C. B. Forgotston: 1945 - 2015

Incredibly sad news.  C.B. was kind to this blogger back when I was political blogging more heavily. I was always a fan of his straight talk and clear assessment of issues.  This is a terrible loss.

Gov. Jindal Wants New $80 Million Slush Fund

Just as critics of the recently approved Amendment No. 1 predicted,, Governor Jindal is making plans to ask the legislative budget committee to establish a new slush fund for "economic development" when the Legislature meets next year.

The constitutional amendment, approved October 22, was approved by a 69.6% to 30.4% margin.  It changes the state Constitution to make permanent a four-cent cigarette tax, a tax increase that was to expire next year.  The Legislature had previously attempted to extend the tax as a separate measure, but Jindal vetoed it as a "tax increase."  The amendment also changes funding for TOPS, the Louisiana merit-based scholarship program which benefits about one-third of Louisiana's full time college students.

TOPS is funded through the general fund as well as through investment revenue generated from the Millennium Trust.  About 11% of TOPS funding came from the Millennium Trust last year (about $16.1 million).

The Millenium Trust was established in 1999 and  holds the proceeds of tobacco settlement the State of Louisiana receives.  The Trust funds TOPS and two other educational programs, one of which would receive the revenue from the four-cent cigarette tax.

Back to the Amendment: it takes about $40 to $45 million per year that has annually been deposited from the tobacco settlement into the base monies of the Trust and moves it straight into TOPS. The base amount of the Trust would be frozen.

The result is that funding for TOPS will rely less heavily on the general fund. 

The Public Affairs Research Council explains (emphasis mine):

This amendment and companion legislation would redirect annual tobacco settlement payments ($40-45 million per fiscal year) that currently are deposited into the Millennium Trust and place them directly into the TOPS fund, beginning with proceeds received after April 1, 2011. This change would provide a new dedicated revenue stream for TOPS. The proposal allows TOPS to receive two payments – totaling about $80 million – from the tobacco settlement during the current fiscal year and single payments in subsequent fiscal years

Of this amendment, C.B. Forgotston recommended a "No" vote:

It’s not about TOPs it is about giving more of our hard-earned tax dollars to the governor and the leges to waste. It really about a tax increase which can not be lowered or repealed without another amendment to the constitution which we will have to depend on the leges to put on the ballot.  This is a very poor precedent to establish in a state that badly needs tax reform.
We shouldn’t be forced to address two separate issues in one amendment. Tell the leges to do it right and stop playing games with our constitution.

Now that the Amendment has passed and the general fund will bear less of a burden to support TOPS, Jindal wants that $80 million for a slush fund for "economic development":

Jindal’s spokesman, Kyle Plotkin, said the governor will ask a legislative budget committee to approve money for economic development projects as needed from the $80 million.

When the Legislature meets next year, the governor will ask for the balance of the money to be deposited into an economic development megafund, Plotkin said.

The megafund is designed to provide incentives for businesses building large projects in Louisiana.

The plot thickens when you realize that Louisiana is facing a potential budget crisis contingent on the outcome of a lawsuit filed in response to the leges taking $198 million from the Rainy Day fund two years ago without replacing it.  Should the State lose that lawsuit, they'll have to pay back $150 to $200 million to the Rainy Day Fund, some of which would have to come from the $80 million slush fund.

Does it surprise anyone that John Alario was the sponsor of the Amendment?

It seems to me to be just a shell game with the State's money. 

I might be mixing apples and oranges here, but with the leges record of funding NGOs and designating pet projects for their districts with state money, something Jindal said he would NOT allow but certainly has (extensively), I'm not convinced that we need to designate another $80 million for anyone to play with. 

If the leges believe that a new fence in a private subdivision in New Orleans is a wise use of state dollars that "benefits the entire state," I can only imagine what they will decide to do with $80 million toward "economic development" or "incentives" to entice businesses. 

Can You Decipher the Proposed Amendments?

Who in the world writes these amendments?

Louisiana voters have five amendments to consider this Saturday.  This is the first one:

To dedicate funds for the TOPS program relative to the portion of the monies deposited in and credited to the Millennium Trust each year from the Tobacco Master Settlement, to provide that once the balance in the Millennium Trust reaches a total of one billion three hundred eighty million dollars, one hundred percent of the annual Settlement Proceeds shall be allocated to the TOPS Fund to support state programs of financial assistance for students attending Louisiana postsecondary education institutions; to provide relative to the rate of tax on certain tobacco products and beginning July 1, 2012, to dedicate such tobacco revenues to the Health Excellence Fund to be used for the purposes of the fund, including providing for the optimal development of Louisiana's children through the provision of appropriate health care and providing health care initiatives through innovation in advanced health care sciences; to provide for the deposit, transfer, or credit of certain monies in the Millennium Trust to the Health Excellence Fund, the Education Excellence Fund, and the TOPS Fund. (Amends Article VII, Section 10.8(A)(1)(c), (A)(2), (3), and (4), and (C)(1) and adds Article VII, Section 4.1)

I'll spare you the rest of them, but they are here if you can decipher them. 

A good grammarian is in order.

If you're confused on the amendments, bone up on what they're about here at The Public Affairs Research Council  (PDF - 23 pgs.)  and see their recommendations.  C. B. Forgotston also has recommendations.    Short, sweet and in plain English.

There are a number of other local and statewide elections this Saturday including Bobby Jindal's re-election bid and various Senate races.  Get out and vote before the LSU/Auburn game!

Bobby Jindal Sounds Off on TSA Groping

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal spoke out against the TSA screenings in an interview on Meet the Press yesterday:

I think that the American people are worried when they see an administration worried about reading Miranda rights to the underwear bomber. They worry when they see an administration committed to civilian trials. They wonder, "You're so worried about the rights of the terrorists , what about the rights of the innocent American traveler ?" So, absolutely, I'm concerned that out of political correctness , they're screening people they don't really believe to be dangerous.

Jindal makes a valid point with regard to political correctness; we've gone far amok there.  Jindal does not suggest we go to profiling but does suggest we use "the information we know," the intel we already have such as travel patterns, how the ticket was purchased, is it a one way ticket, etc.


Jindal makes the case that this administration needs to accept the fact that the war on terror is culture clash against an enemy who simply hates our way of life; they are not misunderstood, disadvantaged individuals who are seeking us out, but well financed, educated extremists who hate us and are willing to sacrifice their lives to kill us.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Additonally, Jindal insists he is not running in 2012 but does leave the door open for a VP invitation. 


In Louisiana, not everyone believes this.  Jarvis DeBerry writes:

If Jindal really has the job he wants, it's fair to ask why he hasn't exhibited more passion for solving Louisiana's problems. Could it be that solving this state's problems in a sensible way would make him less attractive as a Republican presidential nominee?

Jindal has been under fire here at home for his cuts to higher education and his extensive travels across the country as he attends fundraisers for GOP candidates and now promotes his new book.


C. B. Forgotston, a Louisiana blogger, attorney, political pundit and former Chief Counsel for the Appropriations Committee of the Louisiana House of Representatives, has long been nipping at Jindal's heels. Forgotston has been one of Jindal's most vocal critics on the issue of transparency in government, or lack of it.

Jindal is now under fire for his questionable appointments to fill three offices in Creola, a village in central Louisiana who recently recalled three of its elected officials.

All this to say, of course, that while some on the national scene see Jindal as one of the rising stars of the Republican party, there are plenty in Louisiana who see him differently.  That said, Jindal is correct in his assessment of the TSA screenings and the Obami approach to the war on terror.

One of the points George W. Bush makes in his memoir, Decision Points, is that on 9/11 as he was insisting on returning to the White House, he did not want the terrorists to have that small victory of seeing him scurrying to new locations whenever a new threat arose.  He didn't want to be manipulated. 

With these new TSA screenings, the terrorists have certainly achieved another victory as American citizens are being groped and humiliated in airports across the country.  It's incumbent on us to utilize better methods available to us than invasive searches or full body scanners.  The bomb sensing scanners were a flop but the technology exists and could be adapted.

I think in the end that Jindal is correct on one point.  We need to use common sense along with the intel we have.  Luck isn't a strategy and we need to get over the excessive political correctness.

(More at Memeorandum)

Jindal's National Moment

The nation will be watching our own Bobby Jindal tonight as he gives the response to Obama's pseudo-State-of-The-Union-Type address.

I'm watching Jindal too. He was elected with great promise in Louisiana; after the debacle that was Blanco and Katrina, he looked really good.

There are a lot of folks that have not been happy with Jindal, however. One is vocal radio host Moon Griffon. I adore Moon and listen to him regularly when I'm off work in the summer. He's a grassroots, homespun kind of guy. He thinks Jindal has been disingenuous in touting his six tax cuts for the state.

Moon points to the Stelly tax mess as evidence of that and to his credit, he is correct. Jindal is touting the repeal of the Stelly tax as one of his tax credits but to date, nobody is receiving that tax break. In fact, a non-profit group, Believe in Louisiana, ran an ad promoting Jindal last summer; the ad said "Jindal's getting rid of that awful Stelly tax; it's a $300 million income tax cut!" The group bought ad time on Moon's show and once Moon heard the ad, he dropped it and sent the check back.

C. B. Forgotston is even more vocal in his criticism of Jindal. C.B. has a blog and has run several posts demanding that Louisiana citizens "hold Bobby's feet to the fire" about the hiring freeze and outmigration just to name two.

LSUS Professor Jeff Sadow writes articulately about "the dunderhead chorus" who criticized Jindal's decison on the stimulus funds. He explains clearly the logic behind Jindal's refusal of the funds.

What sticks in my mind most is last summer when the state legislature tried to give themselves a huge pay raise immediately after the election. I wrote about it here; Jindal refused to veto the raise until the very last minute despite his campaign promise that the leges would not be allowed to do that. There were protests at every stop he made around the state and a recall petition was circulating until he finally pulled out the veto pen.

Jindal's speech tonight will be poised, articulate, intelligent and he will shine. He will be informed of his facts and he won't be vague. He won't say "uhm" and "uh" a thousand times. He might say "Let's be clear" too much - a favorite of his. Here's a preview of his style:

Bobby Refuses Porkulus

While much of the nation seems to love and adore Bobby Jindal, feelings about him are mixed in Louisiana. Many of us are still waiting for him to prove himself.

Many of us are still unhappy about his having to be dragged to the veto pen over the recent attempt by the state legislature to give themselves a gazillion percent pay increase right after they got elected, despite Jindal's ethics promise that they could not do that. A massive grassroots state outcry forced him to veto the legislation. He sat back for the longest time and said basically that the legislature should govern itself and if the voters didn't like what they did then they could vote the guys out.

Bobby is in the news again today as he has officially refused part of the Porkulus spending package that relates to expansion of state unemployment heath coverage. He said "Increasing taxes on our Louisiana businesses is certainly not a way to stimulate our economy. It would be the exact wrong thing we could do to encourage further growth and job creation."

He went on to say that "accepting the money would have required a change in state law and, after federal money runs out in three years, would have led to a $12 million increase in taxes on his state's businesses to keep funding the benefit. He also warned other states against the program. 'I strongly suggest that other states also look closely at this provision in the bill so they can also avoid ultimately passing on a significant tax to businesses that will be left paying for this expansion of benefits when the federal money dries up,' he said."

C. B. Forgotston points out, rightly so, that the legislature could overrule Bobby. He points out that the following provision in the bailout legislation gives the final say to the leges:

SEC. 1607. (a) CERTIFICATION BY GOVERNOR Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, for funds provided to any State or agency thereof, the Governor of the State shall certify that: 1) the State request and use funds provided by this Act , and; 2) funds be used to create jobs and promote economic growth.

(b) ACCEPTANCE BY STATE LEGISLATURE If funds provided to any State in any division of this Act are not accepted for use by the Governor, then acceptance by the State legislature, by means of the adoption of a concurrent resolution, shall be sufficient to provide funding to such State.

C. B. is usually pretty hard on Bobby. But it's something to think about. Is Jindal refusing the money knowing that the legislature will overrule him and he'll still look good for trying? Is it a ploy? His reasons for refusing the money are certainly spot on. There is much in this bill that is bad and that will become a burden down the road.

Some Louisiana Democrats are, not surprisingly, unhappy with Jindal's statement.

"He seems to be trying to play both sides of the fence. He might refuse some of the money, he might take some of the money," said Louisiana Democratic Party spokesman Scott Jordan.

"We've got almost $2 billion, education, health care, coastal restoration," he said. "The notion that Governor Jindal would turn down money that would help in those areas ... is just crazy."

I'm not sure how Jordan thinks that health insurance money could be spend on coastal restoration but that's probably why I'm not a politician. For my part, I'm with Bobby. Send the whole mess back! Either way, it will be interesting to see how this unfolds. Notably, there was no Porkulus spending directed at Katrina rebuilding, and I was shocked at the lack of outcry from down south on that one.