Tag Archives: Don Cazayoux

Summer Interview Series (Part Six): Andrew Tuozzolo Reply

by • Education, Interviews, Social Activism • Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Andrew Tuozzolo is the Chief of Staff to Senator Karen Carter Peterson (D-New Orleans). He received a Bachelors of Arts in Economics and History from Boston College and a law degree from Tulane University Law School. Currently, Andrew lives in the Aububon Riverside Neighborhood of New Orleans. You can follow him or contact him on Twitter @atuozzolo.

Lamar: I follow you on Twitter, and I’d bet we probably agree on the vast majority of issues. You and I are both white, politically-active Democrats from Louisiana in their late 20s. So, let’s start this interview on the deep end. Personally, I believe that there are some lingering, residual, and institutional divisions between white Louisiana Democrats and African-American Louisiana Democrats and that those divisions are too often exploited to the party’s own detriment. But during the last six years, as I’ve met young Louisiana progressives across this state, both black and white, I’ve come to believe that these divisions may be waning, that there’s a generational shift in the ways in which people interpret the “institution” of race and racial identity. To me, it’s encouraging. Most recently, Louisiana elected the first Indian-American Governor, a Republican, in the nation’s history, yet there seems to be a perception at least that it would be nearly impossible for an African-American Democrat to be elected to almost any statewide office. What are the root causes of this perception? After all, Louisiana is over 30% African-American. Do you have hope in our generation’s capacity to eliminate race from the political equation?

Andrew: I’ll confront the questions in reverse order, if you don’t mind. I think the inevitable answer to “whether we will eliminate race from the political equation” is absolutely not. That said, I suggest that the prism through which we view racial politics will shift dramatically in the next 20 years. I think several factors are at play here. 

The first, I think, is the generational thought separation of the children of the post-civil rights era folks. I largely agree that among younger people, the question of whether someone is black, or white, or part of a distinct community and committed to tribe-mentality (zero-sum: if they get it, we don’t and vice-versa), is going to fade in importance. It already has, and I think young people of all races often reflexively reject the typical racial politics of their parents. This does not suggest that the race question, which is of extreme import in today’s politics in Louisiana (in fact, it is often the threshold question) will not continue to linger. Louisiana is, due to its history, circumstance, and economy, behind many other parts of the county, including the New South, on issues of race relations. So I think this gets better, and Louisiana has hopes of massive improvement along these lines because we’re so far behind. 

The second factor that will shape the race question in the future will be demographics. The very phrase, “the race question,” today inherently commits one into conversation about a binary choice, i.e. what do blacks want, what do whites want. However, demographics in Louisiana are shifting. Perhaps not on the same scale as Texas or Florida, but at some point, there will be several State Lege seats that are Latino-majority (in fact, there is nearly an available one now in Jefferson Parish that was not drawn). 

Then the question is: to what degree does that upset the current paradigm? When combined with decaying reliance on traditional racial divisions, what emerges? All over the country, there will be a new brand of politics coming from a different point of view that has the potential to upset the standard partisan lines unlike anything we’ve experienced. I won’t engage in prognostication, only to say I see tomorrow’s racial politics as very dissimilar to today’s environment, and influenced by very different things.

So I believe the divisions are waning, or at least there is a recognition that a certain stalemate has been achieved in the struggle between ideologies that are often embodied by race. We’re living through the final vestiges 20th century racial politics in Louisiana, and although due to traditions and discrimination, it will never disappear entirely, the circumstances that maintain the lines of demarcation will be fading away, at least in my opinion. 

But what about electing African-Americans statewide? I think it’s definitely possible, and perhaps even probable, that Louisiana will have an African-American elected Statewide in the future. I think an African-American Republican could probably do it right now, if the margins held as they currently are (approximately 51-54% solid Republican vote in the past 5-6 years statewide across most offices). I believe that Louisiana will do it (and mind you, do it again) in the not too distant future. I do think some folks in Louisiana are uncomfortable electing others of a different race, for whatever reasons they harbor internally. That’s not a sustainable or productive view. You could partially assign the result of this type of politics to many of the devastating issues Louisiana faces today: from poverty, to access to healthcare, to public education. Bottom line is that it’s not results-oriented. If you want to sit in your camps and hear your own thoughts echoed back from one another, that’s your prerogative; you won’t see progress, and you won’t make a better Louisiana. 

Lamar: A few years ago, Don Cazayoux, after beating State Representative Michael Jackson in the primary and Republican Woody Jenkins in the run-off, was elected to the United States Congress. His election made national news, because it demonstrated the ways in which Democrats could make in-roads in historically conservative districts. When Cazayoux ran for re-election, Michael Jackson ran against him again, but this time, as an Independent. Many saw Jackson’s decision as a vindictive and calculated effort at siphoning African-American votes from Congressman Cazayoux. Jackson did not seem to wage a serious campaign, but if the goal was to split up the Democratic base along racial lines in order to hand the seat back to a Republican, it worked. Ryan at The Daily Kingfish did a tremendous job covering this story. He demonstrated the ways in which people like Lane Grigsby donated thousands of dollars to the Republican challenger, Bill Cassidy, while simultaneously buying billboards all over Baton Rouge in support of Michael Jackson. Then, the day after Cassidy was elected, he and Jackson were photographed having coffee together at a Baton Rouge coffeeshop. What lessons should Democrats in Louisiana learn from this? They lost a Congressional seat, after all.

Andrew: Anyone that thought that Michael Jackson wasn’t being pushed along by folks who didn’t want to see Cazayoux re-elected are not being honest. Funny fact: Politics is one of those games that people always play to win. And just like water rushing around a levee, looking for a weak spot, if there are tactics that are within the law (or even in a gray area), you can expect that those who want to win will use them. Be ready for anything. Now, dividing your opponents’ vote isn’t a new tactic, but it can be an effective one. And even if Jackson had had every intention of actually winning that seat, it’s hard to argue that his entry wasn’t the sole cause of Cazayoux’s defeat. 

This says a lot about coalition politics, insomuch as it was Jackson who, as a nominal Democrat, divided Democratic votes, and especially African-American Democratic votes. Now, this is always a problem for Democrats: What binds us together? How do we coalesce around issues and policy in a way that secures consistent victories? How do you make the case that voting for the strongest Democrat, white or black, is better than voting for the candidate you are most familiar with or at least more comfortable with? Democrats talk about getting on the same page, but when it comes down to brass tacks, winning isn’t always the priority. And maybe that’s a healthy way to run a community. But it’s not a productive way to win political campaigns. 

I think this is a great example of the big tent that Democrats must hold together, in Louisiana especially– core Democratic constituencies, labor, African-Americans, liberals, Women, environmentalists, etc. 

Will different groups believe that their issues will be addressed, even if not primarily, over time with a Democratic candidate? Do they believe that a candidate they support will even advocate on behalf of them when the time comes? That’s a big problem with many Democratic candidates in Louisiana. Maybe they have a (D), but do they actually want to go to bat for progressive values and ideals? Do they make a positive case for why progressive policies work?

It’s about messaging and about genuineness. Sure, we know what to say about middle-class jobs, education, healthcare, and opportunity. But who is it that’s conveying the message. We haven’t had genuine messengers that strongly appealed to heterogenous constituencies in a long time. Perhaps the last one was Governor Edwards. But there are others. I think Mayor Landrieu obviously has that type of talent, for example.

Lamar: This year, your boss, Senator Carter-Peterson attempted to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act. It was an issue you covered personally through Twitter, so I know you probably worked on this professionally as well. Much of the news coverage, including the coverage I published on my website, focused on our young friend Zack Kopplin. I know that sometimes, it takes a high school student like Zack to make the adults realize that they’re wrong. I also know this is a controversial issue, even though I think it shouldn’t be. What’s your take? The Times-Picayune said Zack “got nowhere.” Do you think that is accurate? Do you think this is an issue our legislators should lead on? And why do you think the Louisiana Family Forum has been so successful in promoting the LSEA?

Andrew: I don’t think it’s at all accurate or fair to say Zack “got nowhere.”

Zack is a high-school student from Baton Rouge who- through perseverance and dedication- got the attention and endorsement of just about every major scientific coalition in the country, not to mention the backing of 43 nobel laureates (now 44). For those of you scoring at home, Nobel Laureates are a really big deal. They’re the Drew Brees’ of science (and math, economics, etc.), except better. And don’t forget the thousands upon thousands of teachers, scientists, and regular folks that signed the petition supporting the teaching of science in science classrooms. 

Now I’m familiar with the general dismissal of folks with letters “behind their names” and international recognition. Unfortunately, those who tend to dismiss empirical evidence tend to end up wrong. Many of the folks that have a problem with science aren’t being honest with themselves. The fact is, everyone can have an opinion, but they can’t have their own facts. And Zack’s going to win because he’s simply got the facts on his side. Big time. 

It gets really fun when you start talking to the business and technology folks. They understand better than anyone the importance of science education for our future. The LSEA is just another law that helps keep Louisiana near the bottom of the pile. It tells others that we don’t want to win. 

In emerging economies, like China and India, they’re not sitting around wasting time debating whether they should teach science in science classrooms. They’re moving full-speed ahead with innovation and research to create the next big thing. Why? Because that’s what’s going to make them money and get them jobs. 

So, the moral is, we should be thanking Zack for fighting back against these regressive laws like the LSEA. Whether some politicians know it or not, he’s doing them a favor by fighting for our future and giving hope that we’ll be able to produce opportunities with cutting-edge, high-paying jobs. That’s better for everyone. 

Legislators should be running to Zack, because despite how fundamentally correct Zack is on the issue, they have to weather the considerable political muscle of LSEA-supporters. It’s important to realize that regular folks in Louisiana probably don’t want consequences of the LSEA, but they haven’t had a champion to focus their energies on this type of dangerous legislation. Laws like the LSEA get passed because the only people that care about them are the extremists. In 2008, almost no one paid attention to the law in the legislature, because it was written to seem as ecumenical as possible. However, as we can plainly read, the bill’s obvious purpose is to open the door for creationism and other nonsense to be taught in science class. The quieter that the extremists can keep their work, the better their success rate. Now that Zack has rightfully raised awareness of the issue, I think we’ll eventually see the LSEA’s repeal.

The LSEA is bad for business, it’s bad for science and it’s bad for our children. And Zack’s going to beat it.

Lamar: Would you ever consider running for office?

Andrew: Not likely. I don’t think running for office should be something you pursue. You have to be called to serve by your neighbors, your friends and your community.

Lamar: I’m asking everyone this. What are the first three things you would immediately do if you were Governor?

Andrew: Now this is definitely just me, and not reflective of anyone else’s views, but:

- Call a constitutional convention where, among other things, I would call to eliminate the Governor’s patronage by eliminating 99% of all State Boards and Commission; reform the tax code and eliminate almost all tax credits while lowering the relative rates; 

- Open the Governor’s Office with transparency via executive order. All applicable records would be publicly available for the current and previous administrations;

- Reverse nearly everything Jindal has done on Healthcare, cancel privatization contracts, revive a reformed charity system (perhaps even through something like making medicare available for all through the options available through ACA).

There’s so much more. Reform Higher Education, shifting more schools into Community and Technical System, investing heavily in the port of south Louisiana and New Orleans to create a world-scale modern containerized port, opening a film school at LSU, passing marriage equality, reforming DEQ and giving it some teeth, order the AG to drop the suit over ACA, etc.

Lamar: Can Barack Obama win Louisiana? I recently read he has a higher approval rating in Texas than Rick Perry. Why isn’t Louisiana on his map?

Andrew: No, Louisiana is likely out of the question. I think Obama has a better shot in several other Southern states, including Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia. The way Republicans have successfully cast the President (and a way local Democrats have been helpless to counter),  I think it’d be impossible for Obama to win a majority of Louisianians over. It’s not his actual policy-making, but rather a concocted perception full of innuendo and falsehoods that drives Obama’s unpopularity. And of course the oil industry’s incredibly successful political attack over the BP oil disaster’s after-effects, or the moratorium. Obama has been a rather historically moderate President, but because he is perceived to be different (racially, biographically, temperamentally), he cannot win Louisiana over. Whether it’s his name, or his unorthodox journey, his presidency will never be given a fair shake on the merits. I’m recognizing by saying it’s all spin and no substance that the right-wing will immediately, and breathlessly, point to several “horrible” and “socialist” policies that he supports. But I’ve watched it pretty closely, and if anything, Obama is very H.W. Bush-esqe. The political and economic climate is just incredibly toxic, and I won’t begin to retread the various influences leading to these circumstances. He’s made a mistake by being a little less populist than he had room to be. But I think the reality is that he needs some cooperation from corporate America to make anything work. And so, he’s tread a middle path.

Needless to say, Texas ain’t Louisiana. Obama won around 39% of the vote in 2008. His approval rating is probably around 37-41% in Louisiana. So he’s basically been stationary. When you think about it, that isn’t half bad. Texas is going to be a purple state by 2020. Demographics make that a guarantee. 

Lamar: Jazzfest or Voodoofest?

Andrew: Jazzfest. Although City Park is a much better venue for a fest. 

Lamar: Who is the greatest living Louisianan?

Dr. John, without a doubt. A close second is Wynton Marsalis.

Andrew: Lamar: Am I making a huge mistake going to law school?

Absolutely, but I already told you that. 

Lamar: Finally, what’s the last book you read?

Andrew: I’m going to mention one that I find important, and highly recommend: Winner-Take-All Politics. Great book on modern political circumstances and how it all fits together. 

Thoughts on the Election 3

by • Local Political News, National News, Social Activism, Today's News • Tags: , , , , , , ,

This morning, I received an e-mail from a friend of mine in Germany. We became friends in high school. His first real experience of America was the time he spent in Alexandria, as an exchange student at Alexandria Senior High.

My friend’s family is originally from Turkey. His parents immigrated to Germany before he was born, and though he is still a son of Germany, there is no doubt that he (and his family), like countless other Turkish immigrants in Germany, has been discriminated against– not only because of his faith, but also because of his ethnicity.

When he lived in America, he made friends with everyone and, in the process, fell in love with our country (even though daily life in Alexandria, Louisiana probably wasn’t what he expected prior to boarding his flight from Frankfurt).

I haven’t ever spoken to him about this specifically, but I think, in many ways, his experience in America inspired a belief about his own future. Today, he is finishing his law degree in Germany, with a focus on international law and with a hope of, one day, being involved in U.S.-German relations.

Since his stint as a foreign exchange student, he has returned to Louisiana several times, and he’s stayed connected with his friends and his host family.

When my father passed away, he was one of the first people to call, early in the morning, from his home in Wolfsburg to express his condolecenses.

And early this morning, he wrote me for a different reason: To express his joy. He’d stayed up all night watching the returns.

By now, it may be a hackneyed thing to say, but last night’s election proved something, to the entire world, about the hope of America. You don’t have to take my word for it. Read the international papers, look at the photographs, watch the videos of the reaction across the world. Last night, the world learned that America is, in fact, a nation of limitless possibilities, a nation that, as the President-elect said, is “built on the enduring power of our ideals.”

Last night, a nation with a shameful history of slavery and racism, a nation that, only forty years ago, discriminated against African-Americans not only as a practice but also as a policy, and, indeed, a nation that still struggles in understanding the discourse of race decided, with its votes, to elect as its President an improbable candidate, a black man with a mother from Kansas and a father from Kenya, Barack Obama.

Pardon my hyperbole, but I strongly believe that last night’s election has both redefined and reaffirmed the promise of America. Even if you voted for another candidate, it is difficult to deny what Mr. Obama’s victory reflects about our country and what it demonstrates to the rest of the world.

As an aside, I am, of course, disappointed Louisiana broke its 40-year-old streak of picking the winner in the Presidential election and perhaps even more disappointed by State Representative Michael Jackson, whose campaign was premised on the notion that he could unwittingly capture African-American voters for Obama (a campaign financed, in large part, by a major Republican donor) simply because he too is an African-American. Mr. Jackson, after losing in the special election and then becoming an Independent, accepted money from someone who is, most likely, diametrically opposed to those Democratic policies Jackson ostensibly supported.

Polls never showed Jackson receiving more than 12% of the vote. He didn’t raise much money, but the bulk of the money he did raise was from a Republican donor. Certainly, he should have known that he was literally being paid to be a spoiler. (Contrary to what a certain State Senator told me at the Democratic National Convention, I do not believe that this spoiler campaign somehow reinforces a candidate’s inherent legitimacy or represents an honest and faithful attempt at enfranchisement, particularly in this context and climate).

Instead of putting the needs of his constituents first, Mr. Jackson put his ego first and, in doing so, undercut the very cause he sought to promote: being a reliable Democratic champion for Louisiana and promoting the needs of his district to the Obama administration.

As the results demonstrate, Michael Jackson effectively spoiled the election for Don Cazayoux and handed the seat to a Republican. With all due respect, Dr. Cassidy may have won the election, but the real winner is Lane Grigsby.

On a brighter note, Karl Rove lost in Louisiana.

His hand-selected candidate, John N. Kennedy, was defeated by Mary Landrieu by nearly six points, a remarkable feat when one considers the margin of victory for John McCain. (Reluctantly and despite my previous prognostications, I admit that Mr. McCain and Mr. Kennedy definitively won Rapides Parish; however, notably, Mr. Obama and Ms. Landrieu actually carried Alexandria).

Mind the Construction 2

by • Local Political News, Media Studies, National News, Social Activism, Today's News • Tags: , , , ,

“Crazy” by Ray Lamontagne

Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity.

Yes or no?

Regardless, with a fedora hat tip to Ryan, I find it pretty awesome that the folks over at TPM Muckraker picked up on the story about the anti-Cazayoux robocaller. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

Actually, not only did they pick up the story, they followed up on it and confirmed our suspicions: Darrell Glasper, the ousted chairman of BREC, was behind the attempt to suppress African-American votes during the run-off election between Don Cazayoux and Woody Jenkins.

Mr. Glasper told the TPM Muckraker:

Glasper told me that he’d been frustrated by the Democratic Party’s lack of support for Jackson when he’d run in the primary against the white Cazayoux — there was no get out the vote operation, he said, and “without money in the community Jackson couldn’t make it.” But that support, he said, materialized on Cazayoux’s behalf in the general election. “That’s my interpretation of how they play the political games.” (Of course, there’s nothing remarkable in the fact that the party did not run a GOTV effort within the Dem primary but did against the Republican candidate.)

When I asked him why he’d signed off the calls “Friends of Michael Jackson,” when the calls were not in fact from Jackson’s campaign, he said “I’m a friend of Michael Jackson’s.” When I pressed, he said that the calls “may have said friends or by a friend,” he can’t remember.

Let’s cut to the chase: Mr. Glasper’s underlying implication is that the National Democratic Party decided to give Mr. Cazayoux more financial support because he is white.

That is absurd.

Mr. Cazayoux had announced his intentions to run way before Mr. Jackson entered the race. Indeed, Cazayoux said he would be running regardless of Baker’s intentions. It’s also worth mentioning that Cazayoux was considered the favorite for Speaker of the House prior to last year’s run-off elections, a position that was subsequently bestowed to a Republican, per the endorsement of Jindal.

To be sure, Mr. Cazayoux enjoyed the support of the National Party, but to suggest that their support was based merely on his race is to imply that he wasn’t a worthy candidate. More importantly, based on Mr. Cazayoux’s campaign finance reports, it appears as if the National Party was not significantly involved in the race until after Cazayoux beat Jackson in the primary.

And again, it’s difficult to believe in the integrity of a Republican who feigns concern over the “right” Democrat being elected.

The Daily Kingfish: Former BREC Chairman Allegedly Behind Voter Suppression Robocalls Reply

by • Local Political News, Media Studies, National News, Today's News • Tags: , , , , , , ,

This morning, Ryan at The Daily Kingfish alerted us to an interesting development in the Jackson/Cazayoux robocall story: Apparently, the company responsible for placing those calls was listed as “Magnolia Computers,” which, as noted in the Louisiana Corporations Database, is owned by Darrell W. Glasper.

Darrell Glasper was the controversial chairman of BREC. He has been lauded by the guys over at LouisianaConservative.com and lambasted by the folks at Rolfe McCollister’s Baton Rouge Business Report. McCollister recently wrote:

This guy (Glasper) should have never been appointed in the first place and has been a disaster—and divisive force at BREC. That he could even come close to getting support from seven folks may say more about the Metro Council than it does about Darrell Glasper.

We recently had a Daily Report poll that asked if Glasper should be reappointed, and 82% said, “No.”

Glasper is also, apparently, a Republican, having donated money to the National Republican Congressional Committee three years ago.

There’s really only one way to look at this, despite what conservative commentators may imply about the dynamics of the upcoming election in November:

This is manipulative, dishonest, racist politics that should be publicly shunned and excoriated. And, if Representative Jackson is telling the truth (and we have every reason to believe that he is; apparently, he recently signed a sworn statement attesting to such), then it should be clear what this actually was: a Republican-backed effort to suppress African-American vote under the pretense of racial equality.

Ryan transcribes the call:

“I’m very upset that the National Democratic Party favored Don Cazayoux from New Roads over Michael Jackson. The Democratic Party raised $850,000 for Don Cazayoux which is the only reason Michael Jackson lost in the Democratic runoff. The National and State Democratic Parties always seem to back the white democrat over the black democrat and that’s wrong. Alot of us who are supporting Michael Jackson feel the National Democratic Party need to be taught a lesson. We’re not voting for Don Cazayoux because we believe Woody Jenkins will be a lot easier to beat in November when Senator Barack Obama is on the ballot. You haven’t heard many black elected officials supporting Don Cazayoux. On Saturday we’re going to stay home and see how the National Democratic Party do without us.”

“Paid for by Friends of Michael Jackson.”

Louisiana’s Newest Congressman, Don Cazayoux 7

by • Local Political News, Media Studies, National News, Social Activism, Today's News • Tags: , , ,

“Friends of Michael Jackson” (the State Rep, not the King of Pop) Attempted to Suppress African-American Voter Turn-Out.

For the first time since 1974, Louisiana’s Sixth Congressional District is represented by a Democrat, Don Cazayoux of New Roads.

Congratulations to Representative-Elect Cazayoux and to his entire team. They ran an effective and professional campaign, and they helped to dispel some myths and misconceptions about the good people of Louisiana’s Sixth District.

Early on, the experts all seemed to agree that a Democrat stood very little chance of winning, but Mr. Cazayoux proved them wrong by building a working and enthusiastic coalition of both Democrats and Republicans.

Kudos.

Ryan at the Daily Kingfish provides an excellent series of articles and posts on this election. Kudos to him and to all of the bloggers who helped raise both money and awareness for this important race.

But don’t rest on your laurels quite yet… we’ve got to do this all over again in November.

And this is somewhat bizarre:

On election day, a number of homes in Baton Rouge’s predominantly black neighborhoods were phoned with a tape-recorded message asking black voters to teach white Democrats a lesson by staying home and not casting ballots.

The ad signed off as “Friends of Michael Jackson.”

Jackson, a Democratic state representative defeated by Cazayoux in the primary runoff, said he was not involved or connected in any way with the calls. Jackson said he will run for the seat in November.

State Democratic Party Chairman Christopher Whittington said the calls violated election law, and the party would take appropriate action against whoever was responsible.

Michael Jackson, with friends like yours, who needs enemies?

Does anyone really think the Obama or Clinton campaign (more than likely, the Obama campaign) will reach out and help someone whose “friends” attempted to suppress African-American turn-out in order to “teach white Democrats a lesson”? Pitiful.

Jackson must believe that an Obama candidacy will lead to an increased African-American turn-out, which would benefit him, an African-American, at defeating Don Cazayoux, a white man.

Of course, this type of political maneuvering and racial essentialization is completely antithetical to Obama’s message.

Obama would be wise to recognize that Cazayoux is, in fact, the first Democrat elected in the Sixth District since 1974, and that means something about his coalition and his message. And considering the Republican Party already attempted to attack Cazayoux by way of Obama (and it backfired), the two are already loosely associated in voter’s minds. Not to mention, Jackson would be challenging as an Independent.

According to the folks over at DailyKos, this makes Cazayoux a superdelegate.

CNN: Democrats Accuse Republicans of Illegal Campaigning (Here in Louisiana) Reply

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

Ryan at the Daily Kingfish and Mike Stagg at Louisiana D2D have been all over this story, which made its first appearance in the national MSM this morning.

From CNN:

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is accusing the House Republicans’ campaign committee of illegally coordinating advertising with an outside group in a competitive Louisiana special election.

The DCCC, which works to elect House Democrats, filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission Wednesday arguing there’s evidence The National Republican Congressional Committee was involved in a TV script for an ad by the conservative group Freedom’ s Watch. According to campaign finance laws, it is illegal for party committees to coordinate with outside groups within 90 days of a federal election.

The ad says that Democratic candidate Don Cazayoux will raise taxes if elected. Democrats say the document for the ad script sent to Louisiana television stations includes a stamp, referred to as “metadata,” that shows “NRCC.”

Democrats argue that Freedom’s Watch launched the TV ad right after the NRCC finished a week-long run of an ad with similar images of Cazayoux.

“Tom Cole (R-OK and NRCC Chairman) may have gotten his wish when Freedom’s Watch came to the NRCC’s rescue, but breaking the law will be the NRCC’s worst nightmare. Freedom’s Watch own Word document clearly shows the script for their ad came from the NRCC – that’s clearly illegal, said Brian Wolff, Executive Director of the DCCC.

Ed Patru, spokesman for Freedom’s Watch, dismissed the charge as a “sensational theory that falls apart once you hear the rest of the story.”

A source with direct knowledge of the Freedom’s Watch Louisiana ad campaign said the consultant hired to create the ad also did work in the last election cycle for the NRCC. The consultant pulled up an old Microsoft Word document and typed the script of the new ad on it. When he saved the script to send to the stations, the old stamp appeared with the NRCC name on it.

NRCC Communications Director Karen Hanretty told CNN that there’s no conclusive evidence showing the campaign committee coordinated with Freedom’s Watch. She said that the NRCC ad went up first and publicized it heavily so anyone could use images from the ad.

Patru said “there’s certainly nothing illegal about saving an old word document and typing over it.” He added, “I find it difficult to imagine that anybody at the FEC takes this seriously.”

LA-06: Cazayoux Will Face Jenkins Reply

by • Local Political News, National News, Today's News • Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Democratic Voter-Turn Out Significantly Higher Than Republican Turn-Out; Scalise Wins Run-Off Against Burns

LA-01:

13,956 41.92% “Tim” Burns -
19,334 58.08% “Steve” Scalise -

LA-06 Republicans:

9,327 38.06% Laurinda L. Calongne -
15,177 61.94% Louis “Woody” Jenkins -

LA-06 Democrats:

19,803 56.80% “Don” Cazayoux -
15,063 43.20% Michael Jackson -