the LHSAA believes its member schools and its participating students should all have to follow the same rules. (In the LHSAA’s brief, they list a series of legislative actions that were specifically undertaken to benefit individual football players).

And that’s what makes the LHSAA’s decision to create a dual high school football championship so genius and so unnerving to Jindal and his supporters. Many of these voucher schools were hoping to make money by recruiting top-notch public school athletes, but if they can’t compete against the teams with the most talent, their “championship” becomes less meaningful and more difficult to commoditize.

There’s less of an incentive to use public dollars for vouchers to build up an athletic program. And that’s exactly why this pending legislation is so important. At the end of this year’s session, Louisiana citizens will have a much better understanding of who cares more about high school football than ensuring a quality education.

Bobby Jindal Proposes Largest Tax Increase in Louisiana History, Highest Combined Sales Tax Rate in the US ¹

Less than a year ago, Governor Bobby Jindal vetoed a bill to permanently extend a existing 4-cent tax on a pack of cigarettes. At the time, Jindal explained (emphasis mine), “I have made a commitment to the taxpayers of Louisiana to oppose all attempts to raise taxes.” It was a blatantly disingenuous argument: The bill wasn’t about “raising” taxes any more than they already were; it was a mere formality: Renewing a tax on cigarettes that had already been on the books, and Jindal’s opposition had nothing to do with the merits of the policy itself and everything to do with ensuring his unblemished resume tax on increases. And the timing couldn’t been worse. Jindal, after all, was still angling for a spot on Romney’s Presidential ticket.

At the time, James Gill of The Times-Picayune noted (bold mine):

But smoking is not the issue here. Jindal must figure that taking a few licks now will be worth it if there is a reward down the road, perhaps when he is running for another office. Indeed, when urging his fellow Republicans to uphold his veto of the cigarette tax, he said the issue is “personal” because he made a promise not to raise taxes.

The idea that it is against Jindal’s principles to break a promise no doubt raised a smile on some of the faces present. But this promise is different, because Jindal is mad about ideological purity.

Jindal was so dead-set on not raising ANY taxes, even a perfunctory renewal tax on cigarettes, that he wouldn’t even consider renewing a paltry 4 cent tax on cigarettes, a tax that had already been on the books. He was, after all, a man of principle.

A year later, Bobby Jindal apparently believes that he had hypnotized the entire State of Louisiana into some type of quasi-amnesiac ignorance (And if his college essay about participating in an unsanctioned demonic exorcism maintained even an ounce of credibility, it may seem at least remotely possible, particularly among his most devout believers).

But if you carried any illusion about Governor Jindal’s consistent ideological position, you’re now having to confront an inconvenient truth:

Two days ago, Jindal announced plans to impose the single-largest combined sales tax rate in the country: Under Jindal’s plan, for every ten dollars you spend in anything and everything, you’ll need to spend an additional dollar with the government, Again, a year go, Jindal even refused to renew a tax on cigarettes; now he wants to collect $1.41 more for every pack sold.

Any why? Because Jindal wants some way– any way– to shuffle in big, out-of-state corporations and pillagers- no state income taxes, no corporation taxes, no taxes on risky speculation. Come first; we’ll sort out the details later. The break almost exclusively benefits the wealthy.

But don’t just take my word. From The New York Times: (I don’t do this often, but read the whole thing:)

These regional disparities go back to Reconstruction, when Southern Republicans increased property taxes on defeated white landowners and former slaveholders to pay for the first public services — education, hospitals, roads — ever provided to black citizens. After Reconstruction ended in 1877, conservative Democrats — popularly labeled “the Redeemers” — rolled taxes back to their prewar levels and inserted supermajority clauses into state constitutions to ensure it could never happen again. Property taxes were frozen; income taxes were held down; corporate taxes were almost nonexistent.

Practically the only tax that could rise was the one that hurt the poor the most: the sales tax. And rise it did, throughout the Deep South in the late 19th century, then spreading into the Carolinas, Georgia, Florida and the rest of the region in the 1960s and 1970s. Even liberal politicians weren’t able to buck the tide — just ask Bill Clinton, who as governor of Arkansas urgently sought new revenue to improve his state’s ailing schools and found the sales tax was the only politically viable option.

If this were just a history lesson, we could set it aside. It isn’t. In the last 30 years, these trends have only gotten worse. Southern states have steadily increased the tax burden on their poorest citizens by shifting the support of the public sector to sales taxes and fees for public services. After California voters passed Proposition 13, which capped property-tax increases, in 1978, Western states began to move in a similar direction. Sales taxes on clothing and school supplies and fees for bus fare and car registration take up, of course, a far bigger slice of a poor household’s budget than they do from the rich.

Over the same 30-year period, some Northeastern and Midwestern states moved in the opposite direction. They mimicked the federal government by passing their own earned-income tax credits (and making them refundable, as the federal government has done, so that very low-income earners get a check after filing their returns), preserved progressive state income-tax rates, and either exempted food and other basics from sales taxes or gave sales-tax rebates to low-income households. No Southern state provides refunds to its poor citizens through the tax code, no matter how little they earn.

There are many reasons to worry about the growing regional divide. But even leaving aside basic fairness — why should a poor child in the Northeast have greater life chances than one in the South? — the divergence exacerbates poverty itself, driving households deeper into distress and lowering social mobility.

For a book published in 2011, my colleague Rourke L. O’Brien and I analyzed the combined burden of sales tax, state and local income taxes on poor households in 49 states, based on consumer expenditures, from 1982 to 2008. (We omitted Alaska because it offers oil-revenue-related rebates to every household). We looked at the relationship between the total tax burden on a poor family of three and state-level figures for mortality, morbidity, teenage childbearing, dropping out of high school, property crime and violent crime.

The fact is, the more the poor are taxed, the worse off they are, whether they are working or not.

And they continue:

It turns out that after factoring out all other explanations — like racial composition, poverty rates, the amount spent on education or health care, the size of the state’s economy, existing inequality levels, and differences in the cost of living — the relationship between taxing the poor and negative outcomes like premature death persisted. For every $100 increase on taxes at the poverty line, we saw an additional 7 deaths and 78 property crimes per 100,000 people, and a quarter of a percentage point decrease in high school completion.

Southern states have far higher rates of strokes, heart disease and infant mortality than the rest of the country. Students drop out of high school in larger numbers. These outcomes are not just a consequence of a love of fried food or higher poverty levels. Holding all those conditions constant, the poor of the South — and increasingly the West — do worse because their states tax them more heavily. They have less money to buy medication, so their health problems get worse. High sales taxes make meals more expensive, so they shift to cheaper, unhealthy food. If people can’t make ends meet, they may turn to the underground economy or to crime.

This self-defeating pattern has plagued the citizens of the “meaner states,” the ones that tax poor people at a higher rate, for a long time. But it is about to get worse. Governors in fiscally strapped states are hoping to roll back state earned-income tax credits. Some — like Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Dave Heineman of Nebraska and Mary Fallin of Oklahoma — are aiming to cut or even eliminate state income and corporate taxes and raise sales taxes. North Carolina lawmakers are considering the same thing.

Proponents say these moves will make their states more economically competitive, bring back jobs, and attract high-income residents. But economists who have studied the impact of raising taxes on residential choices have found that tax rates don’t make much of a difference. Employers represent a different story: they are attracted to low-tax states, particularly if they don’t need high-skilled labor. Accordingly, low-wage job opportunities have grown in the Cotton Belt and the Sun Belt, and shrunk in the Rust Belt. There is something to be said for this, if the goal is to replace the nonworking poor with the working poor. But this is hardly a strategy for eradicating poverty itself.

The fact is, the more the poor are taxed, the worse off they are, whether they are working or not. We all pay a huge price for this shortsightedness. Medicaid payments, food stamps, disability benefits — all of these federal programs swoop in to try to patch up a frayed safety net. Consequently, the Southern states reap more dollars in federal benefits than they pay in taxes (like Mississippi, which saw a net gain of $240 billion between 1990 and 2009), while the wealthier states — which do more to take care of their own — lose out for every dollar they pay (like New Jersey, which handed over a net of $706 billion over that same period). As noble as the federal effort to rescue the poor in the “mean states” may be, it is not enough to reverse the impact of regressive taxation.

There is a better way: increasing taxes on luxury goods; exempting necessities like food, medicine and children’s clothing from sales taxes; and perhaps most important, issuing tax rebates and preserving refundable earned-income tax credits, which put more money in the hands of low-income households. Since poor families tend to spend all of what they take in, these protections would stimulate the economy and preserve, or even expand, the job base.

The states headed in the opposite direction are not only damaging the most vulnerable of their citizens, but exacting a significant toll on Americans in states with more progressive tax policies. We all pay for the damage done when states try to solve their fiscal problems, or score ideological points, on the backs of the poor.

Sound familiar? It should.

On a final note, I highly recommend Tyler Bridge’s commentary on The Lens. Louisiana is so lucky to have him back.

Louisiana Department of Education, Superintendent John White, and Governor Bobby Jindal Double Down on Creationist Voucher Schools ⁴

Superintendent John White Qualifies Six More Creationist Voucher Schools for 2012-2013 School Year, Bringing the Total to 26.

On Tuesday, March 19, the Louisiana State Supreme Court will finally consider whether Bobby Jindal’s school vouchers scheme violates the Louisiana State Constitution. Things aren’t shaping up too well for Team Jindal. Surprisingly (at least to me), District Court Judge Tim Kelley ruled that Jindal’s vouchers scheme was unconstitutional, because it relied entirely on funding through the State’s Minimum Foundation Program, which is specifically established to fund public schools in Louisiana.

Source: http://transparentpiyjay.com/

Despite the fact that Judge Kelly is a well-known conservative who is married to Jindal’s former Commissioner of Administration, Angelle Davis, and who recently received $1,000 in campaign contributions from Jimmy Faircloth, the attorney representing Jindal in the dispute, Kelley issued a remarkably straightforward ruling and thorough analysis of Jindal’s voucher program, carefully assuring some so-called “reformers” that the plan itself may hold up under constitutional scrutiny – at least, abstractly– but that its funding through the MFP was grossly and blatantly illegal and unconstitutional.

Thankfully, for those who care and believe in improving the public system, the facts and the law remain on our side.

Still, regardless, it is impossible to predict how the Court will rule.

But one thing is for sure:

John White is closing applications for school vouchers only four days before the Louisiana State Supreme Court determines their legality and constitutionality. Superintendent White, as he had the previous year, could have provided a more expansive deadline and application process. The wholly, entirely political decision to end applications four days prior to a Louisiana State Supreme Court hearing and subsequent ruling– let’s be honest– is nothing more than crass political theater, needlessly and cynically exploiting dozens of parents and children, a bald-faced effort to “pre-victimize” a class of applicants by hurriedly qualifying and “investing” them to participate in a program that likely violates the Louisiana State Constitution. The Department of Education’s decision, ostensibly acting under the orders of Superintendent John White, isn’t merely gamesmanship; it borders on negligence and coercion.

“But your honor,” they’re scripting themselves to say, “What can we do about the thousands of students?” The most honest answer, in the event that Supreme Court agrees with Judge Kelley is: Blame yourself, and blame John White and his allies.

*****

But here is the real story, a story that, in many ways, is more important than the Louisiana Supreme Court’s pending decision, considering we’re already hearing rumors about Superintendent White’s “contingency plans,” which would either seek to reformulate the MFP program OR would beg already cash-strapped local districts to pony up money for private school vouchers. Make no mistake: Even if he is defeated, Superintendent John White and Governor Jindal will work harder than they ever have in their entire lives to find money for schools. No, not public schools, of course. They need money to subsidize and float unaccountable, largely unaccredited private schools. Quoting from Judge Kelley’s ruling:

“While the Court does not dispute the serious nature of these proceedings nor the impact and potential effects on Louisiana’s educational systems, vital public dollars raised and allocated for public schools through the MFP cannot be lawfully diverted to nonpublic schools or entities,” Kelley wrote in his ruling.

Last summer, Zack Kopplin identified twenty voucher schools, some of whom were set to receive hundreds of t housands of taxpayer dollars every year, that advanced and promoted a series of offensive, racist, and, most commonly, anti-scientific propaganda; these schools were slated to receive millions in tax dollars to help them further indoctrinate children, a clear and unequivocal example of using government money for the sole purpose of establishing religion.

Zack had exposed this story nationally, identifying those 20 creationists voucher schools in Louisiana and then hundreds more across the country. In fairness to Superintendent John White and his spokesman Nicholas Bolt, both men promised a thorough investigation into the curriculum standards of voucher schools.

In December, in response to a question about creationist voucher schools, Bolt told Louisiana Public Broadcasting, “So there’s a couple of different plans of actions around this, this idea. First of all, every school will currently undergo a curriculum review as they do right now to be approved by the State Board. You know, our main concern now is how those students do on the science tests. So, yeah, they will all be tested… and if the curriculum, if the science curriculum is truly bad… then that will be reflected in the science test and in the review of the curriculum as well.”

This may sound all well and good, but it’s complete and total nonsense. Neither Superintendent White nor anyone in his Department actually thoroughly vet the schools they pre-qualify for taxpayer subsidization.By now, that should be abundantly clear: White approved sending hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to a school operated by a man who calls himself a “prophet” of God; he approved even more money to a school in Ruston that doesn’t even have adequate facilities, and millions of taxpayer dollars to teach students that scientists are sinful men, that the Lochness Monster is a living dinosaur that disproves evolution, that the KKK was, at one point, a forc e for moral good, that hippies were dirty Satanists, and the list goes on.

John White and his team at the Department of Education, in an effort to demonstrate how the public school system is failing Louisiana school children, are diverting millions in funding every year from public schools in order to enrich some of the worst schools in the United States– religious zealots posing as educators, fly-by-night operators who don’t even have the necessary infrastructure, and bigoted and religiously intolerant “church schools” that specialize in utilizing thoroughly debunked textbooks and materials to stifle dissent, schools that seek to enrich themselves with taxpayer dollars while reserving their right to expel any student on the basis of their perceived sexual orientation or religion.

And despite the international criticism Superintendent White and Governor Jindal have received, largely because of Zack’s exhaustive and insightful research about the ways in which the voucher program subsidized the teaching of creationism in science classrooms, and despite the weakly-worded public statements by people like Nicholas Bolt, not a single creationist voucher school has been removed from qualifying.

In fact, during the last year, Superintendent John White, Governor Bobby Jindal, and their hand-picked team at the Louisiana Department of Education have qualified at least SIX ADDITIONAL creationist voucher schools for the up-coming school year:

21. Hosanna Christian Academy, which teaches “(t)he soon-coming, personal return of the Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Thes. 4:16-18).”

22. Alfred Booker, Jr. Academy, which teaches math like this: “Creation was completed in six (6) days and commemorated on the seventh. Elisha was able to multiply the widow’s oil and Peter was encouraged to forgive ‘seventy times seven.’” And science like this: “By Design is a creation based curriculum showing the craftsmanship of God in the creation of earth. Created to link Science and Faith, By Design shows students how Science actually backs what the Bible says. When properly taught, Science reflects back to the infinite power of God and allows room for inquisitive minds to grow and develop without sacrificing principle.”

23. Riverdale Christian Academy, which uses the aBeka curriculum.

24. Family Community Church School, which has its own detailed laundry list.

25. Westminster Christian Academy, which believes in New Earth Creationism.

And last but not least:

26. Union Christian Academy, which uses the Bob Jones University curriculum.

Bill Moyers Highlights Louisiana’s Innovative Progressives: Zack Kopplin and the Lafayette Pro-Fiber Movement ¹

On Friday, legendary PBS host Bill Moyers will sit down with my friend and a young man who is increasingly becoming one of the leading education and science advocates in the nation, Zack Kopplin. In only two short years, Zack has catapulted his activism into international acclaim. Last week, Zack addressed more than 10,000 people at the Save Texas School rally in Austin:

And again, on Friday, he will be interviewed by the Great Bill Moyers on PBS (so set your TIVOs). Here’s a preview:

A couple of weeks ago, Moyers’s show also focused on the innovative and incredible work being done in Lafayette, Louisiana, featuring another one of my dear friends, Stephen Handwerk. It’s a great story, and you should watch it in its entirety.

Bobby Jindal’s Catastrophic Negligence: Coastal Restoration Funds Squandered ²

A few years ago, the good people who conduct the U.S. Geological survey realized that the most powerful and effective way to describe the destruction of the Louisiana coastline was to put it in a language that we all understand: Football. Right now, in Louisiana, we lose an entire football field every hour due to coastal erosion.

The destruction of the Louisiana coast and marshlands is, without question, the single largest existential threat to the state’s economy, culture, habitat, and environment. And it’s made all the more insidious because this destruction is gradual (to mix environmental metaphors, you could also say, it’s glacier). We don’t experience it in real-time; it cannot be documented as dramatically as melting icebergs plunging into to the frigid Arctic Ocean. In Louisiana, coastal erosion is tracked through the never-ending, seemingly peaceful, and somnambulant sounds of waves lapping up and then receding on small, uninhabitable marshlands, most of which are at least a hundred miles from any sign of human civilization.

Quoting from The Times-Picayune (back in 2011):

“If that loss were to occur at a constant rate, it would be equal to losing more land than the island of Manhattan every year,” Couvillion said.

Preliminary measurements for the years 2009 and 2010 indicate what could be the beginning of a positive trend: a loss of only 3 square miles of wetlands.

To be fair, we’ve been able to curb some of this destruction through targeted infrastructure investments, rebuilding and repairing far-flung marshes, and no doubt, the coast is continually imperiled by large-scale hurricanes and storms. Quoting again:

That rapid loss rate was likely from several causes, Turnipseed and Couvillion said. Subsidence in wetlands in the Barataria Basin quickly followed the rapid drawdown of oil and gas beneath them. But part of the loss was likely the result of what Couvillion refers to as “sediment deprivation.”

“We built levees and sediment is no longer allowed to get out there and sustain these marshes and help them keep up with sea level rise and the subsidence that may have been in part related to oil and gas extraction,” he said. The loss of sediment also is liked to the rapid development of dams for hydropower and other purposes on the Missouri and upper Mississippi rivers, which captured sand and dirt that would otherwise have traveled to Louisiana.

But the inconvenient truth, to borrow a term from Vice President Al Gore, is that coastal erosion in Louisiana is largely the result of man-made interventions: Levee systems that rerouted the depositing of critical sediment, the building blocks of our marshes, into other areas; the industrialization of our gulf waterways and channels in order to accommodate the oil and gas extraction industry; the construction of large electric dams further upstream.

Yesterday, we learned that during the last two years, Governor Jindal has raided nearly $45 million from the Rigs-to-Reefs fund, which, as its name implies, requires rig operators to contribute a certain portion of their income to create and develop infrastructure projects along the Louisiana coast that could offset some of this destruction. But instead of spending that $45 million on needed coastal restoration projects, Jindal pilfered from the fund in order to offset losses in the State’s General Fund. Thankfully, the Board of the Artificial Reef Fund is now speaking out and making it abundantly clear that, for them, Jindal’s use of their monies is unconstitutional. Quoting (bold mine):

One such program is the Artificial Reef Development Fund, also known as the Rigs to Reefs Program. Since 2010, Jindal has taken $45 million fromthe fund to cover budget overruns, and after sitting on their hands for a few years, the commission that oversees the program is considering fighting against the governor who appointed them in order to recover the money.

The Wildlife and Fisheries Commission held a closed-door session today in Baton Rouge to consider filing suit. The board, which is entirely comprised of Jindal appointees, did not take any action on the matter Thursday, but its leaders say they are convinced that the governor’s use of the money violates the state Constitution.

“It’s in the Conservation Fund and the Conservation Fund is protected by the Constitution,” said Ronny Graham, the board’s newly installed chairman. “The money that comes into the Rigs to Reefs Program or the donation to the Conservation Fund into that, it specifically says it should be used for that program.”

The fund was set up to collect donations from oil companies when their offshore rigs come to the end of their useful lives.

The companies agreed to give the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries the old rigs and half the money they would have spent to disassemble and remove them so the state can pay to move the structures and turn them into fisheries habitats.

Every act of donation explicitly says the money is “to be placed in the Artificial Reef Fund for the benefit of the Louisiana Artificial Reef Development Program.”

Jindal offered this pathetic response (again, bold mine):

“We’re confident that the law has allowed for unused, excess dollars to be used to protect higher education and health care,” said Kristy Nichols, Jindal’s commissioner of administration. “Any time we use statutory funds in this way, we ensure that the core mission of the fund is protected.”

And maybe, to some, that sounds legitimate: “Unused, excess dollars” paying for education and heath care,” says Team Jindal. But unfortunately, for Jindal, that is not even remotely true. From WWLTV (bold mine):

But, as conservative budget hawk Rep. Cameron Henry, R-Metairie, points out, the core mission of the fund is not education or health care in any way. In fact, the oil companies are promised that the donations will go only to building the reefs.

“The oil companies are paying into this for a specific purpose and our constituents believe we’re taking this money and using it the best to save the coast,” Henry said. “I mean, that’s what Louisiana needs to do, and we’re not going that route.”

And Henry also notes that the administration did not use the money exclusively for education and health care. In fact, news reports in 2010 said that more than $12 million of the $18 million taken from the fund that year financed legislative pork.

“They’ve used it for slush funds, for projects for members (of the Legislature),” Henry said.

Henry and another conservative legislator, Rep. Kirk Talbot, R-River Ridge, have already sued the state attorney general and treasurer for what they say are Constitutional violations in the use of hundreds of millions of dollars from one-time revenue funds, including the Artificial Reef Fund.

“The Handgun Permit Fund, the Litter Abatement Fund — all these permits we have that people pay into when you get your driver’s license or your conceal and carry permit, used for a specific purpose — and the administration goes in at the end of the year and sweeps those funds and uses it for their discretion,” Henry said.

According to Representative Henry and Representative Talbot, Governor Jindal is not reallocating surplus monies from the Artificial Reef Fund in order to pay for education and health care; he’s unconstitutionally pilfering from the Rigs to Reef program to provide slush funds for unrelated projects to members of the legislature.

Then again, why would Jindal care about reef restoration and construction when he, alone, possesses the most brilliant coastal restoration plan in Louisiana history: Forcing BP, in the immediate aftermath of the Deep Water Horizon fiasco to fork over $220M to construct sand berms, berms that would not only trap the oil washing on our shores, but berms that could also serve as a steady, long-term investment in rebuilding precious infrastructure in our most environmentally vulnerable places.

Except that: Jindal’s sand berm project was a failure of epic failure, a failure so open and obvious that it seemed like a foregone conclusion before the first shovel hit the ground. Quoting USA Today:

The presidential commission investigating the BP Gulf of Mexico spill has concluded that Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal wasted $220 million building controversial sand berms that captured a “minuscule amount” of oil and proved to be “underwhelmingly effective” and “overwhelmingly expensive.”

The 36 miles of berms, constructed over the objections of many scientists and federal agencies, trapped only about 1,000 barrels of oil out of the nearly 5 million barrels that spilled between April and July, the National Oil Spill Commission said in a draft report released today.

Jindal later responded:

This report is partisan revisionist history at taxpayer expense.

The Commission would do a true service to Americans by recommending federal bureaucracies that can be eliminated or expedited in times of major disasters – like Hurricane Katrina and the BP oil spill, instead of attacking the politics of Louisiana and Huey Long.

The report’s assertion that the berms did not pass the commission’s “cost benefit analysis” is insulting to the thousands of people whose way of life depends on the health of our working coast. What exactly is the cost of thousands of jobs and generations of fishermen and oyster harvesters who have made their living off of our coast for over 100 years? I would like the Administration to provide us with an estimate of the ‘cost’ that they did not deem worthy of every action possible to protect coastal families.

We are thrilled that this has become the state’s largest barrier island restoration project in history.

Here is Jindal’s photographic evidence that his initiative saved thousands of jobs and generations of fishermen and oyster harvesters:

Captioning The Top Six Best Lines From James Varney’s Editorial On Jindal ¹

From The Times-Picayune:

1.

”Foremost – not least in Jindal’s mind, most likely – is a charismatic, articulate spokesman.” James Varney

2.

“This process is more difficult for conservatives than liberals because the scribblers who craft “the narrative” are anti-conservative.(The Boston Globe’s online headline on the Jindal speech is an excellent example.).” James Varney

3.

“When an election hinges on fewer than a half-million votes in a handful of states, and the opposition has painted you there as a dog-hating, filthy rich, tax-dodging, cancer-stricken-wife killing felon, well, that’s a steep hill to climb.” James Varney

4.

“Yet in terms of what is being offered, Jindal already has a much more innovative track record than Obama. It is, and has been for some time, the Democrats who seek the preservation of a creaky system that can be kept on life support only with massive cash infusions.” James Varney

5.

“Yet in terms of what is being offered, Jindal already has a much more innovative track record than Obama.” James Varney

6.

(Federal projections)

“All of which underscores the great irony of the 2012 election: Should Obama’s vision be implemented, it will make real Romney’s most infamous comment about the “47 percent.” For now, that figure – which only includes non-payers of federal income tax – is in flux, and I’ve argued it’s false to say everyone in that club wants to be a member.

“But under Obama’s ‘fundamental transformation of America,’ that figure is sure to rise. With Obama rigidly sticking to bankrupt formulas, more and more people will become “takers.” His philosophy holds that the government is the best – and in an increasingly complex and competitive world, the only – arbiter of “fairness.” Obama would cement a system that runs until the expensive redistribution of everything creates a vast, gray mediocrity for all save the brilliant controllers.” – James Varney

An Extended, In-Depth Conversation With Zack Kopplin (Part One) ^Reply

For the first time ever, I’m posting an extended podcast interview with Zack Kopplin, my friend and, as I’ve said more than once, my “partner in crime” in exposing the sham of the Louisiana Science Education Act and Governor Bobby Jindal’s grand plans to de-fund public schools in order to prop up an untestable and unaccountable school voucher program.

I’ll have more analysis later, but for now, sink your teeth (and ears) into Part One. It’s worth it.

Download Part One Here

LSUS Professor Jeff Sadow’s Stunningly Dishonest Defense of Governor Jindal’s Tax Giveaway ⁷

Throughout the last several years, as anyone who follows Louisiana politics can tell you, whenever Governor Bobby Jindal’s policies are challenged, you can count on blogger and LSUS Associate Professor Jeff Sadow to rise to Jindal’s defense. Sadow has published hundreds of thinly-sourced and poorly-researched screeds on his website Between the Lines, screeds that are often reposted on other conservative-leaning websites and blogs, screeds that attempt to intellectually justify Jindal’s policies by referencing the work of none other than LSUS Professor Jeff Sadow. Suffice it to say, I’ve never been impressed with Sadow’s blog or the integrity of his self-referential “scholarship” (if that is even the right word).

He’s a radical conservative who frequently rants against the basic function and role of the government, lambasting the poor and those who rely on public services and programs and denouncing the legacy of populism in Louisiana. Yet, ironically, this is a man who has spent the bulk of his professional career living off of the public dole, a man who owes much of his own success as a political commentator to the platform provided to him by taxpayers (his blog would carry little import without his title). I’ve read his work for years, and I’ve always been amazed by this basic lack of self-understanding. One could also say “hypocrisy,” but for Sadow, the word doesn’t seem to fit neatly: He’s not a hypocrite. He is, if anything, remarkably consistent. And even though I doubt I have agreed with a single thing Sadow has posted in years, I’ve never really considered him to be a “hack;” to me, he comes across as a true believer.

I’ll give you an example:

Yesterday, predictably, Sadow published a post on his website, which has subsequently been reposted on various other websites titled alternately; The Hayride led with the headline, “Sadow: Jindal’s Tax Plan Might Actually Grow the Economy If He (presumably Jindal) Does It Right.” On Sadow’s own website, he titled the piece, “Jindal tax swap succeeds in fairness, wealth creation.” These seemingly small distinctions are noteworthy only because the former implies even the slightest recognition of contingencies: “might…grow if he does it right;” whereas the latter headline, the one Sadow used for his own site suggests that Jindal’s success is a foregone conclusion.

For those of you who may not be caught up to speed, last week, Governor Bobby Jindal announced his plans to eliminate state personal income taxes and corporate taxes (and as we’ve subsequently learned severance taxes as well), replacing those sources of income (all while maintaining the state’s budget balance) by increasing state sales taxes by 3% all across the State. As I mentioned in a previous post, a 3% increase in Louisiana state sales taxes would make Louisiana’s sales tax rate the highest in the country, with an average rate of 11.86%.

Critics of Jindal’s plan, myself included, immediately pointed out that a massive (essentially a 75%) increase in state sales taxes is definitively regressive; if taxes for corporations and for the wealthiest in Louisiana are effectively eliminated, the State would then attempt to reclaim that lost income though massively expanding the taxes that we pay for every day necessities. The standard Republican response is: Higher sales tax rates discourage people from consumption and that, by extension, encourages investments. It’s silliness, of course.

As Mike Hasten reported in The Town Talk (bold mine):

In another look, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy says the proposal is bad news for middle and lower income taxpayers but good news for the top 20 percent of Louisiana’s taxpayers.

ITEP said it doesn’t figure into its calculations any tax relief for low income residents, even though Jindal says relief will be part of the plan to ease some of the impact of the swap on lower income workers. ITEP said that since there are no details on how that could be accomplished, it couldn’t work it into its calculation model.

The Microsimulation Tax Model shows the lowest 20 percent of Louisiana wage earners, with salaries of $18,000 or less, would pay $395 a year more in taxes under Jindal’s plan.

The second 20 percent, making between $18,000 and $34,000, would pay $566 more and the middle 20 percent, with salaries from $34,000 to $53,000, would pay $534 more in sales taxes.

The fourth 20 percent, earning $53,000 to $93,000, would pay $255 more.

You get this? If you make less than $18,000 a year, under Jindal’s plan, you’ll have to pay more around $395 more a year in taxes. Even if you may as much as $93,000, you’d still be paying around $255 more. Here’s where it gets interesting (bold mine):

But the formula predicts gains for taxpayers in the top 20 percent.

For those earning $93,000 to $182,000, the next 15 percent, there’s a $930 a year reduction in taxes and, for the next 4 percent, earning between $182,000 and $452,000, there’s a savings of $4,052.

The top 1 percent of taxpayers, those with incomes of more than $452,000 (average $1.12 million), is projected to save $25,423 a year in taxes.

Let’s recap: Among the very poor in Louisiana, Jindal’s plan would increase their taxes by as much as 3%, but if you make between $93,000 to $452,000, you’re set to receive a tax break of between 1% and 2%. And if you’re in the top 1% of income producers in Louisiana, you would save an astonishing 5.6% in taxes.

Make no mistake: Under Jindal’s plan, the poor will pay more so that the rich can pay less, significantly less.

Republican apologists like to argue that by shifting the tax burden from “productivity” to “consumption,” they will somehow, magically, transform Louisiana into a state that can become more competitive in landing big manufacturing plants and larger-scale economic development initiatives. It’s utter hogwash. Some call it “trickle-down economics;” others, like former President George H. W. Bush once called it “voodoo economics.” But after experimenting with similar plans during the Presidency of George W. Bush, we should know what it really is: A disastrous economic philosophy that could only be cooked up by those who believe the government exists to make it easier for the wealthy to become wealthier, especially if it means imposing draconian, bank-breaking taxes on the poor. It’ll teach them to save more, to consume less.

Some, like Jindal and Sadow, argue disingenuously that this is about fairness: Poor people usually don’t even qualify to make enough money to pay state income taxes: Why should they enjoy the largesse of tax dollars accumulated by the wealthy? Of course, many of the working poor and lower middle class– those who don’t earn enough to pay state personal income taxes– are our teachers, firefighters, and policemen. They’re the people who run our non-profit charities, social services organizations, and our service industries. They’re actually the backbone of our small businesses and the driving forces behind our local economies.`

And of course, Jindal’s plan would never work if suddenly the poor and the lower middle class actually stopped spending less; for his plan to work, they must consume the same, except with higher taxes.

Which brings me back to Jeff Sadow’s most recent column. Sadow writes:

However, a tremendous amount of exceptions occur to collection of sales taxes. In fact, the 191 of these cost almost as much as the income tax exemptions. And, in one of the few specifics offered, Jindal’s otherwise general plan would keep the biggest exemptions of all intact, including exempting purchase of unprepared food, drugs, and utilities, which are more than half of all of them and lower total state sales tax take by $718 million or more than a quarter in the most recent year with available data.

Sadow implies that those who pay sales taxes are the beneficiaries of a huge number of exemptions and that exemptions for food, drugs, and utilities would likely still remain. In practical terms, this means absolutely nothing. It’s a red herring: The State does narrowly carve out sales tax exemptions for food, drugs, and utilities, and those exemptions do result in significantly less income. But the bulk of those sales tax exemptions don’t benefit individual consumers: They benefit businesses, farmers, manufacturers, and local governments. Jindal, Sadow seems to be implying, will keep the largest and most-needed exemptions for individuals, but it’s incredibly doubtful that he will offset those exemptions by repealing other exemptions that benefit small businesses. Sadow continues:

As constituted currently, if you are a single individual who makes minimum wage, who spends the bulk of that on unprepared (nonalcoholic drinks included only) food, utilities, and (prescription) drugs, and own a home worth $75,000, in net terms you will pay no state income taxes and in fact many in this situation will get a cash grant because of the EITC. For these people, the Jindal plan means they continue to pay net nothing.

This is a patronizing lie: Sadow’s defense hinges on the notion that people who make the minimum wage should only spend money on unprepared food, utilities, and prescription drugs. So, if you don’t need to buy furniture or a computer or a television or a cell phone, your taxes will increase. But according to Sadow, that’s your fault, not Jindal’s:

Government largesse in this instance, and is almost entirely maintained in Jindal’s planned changes, should extend only to basic needs: if you want luxuries like televisions or bigger, newer ones; or cellphones or more minutes for them; or to eat out or eat out more often and more of it, and the like, there’s no reason the state shouldn’t increase your penalty for engaging in this kind of consumptive behavior instead of you using those resources to put yourself in a position for a higher-earning job – or in even getting a job in the first place – while you are being encouraged to do so further by eliminating the penalty you suffer by having income or more of it.

You got that? This is not about raising your taxes; it’s about penalizing (not taxing, mind you) poor people for spending money on “luxuries” like “televisions” and “cellphones” and going out to eat at restaurants, because the poor should be taught a lesson on “getting a job in the first place.”

Sadow almost seems giddy when describing why he thinks the rich should control the political discourse and why the poor should be marginalized. Yes, there is also a social utility in this Machiavellian scheme (bold mine):

In the larger scheme of things, these kinds of exceptions Jindal seems intent on proposing work against his larger theory that simplification brings growth. The most efficient system spreads the tax burden as much and as flatly as possible, which these exceptions subvert. Further, because they reinforce the perverse nature of transfer payments – those who contribute the least to the system gain the most from it – they do the opposite of strengthening the connection that these users feel to the larger, organic society: when people contribute more of their own resources for use in public policy making, they likely are to invest more time and energy into critically appraising the use of those and everybody else’s resources, discouraging through their lobbying of policy-makers the use of those resources to fulfill low priorities, to privilege special interests, and to subsidize inefficient, if not wasteful, individual behavior.

I suspect I’m not the only one offended by Sadow’s borderline bigotry, his classist, arrogant, and paternalistic diatribe against the values of the working poor and the lower and working middle class. But here’s what you need to know, from the Louisiana Department of Revenue’s most recent annual report:

Louisiana already gives away 88.1% of its potential corporate income revenue in exemptions, $1.45B last year. We gave $1.13B away in exemptions for personal income, and $432M in severance tax exemptions. And yes, we gave away $1.3B in sales tax exemptions. That number is likely to not change. We’ll still be giving away the same amount in sales tax exemptions, but Jindal’s plan calls for eliminating nearly $200M a year in corporate income, $2.6B a year in individual income, and $764M in severance tax income. And guess where that money will be made up? By increasing taxes (Sadow may now want to call them penalties) on everyone else.

Here’s the projected losses over the next two years, and hopefully, someone with more skills at Excel than I possess will plug in numbers Jindal is proposing and show the rest of the State what it really looks like.

An Interview with Louisiana Disability Rights Advocate Ashley Volion ^Reply

I am thrilled to learn that this Sunday morning MNSBC, in a segment on “Melissa Harris-Perry,” will share Ashley Volion’s inspirational story with the rest of the nation. Ashley, for those of you who don’t know, is a 28-year-old academic professional and adjunct professor with the Texas A&M system. After earning her undergraduate and master degrees, Ashley remained in academia, researching and writing, among other things, an insightful study and thesis on sexuality.

Ashley has a physically debilitating form of cerebral palsy. She lacks the physical strength to pull herself over, but trust me: During the last few weeks, through the sheer force of her own will, Ashley has been pulling herself up- speaking truth to power, mobilizing thousands from all over the country to join in her support and in the support of disabled students just like her. As I’ve said before, it is a story that needs to be told.

We’ll try to get an audio interview soon, but until then, this’ll do:

Lamar: Ashley, first, I want to commend you for your willingness to share your story. As you know, like you, I have also lived with cerebral palsy for my entire life, and your story resonates with me personally and profoundly. When did your family realize that you were disabled? How does your disability affect your daily life?

Ashley: I was diagnosed with Cerebral Palsy when I was a year old after my parents took me to numerous doctors because I was not holding my head up or crawling at that age. Honestly, I could not imagine life without CP. It has given me my strength and a sense of community. It has also presented me with my greatest challenges.

My disability affects every part of my daily life. I need help with all my daily basic needs such as, toileting, cooking, cleaning, transferring in and out of my chair, bathing, and transportation. With all that said, I depend on my attendants to function in and make my everyday life possible. I am employed as an online Sociology instructor at Texas A&M Central, I am an advocate, and maintain an active social life. Every aspect of my life is affected and/or is inspired by my disability.

Lamar: You are now a 28-year-old college professor who aspires to earn a Ph.D. in Disability Studies. Some people may wonder why you need government assistance to help pay for your personal care attendants. Given your education and your accomplishments, they may assume that you should be able to provide for your own care. How do you respond?

Ashley: would say look at my paycheck and do the math. I make just over $500 a month from Texas A&M Central along with SSI and SSDI. However, I require 24 hour care. At $8 an hour, in order to pay my attendants I would need to make $5,760 a month. This does not include any other expenses.

Lamar: You’ve spoken before about the ways in which government assistance programs for the disabled trap people into cycles of dependency. I certainly understand this personally, but for those who may be skeptical, can you explain what you mean?

Ashley: I will give you an example. In order to pay for my attendant care, I would have to come up with $70,080. You can check the math if you would like. My attendants get $8 an hour X 24 hours a day X 365 days a year. This would mean that I would have to make close, if not, $90,000 a year to support myself.

With that said, to qualify for the NOW Wavier, one cannot make over $2,000 in accumulated resources per month. If I need to make $5,760 in order to pay for attendants alone, how will I even begin to survive? So, yes I feel as if, as disabled people, we have to pick between a real income and our health and safety. So, my question is why can’t we have a system where people with disabilities can pay a certain percentage of their care according to how much one earns?

Lamar: To your knowledge, are there any laws in Louisiana that prohibit funding personal care attendants for Louisiana residents who want to earn a college degree at an out-of-state university?

Ashley: No.

Lamar: So, it seems a little ironic: These programs aren’t about providing disabled Louisianans with the ability to become independent; they seem to be designed to ensure that people remain wards of the state. You’re not allowed to get a quality education; you’re prohibited from making more than $20,000 a year; you can’t even save more than $2,000. If you dare to become self-sufficient, then you risk losing all of the care and services upon which you rely to function independently. I’ve heard and read a lot about people in this country who allegedly voted for certain politicians simply because they love getting “free stuff” from the government. Some people may read your story and think that you’re motivated by the same desire– that it’s about “free stuff.” How do you respond?

Ashley: Lamar, I just cannot believe that people would even begin to say thing like that. However, I have heard the same sort of comments directed to others throughout this presidential election and it’s just sad. I do not want “free stuff.” I want to be a contributing member of the economy. However, I should have the right to health and safety. Everyone should have the right to life.

Lamar: Ashley, you already have made Louisiana proud. And despite the fact that Governor Jindal’s administration, his attorneys, and his administrative law judge have spent thousands in taxpayer dollars and countless hours to reject your request to allow you to attend graduate school, you have remained a steadfast advocate for the people of Louisiana. You may not say this, but I will: Governor Jindal’s administration is shameful. They should be proud of you; they should celebrate you as an example of tenacious success. Instead, they seek to marginalize your life’s work, and in so doing, they are not only preventing you from becoming more successful and self-sufficient; they are also ensuring that the next generation of kids like us are also deprived. What sustains your belief in Louisiana?

Ashley: The people. I remember going to Children’s Hospital as a kid and seeing people like me. My family taught me that I could do and be anything I want to be. I want that for everyone. I want children with disabilities to know that they can be anything they want to be despite their diversity. Look at Tammy Duckworth in Illinois. So in short, people with disabilities, family, and friends give me my faith in Louisiana.

September 6, 2012

Democratic National Convention Exceeding Expectations ^Reply

by Lamar White, Jr • Disability Rights, Downtown Alexandria, Education, Health Care, Humor, Local Political News, Media Studies, National News, Self-referential drivel, Social Activism, Today's News

For those you have you that weren’t able to truly break through the wall-to-wall pundits and hear the unfiltered truth, here you go:

*******

********

August 7, 2012

SHOCKING: Bobby Jindal’s Vouchers Will Provide Over $700,000 Per Year To School Led by “Prophet, Apostle.” ⁵⁰

by Lamar White, Jr • Education, National News, Social Activism, Today's News • Tags: Bobby Jindal, Governor Bobby Jindal, Leonard Lucas, Light City Academy

Meet Leonard Lucas, a former, one-term Louisiana State Representative and erstwhile candidate for New Orleans City Council. When Mr. Lucas sent out a press advisory announcing his candidacy for City Council, here’s how The Times-Picayune reported the news:

Lucas, the founding pastor of Light City Church and a one-term state representative, sent out a statement riddled with grammatical errors saying he will formally announce his candidacy today at 1 p.m. at the shuttered Schwegmann’s Shopping Center on Bullard Road.

And when Leonard Lucas isn’t butchering the English language, he’s busy trying to convince people that he’s an “apostle” and a “prophet.“

Mr. Lucas is also the proud owner and registered agent of at least three dozen different companies, the overwhelming majority of which are non-profits (or, to borrow a term from my friend Dambala, “con-profits”) listed as “Not in Good Standing” by the Louisiana Secretary of State.

Dambala excavated the bones a few months ago. Suffice it to say, Leonard Lucas is a shady, almost comically ridiculous figure. He’s named as a registered agent for numerous non-profits, yet none of those companies disclosed their 990 returns.

And all of this apparently qualifies Mr. Lucas for nearly $700,000 a year in public voucher funding for his school. Mr. Lucas’s school requested a total of 163 voucher spots at $4,555 per student. To be clear, the Jindal Administration, in the first year, has already preliminarily granted eighty spots, at a cost of $364,000. Quoting from his church’s “School of Prophets” website, which, as a reader pointed out to me, should not be confused with his Light City Academy webpage (even though both are hosted on the same domain and both appear to be organized under the same 501c3, Light City Church):

The Light City Church School of the Prophets is a training institute for those who sense the flow and pull of the prophetic upon their lives. The mandate of the school of the Prophets just as it was in the Old Testament days is to train men and women effectively in the prophetic. It is a time of proper training, mentoring, and developing of the spirit in the prophetic realm. It is a time that you are taught how to hear from God, how to speak the mind of God, and how to nurture the gift of prophecy.Those individuals that accept the challenge to attend must have an understanding that they are yielding themselves to the tutelage of Apostle Leonard Lucas Jr., who walks in the fullness of his calling and wears the mantle of an Apostle and Prophet. If you believe this is the calling upon your life, we invite you to join us for dynamic teaching and thought provoking sessions. Classes are held every Friday at 7:00pm at Light City Church, located at 6117 St. Claude Ave. Please call 504-301-4593 for more information.

And quoting from the school’s webpage (which, again, is built into the church’s website) (bold mine):

Light City Christian Academy is a small school located in inner-city New Orleans. Students may begin as early as age five in kindergarten and continue their studies until the completion of High School. We have a·90% success rate of our graduates continuing higher studies in Universities across the state. We are a state approved private school.

The Academy is the realization of the vision of Leonard and Varnise Lucas. At the inception of the Academy, their goal was and continues to be, “to educate children according to the highest academic standards possible, as well as, prepare them to become responsible, courageous leaders.”Our motto is, “Raising A Generation of Leaders.”

Apparently, upcoming events at Light City Christian Academy include catechism classes and “School of the Prophets” training. Education.com describes Light City Christian Academy as follows (bold mine):

Light City Christian Academy is located in New Orleans, LA. It is a private school that serves 53 students in grades K-12. Light City Christian Academy is coed (school has male and female students) and is Christian (no specific denomination) in orientation.

Governor Jindal and Superintendent White have, effectively, provided Light City Christian with the taxpayer funding necessary to nearly triple its enrollment, and that’s just in Year One. If all goes according to plan, Light City Christian Academy will expand its enrollment much more dramatically, from only fifty-three students to well over 200, an expansion that will be paid for and brought to you, almost entirely, by taxpayer funding.

Let’s also put this into context: Fifty-three students in grades K-12 means an average of four students per grade, which should raise questions about the legitimacy and veracity of Light City Christian Academy’s claim of a “90% success rate of graduates continuing higher studies in Universities across the state.” What does this actually mean? 90% of its dozen or so graduates have taken at least one college course in Louisiana?

I don’t know Mr. Lucas personally, but I know this: He is not an Apostle. He is not a Prophet. And he does not deserve or merit taxpayer dollars. If anything, he deserves a thorough audit.

But in Bobby Jindal’s Louisiana, with the full support of Superintendent John White, Apostle/Prophet Lucas is the future of education.

Lord help us.

June 22, 2012

“Twelve Years A Slave” Being Adapted Into Major Motion Picture With All-Star Cast ⁴

by Lamar White, Jr • Media Studies, Self-referential drivel, Today's News

Only a few months before she passed away, I passed along a “top secret” message to my Great Aunt Sue Eakin. Aunt Sue was, arguably, Central Louisiana’s most accomplished historian. She and her sister Manie wrote the textbook that, for decades, was used in seventh and eighth grade Louisiana history classes, so chances are, if you attended junior high in Louisiana, you’ve read her work. But without question, her greatest professional accomplishment was editing Solomon Northup’s Twelve Years a Slave, reintroducing the seminal slave narrative to the American public, 115 years after it was originally published. Northup’s story, in many ways, was personal to Aunt Sue.

She, my grandmother Joanne, and their family were all born and raised in a small plantation on the banks of Bayou Boeuf, the setting for much of Northup’s book. As a professor at Louisiana State University at Alexandria (LSUA), Sue worked, as an academic, on the very same land that Northup had once lived as a slave. And as a lifelong resident of this small pocket of Louisiana and a dedicated historian, Aunt Sue embraced her role as its curator.

Three years ago, while working in the Mayor’s office in Alexandria, I learned that at least a couple of Hollywood producers were seriously considering adapting Twelve Years a Slave into a big budget motion picture. I even exchanged a few e-mails with one group. I didn’t want to get my hopes up; during the last few years, due, largely, to Louisiana’s aggressive incentives for movie productions, I’d heard all sorts of rumors about the Next Big Movie, most of which haven’t yet materialized. But this was different. The people who were expressing interest in Twelve Years a Slave weren’t scouting for locations or incentives; they were researching the source material. They wanted to speak with my Aunt Sue and her family. I called my grandmother. “This may not be for real,” I said, “but you should call your sister Sue and tell her that these Hollywood people want to talk to her about turning Twelve Years a Slave into a movie.” I knew that Sue, then ninety years old, was in poor health, that she wouldn’t be able to sit down for an interview. But I also knew how important it would be for her to know, in the twilight of her life, the story that had defined her professional career endured; that forty years after her edited version of Northup’s story was published, the story was still captivating people and that, maybe, just maybe, it was about to be told on the silver screen– to an audience not just of academics and historians but to the entire world. My grandmother called up her sister and told her the promising news. “She’s thrilled,” my grandmother reported back.

Aunt Sue passed away a few months later. Until a month ago, I hadn’t heard any news on the film’s development for over two years. And I suppose, cynically, I thought it had been shelved.

Boy was I wrong. I don’t know if the same folks with whom I had spoken are still involved in the project, but the news about this film is even bigger and grander than I had ever imagined.

Twelve Years a Slave is set to begin production this month. Directed by Steve McQueen and produced and starring Brad Pitt, the film already promises to be a blockbuster. Only three weeks ago, actors Paul Giamatti and Sarah Paulson joined the ensemble cast:

Helmer Steve McQueen continues to fill out the ensemble of his drama “Twelve Years a Slave,” as Paul Giamatti and Sarah Paulson have joined the cast of the New Regency pic based on Solomon Northrup’s 1853 nonfiction tome.

Duo joins Chiwetel Ejiofor, Michael Fassbender, Brad Pitt, Benedict Cumberbatch, Scoot McNairy, Ruth Negga and Garret Dillahunt.

Ejiofor stars as the book’s author, a free man kidnapped and sold into slavery. Paulson will play Fassbender’s jealous wife, while Giamatti will play Freeman, who takes possession of the slaves upon their arrival in New Orleans.

I don’t know if this film will be shot in Central Louisiana, but regardless, it tells one of the most significant stories in Central Louisiana history. This is big news for our region.

Kudos to the Eakin and the Lyles families, and three cheers for Aunt Sue, who spent her life telling and retelling a story she fiercely believed needed to be told.

January 25, 2012

Alexandria City Attorney Chuck Johnson: Martin Luther King, Jr. And The Mirror That Will Not Shatter ¹

by Lamar White, Jr • Downtown Alexandria, Local Political News, National News, Social Activism, Today's News • Tags: Chuck Johnson Alexandria, Chuck Johnson Alexandria Louisiana, Chuck Johnson city attorney, Chuck Johnson Louisiana

Published with permission.

By: Charles “Chuck” Johnson, City Attorney of Alexandria, Louisiana

How many of you have ever taken the time to consider why the Lord gave you breath?

For what purpose did He smile upon you? Where exactly does your piece fit into the puzzle of life?

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a man who had a very unique understanding of his place in the world. He knew why God brought him here. The answer for Dr. King was simple but also profound: God enlisted him to be a living, breathing, walking, and talking messenger of His Divine Will, an earthen vessel tasked with forcing America to glance into a mirror; a mirror which would reflect an unsightly image of institutionalized bigotry and hatred inconsistent with the lofty ideals recited in the Constitution.

That Divine Will- the Will of the Father- is not always consistent with the will of men. Freedom, justice, and equality were Dr. King’s expressions of the Will of God- which America failed to embrace in any real sense before Dr. King lifted the mirror. Slavery, segregation, lynchings, war, holocausts, or any other form of oppression the mind can conjure are all expressions of the will of men.

The message of non-violent resistance which Dr. King communicated by hoisting that mirror was that you can spit on me.

Beat me.

Spray me with fire-hoses.

Unleash your dogs.

Imprison me.

Even fire the bullet which will take my life, but your likeness must nonetheless change.

I need not lift my hand in spite, curse, or fire a single shot at you, “America,” to make you examine yourself and see the face of injustice.

It’s truly a beautiful thing.

One man used the moral force of his words to shake the conscience of a nation; all the while, he knew what fate awaited him.

The bullet which struck Dr. King’s body did not shatter the mirror. Instead, it galvanized the spirits of those who walk in the steps of the righteous. It gave hope to those who only knew hopelessness. It made hard hearts soften. It instilled in the minds of those with power that force and violence cannot silence the conscience. It broke the rusty chains and shackles from the souls of folks without the strength to contest the authority of the state. And it solved the puzzle America has grappled with since the birth of this nation.

Charles “Chuck” Johnson is the City Attorney for the City of Alexandria and a graduate of Southern University Law School in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

September 27, 2011

Larvadain ¹

by Lamar White, Jr • Downtown Alexandria, Humor, Social Activism, Today's News

Alexandria City Councilman Edward Larvadain III is paid thousands and thousands of taxpayer dollars every year to attend two meetings a month.

Frequently, the man doesn’t adequately prepare for those meetings. He doesn’t read the reports he requests until the day of the meeting. As we now know, he also doesn’t seem to understand the nature and purpose of a financial audit, and he’s willing to publicly disparage a private citizen’s professionalism and expertise without any cause whatsoever. He’s never met with the administration on any issue; he only appears capable of using the media to lodge inconsistent and easily refutable accusations. And shame on the Alexandria media, particularly The Town Talk, for not insisting a more cogent and rational explanation from a Councilman.

Today, Larvadain is claiming that he has no idea how the City of Alexandria could possibly provide its new police chief with a salary in line with his skills.

Until he proves otherwise, I will now operate under the assumption that Edward Larvadain III is a racist who views and determines public fiscal policy, almost exclusively, under a race-based lens. I have no other reason to assume differently. I know, first-hand, the questions that Councilman Larvadain asks before any contract is entered into; he’s race-based. He’s backwards. He lives in the past. And in engaging in such explicitly, stupidly, and obviously race-based behavior, Edward Larvadain III not only hurts and jeopardizes our City; he hurts and jeopardizes the credibility of African-Americans in Alexandria. He gives credence to the notion that African-American businesspeople and entrepreneurs should be evaluated differently. That’s not only racist; it’s insidious, and not surprisingly, it gives credence to former KKK members.

I have said before– and it is worth repeating: Edward Larvadain III is the worst and most divisive person ever elected in Alexandria’s modern history. I’ll stand by that claim. He frequently exhibits discrimination during City Council meetings. He treats Robert’s Rules of Order like a punching bag, not as a guideline. He can easily locate money for his own pet causes, but paying the new police chief, a man who earned a law degree and who has served his community for well over a decade, that’s too much to ask.

Regretfully, unless or until proven otherwise, I must conclude that his dissension has nothing to do with qualifications and everything to do with race. It sucks. It’s awful. Maybe it’s taboo for white people to complain that African-American elected officials are engaging in race-based determinations. I don’t care, really. I know what I’ve heard this man, Councilman Larvadain, say. I know what he said, pejoratively, to a Jewish member of the Alexandria City Council. And I know the ways in which the institution of government has, so far, protected him against his own blatant bigotry; other people– people who have rightfully been offended– have been willing to save him from himself, the meetings that have never been on television. At some point, someone needs to say something, beyond the hackneyed talking points about the Mayor. In my estimation, it’s entirely appropriate to suggest that, for Mr. Larvadain, race seems to matter more than equality or the fair and equitable distribution of justice.

The man says he doesn’t know how he could possibly find an extra $15,000 to pay the most qualified police chief in Alexandria history, yet, somehow, he also is determined to fight to find money to pay people opposed to the City.

Councilman Larvadain, I can immediately solve the budgetary crisis: All you have to do is assign your salary to the new Police Chief.

July 18, 2011

New Yorker Kevin Kane Lectures Louisianans About Our Cultural Economy ¹

by Lamar White, Jr • Local Political News, Media Studies, Smart Growth, Social Activism, Today's News • Tags: Kevin Kane, Pelican Institute

Bienvenue, Kevin Kane, the New York transplant who heads up the Pelican Institute, Louisiana’s first astroturf “think tank.” A few days ago, The Lens allowed (regrettably) Kevin the opportunity to publish a guest editorial about the merits of cutting funding for arts and culture in Louisiana. And perhaps unwittingly, Kevin decided to clearly and definitively demonstrate his complete and total ignorance of Louisiana culture and the tools necessary to sustain and support its vibrancy. Quoting:

There are many reasons why Louisiana has “generations-old traditions like jazz, second lines, Mardi Gras Indians, zydeco and parade floats.” Our state’s unique history, geography and demographic diversity have all had a hand. If there is evidence that government support has been integral to any of these great traditions, Martin does not offer it.

If government funding were so vital to the existence of a rich local culture, wouldn’t other states have figured this out by now? According to this logic, Minnesota and Kansas need only spend a few more millions of dollars on the arts and they would become destinations for the educated young newcomers now heading to New Orleans.

Of course this is absurd. Just as New Orleans has its own culture, Minneapolis and Wichita have theirs. Each of these cultures has developed over many years and each appeals to some people but not others. State spending on the arts has never been a key factor in this process.

So, first of all, Kevin, you know what is most absurd? Comparing New Orleans and Louisiana to Minneapolis and Wichita. Secondly, you’re not from Louisiana. Not your state. I understand you went to Tulane for a time, but that does not make you an expert, by any stretch of the imagination, in our state’s culture and the exponential return on investment we make from our cultural economy.

Mardi Gras? I hate to break it to you, but it’s publicly-subsidized. And believe it or not, Kevin, it usually generates an enormous return for taxpayers. Somehow, I don’t believe the same model would work in Minneapolis or Wichita.

Mr. Kane then suggests that Louisianans need only to look at Preservation Hall and the resurgence of Frenchmen Street as examples of how the private-sector completely and entirely supports the arts (within a mile of each other in a single city), without ever acknowledging or taking into account the millions of public, taxpayer dollars (whether through tax credits or other support) that have been utilized. It’s not just disingenuous; it’s transparently dishonest.

Kevin, have you ever been to Minneapolis? Seriously. It’s a great place, actually. I spent several summers in the Twin Cities as a kid. They don’t support the arts and culture? I’d bet that be news to them, considering they have some of the best museums in the country. If they only spent a few more million dollars, they could do their own Mardi Gras! So could Wichita! Fools!

Look, I know you’re not from here, so let me clue you in: Louisianans believe in investing in our cultural economy because we know it pays back dividends; we recognize the opportunity to monetize our cultural capital. And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.

But you know what sucks? When a New Yorker brands himself as a native “pelican” and then, in so doing, pretends to be a curator of Louisiana culture, as if you honestly know anything about the history of jazz in Louisiana or the real reasons for the renaissance of Frenchmen Street.

Geaux home, Kevin Kane, or better yet, convince Wichita to give you a few million bucks and try- I dare you- to even compete against Louisiana. And while you’re at it, please take your former collaborator James O’Keefe along with you.

CenLamar

Category Archives: Today’s News

Captioning The Top Six Best Lines From James Varney’s Editorial On Jindal ¹

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

“Twelve Years A Slave” Being Adapted Into Major Motion Picture With All-Star Cast ⁴

May 2013
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Apr
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Superintendent John White Qualifies Six More Creationist Voucher Schools for 2012-2013 School Year, Bringing the Total to 26.

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this:

Spread the word

Like this: